Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm not from the UK so the primary school application process if particulary confusing. i looked up the distance from our house (using our postcode) to the local schools using the walkjogrun website recommended in various posts (using the schools postcode). i crossed checked with the last distance place offered chart published in the offical primary school guide.


We are a good 100 meters out of range from the published catchment area of one local school. However a friend's kid got into this school in April- no siblings, no special needs and they live further away. the streets may be crooked in this town but i still live in between their house and the school's post/entrance and so i ask, what have I done wrong?


many thanks to anyone who takes the time to respond.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/36669-does-the-crow-fly-drunk/
Share on other sites

Postcodes cover a few properties so you need to place a pin on the map in the centre of your property and at the school gate and then measure that distance.

Southwark (if this is your borough) uses a measuring tool that is not available for public use and bears v little resemblance to results from other tools. It's a far from exact science - frustrating when every metre counts for getting a place in a primary round here!

It is as the crow flies not door to door. Did you look at the book for Starting School in 2014? If so you would think that the distance should be right based on the offer your neighbour received in April. Or maybe you were looking at last year's book (i.e. Starting School in 2013) in which case the distances would have been based on the previous years' entry and therefore different to offers made in April 2013.

I don't know about Southwark but some schools (non-Community schools?) may still have safest walking distance rather than crow flies/straight line eg in Lambeth, Julians is based on safest walking distance.


But the Starting Schools booklet will make clear each school's criteria.


Edited to add: most non-Community schools probably do have crow flies criteria but there may be some that still use safest walking distance.

The published catchment areas are usually the catchment areas for the last year or previous years, but they change each year, and can change dramatically based on bulge years, increased or decreased numbers of siblings. So, if she got in just based on distance alone, it means the catchment area this year is bigger than it was last year.

thank you to everyone who responded.

I did look at the 2014/15 book and my friend's child was accepted in the general pool. i thought this was April but i guess am wrong. Looks like i have to do the pin on the map thingy.

geez its really hard to top a night of dishes and tidying......figuring exactly where i live compared to local primaries...i need a drink

Southwark is as the crow flys, if you email them you can request distances from your home to nearest schools. Lewisham were great and gave me the distances over the phone, southwark never got back to me! Worth a shot though.


We also found that the nursery attached to our local school used a different system and handled Applications themselves, whereas Southwark handles all the school admissions. They used a post code program online which wasn't very accurate!

It would have been April that your friend found out about her school place probably - applications go in in January and results come in April I think. What school is it and other people might have anecdotal information about the distance? Maybe there was a typo in the book??

I may be wrong but I thought that the published distances referred to those withon the first round of offers, not those who got in from waiting lists or once the second round offers start coming?


Are you sure your friend got in straight away as the very first offer they received? And also that the published distance refers to that year?

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

    • The current wave of xenophobia is due to powerful/influential people stirring up hatred.  It;'s what happened in the past, think 1930s Germany.  It seems to be even easier now as so many get their information from social media, whether it is right or wrong.  The media seeking so called balance will bring some nutter on, they don't then bring a nutter on to counteract that. They now seem to turn to Reform at the first opportunity. So your life is 'shite', let;s blame someone else.  Whilst sounding a bit like a Tory, taking some ownership/personal responsibility would be a start.  There are some situations where that may be more challenging, in deindustrialised 'left behind' wasteland we can't all get on our bikes and find work.  But I loathe how it is now popular to blame those of us from relatively modest backgrounds, like me, who did see education and knowledge as a way to self improve. Now we are seen by some as smug liberals......  
    • Kwik Fit buggered up an A/C leak diagnosis for me (saying there wasn't one, when there was) and sold a regas. The vehicle had to be taken to an A/C specialist for condensor replacement and a further regas. Not impressed.
    • Yes, these are all good points. I agree with you, that division has led us down dangerous paths in the past. And I deplore any kind of racism (as I think you probably know).  But I feel that a lot of the current wave of xenophobia we're witnessing is actually more about a general malaise and discontent. I know non-white people around here who are surprisingly vocal about immigrants - legal or otherwise. I think this feeling transcends skin colour for a lot of people and isn't as simple as, say, the Jew hatred of the 1930s or the Irish and Black racism that we saw laterally. I think people feel ignored and looked down upon.  What you don't realise, Sephiroth, is that I actually agree with a lot of what you're saying. I just think that looking down on people because of their voting history and opinions is self-defeating. And that's where Labour's getting it wrong and Reform is reaping the rewards.   
    • @Sephiroth you made some interesting points on the economy, on the Lammy thread. Thought it worth broadening the discussion. Reeves (irrespective of her financial competence) clearly was too downbeat on things when Labour came into power. But could there have been more honesty on the liklihood of taxes going up (which they have done, and will do in any case due to the freezing of personal allowances).  It may have been a silly commitment not to do this, but were you damned if you do and damned if you don't?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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