Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rule Post Reply

[Ippyevie]

There's a new thread on this. I think we all should get involve!

http://www.nappyvalleynet.com/mums/view ... 15&t=55971

[hellokittyerw]

If you have children for the 2016/17 intake and are interested in Belleville, please register your interest with them for the new school!
Details on how to register are in the attached file.

[gruffalo's dad]

Belleville are looking into opening A NEW SCHOOL IN THE AREA. Why on earth are we still discussing WC's school distance press release?

To answer your question: because most of the people on this board do not live in south Battersea and the two state schools there are not relevant to them.

Which will most likely come to nothing and even if it goes ahead free up only a handful of spaces at a selection of borough schools. The most hotly contested will very probably not adopt as you just cannot have siblings being dropped off simultaneously across the borough's schools.

First, you are prejudging the result of the consultation.

Secondly, the fact that it will affect only a small percentage of places is not the point. Straight line vs walking distance only affected a small percentage of places but I didn't hear anyone argue that was a reason not to consider the change.

Thirdly, limiting sibling preference doesn't force parents to have siblings at two schools -the parents just have to move the older siblings to local schools, and they have years, not months, to do so.

[KatherineHepburn]

Gruffalo's dad, it is my opinion, that's all. And we are all entitled to one.
Not everyone agrees with you and not everyone feels that by stopping a handful of siblings starting schools, where there are a high proportion of families with primary age children, we are going to solve the shortage of school places.
It just isn't a solution and as evidenced here just pits parents against each other as they scramble for school places, especially where there are shrinking catchments.
No, I am not behind a change in the sibling policy. It is too abstract and complicated to manage.
I am, however, for the creation of more schools and more pupil places where they are required. Be that South Battersea, Earlsfield or anywhere else in the borough.

[gruffalo's dad]

KatherineHepburn: School admission policies are already very complicated and necessarily so. I don't know what you mean by the change being too "abstract" but as regards your claim that it is complicated, there's nothing more complicated in a geographical limit for sibling admissions than what is in the current admission rules. By all means argue against the proposed change on other grounds, but your argument re complicatedness doesn't stand up.

Even when Wandsworth had a significant surplus of primary school places there was still a scramble for places at some primaries compared with others. More school places aren't going to bring an end to pressure at preferred/popular schools.

The consultation may well pit parents against each other. That's how these things work. Arguing against the proposed change on that basis is like arguing against council elections. Parents already compete against each other for school places. Making the proposed change or not making the proposed change isn't going to change that.

[AbbevilleMummy]

I think the sibling policy should be looked into for no other reason than to relieve the frustrations felt by many. I personally don't think that it will have much of a positive impact on local school places available, but hopefully it will reduce the sweeping assumptions regularly made that half the places are taken up by children living miles away.

The changes I would make to the council's proposal is that I would extend the 800m to 1km or even 1mile as its really not that far and I would exclude anyone who has not moved since their first child entered the school i.e. if your address has not changed since first getting in, then you have automatic sibling priority.

[KatherineHepburn]

Gruffalo's dad: you have already read posts from parents who were once in catchment for their school but are no longer. Say they moved. Maybe even fractionally closer to their school but not close enough - what happens to the siblings? The parents moved! Gasp! They were no longer in catchment anyway.
Or what about the parents who were offered schools they had not chosen? Alderbrook for example? Say, having got in, catchment shrinks further and they move. The school wasn't their first choice anyway, do you take their sibling priority away? There are too many grey areas to police this.
Currently school admissions are not complicated. You are either in catchment or not. If in then the siblings will follow.
What cannot be denied is that within the borough and within certain hot spots there are not enough places. This is why I believe our energies would be better spent pushing for more schools than fighting over whether siblings should or should not get into existing ones

[hellokittyerw]

I think everyone agrees with the creation of more school places where needed.
But why should this longer term goal stop the council from addressing other issues (the siblings policy, the temporary addresses)?!
I just don't see why these changes should be mutually exclusive, IMO they should be done in parallel.

I also think Gruffalodad makes another very good point. Some objections just don't stand up -e.g. families needing to move out because they need more space, the proposed policy being too complicated etc.

[gruffalo's dad]

Gruffalo's dad: you have already read posts from parents who were once in catchment for their school but are no longer. Say they moved. Maybe even fractionally closer to their school but not close enough - what happens to the siblings? The parents moved! Gasp! They were no longer in catchment anyway.
Or what about the parents who were offered schools they had not chosen? Alderbrook for example? Say, having got in, catchment shrinks further and they move. The school wasn't their first choice anyway, do you take their sibling priority away?

The qualification I proposed in my post above and that was endorsed by several other posters would mean that in both of the hypotheticals that you mention the siblings would retain priority (unless, in the second hypothetical the parents move significantly further away from the school). AbbevilleMummy has just now restated part of the qualification that I proposed.

There are too many grey areas to police this.

