Page 24 | Schools admission criteria......

LookingforMaryPoppins · 2025-10-18T22:01:06+00:00

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?

PurpleThistle7 · 19/10/2025 20:27

I have never in my life been jealous of children in foster care. Or thought they were somehow getting a leg up over my own children. It’s such a strange stance I can’t actually believe this is a real person.

It’s truly startling to see someone say it’s not fair to prioritise cared for children but also fair to prioritise siblings because they’re ‘normal’? I have no idea what that means.

Original poster

LookingforMaryPoppins · 19/10/2025 20:28

Tiswa · 19/10/2025 20:06

@LookingforMaryPoppins having siblings rule for selective isn’t giving all children a fair opportunity

selective is about the merits of the child academically (and yes have had a child go through one years 7-11 before they left now year 12) and shouldn’t be about who can bloody tutor the most (and did god the money spent on tutoring we were definitely in the minority never tutoring)

If a child has got there on pupil premium my god they deserve it - looked after even more so

wjo doesn’t is someone getting there on their siblings merit.

plus isn’t it down to score? I always thought it was

Score comes first, every child has to pass the 11 plus. Of this that do, the allocation of places is based upon 1. in care, 2 PP and 3. distance. Personally, i think there should be a 4. Of siblings - eases family pressure both on transport and uniform costs.

The assumption that everyone other that PP are not struggling financially is wrong IMO but it seems that's an unpopular opinion and I should be eternally grateful for a place in a sink school rather than raising the issue and discussing how to ensure good schooling for all.:::::: I don't understand the mentality of dragging everyone down tbh.

OP posts:

Cl3arDay · 19/10/2025 20:31

LookingforMaryPoppins · 19/10/2025 20:28

Score comes first, every child has to pass the 11 plus. Of this that do, the allocation of places is based upon 1. in care, 2 PP and 3. distance. Personally, i think there should be a 4. Of siblings - eases family pressure both on transport and uniform costs.

The assumption that everyone other that PP are not struggling financially is wrong IMO but it seems that's an unpopular opinion and I should be eternally grateful for a place in a sink school rather than raising the issue and discussing how to ensure good schooling for all.:::::: I don't understand the mentality of dragging everyone down tbh.

Show quote history

Giving children a more level playing field is absolutely not dragging everybody down.

No siblings absolutely should not be a priority, it should be on ability after cared for and PP.

SheilaFentiman · 19/10/2025 20:32

@LookingforMaryPoppins was there a sibling preference when your first DD applied?

DelectableMe · 19/10/2025 20:33

LookingforMaryPoppins · 19/10/2025 20:28

Score comes first, every child has to pass the 11 plus. Of this that do, the allocation of places is based upon 1. in care, 2 PP and 3. distance. Personally, i think there should be a 4. Of siblings - eases family pressure both on transport and uniform costs.

The assumption that everyone other that PP are not struggling financially is wrong IMO but it seems that's an unpopular opinion and I should be eternally grateful for a place in a sink school rather than raising the issue and discussing how to ensure good schooling for all.:::::: I don't understand the mentality of dragging everyone down tbh.

Show quote history

No-one is being "dragged down" by the attempt to support disadvantaged children.

SheilaFentiman · 19/10/2025 20:35

The assumption that everyone other that PP are not struggling financially is wrong IMO

Luckily, no one on the thread has said this.

Christmasjoy6 · 19/10/2025 20:37

LookingforMaryPoppins · 19/10/2025 20:28

Score comes first, every child has to pass the 11 plus. Of this that do, the allocation of places is based upon 1. in care, 2 PP and 3. distance. Personally, i think there should be a 4. Of siblings - eases family pressure both on transport and uniform costs.

The assumption that everyone other that PP are not struggling financially is wrong IMO but it seems that's an unpopular opinion and I should be eternally grateful for a place in a sink school rather than raising the issue and discussing how to ensure good schooling for all.:::::: I don't understand the mentality of dragging everyone down tbh.

Show quote history

How is prioritising vulnerable children dragging everyone down?

Name the region/town where every non grammar is a sink school with only 20% passes.

As I’ve asked before - tell us the name of the school where they are being inundated by PP and LAC children (or even matching their local demographics for these groups) or you really are a hoax poster trying to stir up resentment. No one can be this hateful towards children who have suggested significant harm or abuse and so have been removed from their families or those who (in your tone) have the misfortune to have come from abnormal, lazy families.

