11 Plus Exams Forum

Hi all. New poster here. We went for our IAP today and were told that because two cases in the morning had been ''extremely complicated', they had overrun to such a degree that our session (and others) would need to be postponed for 30 days!

The conspiracist in me says that, because the process is now much more legalistic (proving NOT fair, consistent and objective), the panels are getting embroiled in legal argument about terminology, rather than (as they should be doing) focussing on the academic questions. I would be interested to know whether others have any views on this?

30 days! That is an awfully long time to wait. I suppose it could be because the schools need time to plan staffing the extra panels and that they can't push everyone back, but the cynic in me suspects it is indeed to give them time to reflect on the difficult situation they've put themselves in and marshal their arguments, perhaps after taking legal advice.

It is also not fair on the upper schools to which the children have already been allocated and parents and children on the waiting lists for those upper schools. They will have to endure a longer to find out how many new vacancies they may have in the new intake.

Are you entitled to claim costs/compensation for your wasted time?

If they can postpone at will, then why can't they rearrange in order so that yours is the following day and they delay someone else the next day etc (tongue in cheek)

What happens if you can't make it on the next date?

Is there any way that you could find out why the two morning cases were so complicated (and if possible use that info to your advantage?)

tobyprice wrote: The conspiracist in me says that, because the process is now much more legalistic (proving NOT fair, consistent and objective), the panels are getting embroiled in legal argument about terminology, rather than (as they should be doing) focussing on the academic questions. I would be interested to know whether others have any views on this?

I think the problem with this is, that unless the Panel find that the Review was NOT fair, consistent and objective, they cannot go on to consider the academic evidence anyway.

The conspiracist in me says that, because the process is now much more legalistic (proving NOT fair, consistent and objective), the panels are getting embroiled in legal argument about terminology, rather than (as they should be doing) focussing on the academic questions. I would be interested to know whether others have any views on this?

It has been known for there to be an occasional serious delay due to lengthy cases - even before "fair, consistent & objective" came on the scene.

The difference was that, if an old-style non-qualification appeal had to be re-arranged, it could be heard by any appeal panel. These new appeals are for a specific school, so the same panel (and ideally the same clerk and presenting officer) have to be used. There is much less flexibility in the system when there is a delay.

I have rarely heard of appeals being held during half-term, which suggests to me that this is probably the only date when this same panel will be available.

A panel ought to be focusing both on "fair, consistent & objective" and on the case for selection. It is still early days, and possibly too soon to draw conclusions, but a couple of comments on the forum have suggested that not many questions are being asked about the case for selection ...

We had the first of our two non qualification hearings last week. We were admitted about 40 mins after the stated time and took 40 minutes ourselves. They did seem a bit exasperated with the number of points we wanted to raise under the fair, consistent & objective point, but we felt we had to raise them all as you don't know which one might cut the mustard. I think there is a general problem with pasting the FCO issue on the front of a non qualification appeal and expecting it still to sit within a 20 min slot. Anyway, we heard on Saturday that we succeeded on this one, but it is hard to feel jubilant when one is still way off getting a place. The letter refers to our position being assessed in the next round of admissions, but has no explanation of the process or timetable for that. Good luck all.

http://www.buckscc.gov.uk/bcc/schools/a ... files.page" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;?

Timings of allocation rounds on here.

carolinens wrote:We had the first of our two non qualification hearings last week. We were admitted about 40 mins after the stated time and took 40 minutes ourselves. They did seem a bit exasperated with the number of points we wanted to raise under the fair, consistent & objective point, but we felt we had to raise them all as you don't know which one might cut the mustard. I think there is a general problem with pasting the FCO issue on the front of a non qualification appeal and expecting it still to sit within a 20 min slot. Anyway, we heard on Saturday that we succeeded on this one, but it is hard to feel jubilant when one is still way off getting a place. The letter refers to our position being assessed in the next round of admissions, but has no explanation of the process or timetable for that. Good luck all.

well done can i ask which school?