Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rule

173 posts
AbbevilleMummy
Posts: 830
Joined: Jun 2010
Options:
Share this post on:

Re: Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rul

Postby AbbevilleMummy » Thu Sep 11, 2014 4:37 pm

oh, I see, because if you have to do 2 school drop offs and get to work it would be impossible?

Also, don't all Wandsworth primaries start and finish at the same time? I just cant see how it would work. You would have to have your first child change to the same school surely? And then there may not be a place!

It would be interesting to hear from Beatrix Potter parents to see what they think about their own sibling policy, particularly the impact when it was introduced.
Post Reply
Thatsnotmymonkey
Posts: 29
Joined: Aug 2010
Options:
Share this post on:

Re: Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rul

Postby Thatsnotmymonkey » Thu Sep 11, 2014 4:41 pm

It just makes so much sense to me to keep siblings together in school. It also helps with parents commitment to the school community. Helping out with different events, supporting activities etc would be even more complicated if you are trying to support two different schools.
Post Reply
AbbevilleMummy
Posts: 830
Joined: Jun 2010
Options:
Share this post on:

Re: Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rul

Postby AbbevilleMummy » Thu Sep 11, 2014 4:43 pm

when you look at the numbers I'm not sure it would increase catchment areas MASSIVELY.

According to the council website in 2014 174 siblings who lived more than 800m from the school were offered a place in the borough. Across 62 primary schools. On average, that's only around 3 places per school. Therefore maybe only increasing catchment by a few meters.
Post Reply
Amandineb
Posts: 20
Joined: Nov 2013
Options:
Share this post on:

Re: Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rul

Postby Amandineb » Thu Sep 11, 2014 4:58 pm

Dear Ladies,

We bought a house 417 m away from Belleville and paid tax duty at the same occasion :)
I felt really frustrated last year when I had been offered a place at Alderbrook Primary (2 miles away from home) for my son when I see tons of children every morning arriving at Belleville in a nice car driven by their nice mums.

We are still on the waiting list for year one and I am sure we won't get in

I am not saying every body is cheating

Sometimes it is just bad luck

Still, checking from time to time that the parents are still living in the school area is just common sense

A lot of families are really upset and things have to change
Post Reply
kiwimummy
Posts: 414
Joined: Feb 2011
Options:
Share this post on:

Re: Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rul

Postby kiwimummy » Thu Sep 11, 2014 5:03 pm

I think a previous poster hit the nail on the head.

The issue is that there are not enough places - pitting family against family doesn't help anything.

I'm pleased about the crackdown on temporary residences, but I also confidently predict a rise in appeals and litigation over that one as it will catch genuine people as well.
Post Reply
jg75
Posts: 127
Joined: Nov 2013
Options:
Share this post on:

Re: Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rul

Postby jg75 » Thu Sep 11, 2014 5:08 pm

Sorry I also didn't mean to be disparaging to SAHMs/SAHDs either - I was just looking at the situation from my point of view when both parents are working and already being discriminated at work because of childcare/school arrangements. It would be an absolute nightmare to have to do two separate school drop-offs, quite frankly. When the school place has been obtained in good faith and parents still live at the same address when the sibling applies for school, I would find it very unfair.

Anyway, I agree with all previous posters - more school places please!
Post Reply
Flowermummy
Posts: 142
Joined: Sep 2014
Options:
Share this post on:

Re: Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rul

Postby Flowermummy » Thu Sep 11, 2014 5:13 pm

AbevilleMummy - 174 is not a lot of children, you are right, but i hope that the policy will also discourage those who rent temporarily from further out to get their first child in (safe in the knowledge that they can move out afterwards and their other children will take advantage of the siblings policy)
Post Reply
AbbevilleMummy
Posts: 830
Joined: Jun 2010
Options:
Share this post on:

Re: Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rul

Postby AbbevilleMummy » Thu Sep 11, 2014 5:31 pm

Amandineb - therefore under the current proposals, your second child would not be able to get a place at Alderbrook which is ridiculous.

You could be left with no place at BV for your first, no priority for your second at Alderbrook and therefore your second ending up at another totally random school that is neither on your list or convenient.

This is why changing the sibling policy to add a few meters to reception catchments is very dangerous. You end up with crazy results.
Post Reply
hellokittyerw
Posts: 84
Joined: Aug 2014
Options:
Share this post on:

Re: Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rul

Postby hellokittyerw » Thu Sep 11, 2014 5:38 pm

2 different school runs for parents with siblings is of course very tough on the parents!

