found a small (very small, tiny font used) sentence in the clerk's notes from the SRP stating "inconsistent evidence". Couldn't understand this so went through every line or every piece of paper submitted at SRP and found the school had made a typing error on the Headteacher's Summary sheet (transposing child's results) which contradicted the evidence written - hence it was thrown out at SRP
This is the problem with a desk exercise - no opportunity for clarification, no opportunity for questions to be asked.
Looking forward to IAP hearing next week now - surely as school made the mistake it is reasonable to assume child should have qualified at SRP, therefore before first round of allocations and so we should have a place for her?
Do make that point to the panel. You should have a strong case for admission.
I understand completely that everyone has to go through the process fully to ensure a level playing field for all and that everyone has the same chance. However, has anyone thought through the sheer amount of time and work involved for parents who take this on? It becomes elitist in itself because it relies on parents having the nerve to go in front of an appeal panel, having the wherewithal to wade through all the websites, letters, information out there to know what is needed and, as said earlier, relies on parents having the time to do this?
Appeals have never been easy, but this system is especially hard on those who do not survive the 'desk exercise'.
Sally-Anne and I have long thought that some parents (especially those in more deprived parts of the county) will be hugely disadvantaged by the complexity of the new process. Another blow against social mobility?