School cheats

[frillysockmum]

I was wondering how many over subscribed schools do extra checks after allocations day. We got 1st choice as did about 75% of dds friends but we have several friends who narrowly missed out on distance and I am so sad for them. At the same time 2 people (not effected by it) have told me that they know some one who has cheated this year ie used some one else's address. It makes me so angry - how do we get the school to make extra checks?!?!

You are right that people should be able to rely on what the Admissions Office tells them.

It's slightly tangential here, as the Admissions person did not say 'break the rules and apply using an address where you do not live'. She did say at you cannot apply without an address. Accurate, but incomplete.

This is where it seems schoolcheat began to cheat, instead of pursuing the normal procedures for the homeless. She has not said if she asked Shelter or her Outreach Officer (or whatever they're called) for advice and advocacy. But I bet they didn't tell her to cheat either.

You are right that people should be able to rely on what the Admissions Office tells them.

It's slightly tangential here, as the Admissions person did not say 'break the rules and apply using an address where you do not live'. She did say at you cannot apply without an address. Accurate, but incomplete.

This is where it seems schoolcheat began to cheat, instead of pursuing the normal procedures for the homeless. She has not said if she asked Shelter or her Outreach Officer (or whatever they're called) for advice and advocacy. But I bet they didn't tell her to cheat either.

What are the rules for the homeless? FAP, from the reading I have done, seem to get a school place in an emergency. Can't homeless people apply in the normal round of applications?

I am not condoning cheating, but schoolcheat appears to have been applying in the absence of decent guidance, which she did seek.

Yes homeless people should be able to apply in the normal admissions round. Any LA that refuses to accept their application should be referred to the LGO. If they fail to get a place due to their lack of a fixed address the FAP is automatically triggered.

SueDNim - decent guidance, which she did seek this is what I am struggling to buy into. I don't think you will find many parents who, on being told their DC can not have a school place, would simply sit back and accept it, regardless of their circumstances.

I may be cynical, but I would doubt it very much that they would have taken "No" for an answer whilst applying for benefits and accommodation. This is why I have to ask the reason they simply accepted that answer when looking to obtain a school place for their DC.

It is one thing to claim to have cheated as a last resort. However, given that the lie was given at the very beginning of the application process, which precedes school place allocations by some months, suggests to me that they had very little interest in exploring their options with regards to this particular issue.

I still don't fully understand why a late application was not an option. They qualified for a place under criteria 2 (whatever that might be), surely, at the point that they qualified under this criteria, that would be when they would submit their late application? Happy to stand corrected on this but I was of the understand that a change of circumstances was the point of having the ability to submit a late application.

FAP, from the reading I have done - Really? You think it is wise for the LA to have an unguided, unmonitored, open process for applying for a school place under these circumstances? If this was to be the case, all schools may as well scrap catchments/distance criteria. I can just see the masses of applications from parents who have suddenly been thrown out of their home with nowhere to go but wish to apply to the best school in the County. This may seem harsh but given that parents are already buying school places by renting close to their desired school, I see no reason why these same people would not seize an opportunity to gain the same outcome but free of charge.

Yes there should be a process for applying under these conditions. However, it should be a managed process to avoid abuse of the system. For someone who is prepared to do more than make a single phone call or do a bit of internet surfing, I am sure they will find out that there is a process and exactly what that process is.

Yes, a late application was possible but that would have meant her child would not have got a place until after all the on time applicants were dealt with. That means it would have been unlikely she would have been offered a place for one of her preferred schools.

Of course, it is still possible the LA will realise she used a false address in which case she may lose the place. Indeed, she may end up in a far worse position than she would have been had she been honest.

It's not in the school's interest to do extra checks. Simple! Usually, the type of parents who will cheat will go the extra mile making sure their children get high grades, donate to the school, pitch in to the PTA.
Parents who will be assets to the school, in other words.
Schools should be forced to check address/council tax, on first week of entry and then at some unspecified time during the first year of school.

Pithy It's not in the school's interest to do extra checks. – I fully agree.

Simple! Usually, the type of parents who will cheat will go the extra mile making sure their children get high grades, - I would be more inclined to say that parents who have just invested £15,000 in a school place for their DC are unlikely to want to see it go to waste.

On this point, however, I disagree - donate to the school, pitch in to the PTA. - I would be more inclined to say that these criteria are better met by local parents who have a genuine interest in the overall community in which they live. Those parents who cheat the system are doing so with only their own child’s interests at heart. They are unlikely to have any loyalty to an area in which they don’t genuinely reside or a community in which they have no involvement.

