Sibling priority screwing over local kids

[SJ1987]

We missed out on getting in to our (extremely popular) local primary school. It’s an extremely good school, multiple ‘outstanding’ oftsteds, amazing pastoral/SEN provision. We live 0.38 miles and the max distance this year is 0.32 miles. The area we live in isn’t desirable for the amazing school. It would be considered rough by a lot of people.

Following a FOI request only 8/30 places went to children on distance criteria. 19 places went to siblings. Siblings are prioritised over distance.

We’ve submitted a further FOI request to clarify average and furthest sibling distance. But I know for a fact that kids attend the school from many miles away - often maybe having lived near the school before moving to ‘better’ places.

Are we able to challenge this? It seems grossly unfair that local kids are missing out to siblings who live in different towns. Is there a distance at which people are supposed to move schools if they move house? Or is this just the game when it comes to the best schools?

I think the Australian system is much better.

Every school has a catchment, and every address falls into a catchment. If you live in that catchment, the school has to take the child. If you don't live in the catchment at the time of enrolment, it's almost impossible to get into the school (although there is some room for compassionate grounds).

Some do listen to those arguments on appeal. Many have it as no.1 in their criteria to admit children requiring social care support which may be due to a parents medical needs.

My walk to school was close to 1.5 miles each way to school with a parent who had a disability that made that walk not possible for them sometimes.

My local school is over 2 miles away and we'll probably end up at a less desirable one further away. I agree that schools do best when they build a community and relationships with families including siblings so don't think a child should get a priority based on distance over a child with a sibling there.

What if there are 35 siblings for 30 places? Should all 35 get a place?

Another point is... when a child fails to get into their local school, there often isn't space in any other local schools too. The displaced child can end up miles away. How is the the family supposed to be a member of the community then?

A system where you apply to be counted as In catchment sibling, so that families requiring help can benefit from it can get the help, while putting off the families playing the system would be better.

@SJ1987

So, you'd be happy to move your older child/ren to a different school if you had a younger one starting school & you were now living further away

it's a huge shame for children living closer, but you need to think of the existing children too.

PuttingDownRoots there are some extremely popular and over-subscribed schools in London where even siblings aren't guaranteed a place.

I agree with this.

It would be much more fair overall and parents would be less likely to play the system.

The single parent isn't prioritised because someone else got there first with their older children. If the single parent found themselves with children in different schools they'd be properly scuppered.

I think it's fair enough not to prioritise siblings at secondary school, but I think it's essential for both family quality of life and the school community to do so at primary.

My local primary has changed their admission categories to the following 1) LAC children ect 2) siblings within parish border 3) children within parish border 4) siblings outside parish border 5) all other children outside parish border. This means local children take presence. Although may not help you now, would speak to the chair of governors to look into changing admissions criteria. This could help you move up the waiting list in the future

@SJ1987 so 100 yards??? that is ridiculous!! how far away is the next nearest school? who got the other 3 places available???

I think that's fair enough if the parish border (or catchment) is big enough that people can move within it to accommodate changes of circumstance. It wouldn't be my preference but I don't think it's a crazy criteria. But in cases like OP's I don't think it's fair to restrict people to within less than half a mile of the school.

Im a bit confused OP

Your children didnt qualify because they were out of distance? Its not like they missed a space but you live within the specified distance. You live too far away?

If it was because I could afford a better house in a better area then absolutely. I am a firm believer in society > individual.

If it was because something terrible happened to me then sure, maybe I’d feel differently. As I said, in a totally ideal world, rare cases like this would be on a case by case basis. Certainly where I am though, people are generally bettering their and their DC’s chances by moving, not worsening them. More local people are losing out compared to what I imagine would be a smaller percentage of siblings losing out.

I didn’t say it should be restricted to the distance criteria. I clearly said it should be ~1.5 miles in a previous post.

A lot of families around here are in private rented accommodation, at the mercy of landlords selling up and so on. And the rental market is really difficult at the moment so families don't have much choice where they move to. So, I'm glad that siblings get priority because it means that those children already at school are able to stay in the same primary school, rather than needing to move around because a younger sibling didn't get a place.

No just in London... we are in a small town where school places are few and far between! DD missed out on a primary school place due to siblings taking up all places. No chance of getting in.
She ended up in a little village school 7 miles away... when DS started he was at least given a school place in our town.

I don't need to tell anyone about the joy of having 2 DC at 2 different primary schools ...

I’m confused what you are confused about. Nowhere have I said I think we should have got a place. As I clearly said in a previous post, criteria were applied and we were unlucky. We are no appealing, we have no grounds. I was pointing out that children who live ~350 metres from a school not getting in in preference of siblings who live miles away seems unfair. I was wondering if this was a commonly held opinion or not. Responses are split. I hope that sums the thread up for you enough.

Depends on the admissions criteria. Our primary was 1) children in care, 2) children in catchment with siblings, 3) children in catchment, 4) children out of catchment with siblings, 5) children out of catchment. All children within each category were ranked by distance. As long as they’re transparent with the criteria, there’s not much you can do. 🤷‍♀️

My children's school is 3 miles from my house. I used to live close. I don't drive . School run is an arse. But they have been there since they were 3 years old. They are now at the end of year 3&4. I would never move my kids from their school.

When dd was at primary many parents moved just out of catchment to a cheaper area after their dc started school knowing that the excellent secondary took pupils from feeder schools.

It got changed to distance from the school as people moving into the town couldn’t get their dc into the local schools.

We were lucky in that we lived almost equidistant between two LA’s.
One of dd’s friends moved with her dm from the south east 250 miles away, lived with an aunt, they hadn’t got a place in school at this point so she bought the school uniform and sent the child on the first day. They accepted her and the dm and dd stayed until the dc was 18 then moved back to their home down south. The df visited at weekends.
Quite bizarre.

The trouble is, any way, there are losers. It can’t be helped.

In the event that the move is through choice, OP, rather than divorce, financial loss etc… the family would hold on another 2-3 years as needed and then move. It wouldn’t help you.

This is pretty much how Scotland does it too. Although if you want your child to go to a school which is outside your catchment area and they have space for them, they'll get a place there instead.

Are there class size limits in Australia and Scotland?

Yep.

The national maximum class sizes for a single year group are: Primary 1 - up to 25 pupils. Primaries 2-3 - up to 30 pupils. Primaries 4-7 - up to 33 pupils.

Sounds like your area doesn't operate a catchment policy. It's just pure distance. In my county, each school has a catchment, and only catchment siblings are in a category above catchment children. Therefore, you have to stay local to keep siblings toghether.

That said, we have a lot of primary school places. You'll get in even if you are 15min drive away.

2 miles is hardly distant. It happens, people move. Nobody wants to disrupt their childrens’ school life if they can help it. It’s hardly “clinging on”. Siblings should be prioritised.