Etienne please comment on unfair appeal decision
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
-
Guest1
-
Sally-Anne
- Posts: 9235
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:10 pm
- Location: Buckinghamshire
Hi Guest1
Yes, that occurred to me as well - I heard of one desperately sad case this year. However, despite the extraordinarily dreadful mitigating circumstances, the Appeal didn't go through, so it suggests that toughness of mind comes with practice.
I am seriously thinking about applying ....
Sally-Anne
Yes, that occurred to me as well - I heard of one desperately sad case this year. However, despite the extraordinarily dreadful mitigating circumstances, the Appeal didn't go through, so it suggests that toughness of mind comes with practice.
I am seriously thinking about applying ....
Sally-Anne
-
Sally-Anne
- Posts: 9235
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:10 pm
- Location: Buckinghamshire
Come on Etienne - let's have the low-down!
Why does anyone do it? You've been there - what IS the motivation of panel members?
And if the pressure is that bad, does it change the nature of panel members - only tough cookies need apply?
Oh, and have you ever seen a panel member dissolve in tears for an exceptionally sad case?
Sally-Anne
Why does anyone do it? You've been there - what IS the motivation of panel members?
And if the pressure is that bad, does it change the nature of panel members - only tough cookies need apply?
Oh, and have you ever seen a panel member dissolve in tears for an exceptionally sad case?
Sally-Anne
Hello, Sally-Anne
I found panel members (almost without exception!) to be very dedicated, very public spirited. All tried very hard to be fair to the appellant. A few seemed to have an anti-LEA chip on their shoulder, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that this influenced their judgement. Some had an interest in the judicial process (e.g. magistrates), most had some sort of interest in education (e.g. governors, parents with grown-up children who'd been through the system).
Many were retired, so had time to volunteer.
There were not enough "lay" members, not enough young people, and certainly not enough from ethnic minorities. These groups tend not to volunteer in sufficient numbers.
I don't think it changes the nature of people.
One does, of course, really begin to understand the system (and to discover how incredibly difficult it is to make the sort of judgements that are required).
I never saw a panel member reduced to tears during a hearing, but it did occasionally happen afterwards during the discussion of the case. It can be very upsetting for everyone (e.g. heartbreaking extenuating circumstances but insufficient academic evidence).
Still interested ........?
I found panel members (almost without exception!) to be very dedicated, very public spirited. All tried very hard to be fair to the appellant. A few seemed to have an anti-LEA chip on their shoulder, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that this influenced their judgement. Some had an interest in the judicial process (e.g. magistrates), most had some sort of interest in education (e.g. governors, parents with grown-up children who'd been through the system).
Many were retired, so had time to volunteer.
There were not enough "lay" members, not enough young people, and certainly not enough from ethnic minorities. These groups tend not to volunteer in sufficient numbers.
I don't think it changes the nature of people.
One does, of course, really begin to understand the system (and to discover how incredibly difficult it is to make the sort of judgements that are required).
I never saw a panel member reduced to tears during a hearing, but it did occasionally happen afterwards during the discussion of the case. It can be very upsetting for everyone (e.g. heartbreaking extenuating circumstances but insufficient academic evidence).
Still interested ........?
Etienne
-
CP
The Ombudsman
Hi Etienne,
Thanks for the figures on results of complaints to the ombudsman, does the figure for Local settlement just mean a re hearing or a successful outcome of a re hearing?
By the way with regard to my daughters 116 for her her 2nd paper, this was a higher mark than the other 5 successful appeals second papers!
Thanks for everyones helpful comments.
Thanks for the figures on results of complaints to the ombudsman, does the figure for Local settlement just mean a re hearing or a successful outcome of a re hearing?
By the way with regard to my daughters 116 for her her 2nd paper, this was a higher mark than the other 5 successful appeals second papers!
Thanks for everyones helpful comments.
-
Sally-Anne
- Posts: 9235
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 8:10 pm
- Location: Buckinghamshire
-
Guest38
Question to Etienne re appeal procedure,
Dear Etienne,
Have been reading with interest about alot of people who appear to have strong academic evidence, support from school with good rankings, scores near to the 121 yet their appeals are unsuccessful. Fortunately for us, our son had scores of 115/119, ranked 2 on OofS, 1:1 and huge support from School (although I had to pester them for written evidence of test results etc) was successful. We had no mitigating circumstances but hoped that the academic evidence would speak for itself, which it did. Their have been 2 other children at his school who's academic ability (and one with a score of 114) is not as strong i.e ranking of 23, 2:2, middle 25%, some 4's predicted SATS who's appeals have been suceessful over another child who has scored 120, ranked 9th, 1:1, top 25% and strong academic evidence who hasn't. Whilst I can understand and appreciate we do not know all the ins and out of each case, any mitigatiing or extenuating circumstances surely have to be backed up by a reasonable amount of academic evidence? In the yellow booklet that parent are given re Selection Appeals, under 'What evidence should I provide?' it states that:- in general, the wider the gap between the score a child achieves and the qualifying score, the more compelling evidence IAP members are likely to need to convince them that a child has thenecessary academic ability to succeed in a grammar school. It just worries me that some children who have been high achievers throughout their time at primary school are missing out and that others, who may find grammar school a struggle, are suceeding. The system does not seem a fair one.
