Southwark Survey on School places

[BeccaL]

Southwark?s Overview and Scrutiny Committee is investigating the issue of school places planning and allocation in the Borough.

They would like as many parents in the Borough as possible to tell them what they think about this issue. They have created an online survey to collect their views. The link to the survey is here:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/DH3JYKW

I have no link to this but think it's important that as many people as possible give their opinions

[buggie]

Completed this the other day. Found it cathartic to have a whinge (a Month away from hearing if DD will get a place at our local,sch or if the catchments shrunk to a silly level!).

[Emski]

Indeed, Buggie! Been a couple of years since we went through this, and am still moved to fury thinking about it!

[landsberger]

I do wonder if people ever consider that perhaps it's the system that's broken, not the Council? If more people apply to a school then there are places, and there is a finite physical space that school can expand onto, then there are always going to be people who do not receive their first preference. Have they considered that all the secondaries and a good proportion of the primaries conduct their own admissions procedures (and NOT the Council) - the council just provide them with a list of applicants ?

I often hear people moan about not getting their first preference, and then find out that it's a tremendously oversubscribed religiously based school, and they are not of the religion of the school and/or live some way distant from it. What on earth were they expecting? Or they then allege some vast conspiracy theory that children further away have been chosen - not thinking for 10 seconds the admission could be based on a "sibling" or a "looked after child" or "medical" admission? No, better gossip at the school gates and concoct that some corruption or undue preference has been exercised, or the vast incompetence of the council.

And with regard to school expansion - everyone wants to expand popular schools, don't they...? Er, no. Certainly not local residents, who will whinge about parking and rubbish increasing? Or existing parents who will complain their child will be swamped or bullied in a bigger school. Or academies, who will refuse to expand because it doesn't suit them, irrespective of need or financial inducement. Never was the credibility gap so large, and the myths and legends of school admissions written so big.

[buggie]

Indeed landsberger, however in our case we're less than 350m from the school (our closest & under LEA control) & battling against over half the places being taken by siblings (especially after a bulge class 2yrs ago).

Our road has been comfortably in catchment previous years, but it's been shrinking every year so isn't a given 😳

[civilservant]

I looked at the survey questionnaire and decided not to respond because it didn't address any of the issues which we have faced as parents of a child looking for a secondary school this September. The real problem is the illusion of choice created by the current allocation system and actively promoted by the council and many of the schools themselves.

Our daughter, no sibling priority, not looked after, no 'medical' condition, has been told she's been allocated to the school that was her least favourite choice. She's also been told that she is number 100+ on the waiting list for the top three on her list. But even so, she's lucky compared to many of her classmates who were allocated to schools that weren't even on their lists.

We're lucky enough to have several good schools around ED, so this shouldn't be a problem. It becomes a problem because of the unreal expectations generated by the lack of an honest discussion about the real chances that a child will get into any particular school.

"Almost everyone gets into one of their top three choices" we are told. "Put school X at number 1 and you're sure to get in", we're told. Really? How do people separate out the myth from the truth? That's what the council should be asking itself (but isn't).

The only gainers in this game are the popular schools, the ones that have done the marketing and built up the reputation, deserved or not. The children (and their parents) swallow whole the myth that they've got a decent chance of getting into one of their top three choice schools and end up feeling like losers even before they've started school.

[landsberger]

And if the school DIDN'T prioritise siblings, do you imagine that the parents of kids with siblings would be happy ? Bulge classes are introduced where there's a local need and yes, one of the side effects is occasionally an increase in siblings, but, them's the breaks. There are 70-odd schools in Southwark, and people insist on going just to one.

"the illusion of choice created by the current allocation system" - yes, that's what happens when you have religious schools and academies choosing kids. It's nothing to do with how the council operates the system. The council doesn't 'actively promote choice' - it doesn't promote anything at all ! It just tries to find places for kids and if there are more applicants than kids, what are they supposed to do ?

"Our daughter, no sibling priority, not looked after, no 'medical' condition, has been told she's been allocated to the school that was her least favourite choice. She's also been told that she is number 100+ on the waiting list for the top three on her list. But even so, she's lucky compared to many of her classmates who were allocated to schools that weren't even on their lists". I do feel sorry for people in that situation. There is a chicken and egg situation though, I was reading some stats for an adjacent council and loads of people didn't bother using all 6 choices. They somehow imagined that putting less schools would somehow mean they would get the schools concerned. I was also listening to conversations on the bus about people selecting schools that were some way distant, and religiously based. If you're not of the faith, the chances of admission are slim.

Worst of all are the parents who say "I'm going to home school unless you offer my child Bacons/Charter/Michael Faraday". It is of no consequence whatsoever to the council and actually helps them out if you take your child out of the system. Do they SERIOUSLY think the Council will respond to this kind of emotional blackmail ?

