Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I would be helpful if anyone could help me interpret the published last offer distances for schools please?


We are looking at Sep 2020 primary entry and trying to get a feel of where we may or may not be likely to get a place by looking at the catchments for previous years.


When the council list the furthest distance for an offer, does that include sibling offers too? One school I contacted suggested that it did, in which case it isn't very helpful at all...


Thanks


J

(I appreciate the importance of including some nearby bankers in our 6 choices so as not to end up at the other side of the borough. And that including a couple of unlikely ones won't harm our chances with others on the list. But just not sure how many more aspirational options it is worth going to visit)

For community schools in Southwark (and Lewisham) the distance data in the starting school booklets doesn't include siblings. Sibling places are allocated before places are allocated based on distance. Distance is irrelevant to a sibling place.


That's for the community schools, e.g. Heber, Goodrich, Dog Kennel Hill ... the ones featured in the council booklets.


The other schools, e.g. Goose Green, Harris Primary ED - i.e. the ones _not_ in the council booklets, are academies and are responsible for their own admissions arrangements. Those you'll generally have to ring up and ask what was the furthest non-sibling distance based place they offered. Faith schools have arrangements which are different again.


A reasonable, though not infallible guide, is where the older kids of your neighbours go. Not infallible because of random factors - e.g. some years are abnormally lumpy on sibling places which means fewer places offered on distance which means that particular year you'd need to live nearer than other years to get in.


I hope that's vaguely useful.

Thank you Bonaome, that is useful.


We have a very well regarded school pretty much at the far end of our road, and the only older kids we know on our road go there, but it looks like the catchment for it has shrunk and shrunk and we would have been some 100+m outside it last year. Another one that we like the look of is a little further away but we would have scraped within the distance figures in the last couple of years, although someone in the office there told us that the furthest distance figure quoted (and it is a council one) included siblings. I am hoping that they were mistaken!


I appreciate your taking the time to answer.

Hi JRJ, the distance figures do not include those allocated places via sibling criteria not those offered distance via other criteria eg previously looked after children, those with a statement of special educational need.

RenatA

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

    • Looking to borrow a gazebo for birthday party this Saturday, can you help? Julian - 07961463111
    • Whilst I agree, I have been thinking about this recently in relation to some of the other posts on here about anti social behaviour. We are all products of our upbringing - our experiences at home, school and beyond - plus whatever we have inherited genetically which might affect our behaviour (the nature/nurture thing). So in this case, if people haven't been brought up to love and appreciate trees and other wild things, plus as you say they may be deeply unhappy (or have other undiagnosed issues) it's easy to see how they could have ended up doing this. Also, it's possible they had quite low intelligence and didn't really grasp what they were doing and the effect it would have on so many other people. But that's just surmise and possibly completely wrong. From what I've read about it, they seemed to be two mates egging each other on, like two big kids. I'm not for a minute excusing what they did, and it's right they should be punished, but I really hope they might get some sort of rehabilitation in prison (it would  be appropriate to have them do some kind of community service like planting saplings, wouldn't it, or working in woodland conservation). And the same goes for phone robbers and shoplifters (rehabilitation, not planting saplings), though for SOME  shoplifters there might also be other issues at play, not excluding poverty. Sorry Jasonlondon,  I've gone off at a real tangent here, lucky it's in the lounge! Oh oops I've just noticed it isn't. Sorry admin. Oh, and then there's a whole philosophical discussion to be had about free will and determinism ..... 🤣🤣🤣
    • Thanks! I'll find out in a few weeks when I get the results! It was one of those disconcerting things where a disembodied voice keeps booming  at you to breathe in and hold it, then breathe normally. Apart from that it was OK, all completely painless. I imagine there will be quite a few people going from ED, though I presume it covers the whole Southwark area 
    • Two men behind ‘senseless’ felling of Sycamore Gap tree jailed for more than four years Good to see these two jailed today for four years. There’s something deeply disturbing about people who destroy trees—any tree. Whether it’s a centuries-old landmark or a sapling in a quiet park, trees are living beings that offer beauty, shade, and life. The men who cut down the Sycamore Gap tree are a stark example of how far some people will go to lash out at something peaceful and meaningful. People who harm nature like this aren’t just destructive—they are often deeply unhappy. It takes a troubled mind to look at a tree and see something to ruin instead of something to protect. Read more here  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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