Victory over school siblings

• Alison Smith
  (Unregistered User)
  Dec 15 09 11:00
  Our Ref: 7015
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  We do now live in the "designated area" of this school. View more information at my blog http://www.parentstakepart.com
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

  Report this comment

• Liz
  (Unregistered User)
  Dec 15 09 11:56
  Our Ref: 7017
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  I don't think siblings should be forced into different schools. It means that one child always has to be late, potential clashes of school activities etc. All stresses parents and children shouldn't have to deal with.
  
  
  
  Therefore, siblings out of catchment should come ahead of non-siblings in catchment. So the order should be siblings in catchment, siblings out of catchment, in catchment non-siblings, out of catchment non-siblings. (These should come after the usual higher priorty of looked after and special needs etc).
  
  
  
  Yes, maybe some in catchment children won't get into their catchment school, but this is the fairest solution. If this causes lots of problems then either the catchment areas need to be reconsidered or schools need to extend to be able to admit more children.

  Report this comment

• Mike
  (Unregistered User)
  Dec 15 09 17:52
  Our Ref: 7021
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  There is a wider issue at play here too. The other proposed change to the Admissions Arrangements for 2011/2012 is to do away with the criterion "Social/Medical Need". This would be a failing by the local authority in doing their legal duty under the disability discrimination act by not making "reasonable adjustments" for people with disabilities.
  
  
  
  I for one will watch with interest whether this one gets through and am surprised that the newspaper didn't pick this out as a great headline!

  Report this comment

• Phil
  (Unregistered User)
  Dec 15 09 17:54
  Our Ref: 7022
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  It's a shame that most people with pre-school age children are far to busy raising their children to read the buried link on the Bracknell Forest web site and have their say. More should be done to bring this to the attention of these people. Am stunned that we consult on admissions for such a period in advance! It'll be too late when this is on the radar of those that it effects directly.
  
  
  
  Clearly this must have been the case with this family who have disabilities. It's shocking.

  Report this comment

• Phil
  (Unregistered User)
  Dec 15 09 17:54
  Our Ref: 7023
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  It's a shame that most people with pre-school age children are far to busy raising their children to read the buried link on the Bracknell Forest web site and have their say. More should be done to bring this to the attention of these people. Am stunned that we consult on admissions for such a period in advance! It'll be too late when this is on the radar of those that it effects directly.
  
  
  
  Clearly this must have been the case with this family who have disabilities. It's shocking.

  Report this comment

• Margaret
  (Unregistered User)
  Dec 15 09 18:00
  Our Ref: 7024
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  I have checked out several other local authorities and ALL of them put siblings (in and out of designated area) before any other criteria (except cared for children and those with SEN).
  
  
  
  What on earth are Bracknell Forest thinking? "Local schools for local people"? It sounds like an episode of league of gentlemen!
  
  
  
  Surely if a child is already at the school and has a sibling, they too are part of the local community precisely because they are partaking and contributing to the local school!!! MADNESS!

  Report this comment

• Jane Steadman
  (Unregistered User)
  Dec 15 09 18:15
  Our Ref: 7025
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  If the council are doing a consultation, then they should contact the people that this affects.
  
  
  
  We should be doing all we can to encourage people to walk to school and ditch their cars. But if harassed parents are having to get their children to different schools at the same time, what choice do they have, but to use their car?
  
  
  
  The family unit should come first - keep siblings together.

  Report this comment

• Dave
  (Unregistered User)
  Dec 15 09 18:33
  Our Ref: 7032
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  By splitting families over different schools, there is an ever-present problem facing the working parent (or parents - in many cases, both work): which child will be late for school in the morning? Obviously, it’s not practical to expect both parents to do the school run twice a day - nor is it particularly good for local traffic or the environment. Further, the parents won't get to know other parents in the second school because all their links will be with the first - so they’ll simply use the second school as an educational resource and won’t get so involved in school affairs.
  