I hear what people are saying, but ask yourself - how would you do it differently ? And, when you have devised a method, think how it would affect other people. Catchment areas (real ones, not those defined by distances from schools) are one method promoted by some advocates, but there was a school in Ealing that attempted to socially engineer its intake by missing out the Council estate slap bang next to the school, saying "they've got their own school to attend". It was a middle class attempt to keep Staceys and Kevins out of the nice little enclave they'd built up.

[civilservant]

I think overall you are agreeing with me,landsberger, and it would be interesting to know what your horse is in this race

I too would like to know why there's an absolute need for sibling priority in secondary allocation. In families i know where the siblings are at different grammar schools, there is no problem - if it is accepted in the selective system, why not in the state system? After all secondary kids get themselves to school, they don't need mum or dad or the au pair to take them there.

re your other point, none of the kids I'm talking about applied for faith schools using faith criteria but one - it was his top choice and he got in...

[Dulwich Born And Bred]

Personally , I would want my children going to the same secondary. I wouldn't want one walking ten minutes to the local secondary and its sibling having to catch buses to another one .

I also think to cut down on traffic , travelling ,and so forth , children should go to their local secondary .

I don't see the logic in going to New Cross to attend Habs for example having to leave earlier , cause congestion via taking public transport when they can walk to the local Charter/Harris.

[oimissus]

aren't secondary school children getting themselves to school? Even if you wanted to accompany a younger child just starting, the older child should be able to travel alone, or with their chums? I don't get why the should be automatic sibling priority at secondary, especially as siblings can end up taking up so many spaces, and that they may not be especially local any more.

[landsberger]

>I[...]would like to know why there's an absolute need for sibling priority in secondary allocation

There isn't and indeed some schools, like Bacons and Kingsdale, do not use it. There is an argument for the kind of hysterical parent who delivers the child to the school gate every day would be inconvenienced in having to do that to 2 separate schools

The axe I have to grind personally are schools that pretend to be 'comprehensive' and are not. And that parents are quite happy to have selective (or covertly selective) schools to keep the riffraff/non-English speakers/low-achievers out unless and until their child isn't admitted - then they scream like a bat that it's "unfair". The whole system is unfair.

[confusedbyitall]

Kingsdale do have sibling policy.

Think it should be scrapped at secondary school.

How do you think parents cope with kids at different schools - ask the hundreds that have to cope as first child gets a single sex school and siblings are different gender...they cope and get on with on it!

[njc97]

It's not just morning drop offs: it's holidays that don't overlap and other reasons as well.

[wonderwoman]

I'm not sure about scrapping it altogether but putting it as lower priority. I can see it more useful in primary school if you have all the children in same school but not necessary at Secondary stage where one school may be more suitable for one child but not for another. Also with single sex schools the children may well end up in different schools if their siblings are of different gender.

[newboots]

Harris Boys, Harris Girls, Sydenham School, Forest Hill School - many of the hundreds of East Dulwich children who attend these schools don't get the automatic luxury of a sibling place! And as for the Lottery school giving sibling places ... no one will ever be able to convince me of the logic in that. When you have to try and explain all the inconsistencies in the secondary allocation process to your children you really are confronted with what an unsatisfactory mashup it all is.

[civilservant]

newboots Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Harris Boys, Harris Girls, Sydenham School, Forest Hill School - many of the hundreds of East Dulwich

> children who attend these schools don't get the automatic luxury of a sibling place!

Where did you get that impression? Look at their admissions citeria.

ALL of these schools prioritise looked-after children, SEN children and siblings above proximity to the school.

And note that reverse sibling prioritisation is also allowed - so if your younger child gets a place in a popular school, your older child will have a priority right of transfer to that school!

One way forward would be to ask schools to publish the number of non-sibling places that they expect to have available each year. That would allow families to be better informed about the amount of real choice available.

[oimissus]

I think the point is that they are all single-sex schools so unless your children are all the same sex, there is no sibling priority. And presumably those families just crack on. Same with those who have a child/children at primary and secondary at the same time.

When the number of siblings can account for half or more of a school's places then that system isn't working, especially if there is no check to see if the sibling is still local to the school. There might be a case to be made at primary but secondary? I don't think so.

[newboots]

Yes, of course the point is that these are single sex. Didn't think I'd have to spell it out!

[civilservant]

so over to Southwark - many, if not most, of the local schools are academies, so Southwark will of course have no power to influence admissions policies, but Southwark CAN publish the number of places that were allocated to non-siblings.

Will they?

I suspect we'll find that the number of these who got their first preference will be closer to 20% than 60%.

[confusedbyitall]

I heard that Kingsdale had 120 places go to siblings this year!

[landsberger]

Er, they can only publish if they're given that number in the first place, civilservant. Which I am told they are not. They ARE told in the case of primaries. See page 18 in the attached.

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/6403/starting_primary_school_in_southwark_201516