But so is the case of Amandineb, where every day she needs to walk to school extra 20 mins each way (thats 40 mins extra a day).
I would not worry about getting Amandineb's second child into Alderbrook, as they seems to have free spaces in most years (i am not sure about reception, but i have checked Y1 and Y2).

The 174 siblings affected may be a small number, but i would bet that a lot of those 174 siblings identified are mainly at the very popular schools.
Post Reply
AbbevilleMummy
Posts: 830
Joined: Jun 2010
Options:
Share this post on:

Re: Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rul

Postby AbbevilleMummy » Thu Sep 11, 2014 6:12 pm

I totally agree that Amandineb's situation is horrid and that something should be done, but these proposals could make it even worse. It would definitely be a concern that her second child would not get automatic sibling priority as she is 2 miles away. Therefore her second child would be way down on the list for entry. Behind siblings living within 800 meters and all other children living closer than 2 miles. In an improving school that is becoming more and more popular, in a few years time, it would be a very real possibility that her second wouldn't get in.

I also disagree that those 174 children are likely to only relate to the most popular schools. They could very well relate to the least popular where catchments are much much bigger and children don't live very close to the school at all as they don't need to in order to get in.
Post Reply
Goldhawk
Posts: 1028
Joined: Jul 2010
Options:
Share this post on:

Re: Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rul

Postby Goldhawk » Thu Sep 11, 2014 7:03 pm

Belleville previously consulted on a priority area and the plans were rejected

Their admissions policy measures distance from the Webbs Rd site only so you can live next door to the Meteor site and not get a place
Post Reply
pie81
Posts: 742
Joined: Apr 2011
Options:
Share this post on:

Re: Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rul

Postby pie81 » Thu Sep 11, 2014 7:24 pm

I agree that the ideal solution is expansion of school places.

In the absence of funding for that, however, the next best thing is to make the current admissions schemes fairer.

I am very glad they are looking at the sibling rule. HOWEVER I think the change should not be "more than 800m and your next children don't get in". It should be more along the lines of "if you move address between children then your next children don't get in".

The 800m rule a) doesn't catch enough siblings (174 isn't a big proportion) and b) is unfair on those who've stayed where they are but seen the catchment expand around them.

There may need to be an exception for renters whose landlords terminate their lease between children ie it's not their choice to move ... not sure how that would work though (you could see a lot of people asking their landlord to terminate so they'd be in the exception)
Post Reply
balhamite
Posts: 215
Joined: Nov 2010
Options:
Share this post on:

Re: Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rul

Postby balhamite » Thu Sep 11, 2014 8:00 pm

I think this is definitely unfair for people who haven't moved between applications. We are in a school black hole and I don't think within 800m of any school and I would hate for my kids to get different schools.
Post Reply
supergirl
Posts: 1241
Joined: May 2011
Options:
Share this post on:

Re: Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rul

Postby supergirl » Thu Sep 11, 2014 8:03 pm

Well i agree with more school places are needed.
But the problem is, in my view snyway, that parents only want a handful of state schools (BV, HW, Allfarthing, BP, Wimbledon Park of the top of my head). Some schools HAVE places but parents dont want them.

The council had places for 70-80% of children in the borough i seem to remember from a conversation i had with admissions. I would like yo know how many parents out of these 20-30% would be prepared to put their kids in say Falconbrook or High View? (Disclaimer: i am not suggesting these schools are bad but that they are not the popular ones).

From what i understand the council is adding portacabin where they can and at schools that are oversuscribed. There are schools in the borough that are undersuscribed.

So what the council NEEDS to do is spending money, time and resources so these schools up their game and become popular.
Although i suspect and i m not PC by saying that, that for many parents they want the popular ones because they think the diversity although broader than in independant schools is still largely middle class given the price to rent or buy.
Post Reply
gruffalo's dad
Posts: 79
Joined: Jan 2014
Options:
Share this post on:

Re: Parents to be consulted over plans to change sibling rul

Postby gruffalo's dad » Thu Sep 11, 2014 8:28 pm

What do people think about the following:

Priority for siblings provided that either:
- they are within 800m of the school; or
- the home address from which application is being made is no more than [400]m FURTHER from the school than the address from which application was made for the oldest sibling attending the school.

I'm open to discussion on how the distance for the purpose of the second point.

With this approach:

(1) Nobody will lose priority just because the catchment area shrinks. I think we can agree that would be unfair.

(2) Nobody will be penalised for moving house provided they don't move significantly further away. I don't think someone who would have priority under (1) should lose it just because they move house, provided they don't move a lot further away.

I think that this addresses some of the criticisms below while still dealing with the issue of people moving WAY outside the catchment area and still benefiting from sibling preference.
Post Reply