School bus: am I in cloud cuckoo land?

[partystress]

We live in Bucks, where they still have 11+. We are in a village, 7 miles from the nearest school, which is mixed and the only in-catchment option if you fail the 11+.

If you pass, there are 2 grammars in catchment, both in Aylesbury, about 14 miles away. One is single sex, one mixed. From where we live, the single sex is closer by about a mile.

Council have decided to save money by withdrawing free transport to any but your "nearest appropriate school", which means the nearest grammar if you pass, or the comp if you don't.

DS chose the single sex, so no worries there. But if DD passes next year, she will want to go to the mixed and that wil cost us £720 pa for the bus. People living the other side of Aylesbury will be in opposite position - they'll go free to the mixed and have to pay for the single sex.

I find this completely outrageous. These are state schools, for which we are in the catchment area. Why should a parent with no money worries be able to give their child free choice between single sex and mixed, while a family like ours would have to think really hard about whether we could afford one of the options?

Quite apart from the question of denying the choice of single sex/mixed, the schools have different specialisms, so the more arts-based school now effectively comes with a price tag, while science-based is free.

I don't want to get into a discussion about merits of 11+ (we lived here long before DCs came) and I know it is grossly unfair that the children who don't pass don't get any choice of school at all, but before I start campaigning, just wanted a reality check on whether having to pay £1,000 (which is what it equates to in pre-tax income) to go to your state, catchment area school is as appalling as I think it is.

[Grabaspoon]

Surely the mixed will be the appropriate school for dd as ds chose the single sex school and he is a boy. Or is there a girls only school too?

[partystress]

Sorry, should have made that clear - yes there is a girls' grammar, a boys' grammar and a mixed grammar.

The SEN transport issue is awful too. It just seems unbelievable to me that there can be discrimination of this sort - whether it be against children with SEN or childfren who live in rural areas.

Our council trumpets its success in having reduced car journeys to school over the past few years, but this move will massively increase traffic, pollution, congestion and, no doubt, accidents near school gates.

It also doesn't actually save money. It is not a move to a more efficient way of arranging things, it is simply moving the costs from a big central purchaser (the council) to lots of individual purchasers (parents). There is almost no actual saving to the council of our DD going to her 2nd choice school - the extra mile on the bus would be a minuscule proportion of the overall cost - but massive non-monetary cost to a girl who wil not go to a school that would be great for her.

[Saracen]

But, is this any different in principle from the arrangements which have always been in place in most areas for transport to state schools? Parents who are able and willing to transport their children do have more choice of schools. Unless the child has special needs and requires a particular school, most LAs would only offer free transport to the nearest school which has a vacancy, right?

Is it the whole system you are objecting to, or is there something special about your local situation which makes it seem unreasonable?

[prh47bridge]

The LA is only required to provide free transport if the child goes to the nearest suitable school with a place available and the distance to school is further than the statutory walking distance (3 miles for children aged 8+). Some LAs have previously provided free transport even when the child doesn't go to the nearest suitable school but they are not obliged to do so.

If I understand correctly, Bucks will provide free transport to the girls grammar school but not the mixed, the girls school being the nearest school. That means they are meeting their obligations.

I understand your point that parents with no money worries are better able to afford to transport their child to their preferred school. However, I don't personally see that means the taxpayer should pick up the tab when someone chooses to ignore the nearest suitable school.

[partystress]

Thank you for the comments - it is very helpful to hear why the council might be justified. I'll try again to explain my anger.

The council pay because they do not provide a school near enough to walk or cycle and there is no public bus service. They are obliged to provide free transport to the nearest school if that school is more than 3 miles away.

My issue is that our council chooses to organise its education system in a way which means our nearest school excludes the top 25% in terms of academic ability and then organises grammar schools so that our nearest is single sex.

I pay tax and council tax. I am paying for my children's education. I object to havng to pay a premium on top to enable my child to travel one mile further to go to a school within our catchment area. I appreciate that people living nearer have never benefitted from free transport to school, but they do benefit from having a much wider choice of catchment schools (eg children who do not pass the 11+ get to choose from 4 schools whereas children in our village get no choice at all).

The council will still pay for my daughter to travel to school. The extra they would pay for her to go to a more suitable school would be absolutely negligible - the cost of one more mile out of a 14 mile journey, once you take account of driver costs, contract management, etc etc is minimal.

The council would never get away with re-drawing the catchment areas in a way that left us with only single sex grammar, but effectively that is what they are doing to parents who cannot find £720 per year.

[RustyBear]

"The council would never get away with re-drawing the catchment areas in a way that left us with only single sex grammar"

Not sure that's true - when my DC went to secondary, the catchment schools for where I live were a boys' and a girls' comprehensive. If we'd wanted a mixed school and had applied for the nearest one we would have had no chance as it would be full of children from its own catchment and we probably would have ended up getting the unpopular one which was miles away.

They are currently in the process of changing the catchment areas so all the town centre schools have a common catchment area - but this disadvantages all the children living in the rural areas to the south - they will have no chance of getting into one of the town centre schools and will end up having to travel right through the town to one of the schools in the north of the borough.

[ThingOne]

I don't think that councils should fund transport for children to go to schools other than their nearest appropriate school. It can be tough, yes, and it does cost parents money.

Perhaps you could ask for her fares to be paid as far as the nearest school and then she walks the rest of the way? Is that not an option? The council will be eager to have clear rules to minimise expenditure. I live within three miles of three or four suitable secondary schools and my children will certainly be walking all/some of the way most of the time! I would try contacting your local councillor, cabinet member for education, etc and putting a reasonable case for transporting secondary children to Aylesbury. But don't be aggressive or you will get nowhere.