Saying that there are grey areas does not make it so.
- There is no more difficulty policing the proposed rule (with or without the qualification which I proposed) than there is policing anything in the current admission rules.
- The proposed rule (again, with or without the qualification which I proposed) is clear and does not leave any discretion with anyone.

Currently school admissions are not complicated.

Currently school admissions are very much not a case of being in catchment or not. For most schools there is no catchment. It is a question of looked after children first, then siblings by distance, then non-siblings by distance. For at least five schools in Wandsworth there are priority areas, some with multiple levels of priority area. For the faith schools there are a whole bunch of other criteria. The rules are already quite complicated.

I think this is a worthwhile discussion to be having. I agree with AbbevilleMummy that the number of places involved are relatively small but I also agree with her addressing perceived unfairness on this issue of sibling admission may allow people to move on with considering other issues, such as the need for new schools.

[KatherineHepburn]

I understand the anger, I really do. And perhaps there is truth in the fact that unless the perceived wrongs (siblings, short-term renting) have been righted, we cannot move forwards.
What I would hate though is the important argument for more school places and more schools to be lost amidst the battle over siblings. I would like to see Wandsworth Councils press release for how they will increase the number of quality schools and places across the borough.
It was frustrating that this sibling argument spawned 9 pages of discussion, yet the announcement that Belleville may open a second school didn't even make it past one page. Go figure.

[AbbevilleMummy]

Please someone correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think Wandsworth Council can open any more schools, all they can do is increase the intake of existing schools. I think the only way to open a new school is for a group of people to apply to the government to open a free school. Therefore I agree with hellokittyerw in that there's no reason why sibling priority can't be addressed at the same time as new school opening. Also, once the sibling policy has been addressed and put to bed then there will be more support for the opening of new schools.

[aliyeo]

I would like to note that Alderbrook has been undersubcribed for the last 3 years for intake in every year group.It is 15 minute walk for many BTC families who are very upset about the fact that they believe there are not enough local school places. There are places near the Northcote ward, just not at particular schools. I agree that it would be great if the most popular schools were to create new classes/schools.

The change of sibling policy, according to Adam Wells, is the only legitimate area that they can change. In consultation with governors at the most popular schools, who run their own systems, this was the idea these schools prefer, is my understanding. They are looking at a way of discouraging short term renting with the intention of gaining a place at a school and then moving. It is these families who game the system that they are trying to eliminate. They often have other siblings who get priority and this is partly the cause of reduced catchment year on year.

This information is what I have been told by Adam Wells (WC) and several Governors at Honeywell School including Jane Neal (Governor of Honeywell and MP). It seems that they are doing what they can to make schools local and popular but it is of course a very slow process.

I personally knew of 11 children whose family rented short term to access Honeywell for September 2013. Add that to the 10 outside 800m and suddenly you are looking at a lot of local kids who missed out on places who live just beyond catchment.

Gruffalo Dad, your plan seems reasonable. Or the GPA which they run at Beatrix Potter seems to work too.

[Wandsworth Council]

For parents who are asking what is being done to provide additional school places in the borough, it is perhaps worth pointing out the following:

* Over the past four years 28 additional reception classes have opened in some of the borough's most popular and highest achieving primary schools to meet the growing demand from parents

* New free schools for primary age children have opened in Tooting, Balham and Roehampton.

* The council is currently in the process of building two brand new primary schools - each one will accommodate 420 children. These are at the vacant Putney Hospital site and on land formerly occupied by the Atheldene Centre in Garratt Lane in Earlsfield.

Parents also have a vast number of excellent schools to choose from across the borough.

School standards watchdog Ofsted currently rates 95 per cent of all Wandsworth schools as good or outstanding. This is the second highest score in the country.

In comparison only an average of 80 per cent of schools in other parts of England, and 85 per cent in London, have been given this same quality rating.

[Flowermummy]

Aliyeo – thank you for all the info!

I would like to comment on Alderbook for BTC families.
We looked at it as our back-up option, it’s an improving school, good diversity –we would have been happy to send my DD there EXCEPT for the distance between school and home.
We live BTC, Alderbrook is 20 minutes (22 actually) away from us. To drop-off/pick up and return home, that’s a total of 1h20 mins per day for the parents. We don’t have a nanny, we both work full time (luckily my work is very flexible).
Honeywell and Belleville are 5 mins from us, that’s 20 mins per day to drop-off and pick-up.
The additional 1 hr “school commute” for the parents would have been very very difficult for us to manage. When we got into HW we were delighted, not only because of the standard at HW but in equal measure because it’s so much closer to home.
That is why I fully support any changes that result in the schools being able to accommodate more children living very close to the school, including the proposed changes in the siblings policy.

[footiemum]

Does anyone know if the proposed change in sibling policy would be for children starting school in September 2016 or applying in 2016 for a reception place the following year. Thanks