  Having accepted one child from outside catchment, the administration should be obliged to accept any subsequent siblings. To do otherwise is not in the child's interest and what department wants that label attached to them?
  
  Equally, heads won't thank the parents for having little Johnny marked as 'late' each morning: part of the OFSTED report examines absenteeism.
  
  Children, parents, school and community: we all lose.

  Report this comment

• DC
  (Unregistered User)
  Dec 15 09 19:03
  Our Ref: 7034
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  Primary school children need a parent to get them to school and school times do not fit with many fulltime jobs, therefore where possible siblings should be kept together.\r\nHowever, this may not be possible if it leads to the intake being greater than the school\'s maximum.\r\nUpland’s Ofsted rating makes it very popular, but it is only a one form entry school so it is limited to 30 per year in the infants. This leaves little scope for admitting those outside of the catchment area. It is the borough that allocates places, not the school. Their policy used to bias siblings, it would be useful to know why it was changed.\r\n

  Report this comment

• Ali
  (Unregistered User)
  Dec 15 09 19:04
  Our Ref: 7035
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  The people that could reach the parents concerned are the headteachers. Will they get invoved? I have writtent to all of th
  
  today asking them to share this with their families. I feel they have a duty to promulgate this.

  Report this comment

• Jean
  (Unregistered User)
  Dec 15 09 20:27
  Our Ref: 7037
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  DC's comment about (not) exceeding the school's maximum is at the heart of this, as far as I can see. It's Government policy to have infant class sizes of no more than 30, but if LOCAL demand exceeds this a solution is needed. Splitting up siblings is one way - and a very cheap way of resolving the ceiling limit, but, and it's a very big but, it's counter-productive to family cohesion, walking to school, shared sibling experiences, shared friendships and the many advantages for a school in having ongoing links with individual families. It begs the question, "cheap for whom"? Not the family.
  
  
  
  How many schools within the Borough could physically accommodate more infants than they are allowed to admit? The cost of extra teaching hours for more children would be money well spent if it meant a family's children could all attend the same school: cost savings can be made in areas where is doesn't hurt the council taxpayer.
  
  
  
  Social and Medical needs are given very low priority at present and instead of abolishing this category, surely the Borough should be looking at ways to give greater consideration to such cases - most other Education authorities do, as far as I know. There will always be families who suffer unnecessary and unacceptable hardship in the schools places lottery and to me, this isn't an acceptable way for the Borough to be acting. To be aware of a family's difficult circumstances and to ignore them in the allocation process is, I think, a dereliction of a council's duty to its residents.
  
  
  
  If you have pre-school children, this is your opportunity to influence the policy that may affect your family. I urge you to make your voice heard.
  
  
  
  

  Report this comment

• Joanne Livesley
  (Unregistered User)
  Dec 15 09 22:00
  Our Ref: 7038
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  I am a stay at home Mum, my Husband is Self Employed and works full time, we have 3 children. I am so glad we live in a borough whereby siblings are given priorty when applying for a school place.
  
  
  
  I cannot imagine the heartbreak this would have caused my children in having to separate them at a time which would have undoubtedly affected them settling into school.
  
  
  
  For me this would have also resulted in a car becoming a necessity to ensure that at least one of my children were "on time" for school.
  
  
  
  What about families that do not have extended families to help with childcare? Supposing one of your children had a hospital appointment, that often cannot be changed, that clashed with taking to/collecting from school? Would the other children have to miss schooling or would extra expense be incurred to ensure the safety of your children being taken to/from school.
  
  
  
  With so much in the press about the importance of families staying together, here you have a council breaking them up. So much for "Every Child Matters", more a case of "Every Child Matters except when they start school in Bracknell".

  Report this comment

• Paul
  (Unregistered User)
  Dec 16 09 22:41
  Our Ref: 7067
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  I live in Kent where siblings are given priority over catchment area. I think Bracknell Forest are out of step with most other education authorities in the country and I feel for Ms Smith and her plight.
  
