Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

MNHQ

Primary school admissions - MNHQ needs your thoughts!

808 replies

RowanMumsnet · 08/04/2015 15:25

Hello

We've been asked (in advance of primary school places allocation announcements in England, Wales and NI next week) for MNers' thoughts on the current systems for allocating primary places - so as ever we thought we'd come to you for your insights.

What do you think about how your LA allocates places? Have you found the process stressful? Do you think the difficulty/stress varies widely across the nation - and if so, which locations are particularly difficult and which are relatively stress-free? If you're in Scotland, where the system is different, do you think it works well (or not?) Would you support a change to the allocation system - and if so, how would you like to see it changed?

Any thoughts welcome. Best of luck to anyone waiting to hear about their child's place.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
Almostapril · 11/04/2015 22:44

I have just returned to this thread. It been totally hijacked by the SB campaign. Was that really the original question ?!?!?!? I think not

YonicScrewdriver · 11/04/2015 22:45

Nope, but as MN has been asked for this set of opinions, I'm assuming someone is monitoring the balance of responses on the thread...

tiggytape · 11/04/2015 22:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

violetwellies · 11/04/2015 22:50

Current system rubbish, there should be a similar set up to Scotland. With an opt out clause for faith schools - atheists shouldn't be sent to a faith school, but they should pay their own transport.

If DS doesn't get into our (nearest) only choice primary we're home schooling.

IceBeing · 11/04/2015 22:51

The last question was "would you like to see changes to the allocation system"

My answer would be yes, I would like to see racial, class and religious discrimination removed from it....I ask for gender too but I already have the moon on a stick.

YonicScrewdriver · 11/04/2015 22:52

Well done, tiggy.

I can be passionate in defending a system that I think is broadly right from those who want to change it. But I think t1lly is on a mission to distract with that one.

PenguinsandtheTantrumofDoom · 11/04/2015 22:54

Ice - on the sex thing,are there many state single sex primaries? I agree, but have never come across any.

CalamitouslyWrong · 11/04/2015 22:58

Why not campaign for reception to be more appropriate to just turned 4 year olds instead? If policy expects children to start school a day or two after their 4th birthday, then school should be suitable for them.

The whole 'choice' thing is a complete red herring. Lots of parents don't actually have any genuine choice. The people doing the choosing will disproportionately be the already advantaged looking to secure further advantage for their children; those for whom there is no real choice will disproportionately be the most vulnerable families who really don't need yet another disadvantage.

Parents of summer born children already have choices. They can have their child start reception at just 4. They can delay the start to later in the year. Or they can choose to have their child start Y1 once they react compulsory school age. Those are choices. Just because you don't like them, doesn't mean they aren't choices. My DS1 will have one less year of schooling than he'd otherwise be entitled to because we moved from Scotland to England and he has a June birthday. That is just the way the system works. There's no point wailing about how he's missed out on some perceived entitlement to a number of years at school, because that's no actually how it works.

A small number of people required to prove genuine need for deferral (and I totally agree that this could be made clearer and more transparent) is in no way the same as anyone with an average or even above average summer born child having the right to defer. Not least because those deferring would actually, and demonstrably, be developmentally delayed so the age difference wouldn't matter. The fact is, it would routinely be used by pushy MC parents of perfectly able April born children looking to give their child the best advantage they can. That is not something I think we should be encouraging.

YonicScrewdriver · 11/04/2015 23:02

YY CW.

Guyropes · 11/04/2015 23:06

Primary admissions has become much more of a problem since the birth rate went up in about 2008.

Our council was still busy responding to falling rolls then, and closing schools down. I remember asking in 2010 why they didn't wait for the census in 2011 and use that information to inform their actions. I was told that they didn't use the census information to plan school place numbers.

They closed schools down, and lo and behold 3 years later were forced to expand a few schools to fit all the extra children in.

So all the rhetoric about 'falling rolls' was just a disguise for wanting larger, cheaper, more cramped schools.

And the by product is parents scrambling ever more anxiously for school places. And kids being driven and bussed miles around every day.

The incompetence of some local councils astounds me.

BoffinMum · 11/04/2015 23:14

My thoughts on the matter of admissions.

There are schools I know, many schools, where hardly anyone seems to live locally, and the places are predominantly allocated to younger siblings of families who originally lived in the area a decade or more previously, and then moved away maintained the ability to send their kids there due to sibling-friendly admissions rules at the expense of locals using the school for the first time. Meanwhile local kids, sometimes literally on the same street, are taxied across town to schools that happen to have empty places miles away from home, with their siblings having to go to other schools at the opposite end of town. This is a complete nonsense. If you move out of an area, the sibling preference rule should no longer apply. If you want your kids at the same school, send them to the local one.

BoffinMum · 11/04/2015 23:16

Easiest way to get rid of the summer born problem?

All kids to start school the September after they are six.
Free kindergarten from 3-6 to prepare.
It's not rocket science.

BoffinMum · 11/04/2015 23:18

Next thought.

If Local Authorities fail to provide proper school places in a timely manner, with sufficient notice for parents to make the necessary arrangements re: uniform, transport and so on, force them to pay school fees for children without places to go private.

That will concentrate their minds.

tiggytape · 11/04/2015 23:23

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

GiddyOnZackHunt · 11/04/2015 23:44

Boffin - yes some of us are living in areas where all catchment children get priority over out of catchment children with or without siblings at a school. I do think that should be the norm despite us very nearly falling foul of that rule.

morrissey100 · 12/04/2015 00:11

would like my summer born boy (28 of august 2011) to be allowed into reception 2016, and my views to be looked at

morrissey100 · 12/04/2015 00:13

it feels like the admissions team are so desperate for my school space yet they cant confirm weather he will start this year or next year. Sorry if post do not sense still new to this!!

sunflowershine1 · 12/04/2015 00:46

I don't think children are emotionally ready to start full time school at such young age ,especially summer born. They can learn a lot more in loving home...and why don't we just stop stealing their childchood

ArcheryAnnie · 12/04/2015 06:52

Have you read the thread, morrissey and sunflowershine?

sunflowershine1 · 12/04/2015 08:54

Yes ,I have read it. I think all of the admission business is just too much. In my area all schools have bad ofsted report so I rather educate my children at home

Almostapril · 12/04/2015 08:56

And let's not forget Boffin that LAs can only expand their own school (as well as not open new ones). In my area 50% are academies so just say no. LAs can't force faith schools to expand either. One RC local one said no

Almostapril · 12/04/2015 09:00

As an aside does anyone know if there has been a rise in home schooling? I often see people saying they do or will homeschool as they can't get in a school of their choice. I see people declaring 'I am never sending my child to x local school'. I get it if the allocated school is miles away but not if its local.

CalamitouslyWrong · 12/04/2015 09:00

Easiest way to get rid of the summer born problem?

All kids to start school the September after they are six.
Free kindergarten from 3-6 to prepare.
It's not rocket science.

Absolutely Boffin. That would be much better for everyone. There may still be an age effect but it will be reduced and matter much less. Someone will always be the youngest.

There is actually no good reason why reception should be unsuitable for any 4 year old. The problem is the DfE is full of people who erroneously believe that teaching children academic material earlier will improve later results, despite screeds of very compelling evidence to the contrary.

Almostapril · 12/04/2015 09:03

I agree CW. Reception should be suitable for 4 years olds. Ours is amazing. I don't support the summer born campaign but think that really formal academic teaching of 4 year olds is daft and the government obsession with it has gone mad

sfwebb · 12/04/2015 10:54

My aug born daughter would have possibly made the following school year if she had been as late as she was born early...she is a second child and everyone keeps assuring me that she will 'be fine'. But my just-5 (in Feb) daughter, who has always been so confident, vocal, able and ahead of her peers developmentally all the way through, is exhausted, has nails bitten to bleeding point, cries most mornings, doesn't want to read anymore and generally seems to have lost all her enthusiasm and confidence since just before Christmas, when a 16 week term was just TOO LONG. And she was 4 and a half when she started. School is no longer about encouraging a love of learning through play but getting bottoms on seats and targets ticked for the school. It is too much too early and everyone I know iwht younger children in the year can see - as we all can - the visible differences in their ability to cope emotionally, mentally, physically and academically. One friend, born 28th Aug, has well educated parents who have encourage and helped and supported her throughout. Yet she has been 'in trouble' for comments made towards other children - basically because she is nearly a year younger than some of them so just emotionally and socially not as developed. In our area there is little support or encouragement for children being kept at home a year longer and being allowed to start in reception the following year, even if they are simply a few weeks out of the year after. Flexibility for when children start for those children born between June-November might avoid this issue in the first year or so of school, with years 1& 2 then being equally flexible in who starts when, so that by the time children are in year 2 hopefully they will be in their 'appropriate' age year as their self esteem and confidence will have been focused on in reception and year 1 rather than academic prowess and ability to read or write or sit still for long periods at a time, indoors, 5 days a week. In this way, hopefully, by year 2 those who were less ready to start school will have found their feet and be ready to learn, rather than having already lost any desire to learn as is so often the case.