• 1. Local Authority area in which the appeal took place:

Sutton

• 2. What you were appealing against?
• a. non-qualification only?
• b. oversubscription only?
• c. both non-qualification and oversubscription?

both non-qualification and oversubscription

• 3. Name of school you were appealing for: A Catholic school

• 4. Was this a school where the governors are the admission authority?
(e.g. academy, foundation or voluntary aided)

Yes

• 5. Approx. date of appeal hearing: mid June 2012


• 6. How many days in advance of the hearing, including weekends, did you receive the case papers?

We actually got the school's case papers on 3rd April, but only had the notice of the appeal date, procedures etc. at the end of May.

• 7. Where was the appeal held? At the school.

• 8a. Did your individual hearing start more or less on time? No.

• 8b. If not, how late was it in starting? About 15 minutes.

• 9. What sort of independent appeal panel did you have?
• b. A panel appointed by the school? - because it's an academy, foundation or VA school where the governors are the admission authority.

• 10. Who was on the panel?
(if you were told, e.g. a retired teacher, a businessman, and school governor - no names, please.)

The panel introduced themselves by name only. One was clearly the lay person, and the chair could well have been a retired school head.

• 11. Was there a group hearing?
(This is where stage 1 - the LA or school case - is presented to all the parents as a group)

No.

• 12. Did the appeal follow the recommended order of business?
• a. the case for the admission authority;
• b. questioning by the appellants and panel
• c. the case for the appellants;
• d. questioning by the admission authority and panel;
• e. summing up by the admission authority; and
• f. summing up by the appellants.

Yes, to the letter.

• 13a. Had your case already been considered by a Review Panel?
(sometimes applies to non-qualification) No.

• 13b. If so, were you told that, because your case had already been reviewed, the only issue for the appeal panel was whether the review had been conducted properly? N/a.

• 14. What questions were you asked about your case?

Very few – whether the school DS had been allocated was one of our preferences (it was).

• 15. What were the panel like?
(e.g. Were they friendly? polite? considerate?)

Business like. The chair appeared quite critical of the Presenting Officer, but was very fair to us.

• 16. As far as you know, was the representative of the admission authority left alone with the panel at any point in time? (It's acceptable for the representative to be waiting outside the room, but he/she must not be already in the room with the panel when you arrive, or remain in the room with the panel when you leave.) No, the Presenting Officer entered with us and left with us.

• 17. Were you asked at the end of the hearing whether you had had sufficient time to state your case (or words to that effect)? Not as such.

• 18. Did you feel rushed? A bit.

The Presenting Officer talked for a good 10 minutes about why the school was full etc. despite the chair having already asked us if we had read the Governors’ statement and when we had said yes that it wouldn’t be necessary for the P.O. to read it all. The P.O. then answered both our and the panel’s questions at some length which in all took up the first 20 minutes. We were then asked to briefly put our case, bearing in mind that the panel had read all our paperwork.

• 19. How long did the hearing last?

30 to 35 minutes.

• 20. Were you told you could telephone for the decision?
(most authorities do not allow this, although some do) No, we were told we would receive a letter in about a week.

• 21. If you have the result, was your appeal successful? Yes!!

• 22. How long did you have to wait for the decision, including weekends? 8 long days.

• 23. Success rates for appeals for this school (if applicable, and if known):
• a. on this occasion

• b. in previous years

10- to 15%. One year zero.

• 24. Any other comments:

The panel appeared to support our case on qualification, asking the P.O. whether the Governor’s had (yet) re-classified our application and moved our son up the waiting list (they hadn’t). On the matter of over-subscription, it was harder to assess the panel’s view – the school claimed to have increased its PAN by 3 in the last year which didn’t sit well with the arguments that admitting just one more boy would cause problems. (If things are that tight, why increase the PAN?)

Our feeling was that the panel supported our appeal, and the chair made many of my points before I could. But the outcome will depend on the relative strength of the other 20 – 30 appeals.

• 1. Local Authority area in which the appeal took place:

Trafford

• 2. What you were appealing against?
• a. non-qualification only?
• b. oversubscription only?
• c. both non-qualification and oversubscription?

c. both non-qual and oversub

• 3. Name of school you were appealing for:
(if a specific school was involved)

Altrincham Grammar School for Girls

• 4. Was this a school where the governors are the admission authority?
(e.g. academy, foundation or voluntary aided)

Yes

• 5. Approx. date of appeal hearing:

22nd May 2012

• 6. How many days in advance of the hearing, including weekends, did you receive the case papers?

Over a fortnight

• 7. Where was the appeal held?
(e.g. council offices)

At the school

• 8a. Did your individual hearing start more or less on time?

Yes

• 8b. If not, how late was it in starting?