  
  
  I hope the council see sense and rectify this ludicrous situation.

  Report this comment

• James Johnson
  (Unregistered User)
  Dec 17 09 01:51
  Our Ref: 7068
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  Family that schools together, stays together. If two brother's are not permitted to school, an undue hardship upon the parent is caused. Congradulations to this parent speaking up and the boards consideration.

  Report this comment

• Ali
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 30 10 21:00
  Our Ref: 7913
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  There are only 8 days left for residents with an interest to write in to the local authority with their views on the proposed changes to school admissions in Bracknell Forest 2011/2012. Write to consultation.admissions@bracknell-forest.gov.uk or send a letter in to the address displayed on the council web site. Here is the URL to the consulration \r\n\r\nhttp://www.bracknell-forest.gov.uk/learning/learn-schools/learn-and-starting-school/learn-admissions-arrangements/learn-school-admissions-arrangements-2011-to-2012-consultation.htm\r\n\r\nhttp://www.ParentsTakePart.com

  Report this comment

• Mike
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 30 10 21:03
  Our Ref: 7914
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  Do you feel that Bracknell should have "Social/Medical Need" abolished as a criterion? It is at the top of the list in Surrey, Hampshire, Oxfordshire, Reading, Wokingham.
  
  
  
  Is it OK for the Local Authority to tailor the admissions criteria to suit their administrative issues, or should it reflect the needs of the community it serves?

  Report this comment

• Lisa
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 30 10 21:06
  Our Ref: 7915
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  Do you think that "Local schools for local children" is an outdated sound byte?
  
  
  
  With schools that are over subscribed, there are always families who are not offered a place, but what if in a subsequent year the school is under subscribed due to changes in demographics, OfStEd results etc...? Split siblings will happen to "local" people as a result of this policy too.
  
  
  
  

  Report this comment

• Caroline
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 30 10 21:08
  Our Ref: 7916
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  Should a local authority be providing parents with "Choice advice" over school admissions?
  
  
  
  It is a mandatory requirement in the School Admissions Code (published by the DCSF) that they do.
  
  
  
  Most Authorities provide this at Secondary School level, but with the complexities of the school admissions system these days - and the myths that parents have over how places are allocated - should it be provided at entry to primary?

  Report this comment

• Anon
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 30 10 21:11
  Our Ref: 7917
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  How did you find out about the Local Authority holding a "Public consultation" over school admissions? Did you read it on the local authority web site? Did you see it in the 'local announcements' in the newspaper? Or did you hear by word of mouth or not atall?
  
  
  
  Do you think that the local authority should be targeting their advertising of the consutation period through the schools, school governors, local councillors and nursery establishments?
  
  
  
  Would this targeted advertising ensure that the information reaches the people to whom it concnerns, and ensure that a representative response is given to the matters therein?

  Report this comment

• Anon
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 30 10 21:17
  Our Ref: 7918
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  How did you find out about the Local Authority holding a "Public consultation" over school admissions? Did you read it on the local authority web site? Did you see it in the 'local announcements' in the newspaper? Or did you hear by word of mouth or not atall?
  
  
  
  Do you think that the local authority should be targeting their advertising of the consutation period through the schools, school governors, local councillors and nursery establishments?
  
  
  
  Would this targeted advertising ensure that the information reaches the people to whom it concnerns, and ensure that a representative response is given to the matters therein?

  Report this comment

• Sharon
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 30 10 21:22
  Our Ref: 7919
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  Is it not more likely that a family would falsify their living arrangements to obtain a school place than to move in to catchment, get first child in, move out of catchment?
  
  
  
  Is it not a romantic concept "local schools for local children" in a complex system where a schools cohort year on year is intangible.
  
  
  
  If one were to plot pins on a map around a school for the post code/address of the children presently attending (at the time of application) it would show an interesting statistic of how the catchment (real time) changes year on year in any given school. The borough must have this information and it would be simple to plot in google maps and publish.
  
