Schools admission criteria......

[LookingforMaryPoppins]

So, my youngest has her heart set on the same grammar school as her sister. She has worked hard and successfully passed the 11 plus. Really proud off her, she is dyslexic so no mean feat.... having just checked the admission criteria, having a sibling at the school makes no difference. Passing the 11 plus is the first criteria followed by children in care, pupil premium and then distance - she is bottom of the pile. If she doesn't get a place, which with that criteria is likely., the option is a sink failing school..... how is that fair?

Oh I will!

How entitled does one have to be to think prioritising kids in care over privileged kids is unfair?

Then you need to educate yourself on the level of trauma and disadvantage they suffer.

Read the thread then. You will then see the obvious reasons why this is so.

I think the OP thinks people should know their place.

I suspect that children in care and children of non-working parents are unlikely to pass the 11+ anyways?

So essentially, you’d be happy for your daughter to be given an advantage but those who are actually already at a massive disadvantage in comparison to your daughter aren’t allowed? Or have I misunderstood?

Thank you for saying this!

While these sorts of policies are very well intentioned, they rarely actually work, because they end up creating the kind of unfairness as you describe.

I went to an underperforming state school in a rural part of the UK. Some of the children there are so much materially worse off than pupils in cities from who get priority and funding and focus based on things like ethnic background. It just creates unfairness in different ways than life being simply unfair

The disadvantaged are likely to remain so and the OP’s, already advantaged, daughter will get her place at the lovely grammar school full of children from normal families.

Overall, people do seem to prefer admissions criteria that favour them (so church attendance over distance, or catchment before siblings, or siblings over distance etc).

Unfortunately education is never going to be a level playing field. There will be more pressure on state school places now more families are priced out of the private system.

I don't doubt that they do. There are lots of disadvantaged groups that do not get priority, and I wonder what the utility is of prioritizing this group above others

And, naturally, parents with more resources will always make sure their child gets into a better school using whatever tools the system has available. Whatever system you design this will be the result

Any child that isn’t in care is on the back foot… please read your comment again and sit with it. I’ve seen some stuff on here but that has to be one of the most vile. Regardless of what school she gets, having a mother raising her with those views she’s a lost cause anyway. Wow. What a disgusting, nasty comment.

Yes. It's her daughter. People care more about their children than other people's. This is totally normal

@LookingforMaryPoppins did you feedback during the consultation process

Exactly. What would have gone on school fees will be used to buy advantage in a different way. Tutoring for the 11+ and buying property in the right catchment.

@Gruffporcupineand @KickHimInTheCrotch- it’s also just about being practical. If a child is moved into care, they may be placed a long way from their current home but for various reasons, it’s considered better for them to go to the secondary school the bulk of their primary school class are going to, so this allows them to get round the distance issue. or it could be a way to ensure if there’s extended family in a particular school, the looked after child can go to the same school when their carer’s house location wouldn’t put them in catchment for that one.

It also works the other way, if for safeguarding purposes a child shouldn’t be at the same school as a relative or relative of people they need to be kept away from, but the carer’s house location would normally mean you get allocated that school, they can choose a further away school.

and then there’s just the practical side of carers having several children at different schools being hard work, particularly as often looked after children aren’t allowed to walk alone/take public transport to school for safety reasons.

Looked after children are a tiny fraction of the population of children, but when things go wrong for them the adults involved should be able to make the transition to new schools as easy as possible.

@mamagogo1 I think the grammar schools have taken longer to adopt this criteria because when my adopted DS passed the test 9 years ago there was no priority in the admissions rankings for him.

There was also no sibling criteria and there still isn't.

All children had to have passed the test regardless. The places were then allocated according to test score. So the highest scoring child took the first place. Had my DS passed but scored lower than the child who took the last available place he would not have got in. Luckily he scored well and got a place. He scored 326 and the lowest scoring child got 307.

They have since changed the criteria so now he would be given a place as long as he passed the test - whatever he scored.

If he had applied for any of the non grammars back then he would have had priority even if not living in catchment. We took advantage of this for my DD who got into a school we were not in catchment area for just based on her status as a previously looked after child ( we ended up moving her to private after two years as her problems as an adopted child were so great she needed a smaller calmer environment to learn in but that's a whole other saga!)

Well it is fair to the children who don’t have a sibling but who qualify for the place on other grounds such as passing the 11+ , distance from the school etc. Why should having a sibling give your child preference over a singleton?

Argh I posted this earlier with a load more text and it missed out the rest and now won’t let me edit it and it’s missed out the but!

BUT state education is meant to be about equal opportunity- in the same way the playing field will likely be levelled for your daughter with dyslexia to give her the chance to succeed equally with her peers whether that’s with extra support or extra time in exams- admissions policies do the same for children from the 2 backgrounds you mention because study after study shows how these things affect educational and lifelong outcomes.

Regardless of whether a parent has a worked hard or not (and I think I’d probably think there are a lot more examples of hard working parents with children who qualify for pupil premium) shouldn’t the children (who can’t help the circumstances they’ve been born into) have an equal chance to their peers?

It’s also likely the changed admissions policy reflects the fact that they’re trying to gain back some fairness because many parents with more money often move into grammar areas. These parents will have often had resources whether financial, time or background which means their children are already ahead of the children who qualify for pupil premium or are in the care system.

But surely everyone understands we have to live in the real world where there are other people and our children aren’t as important to wider society as they are inside the walls of their own homes.

Such as?

Re looked after children . The reasons they are prioritised are:-

• Vulnerability and risk: Looked-after children are one of the most vulnerable groups, often facing trauma, abuse, or neglect, which can lead to barriers in their education.
• Poorer educational outcomes: They statistically have lower educational attainment than their peers and are at a higher risk of exclusion and poor mental health, which can have long-term adverse effects.
• Addressing disadvantages: Prioritization aims to provide the support needed to counteract these disadvantages and give them a fairer chance to succeed.
• Role of the state: As a "corporate parent," the state has a responsibility to ensure these children receive the support they need to thrive in school and life.

There is also a high prevalence of SEND on top.

I would bet if dd1 had missed out on her place due to siblings taking priority op would have moaned about that on mn too. Can’t have it all ways.

We live a short walk away from a grammar school, my dd passed the 11+ with no tutoring and went there. I would have been extremely p**sed off if she had missed out on a place because some kid who’s probably had tutoring to pass, that lives miles away, happened to have a sibling that attends.

These kids on pp or in care are exactly the sort of kids that grammar schools should be giving places to, because they are likely to be the naturally intelligent kids who haven’t had a load of tutoring to get in