Why is their a sibling category at secondary school allocation?

[Hulababy]

I am curious, nothing more.

But I am not sure why a sibling category would be relevant at secondary level, as once a child is 11y they are more than capable of making their own way to and from school without parental involvement.

Not all LEAs/schools do have the sibling category, but why do seem feel it is necessary?

Anyone know the answer?

Well depending where you live, not all children can get to school by themselves. Even if school buses are provided, if children want to do any after school clubs etc, they miss the school bus and need a lift home.

I agree with what Tiggytape says - sums it up well.
I am 'up North' and I am very glad my 2 DDs are in the same school. They stay most nights for music/sport/science club. There are no public buses to get them home at this time so they need a lift or taxi home. Sharing a taxi is not much more than the earlier school bus. It is also lovely that they are doing some of these activities together.
Also the teachers get to know you as a family.

I agree with Tiggytape too and cheerfully accept that my view us very Londoncentric, as that has been my experience. In my borough, sibling priority (as far as I can see) causes more problems than it solves.

In Scotland I believe it goes: catchment, siblings, everyone else. That seems fair enough to me.

Teddingtonmum can I ask which school you have been allocated? We are Richmond Borough too. DS moves in summer 2015 and I am interested in people's opinions of the options available.

I think that families should get the option of sending their children to the same school even at secondary level. I went to school with one of my older siblings and we looked out for each other, we got the bus together in the winter months, we supported each other through friendship difficulties.
It was a nuisance at times because my sibling knew what I got up to at school and could report back. But my mum only had to cope with one set of inset days / boiler breakdowns/ same term dates. She got to know the teachers over the years and was familiar with school procedures.

If one secondary aged child has SN and attends a school with his sibling it allows them to travel to school together safely, freeing up the parents to take any primary aged children to school or get themselves to work.

As for single sex schools, I'm not sure how many there are nationally, but there are several within my extended area. I live in a very multi cultural area and the single sex schools are populated mainly by families of minority ethnic origin. I do think that some of those families would withdraw their children from school if they didn't have a single sex state option and couldn't afford a private single sex option and ultimately the biggest impact would be on those children.

Getting rid of faith schools I think is a good idea on the face of it as I'm not convinced that most of the children attending are genuinely religious enough to merit the schools existence as a faith school, however, as those schools are part self funded (usually between 10 and 20%), I'm not sure where the govt would find the additional funds required for those schools if they lost their faith denominational status.

I seem to remember from an earlier thread that Teddington mum did not put her local Teddington school on the CAF, but apologies if I have got this wrong.

I don't think Talkinpeace did either, but I could be wrong and apologise if I am.

We did have a few issues from having children at two different secondary schools. They had different holiday dates - there was one memorable year when their long spring holiday only overlapped by two days, not counting the public holidays. Once we had both their parents' evenings on the same night. That was a little bit annoying but not really the end of the world.

Neither dc can get to school under their own steam. Not everyone lives within reach of public transport.

Also if parents are going to be fined for taking a family holiday within term time, if you have dc at different schools then the schools could have different school holidays, so when are you meant to take a break?

Df had 3 children at 3 different schools at one stage she had 1 off each week for 3 weeks during the half term and the Easter break was a joke.

impatient
No, my kids are not at my local (walking distance) school.
Its on the list of the worst schools in the country and has 400 unfilled places.
I drive mine to the next school along which is 4 miles away.

I think it is an issue in rural areas where schools are not accessable by public transport- yes, there is usually a school bus, but this only runs once in the morning and once in the evening. It would be harder for children/families in rural areas if one was going to school 5 miles in one direction and the other was going to school 7 miles in another direction. Children shouldn't miss out because the parent can only realistically pick one up from an afterschool club at a time.

That's what it would have been like at my secondary school if there hadn't been a sibling link. There were also a number of children who came over county lines, although via public transport, and the other county often had different holidays and inset days.

However, I don't think anyone in the town my school was actually in missed out on a place, and obviously that would be unfair.

Anyway, I can see reasons for having a sibling link in rural areas where children are not close to any school, but I don't know why you would need it in a city or town where there is more than one school accessable by public transport.

My LA has a sibling link for all schools. Some of its schools have suburban catchments, others have mainly town - for these it could be argued there isn't a need for a sibling link. However most schools have at least a percentage of rural children; so I guess that is why it has always had a sibling rule. They have tried to strengthen the rule at various times since I've been here, but I believe they have always reverted to a simple sibling preference because otherwise siblings often win at appeal (especially if they live rurally).

I know Headteachers like having a whole family come through the school, and think it helps the school feel part of the community (and parents to feel more involved).

But then I live in town and have managed to send all 3 of my children to a town school, but not my closest.

I live rurally in an area with no bus service and no schools bus service since the Conservative local gov. did away with it. All children go to the local secondary, which is at capacity. If they don't get in, they have to bus, at their own expense by organising a minibus, or be driven by parents, to a school 12 miles away. In our case, having a sibling who is at the school makes a very real differenece. It means families who have lived in the village for years continue to have an investment in the school. Yes, it's mean to "blow ins" but they are generally well paid and 2 car families anyway, in new build houses far out of the reach of the families who have lived here for generations. Of course there should be a schools expansion program, but in the huge meantime between Gove and that actually happening, the sibling thing serves a purposes, rurally.

Gosh, Phlebas, that sounds grim. I thought it was a legal requirement for the LEA to provide transport for all children who could only be accommodated in a school more than three miles from home (secondary)/two miles (primary). Am I behind the times or are you outside the UK?

phlebas
surely if your catchment school cannot accommodate you, the LEA should have to provide transport to the out of catchment school?

same as they do with statemented kids who go to a distant school ...