  
  
  It would clearly show that "local schools" ethos is nothing but a sound byte from 1983 that is 27 years out of date and desperately needs to be modernised.
  
  
  
  Schools serve the children who have a place allocated to them - it's a legally prescribed framework, not anecdote.

  Report this comment

• Amy
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 30 10 21:30
  Our Ref: 7920
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  Social and Medical need is known in other Local Authorities as "Exceptional Circumstances". It enables an authority to deal with families who have needs that sit outside of the normal place allocation criteria.
  
  
  
  For example, a child may be diabetic and require an insulin injection 3 times a day.
  
  
  
  Teachers and Teaching Assistants have historically "administered" such injections but more and more these days they are refusing to do it, as it is not in their job description, and they fear recrimination if something were to go wrong.
  
  
  
  So the parents are now required to come into school to do the administering of the insulin, or the child needs to be near to a doctors surgery for support.
  
  
  
  If the criteria "social/Medical need" is removed - how can we ensure that "reasonable adjustments" have been made to support a child with a disability? It could be perfectly reasonable for the parent who works to need the child to attend the school nearest to their job, to enable this to happen.
  
  
  
  If Bracknell Forest go ahead and remove this criteria from their published admission arrangements, then the press and public should have a field day over their failure to do their duties.
  
  
  
  Isn't there something in the Disability Discrimination Act" about making adjustments for disabled people?
  
  

  Report this comment

• Amy
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 30 10 21:31
  Our Ref: 7921
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  Social and Medical need is known in other Local Authorities as "Exceptional Circumstances". It enables an authority to deal with families who have needs that sit outside of the normal place allocation criteria.
  
  
  
  For example, a child may be diabetic and require an insulin injection 3 times a day.
  
  
  
  Teachers and Teaching Assistants have historically "administered" such injections but more and more these days they are refusing to do it, as it is not in their job description, and they fear recrimination if something were to go wrong.
  
  
  
  So the parents are now required to come into school to do the administering of the insulin, or the child needs to be near to a doctors surgery for support.
  
  
  
  If the criteria "social/Medical need" is removed - how can we ensure that "reasonable adjustments" have been made to support a child with a disability? It could be perfectly reasonable for the parent who works to need the child to attend the school nearest to their job, to enable this to happen.
  
  
  
  If Bracknell Forest go ahead and remove this criteria from their published admission arrangements, then the press and public should have a field day over their failure to do their duties.
  
  
  
  Isn't there something in the Disability Discrimination Act" about making adjustments for disabled people?
  
  

  Report this comment

• Amy
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 30 10 21:31
  Our Ref: 7922
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  Social and Medical need is known in other Local Authorities as "Exceptional Circumstances". It enables an authority to deal with families who have needs that sit outside of the normal place allocation criteria.
  
  
  
  For example, a child may be diabetic and require an insulin injection 3 times a day.
  
  
  
  Teachers and Teaching Assistants have historically "administered" such injections but more and more these days they are refusing to do it, as it is not in their job description, and they fear recrimination if something were to go wrong.
  
  
  
  So the parents are now required to come into school to do the administering of the insulin, or the child needs to be near to a doctors surgery for support.
  
  
  
  If the criteria "social/Medical need" is removed - how can we ensure that "reasonable adjustments" have been made to support a child with a disability? It could be perfectly reasonable for the parent who works to need the child to attend the school nearest to their job, to enable this to happen.
  
  
  
  If Bracknell Forest go ahead and remove this criteria from their published admission arrangements, then the press and public should have a field day over their failure to do their duties.
  
  
  
  Isn't there something in the Disability Discrimination Act" about making adjustments for disabled people?
  
  

  Report this comment

• Amy
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 30 10 21:31
  Our Ref: 7923
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  Social and Medical need is known in other Local Authorities as "Exceptional Circumstances". It enables an authority to deal with families who have needs that sit outside of the normal place allocation criteria.
  
