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?

Hopping on to say I actually can’t believe how unpleasant and entitled the op is. It will actually do you and your younger daughter the world of good to go to a non selective school so that you can fully appreciate the level of privilege she has. Statistically if she’s smart enough to pass the 11+ and has very engaged parents her outcomes will be very good. Many grammar schools actually don’t do that brilliantly in terms of ‘value add’ ie they take in students with very high prior attainment who are going to be successful pretty much whatever happens in their lessons. My son went to a very bog standard non selective school for gcse and a very competitive grammar for A level and the teaching in many cases was definitely better at the comp.

It should be tweaked. It shouldn't be those fighting and scrapping at the lower end of income.

For example, banded according to score and household income.

There are always going to be winners and losers but i don't think the current system is fair- as it lumps every household from 16 hours PT NMW earners to millionaires in one category. And the ability to support a child in such a broach categy varies greatly.

You sound quite entitled and I’m not sure you realise just how poor a family has to be to qualify for pupil premium. Children in care or those who’ve been adopted have often faced incredibly difficult starts in life, why on earth shouldn’t they be prioritised? Many of these children are just as, if not more, intelligent than their peers, whose parents may have spent considerable time and money coaching them for entry. These children will rarely have had that kind of additional support, and even if they were adopted into wealthier families, they may still be dealing with major health or psychological challenges.

Most schools seem to have moved sibling priority further down the list anyway. Both the school my children attend now and the high school they’ll move on to have made this change recently. Children in care or adopted children have always been top of the admissions list and rightly so.

I’m against grammar schools generally anyway. They only reinforce inequality in education and ensure that those with the most resources continue to have the best opportunities. I’m grateful I grew up in an area without them. I struggled quite a bit in primary school, I’m dyslexic, though that wasn’t recognised in the 1980s or 1990s for that matter, so I was just labelled slow or lazy. Thankfully, I attended a good non-selective secondary school where, through hard work, I achieved top grades. I now hold three degrees, including a PhD and have a fulfilling career. I’m very glad that a test at age 11 didn’t define my potential.

This

We have the same problem for our son. We are in pot 5 of 5 and they only take top 7. So if 10 children get the top score of 270 on the 11 plus exam they take the 7 who were marked first. The schools in the same group are just too far away

Although I agree with most of your post, lots of the LAC & PP children will have engaged and loving Mothers, it doesn’t mean they aren’t still disadvantaged though.

If they are that smart they wouldn't need private tutors to pass an exam.

Many PP parents may be engaged but might not have resources to help their DC and may not have had the education to be able to help either.

I suggest a look at the eleven plus forum website. That will open your eyes to the entitlement of a lot of parents when it comes to the eleven plus.
The things parents will do to make sure little Johnny gets a place is beyond words. And it’s not just for local schools. Some parents will enter their children for entrance exams all over the country. Some parents will make their children travel for hours to get to school just to get a place at the top Grammar in the county. It’s ridiculous.
I know if a girl who had to stop all extra curricular activities for 2 years in the run up to the eleven plus so she could be tutored every day.
I value education a lot, but would never go to these extremes.

This is how it used to be years ago. No tutoring and so only those that showed capability passed the exams.

I don’t think kids in care are comparable to kids with pupil premium tbh my kids get free school meals pupil premium and even though we’re not rich they have a loving family.

A kid in care doesn’t have that if they had an engaged mother they wouldn’t be in care.
The op begrudging kids in care is very messed up especially seeing as they’re such a small percentage of the population they aren’t actually even going to affect her child’s chances of getting into the school.

Although I do actually agree with the op that having siblings at a school should be prioritised over distance seeing as families can move to the other side of town but it would be inconvenient to drop multiple kids at multiple schools. Although that does apply more to primary school seeing as older kids can usually make their own way to school

Haven't rtft but is OP aware that selective schools are not permitted to take siblings into account if they rank in order of test score? They can if the school (or county) sets a pass mark and that confers elgibility with no ranking by score.

@Jugjug LAC can include children who are now adopted, so should now have engaged parents but more than likely a troubled past

My parents were tutored for the 11+ and they are in their mid-80’s. Tutoring isn’t a new thing.

Children in care will have abusive or neglectful mothers (and fathers). Some might have engaged and supportive foster carers or kinship carers but that’s really not a given.

@SatsumaDog if your parents are in their 80s the Primary schools would have tutored them for 11+. Nowadays state Primaries are not meant to do this

We’ve got one 50 mins away. The next closest is 2.5 hours!

Fair point - I agree with you.

Do you really not think that LAC and pupil premium children should have a small leg up in Education? To make things fairer for them? 🙄 not better - fairer!

I wasn't. 61.

Maybe. I know they had additional tutoring outside school and it wasn’t uncommon. My point is there has always been and always will be inequality in education. It’s impossible for there not to be.

Um, yes it usually does. PP funding is allocated to schools based on the number of children eligible for FSM (or who have been in past six years), from service families or who are looked after children. All children in these categories are likely to have experienced disadvantage of some kind. It doesnt for a single second mean that they don't come from "hard-working families." It means that they have experienced disadvantage in their very young lives though no fault of their own. They still have to pass the 11+ like anyone else who wants a place, which is already more difficult for them when there are children from more affluent backgrounds who can access tutoring or have simply experienced greater stability in their lives.

I can understand it is frustrating but the children who would attract PP funding for the school are likely to need the social mobility provided through attending a grammar school more than a child who isn't.

In reality, I would imagine such children in many cases have already been impacted by their disadvantage in life such that they won't pass the 11+ anyway, so I imagine you don't have much to worry about and your DD will get a place. None of these thorny issues are straightforward but your DD isn't more deserving of a place than any other child just because you value education and work hard. Conversely, you could certainly argue that a child from a family where education is not valued, poverty is the norm, family stress and instability are everyday facets of life and manages to pass the 11+ really does deserve their spot...

I read that grammar schools have very low numbers of pp students (about 8%) and lower still LAC so very unlikely that op's child will miss out on a place due to this criteria. If a child is disadvantaged and still manages to pass the 11+, they are in a very small minority and deserve priority for places. The schools are often set targets to increase representation from such groups so they have to prioritise in this way.

actually thats exactly what it means, pupil premium is awarded to those who are disadvantaged; you might disagree with how that criteria is judged but that is what it is for. in an educationally selective system those from disadvantaged background have barriers your children do not, it is fair but I understand why its frustrating, I am frequently in the same position, I have never been in receipt of any benefits or support and have struggled but I have worked in education and school governance and these policies are correct and mostly effective in trying to provide as fair access to quality education as possible under the current governments budgetary constraints.

Sorry but you sound really entitled here.

Why should DD be entitled to a place over others because her sister got in?

You know how competitive getting a grammar place is, particularly now that so many extra kids are taking the test due to parents not wanting to pay higher private school fees.

I'd rather looked after kids and PP kids get places over middle class kids. Round here they all play the system with prep schools using class time to prepare for the 11+ and expensive tutors who cherry pick kids. That's not what grammars are designed for.

There is nothing 'unfair' about prioritising clever under privileged kids for grammar places.

And yes, I do understand the system. I am a middle class parent from a 'naice' village with a child in grammar myself.