Failed appeal for Parmiter's
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
Ricky CI list
I'm not sure where we are on the list - I guess we could now be right near the top. However we would not accept a place at Ricky now.
It is about 12-15 minutes to Ricky from us through the lanes in the car. There is a public bus from the top of our road but it goes round the houses and takes well over an hour. So not a lot of advantage in terms of travelling.
I wonder if the up and coming 'taster' day has forced one or two people who have been hanging onto their places to make a decision and hence freed up several places? Or perhaps they didn't let many through on appeal and are topping up from the list - could they do that?
A friend of mine who teaches at a private school said she has just found out that two of her pupils are hanging onto Boys Grammar places but have not given notice at their current school (they go up to age 13 at this prep) and would therefore be liable to pay the next terms fees.
I know of another child who got a place at Parmiter's as a result of a child not turning up to their taster day last year.
It is about 12-15 minutes to Ricky from us through the lanes in the car. There is a public bus from the top of our road but it goes round the houses and takes well over an hour. So not a lot of advantage in terms of travelling.
I wonder if the up and coming 'taster' day has forced one or two people who have been hanging onto their places to make a decision and hence freed up several places? Or perhaps they didn't let many through on appeal and are topping up from the list - could they do that?
A friend of mine who teaches at a private school said she has just found out that two of her pupils are hanging onto Boys Grammar places but have not given notice at their current school (they go up to age 13 at this prep) and would therefore be liable to pay the next terms fees.
I know of another child who got a place at Parmiter's as a result of a child not turning up to their taster day last year.
appeal results
Appeal results for KL were out today. Of the many parents that I know appealed for this particular school, 2 were successful.
One on medical grounds and the other because County had incorrectly offered a place and then withdrawn the offer after it was realised a mistake had been made.
So basically in Herts you will only win an appeal if there has been an error or if you have severe provable medical reasons for getting a place.
And as for any of the selective schools - well there would seem to be virtually no point in even trying. Sorry if that sounds negative but it would appear to be the reality round here.
One on medical grounds and the other because County had incorrectly offered a place and then withdrawn the offer after it was realised a mistake had been made.
So basically in Herts you will only win an appeal if there has been an error or if you have severe provable medical reasons for getting a place.
And as for any of the selective schools - well there would seem to be virtually no point in even trying. Sorry if that sounds negative but it would appear to be the reality round here.
Parmiter's appeal
I have just found out that the appeal panel only upheld one appeal for Parmiter's out of the 60 they heard!
Apparently this was on a 'technicality' so presumably there was some mistake made in the way the admissions criteria were applied.
What I cannot get my head around is how the panel could possibly believe that Parmiter's is such an overcrowded school that they can only 'afford' to admit one additional pupil.
One only has to visit the school to realise that the grounds, facilities, building and staff are far better than say, a school like Ricky where I could well believe that there overcrowding issues. Yet Ricky routinely allow 8-10 through on appeal!
I believe that the panel are not allowed, under the code of practice, to visit the school prior to the appeal and yet surely a visit to the school, whilst it is at work, would clearly show whether there was spare capacity.
The whole process from start to finish - now about 10 months from the initial open evenings has been very stressful for all of us. I just hope that Queens' hasn't been forced to get rid of their sibling criterion before my youngest applies in 2011.
Apparently this was on a 'technicality' so presumably there was some mistake made in the way the admissions criteria were applied.
What I cannot get my head around is how the panel could possibly believe that Parmiter's is such an overcrowded school that they can only 'afford' to admit one additional pupil.
One only has to visit the school to realise that the grounds, facilities, building and staff are far better than say, a school like Ricky where I could well believe that there overcrowding issues. Yet Ricky routinely allow 8-10 through on appeal!
I believe that the panel are not allowed, under the code of practice, to visit the school prior to the appeal and yet surely a visit to the school, whilst it is at work, would clearly show whether there was spare capacity.
The whole process from start to finish - now about 10 months from the initial open evenings has been very stressful for all of us. I just hope that Queens' hasn't been forced to get rid of their sibling criterion before my youngest applies in 2011.
Blimey Toony, where do you get all this information?! 
Re: appeals. Surely it's better that a school has a realistic admissions number than "routinely" allows X appeals through? It would save a number of families from the stress you've been through.
I wouldn't worry too much about the sibling rule. If Queens' is forced to drop it, I should think the other schools in the consortium would be too.
Re: appeals. Surely it's better that a school has a realistic admissions number than "routinely" allows X appeals through? It would save a number of families from the stress you've been through.
I wouldn't worry too much about the sibling rule. If Queens' is forced to drop it, I should think the other schools in the consortium would be too.
That wasn't it: they were forced to 25% because of a late amendment to the Education and Inspections Act 2006 that limited selection to the lowest level since 1997, and these schools had been made to use 25% in 2005 by an adjudicator, while Queens' and Dame Alice Owens escaped. Certainly it has left Queens' and DAO standing out, though.toony wrote:The particular worry with Queens' is that they have carried on selecting 35% whereas all the others have reduced to 25% this year supposedly so that they can keep their sibling rule.
