Bucks replacing selection appeals with HT review

[Looking for help]

In addition to Rehab, in view of all the changes in the pipeline I think we're going to need a new section called The Dark Room (equipped with a few comfy sofas, soothing music and eye shades!)

I think that sounds like a plan, as long as those of us moving forward through the wonder that is known as education can also join ......where is the I'm stressed to the nth degree emoticon

[Etienne]

I don't understand how this new Selection Appeal Review would work!

You are not alone!

We don't yet know what sort of review they have in mind.
Some information about what happens elsewhere can be found here:
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/appeal ... cation#b18" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In addition to Rehab, in view of all the changes in the pipeline I think we're going to need a new section called The Dark Room (equipped with a few comfy sofas, soothing music and eye shades!)

What a great idea!

[haldeman]

I imagine that the new system will be based on the pre-2004 Bucks CC selection review system which worked very well and took much of the stress out of the system for parents. Parents would complete a form listing their reasons for believing their child underperformed and the primary school headteacher would complete a form indicating their opinion about suitability. The panel would then consider the evidence without the need for an expensive and stressful hearing and would make their decision. Clearly it would be in the grammar schools' interests to keep the numbers of children qualifiying through the new system the same as it is now as otherwise they would have empty places.

[Etienne]

Welcome!

I agree the system worked well up to 2004 - but this rather misses the point that parents still had the option of a separate selection appeal.

I'm sure those parents who had a successful review were absolutely delighted - but those who didn't were somewhat less than satisfied to put it mildly - "decisions taken behind closed doors," "lack of transparency," "impossible to get any information about why our review failed".

What the old review did, as far as I can tell, was to filter out the more obvious cases - it was left to selection appeal panels to sort out the rest, including the 'difficult' cases!

Do you happen to know the average length of time spent on each case by the review panel (excluding preparation)?

Clearly it would be in the grammar schools' interests to keep the numbers of children qualifying through the new system the same as it is now as otherwise they would have empty places.

This is suggestive of a quota - shouldn't decisions be made solely on the merits of each individual case?

The success rate for selection appeals has usually been between 30-40% - but this was never planned! With 6 different appeal panels per day, each taking its own decisions in isolation, there is no way any particular success rate could have been fixed!

There are bound to be reservations about what is being proposed.

It seems likely that there will be a significant knock-on effect in the summer term - each statutory appeal for any particular grammar school might have to deal simultaneously with selection as well as oversubscription, and could take twice as long. It's entirely possible that appeals could extend into September/October ...........

[Sally-Anne]

Hunting around the BCC website for more information about the review process, I unearthed this fossilized nugget of information from 2005: http://democracy.buckscc.gov.uk/Data/Ov ... Item06.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(I have added some paragraph breaks for ease of reading.)

4. The review process was phased out following legal advice and NFER research indicated that it would be possible to achieve a similar number of qualifiers using the best of two tests as through the average of the best two of three, through a standardisation process.

It was anticipated that there would be approximately the same number of qualifiers through the testing process in 2005 as in 2004 at the end of the review process. This year, however, there was a larger than expected number of selection appeals (almost 1000).

These were heard during January and increased the qualified cohort by nearly 400. In the past the appeals have added only approximately 200 extra qualifiers.

As a result there is currently a review of the information provided for appeal panels, including the training of presenters, panel members and clerks.

The review system was therefore identifying only 200 children who should have qualified for a grammar school, whereas the selection appeal system in place since 2005 has consistently identified around 325 – 350 children who should have qualified (shown here: http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/ ... 12&t=25253" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; )

Arguably, therefore, the selection appeal system has been more successful in identifying cases of apparent injustice in the 11+ process than the earlier review process was. It has also filled more grammar places, albeit by accident rather than design, as Etienne points out.

I am merely speculating here, but I suspect that the additional numbers are almost entirely drawn from cases on lower scores. As Bucks forum regulars know from “Morning Glory’s” successful appeal for her son back in 2010 on a score of 108, a small number of deserving cases on very low scores can succeed, but they require exceptional levels of evidence (rather more than a form to be completed by parents!)

haldeman, the review process is before my time, but you seem to remember it well. I have the impression that the old review process centred on borderline cases on quite high scores? And that it didn't “invite” cases on lower scores in the way that the selection appeal system has done?

Inevitably that brings with it a lot of surplus cases that should probably never be at an appeal, but occasionally it does unearth some really extraordinary surprises. I know of a case where a child had two very low scores, the appeal succeeded because of the overwhelming evidence of academic ability provided to support it (which did not stint on A4 paper, as might be imagined), and the child is now right at the top of their year group at a Bucks GS.

I wonder if the new review process will cope with such complex cases, or whether they will fall by the wayside?

[Atilla]

Are there any statistics on how the review process dealt with low scorers with rare but special circumstances (such as disability)?

The danger to me is that if it is only looking at borderline cases, then those cases that currently have gotten through with a finding of discrimination (and lower score) will find themselves having to appeal both on non-qualification and over subscription. I know we found it stressful enough going through non-qualification, but I think if we had to appeal both then we would not have gone through the process due to the additional uncertainty and stress. We knew we had academic evidence, but over-subscription appeals are so much more subjective.

So in changing the system there is a danger that special needs cases that do currently get through may not even be applied for, thus having fewer suitable special needs children getting through.

I know it does not effect that many people, but there is a small but more vulnerable section of society that could be adversally effected.

[pippi]

Members detailed parental feedback about their experiences that they have had with appeal panels – giving examples of: inappropriate comments made to parents, panel comments criticising headteachers, rudeness, panel members confirming that they know child’s headteacher, sharing their opinions in front of parents & weary panel members.
However, also recorded that many parents had said panels were polite, friendly and less uncomfortable than they thought.
Members all recognised that the review process could be viewed as a fairer system than the appeal if it was comprising of a mix of educational professionals making the decision.

Presumably related to the switch to HT review?

Off topic the new Highcrest Academy admissions have been published at: http://www.highcrest.bucks.sch.uk/Admissions1. They're going to apply banding from 2013 as in the draft but apparently have been advised by Bucks CC against using their 11+ tests (!?) - they're going to use non-verbal reasoning instead.

[Etienne]

I doubt that the switch is being made on the basis of anecdotal evidence! It may well have more to do with the cost of running selection appeals.

I believe BCC have conducted regular surveys (with equal numbers of questionnaires going to successful and unsuccessful appellants), and that overall satisfaction levels have consistently been on the high side.

This is not to say that there are no aggrieved parents out there ......... !

[Guest55]

Presumably the cost would be to the GS now, not BCC?

[Etienne]

I was thinking along the same lines .........