last minute arrivals for distance proximity

[hermanmunster]

We the parents, as the residents and rate payers to councils in Herts

I agree about bogus renters but worth remembering that almost all of the funding for education in your and any other area of the country comes from central government taxation - not local rates .

The people of Yorkshire, Norfolk etc have paid as much to Herts schools as you have (more in Yorkshire's case - huge county ) and vice versa of course

[BaldPeg]

Any one in West Watford for whom close proximity is the most important factor for selecting a secondary school for their children have the option of sending their children to Westfield. It is a much larger school than either of the Watford Grammar Schools so they should have a good chance of securing a place.

I am not aware of any reports of 'bogus' renters trying to cheat their way into Westfield either...

[angels]

We the parents, as the residents and rate payers to councils in Herts must and have the right to demand that bogus renters and owners are flushed out once and for all. To achieve this I recommend the following:

Once ascertained to be valid resident, one shall be entitled to gain admission to the local school via proximity and distance rules.

Once admitted to the school, the place shall be given up to another child if the parents choose to move out of their house at any point in time before the child finishes year 13. This only happens if they move outside the furthest distance of their respective Year 7 intake.

The replacement child shall be one who is currently on the waiting list, chosen based on distance.

The child whose parents chose to move after gaining admission can only stay in the partially selective school if no other children want to take up his or her place.

The above only applies to those who gained a place via proximity or distance rule.

i am new to this forum and have followed with interest on different topics and i would like to say the info i get on this forum is appreciated. Concerning the above statements i can understand how someone would feel their dc's/other children in the area are being robbed of admission places as i am not sure how big this problem is. My point is i do not think it is the school's responsibility to police parents as it is time consuming and they can only cover the basics. I cannot c how they can be doing checks on all families one year on or longer. Also another point as parents would we feel good about a child being removed from school and friends halfway through their education no matter how just it may seem

[Parent68]

We the parents, as the residents and rate payers to councils in Herts

I agree about bogus renters but worth remembering that almost all of the funding for education in your and any other area of the country comes from central government taxation - not local rates .

The people of Yorkshire, Norfolk etc have paid as much to Herts schools as you have (more in Yorkshire's case - huge county ) and vice versa of course

Let's not split hairs and move away from the crux.

[thumbelina]

yes abuse of gaining entry via a close distance proximity DOES go on. Judging from what i have seen first hand at my dd primary and through numerous one-person removed accounts - it happens more than you think.

Yes, i would not advocate the removal of a child half way through their education but i wouldnt feel bad if the parents were prosecuted over it. And i certainly believe that the sibling entitlement for any subsequent children should not be extended, whereby by an older sibling gained entry by being in rental property just for just a short time and then found to return to harrow, wembley and harpenden etc.

I beleive that the rental provision is there for those actually cant afford to buy a house and do live in the area and so even genuine less well off folk are losing out. The provision is not there for those who are able to contrive and abuse.

And yes it is upto the schools to police since they set the rules. My guess is that they are well aware it happens because they see that a year later the addresses of children who gained entry on the close proximity distance (largely on a rental contract) change to one much further away.

My worry is that the schools turn a blind eye.

[Cutting42]

I work in the USA a great deal and in most areas in the USA you need to live in the catchment area for your school at all times. If you move, you get kicked out of the school!

You are confusing proximity with catchment area.

Actually I was not confusing it, the point I was making was that here was once your child is in a school (regardless of by what means) they are in it. You are free to move out of catchment, your child still has a place. That is not the case in the USA.

[11nuts]

No matter what the rules are, competitive parents will always try and find a way of bending the rules in favour I am afraid.

Renting does seem a little unfair TBH. The cost could be manageable in opting to rent a flat in comparison to buying a home. However it is still not cheap (12mths * £600pm = £7200).

You would have to be quite certain to gain a place for that cost to deem it viable.

[Magoo]

I admire those people who are prepared to uproot their family and move to an area that would not otherwise choose to live to ensure that their children get the best possible start in life.


Admire? Or pity?

Not exactly a vote of confidence in the academic ability of the child concerned. If parents feel they need to uproot their family and move to an area that they do not necessarily want to live, instead of having faith in their DC's ability to gain entry through academic means, then they should ask the question as to whether or not their DD will thrive in that high achieving environment.

I agree that displacing a child (and subsequent siblings) who has lived in the area all of their life - but who perhaps does not have the economic firepower to coach and tutor their DD in the run up to year 7 entry - is somehow very wrong.

[hermanmunster]

I admire those people who are prepared to uproot their family and move to an area that would not otherwise choose to live to ensure that their children get the best possible start in life.


Admire? Or pity?

Not exactly a vote of confidence in the academic ability of the child concerned. If parents feel they need to uproot their family and move to an area that they do not necessarily want to live, instead of having faith in their DC's ability to gain entry through academic means, then they should ask the question as to whether or not their DD will thrive in that high achieving environment.

I agree that displacing a child (and subsequent siblings) who has lived in the area all of their life - but who perhaps does not have the economic firepower to coach and tutor their DD in the run up to year 7 entry - is somehow very wrong.

It is possible that people will want to move to an area with the type of schools they prefer - for example leaving a solely non selective area for a Grammar school area.

[Magoo]

It is possible that people will want to move to an area with the type of schools they prefer - for example leaving a solely non selective area for a Grammar school area

Agree - If the family intend to stay in that area for a reasonable period and play a part in that community then I think that is fair.