Have been reading with interest about alot of people who appear to have strong academic evidence, support from school with good rankings, scores near to the 121 yet their appeals are unsuccessful. Fortunately for us, our son had scores of 115/119, ranked 2 on OofS, 1:1 and huge support from School (although I had to pester them for written evidence of test results etc) was successful. We had no mitigating circumstances but hoped that the academic evidence would speak for itself, which it did. Their have been 2 other children at his school who's academic ability (and one with a score of 114) is not as strong i.e ranking of 23, 2:2, middle 25%, some 4's predicted SATS who's appeals have been suceessful over another child who has scored 120, ranked 9th, 1:1, top 25% and strong academic evidence who hasn't. Whilst I can understand and appreciate we do not know all the ins and out of each case, any mitigatiing or extenuating circumstances surely have to be backed up by a reasonable amount of academic evidence? In the yellow booklet that parent are given re Selection Appeals, under 'What evidence should I provide?' it states that:- in general, the wider the gap between the score a child achieves and the qualifying score, the more compelling evidence IAP members are likely to need to convince them that a child has thenecessary academic ability to succeed in a grammar school. It just worries me that some children who have been high achievers throughout their time at primary school are missing out and that others, who may find grammar school a struggle, are suceeding. The system does not seem a fair one.
Dear Guest38
I'd rather not get drawn into a comparison between the particular children you mention without knowing all the facts, so I'll answer in general terms. Let me first of all agree with you that extenuating circumstances are not enough - there should indeed be evidence of high ability. This is not necessarily the same thing as current high achievement.
Let me give as an example "John". John scored 114, has a "2" recommendation, middle 25%, predicted 4/5s for KS2. Horrendous extenuating circumstances, ongoing for 1-2 years, affecting 11+ and depressing curriculum results, but thankfully now at an end. Parents say that John is actually very bright. He achieved straight 3s at KS1. His school reports before the extenuating circumstances are exceptionally good. He has a VR CAT score of 129 in September of year 3, and 130 in September of year 4. His current academic achievements may not be impressive, but there is plenty of evidence of high ability.
Now, it may be that John's case is nothing like the one you have in mind. I'm just trying to make the point that there are sometimes good reasons for upholding an appeal with a score of 114, predicted 4/5s, etc.
Then there is "Janet". Janet scored 120 and 114, has a "1" recommendation, top 25%, predicted straight 5s for KS2. Janet shines in class because she is so hardworking and enthusiastic. All her subject reports put the emphasis on how diligent she is. If there is a criticism, it is that she works slowly. Her previous CAT VR scores are 114 and 110. There are no extenuating circumstances. The panel conclude that Janet achieves her results through sheer hard work, is not quite as bright as her school thinks, and that 114 - or perhaps the average of the scores, 117 - is a better indicator of her ability than 120.
John and Janet may be fiction, but there will be some cases every year like John's, and quite a lot of cases like Janet's.
Congratulations to you on your successful outcome.
I'd rather not get drawn into a comparison between the particular children you mention without knowing all the facts, so I'll answer in general terms. Let me first of all agree with you that extenuating circumstances are not enough - there should indeed be evidence of high ability. This is not necessarily the same thing as current high achievement.
Let me give as an example "John". John scored 114, has a "2" recommendation, middle 25%, predicted 4/5s for KS2. Horrendous extenuating circumstances, ongoing for 1-2 years, affecting 11+ and depressing curriculum results, but thankfully now at an end. Parents say that John is actually very bright. He achieved straight 3s at KS1. His school reports before the extenuating circumstances are exceptionally good. He has a VR CAT score of 129 in September of year 3, and 130 in September of year 4. His current academic achievements may not be impressive, but there is plenty of evidence of high ability.
Now, it may be that John's case is nothing like the one you have in mind. I'm just trying to make the point that there are sometimes good reasons for upholding an appeal with a score of 114, predicted 4/5s, etc.
Then there is "Janet". Janet scored 120 and 114, has a "1" recommendation, top 25%, predicted straight 5s for KS2. Janet shines in class because she is so hardworking and enthusiastic. All her subject reports put the emphasis on how diligent she is. If there is a criticism, it is that she works slowly. Her previous CAT VR scores are 114 and 110. There are no extenuating circumstances. The panel conclude that Janet achieves her results through sheer hard work, is not quite as bright as her school thinks, and that 114 - or perhaps the average of the scores, 117 - is a better indicator of her ability than 120.
John and Janet may be fiction, but there will be some cases every year like John's, and quite a lot of cases like Janet's.
Congratulations to you on your successful outcome.
Etienne
Re: The Ombudsman
Dear CPCP wrote:Hi Etienne,
Thanks for the figures on results of complaints to the ombudsman, does the figure for Local settlement just mean a re hearing or a successful outcome of a re hearing?
It means only that a re-hearing was offered.
Regards
Etienne
