How would you organise admissions criteria and priorities, if you ruled the world?

[Blu]

Having read so many threads with so many people navigating difficult admissions processes, people 'gazumped' for places by temporary renters, people in 'black holes' between catchments, children with no place at all, I have been trying to work out the best system.

My opening proposal is:
1.Priority admissions to Looked After / medical and social needs - as in most admissions codes

1. Siblings
2. A lottery amongst all children for whom the school is the closest school

4 If any places still unfilled: a lottery for all children for whom it is the second closest school

1. Open lottery.

I do not think lottery systems are fair. You can end up with a situation where pupils who live next door to a school do not get a place but pupils who live a mile away do and they all arrive by car which causes traffic congestion close to schools!
Do agree that siblings out of catchment should be lower priority than children living in catchment.
Faith schools should be retained but should take children with no faith affiliation who live very close to the school. My dds C of E school reserves 10% of places for "local" children and I think if more schools did this it would improve community cohesion.
My LEA does not have a medical and social category and agree this should be included. There are heart-rending stories of children with severe asthma being allocated schools 1.8 miles away and this is not acceptable.

But all children within that catchment would have an equal chance of getting in. At present only children who live nearest have a chance.

Blu, your understanding of catchment is different from mine. A catchment school should be one that you have certainty of being offered a place. That is the case in Scotland. Catchments have geographical boundaries that do not vary from year to year. Parents can make a placement request for out of catchment children, but they can only be offered a place if there are any left over.

I wasn't sure if this was a good system until I started reading mumsnet and learned that, with the shortest walking distance criterion, some families had several choices, whilst others are left with, not only a school they wouldn't have chosen, but also one miles from their home.

Soup dragon I think the higher ability children do fine with 30 to a class it's the less able children who are in need of more support. When I was at secondary school I was in top stream ( grammar stream) which had 30 kids to each class and progress and behaviour in these sets were fine. The behaviour deteriorated in the middle set and was always the worst in the lowest ability sets but they still had 30 pupils in each class. Talking to friends who have dc in secondary schools it still seems to be case so if I ruled the world I would ensure kids who needed the most help had the smallest class sizes.

Personally I think that the brightest need as much help as the least able.

I would change things dramatically at the senior level. Introduce Germany-like 3-tier ability-determined school system with LOTS of flexibility to move between tiers at any point in time for any children as their ability changes. Scrap catchments and proximity criteria; give parents complete choice how far or how near they travel/live. Give popular schools in all tiers the resources and freedom to add extra classes as and when there is demand for them. Admit on the basis of appropriate ability x available space.

Would you be happy with schools with 3000 pupils, Auroborea?

If appropriately staffed and resources, why not? But actually as they grow to that extent they might become less popular, precisely because of the question you raise, thus balancing things out.

Sorry, 'resourced' - damn autocorrect!

Mine would be:

special needs
length of time you lived in the borough
catchment area (within borough)
siblings within catchment and borough
siblings within borough
other siblings if not full up with previous

Except less popular schools would no longer be viable and forced to close, so these hugh schools would be the only ones left.

Perhaps the really bad ones would close. New better ones would start in their place. Again, I think few schools would grow that big because of the self-balancing mechanisms.

Sorry, haven't read whole thread, so apologies if this has been mentioned.
My local EA has a criteria for secondary schools for which it is the admission authority (so several are excluded being VA faith schools or academies) that children for whom it is their nearest school get priority.
I think that is sensible, as it avoids the black hole/grey areas on the outer edges of catchments/priority areas.

Chippy, surely it is giving priority to children who live nearest toschools is what creates the black holes, as some families don't live near enough to any school to be amongst those who live nearest.

That is virtually how it works here.

Looked after children.
Statemented Special needs best met by school.
Siblings.
Distance.

Don't really have problem with it.

That's right cecilyp. This is not measuring from the school outwards, which is how a lot of distance criteria work. It means that if x is your nearest school you get priority. Hope that makes sense.

Thanks chippy. It sounds confusing but I will try to get my head round it.

I would have more grammar schools. I would close any school not delivering expected results. Parents should be able to choose a school based on their child's needs.

SEN needs of chid and/ or parent

no child to travel more than 30mins to/from school

Any child taken to school by car, who lives within 2 miles of school (unless SEN prevent use of public transport) to have GCSEs downgraded by one grade

No faith schools

If a parent has cheated - moved house / rented in area etc to get their child into a particular school then the child (and any siblings) will be removed from the school, even if it is in the middle of GCSEs

That's a bit harsh, sashh. DS's secondary school was about 400 yards from my office, so it kind of made sense to let him come in the car with me.

Ellefabulosa I would be in favour of scrapping grammar schools. It really is not fair that only families who live in certain areas of the country have this choice and the rest of us do not. It would also prevent parents from other LEAs moving into grammar areas resulting in less places for children who have lived there all their lives. What we need is more good secondary schools who cater for the needs of all children.
Miggsie I am not sure about having the length of time you have lived in the borough as a category. Not everybody who moves house chooses to do so. What about families who live in Council houses or housing association who are re-housed who haven't chosen this ?

My DD is at a school just under 2 miles away, but as I have no car and there is no bus, it will take her one hour to get home. She will get one bus from school down into town, and another bus back up home passing her school again. The other option is for her to walk home, in near darkness, walking on the road as there is no footpath, across moorland 1,000 feet above sea level in rain and 30mph winds. There is actually a school in our village, but many of the places went to out of catchment siblings.

For that reason I agree with whoever said that the order should be siblings in catchment, catchment, siblings out of catchment.

I should clarify that there is a bus direct, but it leaves the village where DD is at school 10 mins before the end of the school day.

That's awful, MillyR. I feel that there can be no hard and fast rules - the criteria should adapt to local circumstances.