[GRW]

I'm in Bucks too, and have a DD at Aylesbury High school which is an all girls grammar. I won't have to pay for her bus until sixth form, as it's our nearest grammar school, but would have to if we had chosen the co ed grammar in Aylesbury. I would be prepared to pay for the bus for her, as it's a small price to pay for a grammar school education.

[bitsyandbetty]

We pay about the same for the school bus in Worcestershire as they only private free bus passes for those who are on benefits.

[EvilTwins]

I teach in a rural secondary school, in an area with a lot of social deprivation. Having recently been made Head of VI Form, I have only just discovered that the students who travel to us on the school bus are expected to pay part of the cost anyway (it costs their parents £300 per year). This is only marginally cheaper than getting the public bus (passes are £45 per month, but obviously the child then has to walk from the bus stop, rather than getting dropped off at school) When I first started at that school, there were 3 school buses, plus a late bus for students who had stayed behind to do extra curricular activities. Just before October half term, the late bus was stopped, as the council deemed it financially unviable. There is now just one school bus, as the council have decided not enough children use it to merit more than that.

OP, you should think yourself lucky that you get free transport to a decent school - not everyone has that option. And by the sounds of it, you will still have free transport, but you are choosing to send your DD to a different school.

[inspireddance]

OP perhaps now is the time to reinforce the concept of compromise with your DD. She has to decide if going to a mixed sex school is worth more than going to a grammar school.

Your being offered more than most people are and I don't see why anyone but you should pay so you can get the best of both worlds.

[QOD]

My understanding in Kent now, is that we will get free bus pass if teh nearest appropriate school is more than 3 miles away. Even though we are 11+ area, as the local high schools are considered able to educate children who DO pass the 11+ it means you WON'T get free pass for grammar school at all!

Our local comp is about 4 miles and the grammar is 10. Luckily dd is already there and that means we continue to get free pass until she leaves!

So Bucks is more generous then Kent as here, you'd have to pay regardless of what grammar you picked (although there is a Kent freedom pass which is currently £50 p/a but increasing to £100 wef Sept)

[RustyBear]

Actually, if you would pay £720 pa for the bus for a 14 mile journey, I think you're pretty lucky - DS went to a grammar school 7 miles away and it cost us £770 the first year and £880 the second. In his third year the fare was going to be over £1000, so he started going by train, with a 20 minute walk each end. And this was 12 years ago, so £720 looks like a bargain.

[Yellowstone]

In our area the LEA has announced that it is withdrawing all transport assistance for pupils starting in Year 7 in 2011 which goes beyond its statutory duty (the threee mile rule). The LEA has hitherto been over-generous. We live in a rural area so the cost of transport is one of the main stumbling blocks in ensuring true access to the grammar for lower income families and this now looks set to increase. This is a far bigger problem than the alleged effect of tutoring to spoon better off pupils in, with no very obvious solution.

[princessparty]

Our LEA have withdrawn all funding for sixth form students .We live 10 miles from the nearest school so that is going tio be a problem for us next year costing £500 p.a.Wheras they are still paying for kids from 30 miles away to travelpast 4 other secondaries to attend a faith school.

[prh47bridge]

I sincerely hope no LAs are considering refusing to provide transport if the family have a car. That would be a clear breach of the law.

[TeamLemon]

Not read the whole thread, so sorry if I'm repeating another poster.
Can your child not get the bus to the single sex school and walk the mile to the mixed school?
I'm sure she won't be the only child walking from that location, and 1 mile isn't far.

[boysinthehood]

I'm sorry OP but I fail to see how your situation is any different to a large proportion of the population who have little or no "real" choice when it comes to schooling. Our catchment senior school for DS2 is awful so I am hoping to send him to the grammar school 1 mile further down the road when the time comes, I will have to pay for his transport there. End of.

My DS1 attends a special school, he is quite severely disabled and his school is quite far from us but the only one suitable for him and his needs. His transport to school is currently under threat due to budget cuts. If his school bus gets cancelled i'm quite literally stuck. There is no way on this earth I can physically manage to take DS2 to his school on time at 8:50 (and I have to take him, he's only 6 and it's a two mile walk across lots of very busy roads) then get DS1 to school for 9am 7 miles away when I don't drive and also have a small baby. I would then have to pick both of them up at exactly the same time.

Apologies for having no sympathy for your situation but I would rather the government spend the money on those in situations like mine than yours.

[Decorhate]

I agree with all those who say OP is lucky to have a choice! We have no choice other than single sex (comps not grammars) as we can't get into our local mixed schools as they are so over-subscribed.

[partystress]

Well it does sound as if our council are no worse than others. The free bus to achool 1 then walk the rest wouldn't work as she would not get to school 2 on time. I do appreciate that people living in big cities seem to struggle to get children into first choice schools and so (assuming she does pass 11+) we are lucky to have a choice at all. I just think it is basically dishonest of council to have catchment areas which actually count for nothing in the sense that financially we will be in exactly the same position as someone who chooses to send their child out of catchment. (And, yes, the grammar schools do take quite a high proportion of children from neighbouring counties which means there are fewer places for in-catchment children.)

Transport to school for children with disabiliies is a whole other question and it is unbelievable that councils are even considering cutting. The worst thing about all of these kind of cuts is that they won't save money, they will just force the costs further down the line to individual families. That is not Big Society, it is Big Stupidity. Looking at the wider costs in terms of parents' time, congestion, RTAs, etc etc, the actual costs will be higher - they will just be more dispersed. And then the impact of these costs will be to reduce what families have to spend in the local economy, so the suffering is spread further.