Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi, would appreciate any help, we're currently looking at buying a house, which seems like it only has 1 possible primary school (Except for faith schools) There are several other (imo, better) primary schools but none of them seem to indicate that we would be successful. What would happen if I don't put the closest school down on my 6 preferences because I would prefer to be further away at a better school?
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/201179-school-catchment-areas/
Share on other sites

The first school that can offer you a place will do so regardless of where on the list you put them and you will go on waiting lists for any higher preferences.


So if you put a long shot down as your first choice for example and the close one as your second, you will likely be offered a place at the close one and go on the waiting list for the long shot. In this scenario you would not go on waiting lists for third, fourth, fifth or sixth choice.


Hope that makes sense/answers your question!

Thank you so much! Still trying to make sense from this whole school catchment thing!


So the issue is, from the 2017 numbers, there would be only 1 primary school that we would be in the catchment for, but I don't really want to send my daughter there if I Can help it. If I don't put it as any of the 6 choices, will I run the risk of not getting any of my 6 (Other, further away, but still less than a mile away) choices? I guess, what happens if none of the 6 choices can offer her a place?

Okay, thanks! I guess the catchments change every year quite frequently as well according to the schoolchecker thing, so it's just a risk. The only school still a good school, it's just probably not one I would have naturally chosen - so it's not the end of the world.
In this situation, perhaps the strategic thing to do would be to put the close one as your sixth choice. This would maximise your chances of being offered a place elsewhere but guarantee (assuming safely in catchment) the close one which should offer if none of the others can. As pp said, you won?t be guaranteed one of your six so if they?re all long shots you risk being sent somewhere miles away within the borough!
Thanks Tomskip, it's actually in Sydenham, Byne Road. It's in the borough of Bromley. The only school that seems very comfortably in the catchment area is the Harris Academy Crystal Palace (Which is a good school but I'm not keen on these blueprint schools and neither do I like the idea of having absolutely no choice at all!) The very annoying thing is that the school that is closest to the house itself (Alexandra Juniors) the infant school that is the feeder to the juniors is out of catchment as they are different sites and the kids that are already at the infant school get priority for the juniors of course. The infant school also has a minuscule catchment area and we wouldn't have any chance of a spot. Last year only 4 places opened up at the juniors to those not from the infants, and then I'd be uprooting her during her primary education even if we were to get a spot.... Anyway.... I'm rambling....

If you do a search on the Sydenham Town Forum there?s a thread from a couple of years ago on Byne Road and school catchment areas.


Depending on where on Byne road the house is, St Bart?s and Kelvin Grove are both good schools which are potential options. With faith schools it?s worth remembering that they can vary quite a lot in terms of how religious they seem, and the split between % of kids attending through ?foundation? (faith) and ?open? or ?community? (ie people who happen to live locally) places. The schools can tell you the split (I think for St Bart?s well over half of places offered for next year were ?open? places) and the furthest distance offered for these places. So depending on how strongly you feel about the concept of faith schools they can be an option worth considering, even if you wouldn?t describe yourself as religious.


I know a number of kids at each of these schools (including my own!) - feel free to PM me if you have any questions.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I went to France recently and in the city I visited there were large billboards on the main streets urging people to stop their dogs from messing on the streets and in a little park a sign said something to the effect that this park was built for your enjoyment not as a dumping ground for dog mess. There were also big signs about not fly tipping. I wonder if councils are too worried about offending dog owners by making a fuss about this major problem. I was a dog owner for many years, got free bags from the council and there were even bins around then.
    • I was also woken by this. It happened in two bursts, which felt even more anti social.
    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...