  
  
  For example, a child may be diabetic and require an insulin injection 3 times a day.
  
  
  
  Teachers and Teaching Assistants have historically "administered" such injections but more and more these days they are refusing to do it, as it is not in their job description, and they fear recrimination if something were to go wrong.
  
  
  
  So the parents are now required to come into school to do the administering of the insulin, or the child needs to be near to a doctors surgery for support.
  
  
  
  If the criteria "social/Medical need" is removed - how can we ensure that "reasonable adjustments" have been made to support a child with a disability? It could be perfectly reasonable for the parent who works to need the child to attend the school nearest to their job, to enable this to happen.
  
  
  
  If Bracknell Forest go ahead and remove this criteria from their published admission arrangements, then the press and public should have a field day over their failure to do their duties.
  
  
  
  Isn't there something in the Disability Discrimination Act" about making adjustments for disabled people?
  
  

  Report this comment

• Amy
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 30 10 21:31
  Our Ref: 7924
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  Social and Medical need is known in other Local Authorities as "Exceptional Circumstances". It enables an authority to deal with families who have needs that sit outside of the normal place allocation criteria.
  
  
  
  For example, a child may be diabetic and require an insulin injection 3 times a day.
  
  
  
  Teachers and Teaching Assistants have historically "administered" such injections but more and more these days they are refusing to do it, as it is not in their job description, and they fear recrimination if something were to go wrong.
  
  
  
  So the parents are now required to come into school to do the administering of the insulin, or the child needs to be near to a doctors surgery for support.
  
  
  
  If the criteria "social/Medical need" is removed - how can we ensure that "reasonable adjustments" have been made to support a child with a disability? It could be perfectly reasonable for the parent who works to need the child to attend the school nearest to their job, to enable this to happen.
  
  
  
  If Bracknell Forest go ahead and remove this criteria from their published admission arrangements, then the press and public should have a field day over their failure to do their duties.
  
  
  
  Isn't there something in the Disability Discrimination Act" about making adjustments for disabled people?
  
  

  Report this comment

• Louise
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 30 10 21:40
  Our Ref: 7925
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  The Three F's.
  
  Family, Family, Family...
  
  end of.
  
  

  Report this comment

• Philip
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 30 10 21:45
  Our Ref: 7926
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  In one breath, the so called "local people" that live in the school's catchment hide behind this 'local schools for local people' sound byte.
  
  
  
  But they are the ones that are making a mockery of the system. Once they safely have their two or three children in the "local" school, they have a house price that is inflated by £15-£20 thousand by having a Outstanding OFSTEAD school nearby - so what do they do? Sell up and move out of the "local" area!
  
  
  
  Enough said?

  Report this comment

• Bev
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 30 10 22:35
  Our Ref: 7927
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  We applied for a place under the social medical rule. We couldnt get an application form until we had put our CAF (common school application form in) which was weird - and they don\'t really give you any advise about who to get \"evidence\" from, or what is accepted as a reason... It\'s more a leaflet saying \"our decision is final\" and you have to prove its the \"only\" school your kid can go to. Well how do you prove that then? Seems a bit impossible doesn\'t it. My friend lives in St Johns, and she said that their system was supportive, open, clear and straight forward. Why are they so different? Why does every borough do it their own way? It\'s so complicated. But I agree, it should be there really...

  Report this comment

• Steve
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 31 10 20:24
  Our Ref: 7933
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  People feel comfortable with the \"local schools for local children\" because people erroneously believe they have a choice about school places. In reality they can only make a preference for a school.

  Report this comment

• Ali
  (Unregistered User)
  Jan 31 10 20:34
  Our Ref: 7934
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  So it's ok to separate siblings when a family are trying to move into the catchment area, but have a look at this, (below) there's a whole catchnet for families where it happens the other way around!!!! This is seriously not working by it's own definition eh!
  
