Appeal for a twin - both eligible but oversubscribed

[Goodheart]

To clarify this means that the girls would have to be placed at position number 180 and 181 to be admitted."

That's a very 'creative' definition of the word span. In common English usage I'd say that 'span' (in this context) means "either side of"; it doesn't mean "directly on either side of with nothing in between". A bridge does not stop spanning a river simply because its footings are set back from the bank a little.

[Goodheart]

Parkstone Grammar is an Academy, meaning it is responsible for its own admission arrangements. Although it has 'adopted' the multiple birth policy proposed by the Borough of Poole (as have most admission authorities in Poole) it has used slightly different wording. In fact, if you look at the admission policy of other local schools they all seem to have the same wording as each other - which is different to that proposed by the Borough of Poole:

If applications from children of a multiple birth span the threshold for the Published Admission Number, this will be treated as an exceptional circumstance and they will all be admitted if they are all of the required standard.

If applications from children of a multiple birth span the threshold for the published admission number, this will be treated as an exceptional circumstance and they will all be admitted if they are all of the required standard.

If applications from children of a multiple birth span the threshold for the published admission number, this will be treated as an exceptional circumstance and they will all be admitted if they are all of the required standard.

If applications from children of a multiple birth span the threshold for the published admission number, this will be treated as an exceptional reason for increasing the Planned Admission Number and they will be admitted.

I suspect that this is similar to the situation when the EU come up with a directive: a directive in binding upon each member state, but is left up to individual member states to enact a specific law to do so.

The actual admission arrangements are down to Parkstone Grammar, not the Borough of Poole. It would be interesting (although not binding) to know if the other schools interpret the word "span" in the way that Parkstone Grammar do. Would it be worth contacting them to ask?

Having said all the above, I'm sure the parents of the 17 girls above your 'Twin 2' on the waiting list would argue the opposite to avoid what they might consider 'queue jumping.

[TIDDLYMUM]

Hi

I've sent you a pm.

[catcool]

I think you are reading that paragraph in isolation and really need to read the whole criteria
This is the oversubscription criteria



7. OVER-SUBSCRIPTION
Where the number of students who have met the required standard exceeds the Published Admission Number, the following criteria will be applied (using the student’s circumstances at the date of application) in the order set out below, to decide which students should be offered a place:
a. Eligible girls who are classed as ”Looked After” or who have previously been “Looked After”
b. Eligible girls who live within the Borough of Poole and who are currently entitled to the Pupil Premium (at 31st October 2015) . Documentary evidence will be required at the point of test registration.
c. Eligible girls who live within the Borough of Poole.
d. Eligible girls who live outside the Borough of Poole, and who are currently entitled to the Pupil Premium (at 31st October 2015) . Documentary evidence will be required at the point of test registration.
e. Eligible girls who live outside the Borough of Poole, in rank order of the entrance test scores, with those girls obtaining the highest scores given higher priority.

In the event of over-subscription in any of the above criteria, then priority will be given to those students obtaining the highest scores.

Places are allocated on basis of score . In my humble view the school are correct .

.

[Twinmumdorch]

[quote]Parkstone Grammar is an Academy, meaning it is responsible for its own admission arrangements. Although it has 'adopted' the multiple birth policy proposed by the Borough of Poole (as have most admission authorities in Poole) it has used slightly different wording. In fact, if you look at the admission policy of other local schools they all seem to have the same wording as each other - which is different to that proposed by the Borough of Poole:
quote]

The school admission code says that a multiple birth policy should be clear. I don't see how using these words are clear. I feel confused!

[Twinmumdorch]

[quote="catcool"]I think you are reading that paragraph in isolation and really need to read the whole criteria
This is the oversubscription criteria



7. OVER-SUBSCRIPTION
Where the number of students who have met the required standard exceeds the Published Admission Number, the following criteria will be applied

e. Eligible girls who live outside the Borough of Poole, in rank order of the entrance test scores, with those girls obtaining the highest scores given higher priority.