SheilaFentiman · 19/10/2025 20:41

I should be eternally grateful for a place in a sink school rather than raising the issue and discussing how to ensure good schooling for all

Could you point us to where you have tried to discuss how to ensure good
schooling for all? Because I have only read about you complaining about lack of sibling preference at the grammar school, but perhaps I missed your discussion posts.

DelectableMe · 19/10/2025 20:42

Christmasjoy6 · 19/10/2025 20:37

How is prioritising vulnerable children dragging everyone down?

Name the region/town where every non grammar is a sink school with only 20% passes.

As I’ve asked before - tell us the name of the school where they are being inundated by PP and LAC children (or even matching their local demographics for these groups) or you really are a hoax poster trying to stir up resentment. No one can be this hateful towards children who have suggested significant harm or abuse and so have been removed from their families or those who (in your tone) have the misfortune to have come from abnormal, lazy families.

Show quote history

Please address these very valid points, @LookingforMaryPoppins

CandyAppleChristmas · 19/10/2025 20:42

LookingforMaryPoppins · 19/10/2025 19:53

100% not resentful of equaling the playing field. No issue at all with children in care taking priority but do feel that PP
couoled with no siblings simply transfers the struggle slightly higher up the chain.

l struggle to understand how "equalling" should involve children from normal working families being disadvantaged by poor state school provision - all of those that are appalled - do you think a school where less than 20% acheive a pass in maths and English is acceptable? Would you happily send your children to a school with such poor outcomes?

It's not so simple as moving closer (which in itself is a position of priviledge if you are able to do this), rural communities are generally not close to schools - distance criteria never works well for them as secondary schools tend to be in built up area.

The addition of VAT onindependent school fees has widened the situation as there is no greater competition for places at non failing schools.

Yes, I want the best for my children - who doesn't! Yes, also want all children to have a fair opportunity - this doesn't come across to me as meeting that!

Please stop using the word ‘normal’! You are inferring that those families with LAC, PLAC or PP are in some way ‘abnormal’. This whole thread is wild. I’m appalled.

Wasitabadger · 19/10/2025 20:43

@LookingforMaryPoppins shall you object to those care leavers being offered a place at University also? If you perceive a place being taken from your daughter. I mean they may had to complete an Access to HE course to gain a place. Will they be stealing a place from children like your daughters.

During my undergraduate years I was in receipt of benefits. I had to listen to silly girls from families like yours thinking it was easy for me. Receiving the small amount of money I did in benefits was pocket money in their eyes. Not an ounce of understanding that what was pocket money to them had to purchase my food, travel and pay the bills. While they were able to purchase fancy clothes, handbags and make-up. Interestingly one of the privileged girls was very good friends with a member of the lovely Labour councillor group Shiver-me-timbers who informed me that the likes of me only get a place in universities and employment as they tick-a-box.

I was not able to work during the breaks and gain work experience, I would loose the small amount of benefit money. I volunteered instead and sacrificed holidays. When they went to complete a Masters in 2008. I had to wait until Post Graduate student loans were available in 2016.

i actually do not have an issue with parents choosing private education, or indeed tutoring. If I was to adopt a child. They would be going to a fee paying school to support their learning needs. I just happen to recognise some of the privilege I do have. Without feeling the need to punch down.

By the way a grammar school ethos does not guarantee success for children in care. I actually attended a school which had a grammar school ethos. Unfortunately during my mandatory education years, I was labelled as educationally subnormal for the crime of being a foster child being raised in a higher socioeconomic environment.

I left school with no qualifications. It was an access course at 24 that enabled me to attend university. I did get equivalent to 3 A’s at A-level, then BSc 2:1 (68%) and MA: Merit (72%) just in case those with your attitude think I stole a place from another more deserving student.

UnderstoodBetsy · 19/10/2025 20:48

LookingforMaryPoppins · 19/10/2025 20:28

Score comes first, every child has to pass the 11 plus. Of this that do, the allocation of places is based upon 1. in care, 2 PP and 3. distance. Personally, i think there should be a 4. Of siblings - eases family pressure both on transport and uniform costs.

The assumption that everyone other that PP are not struggling financially is wrong IMO but it seems that's an unpopular opinion and I should be eternally grateful for a place in a sink school rather than raising the issue and discussing how to ensure good schooling for all.:::::: I don't understand the mentality of dragging everyone down tbh.

Show quote history

OMG don't be so disingenuous. You couldn't care less about "how to ensure good schooling for all." You just want your own child to attend a grammar school, not due to her own merit but through the privilege of having a sibling at the school. And you would happily leapfrog your way over extremely vulnerable children to gain that unearned advantage. At least be honest about your appalling views. Or have you realised that they are indefensible and now you're trying desperately to backpedal?

