Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5

Original poster

Why do most secondary comprehensives still have a siblings policy?

108 replies

bibbitybobbityhat · 08/10/2011 21:15

Any thoughts?

OP posts:

alemci · 08/10/2011 21:18

Probably because they already know the family and it gives a sense of continuity. My 2 yc got into their school as siblings.

CecilyP · 08/10/2011 21:20

It is very inconvenient for parents to have their children at different schools. What don't you like about a sibling policy?

cat64 · 08/10/2011 21:21

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Original poster

bibbitybobbityhat · 08/10/2011 21:22

Cecily - I have a girl and a boy in an area with two highly oversubscribed co-ed schools. Everyone else has to make do with single sex.

OP posts:

GnomeDePlume · 08/10/2011 21:52

For one year we have all three DCs in the same school. For one year we have parent's evenings which dont clash. For one year we have a single uniform policy. For one year the DCs can talk about things and explain them to each other - it does help.

TalkinPeace2 · 08/10/2011 22:06

why would they not?

RobynLou · 08/10/2011 22:08

because it makes things easier and cheaper for parents - being able to hand down uniform, knowing the school and teachers, not having clashing parents evenings/school plays etc.

Original poster

bibbitybobbityhat · 08/10/2011 22:15

All very nice if you have co-ed schools or siblings of the same sex. The inconsistencies in the so-called comprehensive system in this country are really beginning to get on my wick tbh!

We have a comprehensive school in my area which attracts 10 or more applicants for each place. If you have a family of 10 children, you only need to apply once and be successful and then all the rest of your children automatically get a place. It seems questionable to me, tis all.

OP posts:

LynetteScavo · 08/10/2011 22:16

Well said, RobynLou.

I actually said to DS1 this week "will you please take care of your blazer, I would like DS2 to wear it one day"

I live in a grammar school area. I know families who have 3 DC at 3 different schools because of this system. I also know a mother who didn't sent her DS2 to a grammar school because she thought it would be easier to have all 3 of her DC at one school.

cat64 · 08/10/2011 22:50

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

hmc · 08/10/2011 22:55

Christ -how many families with 10 children do you know op?

Original poster

bibbitybobbityhat · 08/10/2011 22:58

I know plenty with 4 and one with 7.

OP posts:

CardyMow · 08/10/2011 23:02

I know one family with 10 dc...but NOT all their dc go to the same school! her dc are 24(g), 21(g), 19(g), 17(g), 16(g), 12(g), 10(b), 7(g), 7(b), 3(g).

Her 10yo is at one primary, her 7yo twins at another...and her 3yo is likely to be given a 3rd primary...

Northernlurker · 08/10/2011 23:05

The problem with anything like a sibling policy is that if you're on the right side of it, it makes sense and you think it's fab but if you're on the wrong side - like the OP it appears - it seems unfair.

The problem in the OP's case is that the good school is hugely over-subscribed. The sibling policy having an impact is only a by-product of that.

CustardCake · 08/10/2011 23:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

GnomeDePlume · 09/10/2011 01:49

Try living in an area where you have a Hobson's choice of one slightly crap, in and out of special measures comp.

hmc · 09/10/2011 10:31

huntcat - 10 children!!!!!! OMG

CecilyP · 09/10/2011 11:43

I can now see how people playing the system can make a reasonable policy seem unfair. It would it be fairer to continue with a sibling priority, but with certain conditions. Eg only having a reasonable catchment where siblings are given priority. And, perhaps, not to apply at all where the older child in already in 6th form.

Blu · 09/10/2011 12:59

One problem with the sibling policy in over-subscribed schools is that it enables a family to get the first child in on distance (having possibly rented a place to apply from), and then move away and all the other siblings get in, meanwhile every year a new family gets their first child in and then moves away...and the accumulative effect is that lodas of siblings get in and the actual distance catchment for first children gets smaller and smaller.

I can see why some families would find it much easier to have children in the same school especially in rural areas where the schools might be miles and miles apart and very little public transport.

And why it might be important for some to send their children to the same school, but in terms of justification as to why a child has a priority over others to get in it seems a bit unfair. i.e a child who llives within 800m of the school really wold seem to have more of a case than a yr7 sibling of a child in their last year, who lives 4 miles away.

In any case, the children have already been in separate schools for years while the younger sbling was still in primary!

Wormshuffler · 09/10/2011 13:16

In the village where I live there were a couple of years with hardly any villagers applying, as there weren't any. So being that its a great school loads from the nearest town applied and got in. Fast forward to now and the village kids can't get in as siblings from the town people get in first. 8 last intake in a small village and these are people who have lived there more than 10 years. This is a primary though

Bonsoir · 09/10/2011 13:17

It is very inconvenient for families to have their children at several schools. That's why sibling policies are a good idea.

TalkinPeace2 · 09/10/2011 14:36

What I have learned from this thread is that the London education system is even more broken than I thought it was.
Time for ILEA to be resurrected in a non 1970's form methinks

CecilyP · 09/10/2011 17:26

I have gone from wondering why anyone would object to a sibling policy to understanding that there are problems. In the case of Wormshuffler's village school, it seems to me that villagers should get priority over siblings of existing children who do not live in the village. Then out of village siblings should be second priority group. I think the conditions from my earlier post should apply to secondary.

TalkinPeace2 · 09/10/2011 19:19

at our schools its
catchment plus sibling
catchment
non catchment plus sibling
non catchment
therefore Wormshufflers problem should never arise
I'd be interested to hear Prh's views on this

CustardCake · 09/10/2011 19:31

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5

Swipe left for the next trending thread