In the event of over-subscription in any of the above criteria, then priority will be given to those students obtaining the highest scores.

Places are allocated on basis of score . In my humble view the school are correct .

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In terms of the oversubscription criteria, we fall into bracket e - eligible and out of catchment. My first daughter is within the 180 and my second is not (there were only 16 OOC places left). The multiple policy isn't designed to take a place away from another child. It is designed to keep multiples together rather than forcibly separate them. If we were given a place above the PAN as an exception, that falls in line with a national multiple birth policy. I'm not sure how to go to appeal if we can't make sense of the policies.

[mattsurf]

In terms of the oversubscription criteria, we fall into bracket e - eligible and out of catchment. My first daughter is within the 180 and my second is not (there were only 16 OOC places left). The multiple policy isn't designed to take a place away from another child. It is designed to keep multiples together rather than forcibly separate them. If we were given a place above the PAN as an exception, that falls in line with a national multiple birth policy. I'm not sure how to go to appeal if we can't make sense of the policies.

I am sure that you have a strong case: this is an extract from the School Admission Appeals Code February 2012
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... y_2012.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

3.2 The panel must consider the following matters in relation to each child that is the
subject of an appeal:
a) whether the admission arrangements (including the area’s co-ordinated
admission arrangements) complied with the mandatory requirements of the
School Admissions Code and Part 3 of the School Standards and Framework
Act 1998; and
b) whether the admission arrangements were correctly and impartially applied in
the case in question.

Taken from Parkstone Grammar ADMISSIONS POLICY For Entry September 2016
http://www.poole.gov.uk/EasySiteWeb/Gat ... ?alId=8064" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

11. APPLICATIONS FOR CHILDREN OF MULTIPLE BIRTHS
If applications from children of a multiple birth span the threshold for the published admission
number, this will be treated as an exceptional reason for increasing the Planned Admission
Number and they will be admitted.

Basically it would be clear to any appeal panel that Parkstone Grammar have not conformed to section 3.2(b) of the School Appeal Code. They are trying to argue that the word "span" implies one place either side. The definition of the term Span does not have any quantity associated with it and can mean any amount above or below a threshold. The wording is unambiguous it states that they WILL BE ADMITTED - the only possible ambiguity is the term "Span" and I really struggle to find any ambiguity, I have checked the dictionary and no definition suggests that the definition of Span is between to adjacent points

I think that it is very unlikely that an appeal panel will disagree with you.

The school has clearly made a mistake, however, I do not believe that a mistake can be reversed other than waiting for an appeal to take place

[Sally-Anne]

Although I agree with mattsurf's interpretation of the word "span", I would advise caution before getting tangled up in the Appeals Code on this issue.

I think Goodheart's post is very revealing, and there is no harm in putting before the panel Bournemouth LA's wording, plus the wording from the four grammar schools' Admissions Policies.

I think that should raise sufficient doubt in the panel's mind as to whether the Admissions Policy is clear enough on the issue of multiple births. (By all means have the excerpt from the Appeals Code to hand to deploy as necessary.)

In my experience, very few academies (i.e. their governing bodies) take sufficient care over the wording of their admissions policies and the implications of their choice of wording. The school's mistake is not necessarily with the way they have administered your daughters' admissions, but in the way they have worded their policy, in contravention of the global wording from Bournemouth LA.

Please also focus on the issues that this appeal will ultimately turn on: the prejudice to your child of not gaining admission when balanced against the prejudice to the school of admitting her.

Although you have a very strong and emotive issue on your side from the outset, you must still seek to provide as much other evidence as possible to support your case for prejudice.

[Twinmumdorch]

I have sent an email to the moderators with information and criteria which is ??? Relevant to an appeal.

[MaggieMay]

Agree with Sally Anne about the 'casualness' of some schools posting their admission policies - I have heard of some schools who just cut and paste another schools policy and couldn't quote it back to save their life!