I do agree that Schools should be forced to check address/council tax... along with checks on the voters roll etc. Unfortunately the likelihood of this happening appears to be very slim.

In the area I live, the schools are actually confirming on the phone as to whether certain rented addresses fall within the distance criteria etc. To have a distance catchment of 224 metres (much of which is actually taken up by the school itself) in which 19 boys, all of the same school age reside, does give the game away. What’s more to have the same addresses offered up year-on-year, does make the whole situation nothing short of a joke.

It's not in the school's interest to do extra checks

I thoroughly disagree.

It is in the admission authority's interests to check addresses particularly if cheating is alleged. If they don't they may well face successful appeals from those who have been denied places by cheats. The school then ends up with unhappy parents because classes are bigger than they expected.

And the type of parent who cheats to get a school place often cheats in other ways as well. They think the rules don't apply to them or their children. They have already shown that they don't mind trampling over other people's children to get a perceived advantage for their own. As such they can be a real problem for the school.

prh47bridge the reason I agree with "It's not in the school's interest to do extra checks" is because the schools in my area, that I have referred to, are semi-selective secondaries. Their primary focus appears to be their position in the league tables.

It would certainly appear that they would prefer to admit a child who has a bought place over a local child who may have an amount of natural academic ability, but lacks the same level of determination behind them to make it work at all cost.

I fully agree with your point regarding the values of these cheaters and subsequently those of their children.

I think the most alarming aspect of taking the view that it was "not really cheating as it was their only option" is that there are plenty of people locked up in jail who share this view. Should these people be excused as they were simply a victim of circumstance?

We live on the same short road as the primary school I applied for and my son has not got in. We are 273 meters away and 13th in waiting list.

Based on data researched in previous years, 13th is too high to get in. We need a small miracle.

I'm still shell shocked after 3 weeks. I'm not prepared to take my son to the school offered when it requires a 1hr30mins commute a day. That would neither be safe or healthy for a 4 year old.

Oh that's just so ridiculous. What other options are there?

Sounds like it must be full of siblings who may or may not be local now and yes a bulge class creates issues later

Ah I know there is a rumour flying around at the moment that I stole a place at my DCs school.

Both DDs siblings go there which is how we got the place. However we moved to the next town over last year so no where near catchment. No places at the local school so older sibs have to stay at old school so that's where DD will go.

I was grabbed by two mothers at nursery asking if DD got at place at x school swiftly followed by 'but you don't live there' and couldn't I just move all DC to another school.

Yawn

Well that's people being silly and desperate. Your DD has a sibling place so they should just accept that - that's normal everywhere. I have not heard anyone querying sibling places before !

Oh yes I forgot about that - I stand corrected. At our school people just accept that siblings get priority over local first borns although it is annoying that some people stick
It out in a tiny flat / house, get one child in then move to a cheaper area with less popular schools. I often think a rule such as siblings get priority if within e .g 0.75 of a mile would be better. The distance for us normally falls around 0.5 for first children. This year was much less due to huge numbers of siblings - and yes many live up to 2 miles away

It wouldnt make sense to me to prioritise a child of no fixed address over local children as they are likely to move around anyway. (In some ways grateful there is a place they dont need to drive to etc. although accepting they may be vulnerable etc)
My local school on our road has i think doubled its intake recently but ridiculously they are building more new houses were are the kids going to go. ?
The school is still oversubscribed already. People in the new houses already existing cant get in.
Fundamantally they need to improve all schools.
But sometimes it is just convenience why would you want to drive miles when you have a school minutes away.
As immoral as cheating is making people drive kids to school when they could walk is environmentally sickening.
The cheats are making this worse too as they would have to drive kids.
There are reasons why the better shools are also in more expensive areas
Although having areas with worse schools etc is not going to help society overall.
I dont think having parents who cheat is going to help a school at all.

At least with private school there is no need for this sort of cheating they are good enough or they arent etc

Ds got into a massively oversubscribed primary school which is on our road (250m away). No cheating involved just plain old geography and following the rules to the dot.

Lots of the pre-school mums are and and there is gossip behind my back as they don't exactly know where we live?

It's really shocking to be honest and I can only thank the fact that there must be plenty of cheats out there who contribute to an atmosphere of competition and misgiving.

In areas where there are many schools in 10-15 walking distance maybe there should be a lottery based system?