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 the irony! Any child who IS in care or IS pupil premium is already massively on the back foot. Their life chances are already compromised. Their parents won’t be able to afford to buy or rent a house close to an oversubscribed school due to the inflated costs of such houses.
How do you suggest the system should be set up?

I have 3 kids. 2 are twins.

All three were at different schools - drop off was a nightmare each morning especially if it was raining.

None went to sink schools - but I would question why there are sink schools in the first place? Teachers are equally qualified.

They main issue is the lack of priority parents give to schooling, given my grandmother born in 1912 was able to go to school and get a free eduction never left her -

There are too many families living on benefits and don’t have the drive to change. These are the children we should be targeting to get out of the poverty cycle. Then the whole country will benefit.

I worked in schools, I’ve heard it all, kids like to talk ‘my mom says ….’

It’s a shame when so many could do so well.

Great post. Thankfully, your children did get some good luck when they were placed with you and your partner/husband.

I can't believe how mean-spirited OP is being about children in care, as though they have got some golden lottery ticket denied to her child.

Your whole post smacks of entitlement. You are being emotive it’s not selective against sink schools. You are passing your prejudice onto your child. Lots of academy schools don’t have the same funding and privileges as selective but to label them as a sink school is frankly stupid. Pupil premium and looked after kids should come first why are you finding it hard to understand this.

Really?
do you honestly think children living in a household where they have to rely on benefits are not disadvantaged? I think you could do with going back to school!

I think this is normal though? If you look at the criteria for most public schools, you’ll see similar - children in care, etc being high in the list of priorities. This is to make up for any disadvantage.

The good thing about the grammar you’re talking about is that it specifies that the priority order only applies to those that passed the 11+. I would imagine that the number of children admitted ahead of your daughter because they’re in care or have the pupil premium will be zero or very small.

As for sibling priority, that would be lower down the priorities because the whole point is the individual ability of the child (having allowed for children in care and pupil premium, as the majority of public schools do).

Don't worry OP, most of those awful PP students won't pass the 11+ anyway because they don't have the financial support that you 'normal' families do to afford tutoring/private prep school etc.

Good God, I've never heard anything so awful as your attitude. Me first/I'm alright Jack. 😐

These are children you're talking about, who clearly the grammar school are trying to help. Take it up with the school governors, why don't you?

You clearly don’t understand the admission criteria and are having a completely unsubstantiated rant over something that hasn’t happened yet and your target are disadvantaged kids.

If your DD has a decent score (rather than the minimum) she will get in as she is in the first category, not “bottom of the pile”.

Why didn't you put DD in care a few years ago? Have her live that life so she can get into the school?

As a child in care, she'd be top of the pile.

Would that make you happy, knowing she was living a miserable life having been through massive trauma to get to that point?

(PS You do realise how ridiculous you sound, don't you?)

Having a sibling rule for Grammar is wrong

that said isn’t it usually based on score and not just passing DD was or is this one just pass and that is it

the actual numbers from care and pupil premium will be low anyway sadly

If it’s anything like my daughter’s Bucks grammar, there are virtually no pupil premium kids - the % is tiny compared to the non-grammar. Social mobility isn’t a thing - it’s full of (relatively) wealthy middle class kids. I wouldn’t worry, I’m sure she will be fine and get her place - well done to her for passing her 11 plus.

She thinks the serf should remain in their hovels and be grateful for any scraps sent their way. They should know their place!!!

The implication being that children in care, or for whom the school receives PP, are from families who don’t value education and shouldn’t get to go to a decent school. Children with parents who perhaps don’t work or have a negative relationship with schools themselves shouldn’t get a good education, why waste the time and energy on them. Is that what you’re saying? It very much reads that way.

All children should get to go to a decent school, regardless of their parents’ views on education. Children from disadvantaged backgrounds should be given priority entry to schools. This is about equity, not equality.

Your child isn’t more important than a child in care or whose parents don’t earn as much as you just because you really want her to go to a “good” school and her sister already goes there.

I don't think it's wrong at all.
Why should my DD who will be going for 11+ Sept 2026 have a lower chance of getting in just because she doesn't have a sibling there. She will have worked just as hard as those who do. If anything, those who have a sibling there already have a slight advantage as their families have already been through the exam and process and know it better, the older sibling can help the younger with their preparations etc.

Average intake to a secondary is probably around 150 -180 per year group. The LAC children may be none or only a very few, and same for pupils premium. Most children who get into grammer have had tutoring which those families can't afford, so unless they are so bright that can get through without tutoring (and then arguably they are most deserving of one) then they are unlikely to get in. It's unlikely that more than 5-10% of spaces go to these 2 criteria so there isn't a significant impact on your daughters likelihood of getting a space.

Your idea that children who have a difficult background, are on pupil premium or in care for reasons outside their control must therefore be from a family that doesn’t value education as much as you do is shameful. Why should those children go to a sinkhole school when they already have disadvantages in life?
I was on pupil premium, and because of supportive policies like this, I now have a profession, a masters degree and am able to volunteer too. Because guess what, my family valued education too, but it was much less accessible to me.

You sound awful.

As you are implying that these parents are feckless and workshy, surely it would be an incredible achievement for their disadvanted children to pass the 11 plus without tutoring (because obviously they wouldn't be able to afford it) and they would definitely deserve a place. I doubt that they would have access to books and help with their homework. Surely these would be the sort of very bright but disadvantaged children that grammar schools were originally set up to help?

if the criteria has changed though there would have to be admissions consulted

@LookingforMaryPoppins has it changed or has sibling never been included

the sibling rule for grammar is actually quite unfair given it is selecting you on your circumstances and abilities not that of yourself

anyway checked DD and it is looked after, 85 top scores, 35 pupil premium scores 125 catchment scores

This is such a bullshit response. It just shows a complete lack of understanding on why some children need to be prioritised. Firstly all children entering the school need to pass the 11+. How many children in care or on pupil premium do you think this accounts for? Google says something like 6% of all applications.
Given grammar schools are state funded why shouldn't there be a diverse representation from all backgrounds across the school? Why should we be funding schools for specifically for white middle class families?
I find your disregard for these kids to gain an advantage for your own daughter pretty horrifying,

in my experience the number of children in care and pupil premium who actually get in is small. I don’t think it will materially impact your daughter’s chance. You can check the actual stats to confirm too.

Looked after children will have been top on the list of criteria when your older child got in too, it’s been the case that looked after children, plus former LAC, are a priority group for admissions since 2012 and this is the case in all schools. LAC (and children with a school named on an EHCP) always top the list and do so in every school.

Beyond that the school get to choose the order of priority for their admissions criteria. It’s totally reasonable for them to place students on pupil premium at the top, pupils identified as receiving pupil premium are statistically at a disadvantage compared to children from other backgrounds. They are already disadvantaged so will likely do worse at the ‘sink school’ than your daughter so if they’re capable of passing the 11+ why shouldn’t they have an opportunity to go to the school, even if their families can’t afford to move closer to the school? Why do you think distance would be a fairer way to admit families than the current criteria? That means you advantage families who can afford to buy nearby or move closer instead of those who are identified as part of a disadvantaged group but it doesn’t level the playing field or make it fair if it’s the only good school in the area.

Anyway, realistically because children receiving pupil premium are at an educational disadvantage compared to those who aren’t I imagine the actual numbers of children on pupil premium are low due to the selective criteria of passing the 11+ being highest. I would be surprised if there are huge numbers of children eligible for pupil premium in the school, it’s likely the reason they are high up
on the admissions criteria is because the school has recognised it has a lower than average number of children from this demographic and is wanting to boost its numbers to make the school more inclusive and representative of other schools. Maybe look at the published data for the school and look at how their numbers of children receiving pupil premium compared to the local average and the numbers at other schools. You might find they only admit a tiny percentage of pupil premium eligible pupils anyway and you might be getting your knickers in a twist and frothing over nothing.

In care has been the priority for 20+ years, pupil premium was a criteria at my DCs school 15 years ago. Sibling was number 3

I understand you better now and I’m confident - sadly - that your worries are unfounded.

do you really think that loads of kids in care or in receipt of PP pass the test??? They absolutely DON’T, that’s why those who do absolutely deserve to skip the distance criteria. My kids applied for a school where the test had a different pass mark for PP kids for precisely that reason. There still weren’t many/enough PP kids… This sort of ‘help’ is, as others have said, all about trying to remove structural inequity.

look up the % of PP kids at the school. I’d be astonished if this new criterion has made a substantial difference to who attends.

This is very true. Having recently looked at Bucks grammers vs non grammers, the difference in facilities is huge. I asked the question of how the facilitaties be so much better when they get the sane amount of money from government per pupil than the non grammer. The answer when speaking to a governor was very revealing
'We actually get less from the government than non grammer as we don't have as many children with pupil premium so don't get some of the associated top ups. We ask parents for a voluntary donation of £500 per child per term. The average donation last year was around £2500 per year per girl'

Really? That's what PP is for, to help make up for the disadvantage of living in poverty.