Cheeky19863 · 19/10/2025 20:53

Thats life. Most kids have to go to "sink fail" schools

SleepingStandingUp · 19/10/2025 20:56

LookingforMaryPoppins · 19/10/2025 19:53

100% not resentful of equaling the playing field. No issue at all with children in care taking priority but do feel that PP
couoled with no siblings simply transfers the struggle slightly higher up the chain.

l struggle to understand how "equalling" should involve children from normal working families being disadvantaged by poor state school provision - all of those that are appalled - do you think a school where less than 20% acheive a pass in maths and English is acceptable? Would you happily send your children to a school with such poor outcomes?

It's not so simple as moving closer (which in itself is a position of priviledge if you are able to do this), rural communities are generally not close to schools - distance criteria never works well for them as secondary schools tend to be in built up area.

The addition of VAT onindependent school fees has widened the situation as there is no greater competition for places at non failing schools.

Yes, I want the best for my children - who doesn't! Yes, also want all children to have a fair opportunity - this doesn't come across to me as meeting that!

So you shouldn't have to send your kid to a shit school because you're all normal, but the abnormal families shouldn't be given any help to avoid them? Because the abnormal children should have just come from a nice normal family like yours? God forbidyoud have had an abnormal child yourself or your circumstances should ever change this making your children abnormal. It doesn't take much to plunge the average family into a distater that would render them, by your words, abnormal. If something changed in your life and you ended up on a low income / dealing with a child with additional needs etc would you be happy for everyone to go around pointing out how abnormal your family is?

Cheeky19863 · 19/10/2025 20:57

LookingforMaryPoppins · 19/10/2025 03:05

her sister did however the criteria as changed - any child that isn't in care or pupil premium is on a back foot. If the non selective alternative were decent it wouldn't feel so unfair however it's a school where less that 20% of children come out with a pass in Maths and English! Why should families that work hard and value education end up with their children being the least likely to get a decent school. 🤷‍♂️

Show quote history

Most parents work hard and value education and their children go to state schools. It doesnt make you or your children any better!

Several · 19/10/2025 21:01

LookingforMaryPoppins · 19/10/2025 19:53

100% not resentful of equaling the playing field. No issue at all with children in care taking priority but do feel that PP
couoled with no siblings simply transfers the struggle slightly higher up the chain.

l struggle to understand how "equalling" should involve children from normal working families being disadvantaged by poor state school provision - all of those that are appalled - do you think a school where less than 20% acheive a pass in maths and English is acceptable? Would you happily send your children to a school with such poor outcomes?

It's not so simple as moving closer (which in itself is a position of priviledge if you are able to do this), rural communities are generally not close to schools - distance criteria never works well for them as secondary schools tend to be in built up area.

The addition of VAT onindependent school fees has widened the situation as there is no greater competition for places at non failing schools.

Yes, I want the best for my children - who doesn't! Yes, also want all children to have a fair opportunity - this doesn't come across to me as meeting that!

Still insisting on using the word "normal". Awful.

Your poor children.

Pipsquiggle · 19/10/2025 21:01

LookingforMaryPoppins · 19/10/2025 20:28

Score comes first, every child has to pass the 11 plus. Of this that do, the allocation of places is based upon 1. in care, 2 PP and 3. distance. Personally, i think there should be a 4. Of siblings - eases family pressure both on transport and uniform costs.

The assumption that everyone other that PP are not struggling financially is wrong IMO but it seems that's an unpopular opinion and I should be eternally grateful for a place in a sink school rather than raising the issue and discussing how to ensure good schooling for all.:::::: I don't understand the mentality of dragging everyone down tbh.

Show quote history

@LookingforMaryPoppins which area are you in?
I can't work out if you are in a super selective area or an area with a minimum qualifying score.
I haven't heard of any school without a sibling policy unless it's a super selective (but even a few of them have sibling policies).

Bushmillsbabe · 19/10/2025 21:01

LookingforMaryPoppins · 19/10/2025 20:28

Score comes first, every child has to pass the 11 plus. Of this that do, the allocation of places is based upon 1. in care, 2 PP and 3. distance. Personally, i think there should be a 4. Of siblings - eases family pressure both on transport and uniform costs.

The assumption that everyone other that PP are not struggling financially is wrong IMO but it seems that's an unpopular opinion and I should be eternally grateful for a place in a sink school rather than raising the issue and discussing how to ensure good schooling for all.:::::: I don't understand the mentality of dragging everyone down tbh.

