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?

Sure. But people are on average motivated by wanting the best for their children. Your obligations to other people's children are unimportant in comparison to your own children. This is why school admission systems that don't recognize this basic truth never work to create the fabled 'level playing field'. Any parents with the resources will game the system for their kids, as anyone who had the resources would

I know a few (previously) "looked after" children who would qualify for priority. One was born addicted to heroin, another abandoned as a severely malnourished infant, and the third removed from their birth parents as a young child after severe abuse.
If children with this level of trauma can nonetheless pass the 11+, they have demonstrated a level of resilience and capability that has earned them a prioritized place.

This isn't unfair and your tone reeks of privilege. Your daughter will most likely get in.

The percentage of children in care or in receipt of pp at grammar schools is staggeringly low. Don't worry, she will likely join all the nice children from "hardworking" families. Obviously those children from disadvantaged backgrounds who have managed to pass the 11 plus shouldn't take priority. I say this as somebody who went to a grammar school and then on to Oxford when neither of my parents when to uni.

Jesus, give your head a wobble.🙄

Looked after, and ex looked after now adopted, are a clearly definable group who as a whole have less good outcomes. Letting them have priority access to the school their guardians think is most suitable for them is a tiny tiny step towards redressing their disadvantage.

Yes there are others who could do with a leg up too, but that is no reason not to give this group priority.

I'd support a view that LAC/Adopted should actually all get EHCPs as standard, but that's another discussion. (I'm an adopter for clarity).

I think you need to relax.

I can totally understand why you are anxious about this, I understand too why you want this school for your child. I do think however, some of your language here is problematic. For example, “hardworking families” - the suggestion is that those in the bands above your own are not hard working which is a massive assumption. Secondly, “why children from normal families” - the use of the word “normal” is so judgmental and says a lot. I think that this is important for you to reflect on your language here and the inherent judgments that are taking place in your posts. However, I wonder, does her diagnosis of dyslexia offer any elevation in the criteria. Might there be a case to argue that the grammar school is a better fit due to support and resources? You mention that you, of course, value education so, whilst obviously not ideal, if she did go to the other school, could you utilise tutors to offer further support and elevation of her learning. I very much hope that you find that a place is offered at the school of your choice as I can totally understand your desire for both of your children to be at the same school.

I don’t understand why covid would
have changed the catchment area. And I would be astonished if “looked after children” weren’t first priority amongst those who passed the exam back when you first applied - that’s a very standard preference

Are you saying that there was a sibling preference in the list when your older one got in, and now there isn’t?

I checked our non selective and oversubscribed comp school. Last year only 3 places went to the first categories of children looked after and named school. Siblings in catchment swamped those numbers by a mile. How is that fair to first born/only children? See we can all play top trumps.

In our area they relax the pass rate for pupil premium and LAC - 10% lower than the required attainment for ‘normal’ kids and then also give them priority over distance. I think it’s fair as it levels the playing field. Everyone else tutors heavily.

Does anyone think this post could be fake, considering how tone deaf it is?

It's awful isn't it OP? All these poor children and orphans taking away our opportunities! Why aren't they in the workhouse where they belong?

All care leavers (or ex the disadvantage doesn’t go away if adopted, relationships more likely to break down etc…) should get grants for university fees rather than loans. All accommodation should be paid for for the full year (as they often don’t have anywhere to go during the holidays). Probably up to a starting age of 25.

Education is one way of breaking the cycle and it is increadibly hard for care leavers to access.

Then report don’t troll hunt.

Because a child that is not living with their parents and is being looked after by a family member hasn't in that position because they're in a privileged position.

There parents might have died and they're being looked after by a pensioner who can't get them to places to access opportunities.
Their parents might be drug addicts or in prison or in hospital for any number of reasons. They might have been looked after by granny who died and now auntie looks after them, all whilst still visiting their parents in prison for example.

Their home lives are more likely to be disruptive, chaotic, live in poverty, transient etc. they're could be in children's homes, fostered etc

We want these children to rise above and give them any opportunities to break the cycle,get the best out of their education.

This doesn't discriminate against race, religion or anything.

I'm not sure what other metrics you're thinking of?

What an odd perspective! You're not bottom of the pile. You're in the same order as any other school. Children in care is a very low number of children and PP won't be huge. Then it's just normal order.

There not the lowest priority. Only those that don't live nearby. That is how most school work. The non-priority of sibling is unusual though.

Could you move closer to be in the catchment area?

What makes you assume that children in care and on pupil premium aren't hardworking? The reasoning for putting them first is obvious. There won't be that many of them applying, so if your daughter is at the bottom of the heap it is only because of where you live - which is nothing to do with whether you are hardworking or otherwise.

@Hazlenuts2016 sadly as an adoptive mother I've been on the receiving end of comments just like this. Many people think that once a child is adopted all of their problems and disadvantage magically disappear.

I received negative comments from a school mum friend who was most put out that my DS qualified for contextual uni offers.

I also received negativity from patents at my DDs school because they couldn't understand how she had got in out of catchment.

Very short-sighted view. Of course parents (mostly) want the best for their own children. However, if we as a society don't do our best to get all our children off to a good start, there will be problems in the future when we don't have a well educated workforce to keep the economy going. We also want all our children brought up to understand how the world works so they can take their part as citizens and be good parents in their turn, if that's how life turns out for them.

No - pretty standard tone for grammar school wanna-bes.

Which criterion has changed?

I'm just catching up. Having a PP criteria levels the playing field. Rich families can game the system by moving close to the school. Poor families can't. I understand that there will be a 'squeezed middle' that can't afford to move close but also haven't got PP. But what do you want? A lottery system? Would that feel fairer?

We do have the same choice to apply for any school, like the rest of the UK, brought in by the Education Act of 1980. LA’s have differing criteria though, the first always being children within catchment. The second is usually baptismal certificate, if a Roman Catholic school. Most have siblings priority in the admissions criteria but some have it higher than others. This is for state schools. The only selective schools we have is Independent. We don’t have selective grammars in the state system.

Fellow adopter here, I hear you! But I just found it unbelievable that someone would publish these views.

Is that we are calling families who trip over the threshold of pp - the squeezed middle?

This is the squeezed poor. Disadvantaged by poverty and the meddling instincts of those who won't acknowledge their poverty or disadvantage.