  
  
  extract - Bracknell Admission criteria (D)
  
  (D)
  
  Children who have statutory (compulsory) school age siblings, brother(s) or sister(s), at the school, and who will still be attending the school at the time of the child’s admission.
  
  In circumstances where:
  
  (a)
  
  the sibling is an older sibling and is attending the school because he or she was not able to secure a place at his or her designated school ; and
  
  (b)
  
  as a consequence is attending the school which is in an adjacent designated area the applicant will be treated as a ‘preferential sibling’ and will be considered before other non-designated area applicants who have siblings at the school.

  Report this comment

• Ali
  (Unregistered User)
  Feb 10 10 14:38
  Our Ref: 8110
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  
  
  SURREY ADMISSIONS POLICY FOR SEPTEMBER 2011
  
  The County Council agreed the following Admissions Arrangements for 2011 for
  
  Surrey’s Community and Voluntary Controlled Schools:
  
  1 All Surrey schools will operate an Equal Preference System. Parents will be given the opportunity to
  
  state 3 ranked school preferences.
  
  2 The admission arrangements remain unchanged for September 2011 for the majority of Surrey’s
  
  Community and Voluntary Controlled schools as follows:
  
  1. First priority: looked after children
  
  Children who are registered as being in the care of a Local Authority (LA) (for example, fostered or
  
  living in a children’s home).
  
  2. Second priority: exceptional arrangements
  
  Occasionally there will be a very small number of children for whom exceptional arrangements will
  
  apply. Evidence from a consultant doctor will be required for medical cases or documented evidence
  
  from any support services involved for other sensitive family circumstances will be required. These
  
  exceptional arrangements may override other admissions priorities and the LA may apply them when
  
  they first offer places. The LA may also ask schools to admit over their Published Admission Number
  
  at other times under this category.
  
  3. Third priority: brothers and sisters (siblings)*
  
  After ‘exceptional arrangements’, places are then offered to siblings. A sibling is a child who will have
  
  a brother or sister still at the school concerned at the time of another sibling’s admission. So, a sibling
  
  will be given priority for admission only if another sibling will still be at the school in September 2011
  
  or he/she has a sibling at a junior school on a shared/adjoining site in September 2011.
  
  A sibling is a brother or sister (that is, another child of the same parents, whether living at the same
  
  address or not), or a half-brother or half sister or a step-brother or step-sister, living at the same
  
  address, or foster children living at the same address.
  
  Please note: this does not apply if the older brother or sister joined the school at sixth-form level.
  
  *NB the sibling criterion may change to encompass the proposed change outlined in Annex 2,
  
  Section A.
  
  4. Fourth priority: children for whom the school is the nearest to their home
  
  Currently the nearest school is defined as the school closest to the home address admitting pupils of
  
  the appropriate age-range, as measured by a straight line. The nearest school may be either inside
  
  or outside the county boundary.
  
  5. Fifth priority: any other applicant
  
  If there is oversubscription in any of the above criteria priority will be given on the basis of nearness
  
  to school measured in a straight line from the address point of the pupil’s house, as set by ordnance
  
  survey to the nearest school gate for pupils to use. This is calculated using the Admission and
  
  Transport team’s Geographical Information System.
  
  If there are two applicants from the same block of flats the applicant with the lowest door number will
  
  be given priority.
  
  In the case of multiple births where only one place remains the parents will be asked to decide which
  
  child will be offered a place. (The remaining siblings will be placed a the top of the waiting list.)

  Report this comment

• Rebecca Johnson
  (Unregistered User)
  Mar 2 10 16:38
  Our Ref: 8428
  Use the ref number if you need to report this comment

  So what are people's thoughts about the school admission places put out this week?
  
  Editor

  Report this comment

Comments

For your convenience, you can now register with our website (which will save you from having to retype your name each time you post a comment). If you would like to do this (or have already!) then please Log in or Register