Show quote history

How does it ease pressure on travel costs. Train tickets aren't a 'buy 1 get 1 free' kind of thing.

You have not managed to make any case for why your daughter should get a place as a priority. You talk about 'working families should get a good school place' - we are a working family, and if my daughter lost out on a place to yours based on sibling priority, how would that be in any way fair?

You have presumably paid for tutoring for your girls for the 11+ to some extent? If yes, you have to see that they are already privileged to have parent who take an active interest in their education - that, more than any other thing, contributes to their success. A hard working bright child with engaged parents will do well anywhere.

Ultimately, if you don't like a schools policies and priorities, then you have the choice not to send your child there.

mumoftwo99x · 19/10/2025 21:05

Glowingup · 19/10/2025 03:59

Get a fucking grip of yourself. How many children in care do you think has someone who gives enough of a shit about them or has the means to put them through the tutoring that you need to pass the 11+? I’m not sure you understand how disadvantaged these children already are in life and what a massive difference going to a grammar school will make to them, yet you want your middle class DD to get priority over them. Why should she get priority because she has a sibling? It’s a selective school ffs I have never heard of any of them prioritising those with siblings as it literally would give an advantage to those whose brother or sister was clever enough to get in and now the younger one gets priority. Not how it works.

Honestly, the entitlement.

Show quote history

👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

MushroomPuff · 19/10/2025 21:12

Pipsquiggle · 19/10/2025 21:01

@LookingforMaryPoppins which area are you in?
I can't work out if you are in a super selective area or an area with a minimum qualifying score.
I haven't heard of any school without a sibling policy unless it's a super selective (but even a few of them have sibling policies).

Show quote history

Same - sibling policies are really common around hear and I don’t see why everyone on this thread has such an issue with it? Can anyone explain?

Cheeky19863 · 19/10/2025 21:12

Why do you think your daughter should have priority because of her sibling than those that live closer?

Annoyeddd · 19/10/2025 21:13

What makes a school a bad or sink school?

Could it be the badly behaved students with disinterested parents. Children who come to school having had to get themselves ready. The fact they are short of permanent teachers as none stay long because of bad behaviour.

Tiswa · 19/10/2025 21:18

LookingforMaryPoppins · 19/10/2025 20:28

Score comes first, every child has to pass the 11 plus. Of this that do, the allocation of places is based upon 1. in care, 2 PP and 3. distance. Personally, i think there should be a 4. Of siblings - eases family pressure both on transport and uniform costs.

The assumption that everyone other that PP are not struggling financially is wrong IMO but it seems that's an unpopular opinion and I should be eternally grateful for a place in a sink school rather than raising the issue and discussing how to ensure good schooling for all.:::::: I don't understand the mentality of dragging everyone down tbh.

Show quote history

So what you are saying is before distance your DD should be rewarded because her sibling is there?

no every child gets in on own merit

donthe scores get put in a list

Cheeky19863 · 19/10/2025 21:19

LookingforMaryPoppins · 19/10/2025 20:28

Score comes first, every child has to pass the 11 plus. Of this that do, the allocation of places is based upon 1. in care, 2 PP and 3. distance. Personally, i think there should be a 4. Of siblings - eases family pressure both on transport and uniform costs.

The assumption that everyone other that PP are not struggling financially is wrong IMO but it seems that's an unpopular opinion and I should be eternally grateful for a place in a sink school rather than raising the issue and discussing how to ensure good schooling for all.:::::: I don't understand the mentality of dragging everyone down tbh.

Show quote history

What if siblings are different genders you cant hand down uniforms. Children at senior school should be able to make their own way to school aswell. I think youre clutching at straws with the uniform and ease of transport. Your child shouldnt have priority just because they have a sibling in the school. People could get 1 child in then move house and still send more and more children

JamesWebbSpaceTelescope · 19/10/2025 21:31

MushroomPuff · 19/10/2025 21:12

Same - sibling policies are really common around hear and I don’t see why everyone on this thread has such an issue with it? Can anyone explain?

Show quote history

Sibling policy are very common in non-selective school and very rare for selective schools.

A lot of the grammar schools near me don’t use distance at all and go down the marks. Some might have priority catchment zones.

An example I looked up (I was bored) set a pass mark
1 LAC and PP that have passed
2 highest scores working down to fill up 75%
3 some ratio from zone 1
4 zone 2
5 outside of catchment zones

I struggle to see how sibling policy is fair in any situation, other than the OP because she was counting on it to get her second daughter in.