Secret plan to end pupils' right to go to sibling's school

[CountessDracula]

So saith the Daily Mail

At DS1's grammar school, the oversubcription criteria is (a) children in local authority care - very few so not really a problem - (b) family association, i.e. a sibling at the school at the time the second/third child starts there (c) distance from school.

Obviously any sibling has to pass the 11+, but assuming he/she does, then the sibling rule will apply.

Our primary doesn't give first priority to siblings - it is catchment first then siblings, which seems to work for all the village schools round here. Usually people with a sibling get a place but not always. The catchment children always get places. Only people who complain are those that get 1st child in on a low birth rate year and live some distance away and so subsequent children don't get in.

The secondaries round year do give preference to siblings which I don't think is fair - they all go by bus anyway.

I agree with Scarey Caligula: it is family- friendly to let siblings go to the same school.
It also means you can be more involved as parents and attend meetings, events etc. It was one of our main criteria when applying for eldest child, that our younger two wd be able to follow him there.

This is not new and is what is currently in place in Scotland I am sure. It affects parents here who do not chose to send their children to the school they are zoned for. If they are fortunate to get a place in the non-zoned school, it isn't automatic that a sibling will also get entry.

Does London have the problem of there being more than one possible zoned school?

Mears, London has the problem that secondary school entry is extremely complicated in many areas; there are loads of possible options, but you need a degree, or possibly a PhD, in School Admissions to understand them all.

What I don't understand is the process by which all these changes are taking place. Admissions criteria, and indeed school systems eg Trust schools, are changing so much, yet there seems to be no actual debate about the changes. Shouldn't there be some?

In our area, quite a few of the grammar schools do have a sibling rule, and our understanding is that that is set to go.

This makes perfect sense as the article is talking about partially selective schools. If the school selects pupils due to ability or specialism, then why would they want to admit siblings without that ability or specialism and risk lowering their attainment figures?

If grammar schools want to maintain 98-99% attainment figures then I can see why they don't want the school filled with siblings who might bring those figures down and so make the school appear less successful.

or (less cynically) giving a place to a child totally unsuited to the specialism?

'I think it is reasonable to expect a year 7 child to do a bus/train journey and then a walk. '

I live int he country and I wouldn't want my children doing this alone, especially in winter in the dark. Plus, here, public transport is rubbish so I want all my children in the same school so that I can drop/collect them, or they can all go on the school buses together. But then, my thoughts are that I will stay in the lcoal area until all four of mine are through school so that they can stay in the same high school together.

I am dreading my eldest going to secondary in 2 years time. It will seem a very daunting place after the little cocoon of his primary school. I am hoping that when DD goes 2 years later it will be less alarming for her as DS will have paved the way a little...ditto DS#2 after that. And DH and I will be familiar with the teachers and the school as well.

I would hate for all 3 kids to have to reinvent the wheel each time.

So when a pattern starts to emerge that 1 or the other child is being late to school you also end up with the E.W.O round your house for afternoon tea, prying into your parenting because you 'appear to be struggling with the school run' ? I think not!

For all children, if the nearest suitable (not chosen) school is more than 3 miles walk away, the child is entitled to transport or free travel.

I don't think children should be at the same secondary school. I have 2 girls, 1 year apart, and the younger one is always being compared to the older one (older one A* student, younger one is b-c) They are at all girls school. My son goes to all boys school. They all walk to school. My youngest has special needs and the best school for her, was a mixed comp, 3 miles away.

I think you should chose the school for the child, not just plonk a child in a school because siblings are already there.

An 11 year old is quite capable of train/bus/walk to school......it would stop the 4x4 gridlock in the mornings!!!

Fauve: The process by which all these changes are taking place is the Education Bill 2006 , currently going through report stages in the House of Lords.
It's had quite a lot of discussion, but it doesn't tend to make the news as a political battle, because the Tories are, in the main, supporting it - which is why it tends to be assumed it will be passed.

How times have changed. I used to catch a bus to school (not even a specific school bus, just a standard school bus) on my own when I was 6, and nobody would have batted an eyelid then.

pointyfangedweredog, you asked why a partially selective school would want to admit siblings that might bring their results down. I think the answer is that the idea of all their children going to the same secondary school appeals to many parents, and might sway their decision on where to send their first child if they had a choice between a partially selective school with a sibling policy and a grammar school where, even if there were any preference given to siblings they would still have to pass the 11+.

rustybear, thank you for posting the Bill. Would you mind awfully pointing out the reference to sibling policies to me - my Bill-reading skills are distinctly rusty and I couldn't find it . Or does the point lie in giving a Minister the power to change the admissions code by statutory instrument at a later date?

I think the thing about the Bill is that it will make schools (not sure of exact wording here)'abide by' the admissions code, rather than(as now) 'have regard to' it - which means that at the moment, as long as they consider it, they can then go against it.

The bit about siblings in schools that partially select by ability (i.e. not grammar schools, nor schools that select by aptitude ) is in the new admissions code , which is currently under consultation and is due to come into force next February. The relevant bits are in Chapter 2:

2.12 It is acceptable for schools that select up to 10% of their intake by aptitude in permitted subjects under section 102 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 to give priority to children who have a sibling at the school whether that child was admitted by selection or not.
2.13 However, a number of schools are still permitted under section 100 of the 1998 Act18 to use pre-existing partial selection by ability. Giving priority to siblings of children at the school may result in a disproportionately high number of children who live close to the school being denied a place in favour of children who live further away and children from poorer families or certain social groups being given lower priority compared to others. The higher the proportion of children that are admitted by selection the more likely it is that this will be the case, and the greater the potential for unfairness. Accordingly the admission authorities of these schools should not give higher priority to the siblings of existing pupils.

Thanks, rustybear . Now I have some light bedtime reading...

2.7 is curious - schools will be permitted to give a place to the child of a new appointee to a hard-to-fill post after 1 March. Hmmm...

Isn't competition just wonderful. Parents are scrabbling around for the best school for their kid and schools are scrabbling around to nab the best pupils.

And this is the best our society can do for its children's education.

If you get one child into a school {after doing 11+} round here, all the others follow WITHOUT doing 11+

Surely the fairest thing is to have each child going to senior school on an equal basis

ie no sibling rule

But keeping the distance rule so that ALL families are equal

So if you stay living near to the school then you are given a place but if you move away from the area {or out of the rented flat you got for admissions!!!!}

It also means that children won't be turned away from their nearest school cos it is filled with siblings

If you go on the underground you see loads of senior children going to school - they fill the trains

Thanks very much indeed for explaining that, Rustybear. As Hallgerda says, some light bedtime reading [sigh]. I'm sure this is on that website somewhere - but when do you think the bill will go through? And I'm still slightly at the lack of discussion - presumably if people want to lobby their MPs on any of the bill, now is the time to do it; yet I bet most parents are no more clued up than I am.

It's just had it's report stage in the Lords 19Oct. As a guide, the Childcare Bill passed this stage on 12 June this year & got Royal Assent on 11th July - not sure if that's the normal timescale.

Blimey, that's quick. Thanks again. I've read the 12 page summary...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz