Secondary School Admission

[cwazycaz]

What I learned this week is that if you want DC to attend oversubscribe secondary school it pays to cheat... we didn't but so wished we did! We have seen so many people pushing into the area and moving almost on the doorstep of fave school. It saddens me when I see people who can afford to jump the queue. We didn't get our first choice even though we have been in the catchment area for years. We see the catchment area shrinking every year due to queue jumping. Once DC is in school, parents move back out again where property more affordable and bigger and are guaranteed space for siblings thereafter.
How is that a fair system?

[gingeroots]

Couldn't agree more - this happened to us .
We didn't cheat ,although I alone personally could quote names of 6 people who did ,and DS didn't get in .
And yes it's disadvantaged to him .
People who do cheat talk to you as if you are mad and as if you've not done the best for your child .
This is not a victimless crime - you're not just doing the best for your child ,you're shoving aside others who would get a place if it weren't for the cheats / don't have the money to cheat .

[prh47bridge]

If they are genuinely moving into the area to get a place and then moving out again it is hard to do anything about that. However, if they are renting or buying accommodation to get a place but continuing to live elsewhere, or using someone else's address or similar you should report that to the LA. They should investigate and can withdraw offers if they find that they have been obtained fraudulently.

[crazymum53]

Some secondary schools in our LEA have found a way of dealing with this so that siblings who live outside the catchment area are a lower priority than other children who live nearer to the school. I think this is a good idea and perhaps more LEAs could do this. Some LEAs have a review of admissions criteria each year and this may be a good time to suggest this for the future.

[TheWomanOnTheBus]

And if people genuinely move into an area to get into the school, then surely that's fine too. We all consider many different things when chosing places to live. Proximity to parks, transport for work, street environment, good schools! Having the catchment area shrink is not the effect of people cheating; its the effect of more and more people wanting to move to be near a school they consider "good".

How long before your children go to school do you need to move to an area before its not "cheating". Before you conceive? I don't see why that is considered "queue jumping". (Except for the fraudulent or short-term use of rental premises.)

[inkyfingers]

I don't see why schools have the sibling rule. If entry to a school is on catchment, church attendance or entry test, this should be applied for each pupil. If you want a local school then you have to continue to live in the catchment (or near enough if the boundaries move as they do sometimes); or continue to go to church etc and not fulfil it once for eldest and move away.

[prh47bridge]

The Admissions Code doesn't stipulate a sibling rule but does encourage it. It says:

Giving priority to younger brothers and sisters of children already at the school supports families and can reassure parents about the safety of children when walking to school. Older children can also offer support to their younger brothers and sisters while at the school.

[cwazycaz]

Hi again

thanks gingeroots! I think you understand where I am coming from.
This is my first time blogging, but I felt so strong about the subject I had to do it.

I ought to clarify that by "queue jumping", I mean short-term use of rental premises (or even short-term purchases if you can still afford it) for the SOLE purpose of getting a place. I mean people who move just in time for the application form to be sent off, wait a little while, get the school wanted and move out.

I know of someone who got eldest DC in, moved out and has paved the way for other 3 DC's. (DC2 just got admitted) They live further out than we do and drive to school everyday.
The sibling rule ought to be reviewed. (I see your point Inkfingers)

I got it from good authority that the catchment area has srunk due to oversubscription.
Surely someone who has lived in catchment area for year should have priority over someone who has just swanned in.

[MrsGuyOfGisbourne]

I think its good to the sibling rule in primary where they need to be taken to school - not relevant, tho' more convenient in secondary.
Maybe one way to do it would be to give children priority based on the length of time they have lived in that house/flat? So if for five years from birth, regrdless of actual distance, but within a prescribed catchment area they get priority over people who have moved in more recently?

[TheWomanOnTheBus]

I agree re short-term use of rental premises. That in fact is a fraudulent application. And if you know about it, of course, you can always report it to the school who might then - if substantiated - withdraw the place. The family needs genuinely to live there. If its a one-bed flat for 4 DCs - not very genuine. However, I can't see how you can distinguish between someone wanting to move into the area for the schools and then moving out after a few months, or someone moving into the area for the shools, and only wanting to move out when the children are grown up!

What about the people who move in for the schools and then circumstances change a few months later(divorce, redundancy, job change). You can't really expect the schools/LAs to check all this and so a line has to be drawn somewhere.

[risingstar]

agree, if they move in for short time, not a lot you can do but by changing the sibling rule, i think it will make a difference

there was a to do locally a few years back because of huge developments being built on the other side of town. families that moved there looked at schools, realised that they would have to get in a car to go to any school and picked the ones on this side of town. not a problem really as there has always been around half the spaces taken by catchment area and half allocated by distance. this changed to if you go to x playschool you get some priority. a few years down the line, catchment area children were fighting for places at the playschool and the reception intake was full of siblings of children outside the catchment area.

rules changed, to siblings, catchment area, siblings outside catchment area, playschool.


in the space of a few years, this addressed the balance. suddenly people did not want to get first child into school, then face another in their catchement area school 4 miles away.

[cwazycaz]

There's nothing that can be done even when they move in even for a short time! even when they blatantly admit that they are only doing it for the the school and plan to move as soon as DC in!
I have come to believe that education is all about money!
You either have enough to afford private school or you don't. You either have enough to move to the catchment area and push people out of the way!

[TheWomanOnTheBus]

And what's the (moral) difference between:-

1. Family that can afford, say, the extra £50K to £100K to buy the house within the catchment who plans to stay there for the next seven to ten years.
   

1. Family that can't afford that amount, but can afford, say, £5K to rent a place for six months during the admissions process and then moves to just outside the catchment where the houses are cheaper.

[DaddyConfused]

Question for anyone who may know, we applied for secondary school online and on time - we had two preferences, but filled out 3 as the form required 3 and we were strongly advised to fill all 3. As it turned out, we indeed got offered the 3rd school which is the best of the rest, and closest of the rest - but much further than the first 2 and not as good imho. Anyway, if I appeal do we lose the place offered by school 3 and if we failed the appeal then would we be struggling to find a place at any available school in the City?

[prh47bridge]

No you do not lose the place you have been offered just because you appeal. You should accept the place at this school and appeal.

[DiscoDaisy]

Wher we live siblings only get priority if you live in catchment.

[GregorSamsa]

It is theoretically possible to do something about people who rent for a short while in order to submit a school application and then move back to their 'real' home.

For example, I've come across a primary school that specify that sibling priority will not apply where the family have moved house since the original sibling was admitted. Which seems a pretty fair way to prevent strategic renting, although obviously there will be some families who will be disadvantaged through no fault of their own.

There is a v. over-subscribed secondary north of London who insist on the application address being a permanent address, and publish a set of what they call 'Indicators' that suggest an address may not be permanent. If the indicators apply to you, then you are required to prove to the admissions committee that it is indeed your permanent address. The indicators are pretty comprehensive, and include things like:

The application address having been used by another family within the past two years;
Any rental agreement not extending past the December of child's Y7 year;
The application address is more than 3 miles from the child's primary school;
The address appears to be uninhabited at any point;
Electricity and gas usage for teh address are below reasonable expectations;
The applicant has moved house in the two years before application and not severed links with previous address (ie you still own your previous house).

So there are ways of minimising strategic renting, or at least making it far less attractive as an option.

[ptitemaud]

divide to conquer... you are criticizing parents who move to get a good school instead of being involved in changing the system that allows selection on grounds of wealth and/or property prices. It is not a rule set in stone. The lack of good quality schools is a political issue. There is a lot of other ways.
British parents need to ask their political representatives to change the system not attack parents who do their best for their kids.
if you don't like it, then protest and change it

[prh47bridge]

ptitemaud - I understand what you are saying but I cannot support parents who "do their best for their kids" by submitting fraudulent or misleading applications, thereby depriving other children of their rightful places.

[gingeroots]

Thank you prh47bridge - every child who gets a place because their parents have worked the system deprives a child who would have gained admission honestly .