Any real moral difference between a short term let for admission purposes or permanently moving

[OhDearConfused]

Question says it all really.

A short term let or a more permanent move, in either case to get you into catchment for admissions at a popular school, still has the effect of reducing the catchment area, increasing housing prices, disadvantaging the poor, and so on.

Is there a real difference?

Struggling with this at the moment, as in catchment for a not-particularly-attractive school, when many others are doing one or the other to get into another school a little further away.

Just wondering what other's views are?

Describing a school as crap is not morally wrong That's just silly.

It's not very informative or descriptive because we all have different opinions of what crap means, but some schools are crap.

How would you prefer to describe a school that has a significant number of children in year six who are barely literate?

I don't think it matters whether we are talking about primary or secondary tbh.

"How would you prefer to describe a school that has a significant number of children in year six who are barely literate?"

Give me a link to one and I'll tell you.

LOL! Do you really think schools would put that information on their website?

Or are you denying that it happens?

After a very quick google, I found this on the National literacy Trust web site

The number of children achieving the expected levels for reading at age eleven is 84% in 2011

Which means 16% of children are not achieving expected levels. That is a lot imo, considering that not all of those children are likely to have SEN. Which in turn means that there must be schools out there that are failing to get NT children achieveing expected levels at age 11. I would say that is quite crap.

Custard, thank you. I'm glad you see it that way, as I do too.

There were children admitted from teh waiting list after my child was awarded his place though, and the school has not gone over PAN to admit my child. They just offered one less waiting list child a place than they would have done otherwise. I know it's different for primary/infant school admissions.

"LOL! Do you really think schools would put that information on their website?"

Well, they do put their SATs results on their websites- that's a pretty good indicator!

i have a few years to decide which school dd1 goes to. if the catchment school doesnt improve i will readily move to an area with a succesfull school. rent or buy.

I remember at nursery my daughter didn't get a place at the 'best' one. I was distraught and went with the local one and it was brilliant. Brilliant facilities, brilliant staff, brilliant everything. Only around 15 kids in each day, for 3 well trained lovely staff.

Then for school we were worried again. Again we went to the default school. Turned out to be excellent. People were fearful and sneering about it, many white middle class parents took their kids out as soon as they could but it was a happy ending for us, a good school that could handle any problem that was thrown at them.

Again for secondary school it has been much the same. I still hear people mention the school name with dread and fear, talking about the 'intake' as though it were a euphemism for 'scum'. But dd is fine, learning well and everything's OK.

Sometimes life is what you make it and schools are no different.

Unless buying organic is morally wrong, having a nicer safer car is morally wrong, everything that money buys better is morally wrong, which you may think it is, it is not morally wrong to do the best by your child. Is it morally wrong to buy the larger house with the absolute purpose of getting into a brilliant state school when you can afford private? Pushing up house prices, is that morally wrong? Is it morally wrong to make choices for your child that are better than others? Is unfair morally wrong?

See this argument, for me living in Bristol, is that only the wealthy children get private or best state education. The new secondary was built in the middle of one of the most expensive areas.

We live in a capitalist society, it starts early, may be shit, may be great depends how slick your paddle is.

Interesting web post on educational advantage and the middle classes

wecheated- But you didn't cheat did you? You were following the rules!!
You have done absolutely nothing wrong!! We did the same (although we didn't in the end move back to the family home, we remortgaged it and bought another property in catchment)

"Is it morally wrong to buy the larger house with the absolute purpose of getting into a brilliant state school when you can afford private? "

The issue though is that - for state schools at any rate - it's a state provision that comes out of general taxation and should be accessible, and equally good, for all.

Comparing it to organic carrots would only work if carrots were free from your local council, and they gave people in certain areas organic ones and people in other areas rotten manky ones.

Actually, more on the carrots - what the current system is like, is that the people who have been assigned the supply of organic carrots feel they have a not just a legal but a moral right to them. If the people who have been assigned mouldy carrots think they would rather swap them for organic, well tough!

I don't see why 'better parents' has to come into it.

I very much doubt that any parents try to get their children decent carrots feel any sort of joy over the fact that other children are eating manky carrots. They are just grateful that they have got something good enough for their own children.

It's not a competition, it really is just as simple as a parent wanting to do the best they can for their child. The same as any parent would want. That doesn't make them superior, or better parents, but nr does it make them immoral, selfish liars who couldn't care less about any other child except their own.

Do you know what I don't care about every child as much as my own.

When people buy in the nice areas, where the good schools are, and pay £20k above the market value/price for that house are they immoral? For the sake of their child's education they, eventually, make someone else homeless. By pushing house prices up.

FGS. I can only imagine those wailing about morality don't genuinely face the dilemma. For the sake of £10k I can ensure that all of my dcs get into a school that we are 0.5km's out of the catchment (going on last years intake). The alternative is dire, truly dire. I can't afford to move permanently. I can afford £10k. So either people can't afford to rent, can afford to move or live in the nice area already.

But Custy, you can't help a shit catchment. Seriously the difference between the schools is too huge to try to change.

Morals or not, I want my dcs to go to decent schools.

I'm not here to change the world.

"the answer to that is not to ignore the unfairness and exploit it for your own ends"

And the people who are already in the good catchments? Are they not ignoring the unfairness? They're certainly getting the benefit of it, and, I would bet, doing nothing to address the inequality.

Lying and "cheating" to get a place in a good state school may be illegal, but I can't agree that it's immoral to do this when the system is so immoral to start with. "stolen" the good carrots? Uh, no. Everybody, according to their means, pays taxes for these carrots. The carrots should not have been assigned so unfairly in the first place.

Using the carrot analogy, they would therefore be happily feeding their children organic carrots, while feeling smug and content that the child down the road had the rotten ones.

I really think you are wrong about parents feeling smug and content at the thought of a child down the road having rotten carrots, or a second rate school. Maybe that is true for a small minority of people that are generally not nice people, but for the majority of parents that just try to do their best by their children, they are feeling nothing but grateful and relieved that their much loved child is going to have a happy environment in which to fulfil their potential.

Custard, I take your point that all parents should be doing more to demand improved standards in all schools. You are right, we probably should. But really, what can we do? What are you doing?

As I said upthread, you can have brilliant teachers in a school with brilliant facilities, but if a large number of the parents have a bad attitude, there is nothing any of us can do to stop that rubbing off on the school.