School changing admission criteria - prioritising catchment over siblings

[lucysnowe]

Hi all

Just been informed by school that they are changing admission criteria from 2017. At the moment it is: siblings >catchment >out of catchment, but it will be siblings in catchment>catchment>siblings out of catchment>out of catchment. Supposedly it is to bring the school in line with county requirements (we are in Oxfordshire). It won't affect current children or their siblings. I guess I want to ask

• has anyone else in Oxfordshire had their school done this?
• any one else who have attended a school that has made these changes, how has it changed admission, the school ethos etc?

We are on a country boundary next to schools that still prioritise siblings so I am worried that no one out of catchment will consider applying to the school, so that remaining numbers will be made up of people who REALLY don't want their children will come or who immediately try to get in somewhere else. But maybe I am overreacting - would love to hear mumsnetter's thoughts :)

I wish ours had that - our neighbouring LA does

Our authority (Wokingham) will treat siblings of children allocated to a school they didn't want were as in catchment siblings

They brought in the rule a few years ago and it seems to work well. Parents do have to say on the application that they want this to apply.

That's interesting Rusty, how does that work? just if the school is second or third choice? I can't see how it would work if the school wasn't on the list at all.

I think it's the opposite. It is if it isn't on the form at all. Otherwise you can game the system.

www.wokingham.gov.uk/EasysiteWeb/getresource.axd?AssetID=319620&type=full&servicetype=Attachment

I think you have to have applied for your 'designated area' school for the first child but not got in. See page 25 of the guide in the above link (note 5 on the over subscription criteria) - it's a bit long to copy, but it gives examples of how it might work in practice.

I'm in London and my borough (Tower Hamlets) does this. They introduced catchment areas a few years ago and included a caveat similar to meditrina's suggestion, so:

1. LAC and former LAC
2. Medical/Social
3. In catchment siblings (includes the sibling of a child who does not live in catchment, but was admitted before the start of the 2015/16 school year) *This date has changed every year since the catchment areas were introduced
4. In catchment children
5. Out of catchment children

I'm in rural Oxfordshire as well, in a village with an outstanding primary school. Our school has always had this and it seems to work well.

I'm in Oxford and city schools have had this as long as I've known. Why should a first or only child living in catchment miss out on a place, just because a child living out of catchment happens to have an older sibling at the school?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3041481/Siblings-no-longer-given-priority-school-places-competition-grows-booming-population.html

DD2 starts reception this year. Out of 60 places, 26 have gone to siblings.

I forgot to add, last year was a big sibling year, some non-Catholic siblings did not get places, as practicing Catholics are prioritised over non Catholic siblings

I too think that this new is MUCH better than the old criteria you listed.

I'm glad dd already has her place! We're out of catchment for their school but only cos we didn't get a place in the schools closest when ds started school. It was a very stressful time but thankfully the school he's ended up in is good and dd has been going to nursery for a year plus one term. If we had to pull them both out it would have been horrible for us all as they've both made really good friends and settled in well.
I'd definately feel like I was getting kicked again if dd didn't get a place!

There are government schools where I live in Australia where if you move out of the catchment, you have to move schools at the end of the academic year.

I don't see how the criteria here:

1. In catchment siblings (includes the sibling of a child who does not live in catchment, but was admitted before the start of the 2015/16 school year)

is the same as :

Catchment siblings
Catchment pupils
Non-catchment siblings
non-catchment pupils

If a school were to 'allow pupils who already attend the school 'to count as siblings.. then its not really stopping the 'I rent a house near the school'.. then move.. but use the sibling rule to get my kids in is it..

It will over time Tigsley as the 15/16 cutoff date won't change. This will be to allow people who got their first child in under the old rules to still get siblings in, but over time (6 years) these will gradually decrease to leave only the new criteria standing.

Not if as the OP says :

1. In catchment siblings (includes the sibling of a child who does not live in catchment, but was admitted before the start of the 2015/16 school year) *This date has changed every year since the catchment areas were introduced grin

It makes the 'catchment criteria' a farce!

It wasn't the OP who said that though. It was Tethers

Sorry I meant 'other' not 'opening'

Our county operates this way.

My niece had lived in catchment for 8 years since her ds was born, so he got a place in reception, she separated from her partner just before allocations for her dd and moved just out of catchment so her dd didn't get in. She lived right in the middle of both their schools, which proved very stressful since she really didn't have any help with getting them to school and doesn't drive.

She ended up moving her ds to the school her dd was allocated. He's had a shaky start but thankfully he has settled now.