• 9. What sort of independent appeal panel did you have?
• a. A panel appointed by the Local Authority? - because (i) it's dealing with a community school for which the LA is the admission authority, or (ii) it's responsible for hearing Bucks 'selection' appeals.
• b. A panel appointed by the school? - because it's an academy, foundation or VA school where the governors are the admission authority.
• c. A Local Authority appointed panel acting at the request of the school? - because it's an academy, foundation or VA school where the governors are the admission authority, and they 'hired' a panel from the LA.
• d. Some other panel acting at the request of the school? - because it's an academy, foundation or VA school where the governors are the admission authority, and they 'hired' a panel not from the LA but from a commercial organisation, charity, or some other body.

b. A panel appointed by the school

• 10. Who was on the panel?
(if you were told, e.g. a retired teacher, a businessman, and school governor - no names, please.)

5 members, the Chair "had an interest in education" - she was a retired headteacher.


• 11. Was there a group hearing?
(This is where stage 1 - the LA or school case - is presented to all the parents as a group)

No

• 12. Did the appeal follow the recommended order of business?
• a. the case for the admission authority;
• b. questioning by the appellants and panel
• c. the case for the appellants;
• d. questioning by the admission authority and panel;
• e. summing up by the admission authority; and
• f. summing up by the appellants.

Yes, although the panel did not question the school representative

• 13a. Had your case already been considered by a Review Panel?
(sometimes applies to non-qualification)

No

• 13b. If so, were you told that, because your case had already been reviewed, the only issue for the appeal panel was whether the review had been conducted properly?

• 14. What questions were you asked about your case?

What does your daughter do outside school? What year is her sister in? How far is the allocated school from your home? Do you have a doctor's note for the exceptional circumstances form?



• 15. What were the panel like?
(e.g. Were they friendly? polite? considerate?)

Friendly and polite, but hardly probing!

• 16. As far as you know, was the representative of the admission authority left alone with the panel at any point in time? (It's acceptable for the representative to be waiting outside the room, but he/she must not be already in the room with the panel when you arrive, or remain in the room with the panel when you leave.)

No, she came in and left with us

• 17. Were you asked at the end of the hearing whether you had had sufficient time to state your case (or words to that effect)?

Yes

• 18. Did you feel rushed?

Not rushed, but the lack of questioning made the whole process seem very perfunctory.

• 19. How long did the hearing last?
(excluding the group hearing, if there was one)

About 12 minutes

• 20. Were you told you could telephone for the decision?
(most authorities do not allow this, although some do)

No

• 21. If you have the result, was your appeal successful?

• 22. How long did you have to wait for the decision, including weekends?

We are still waiting - we were told "mid-July", that's about 7 weeks!

• 23. Success rates for appeals for this school (if applicable, and if known):
• a. on this occasion

• b. in previous years


• 24. Any other comments:

A disappointing appeal in that it appeared perfunctory and was heavily based on the written submission. We had kept ours very short and thought we were going to expand at the hearing. Instead we were asked to summarise our brief submission. I declined and asked to read out our speech! With hindsight I would have made our written submission as detailed as possible. The panel didn't question the school rep, and didn't indicate that they expected us to either - so I had to jump in and felt awkward. That my husband (and I for all they knew) had had to take a morning off for 12 minutes and then to wait at least 6 weeks for a response is hardly conduicive to a parent feeling positive about the appeal experience!

Hope this helps someone in the future
_________________

1. Local Authority area in which the appeal took place:
Trafford

• 2. What you were appealing against?
• a. non-qualification only?
• b. oversubscription only?
• c. both non-qualification and oversubscription?
b

• 3. Name of school you were appealing for:
(if a specific school was involved)
Altrincham Grammar School for Girls

• 4. Was this a school where the governors are the admission authority?
(e.g. academy, foundation or voluntary aided)
Yes Academy

• 5. Approx. date of appeal hearing:
23rd May 2012

• 6. How many days in advance of the hearing, including weekends, did you receive the case papers?
15 days

• 7. Where was the appeal held?
(e.g. council offices)
In the school library

• 8a. Did your individual hearing start more or less on time?
No

• 8b. If not, how late was it in starting?
About 15 minutes

• 9. What sort of independent appeal panel did you have?
• a. A panel appointed by the Local Authority? - because (i) it's dealing with a community school for which the LA is the admission authority, or (ii) it's responsible for hearing Bucks 'selection' appeals.
• b. A panel appointed by the school? - because it's an academy, foundation or VA school where the governors are the admission authority.
• c. A Local Authority appointed panel acting at the request of the school? - because it's an academy, foundation or VA school where the governors are the admission authority, and they 'hired' a panel from the LA.
• d. Some other panel acting at the request of the school? - because it's an academy, foundation or VA school where the governors are the admission authority, and they 'hired' a panel not from the LA but from a commercial organisation, charity, or some other body.

b. A panel appointed by the school

• 10. Who was on the panel?
(if you were told, e.g. a retired teacher, a businessman, and school governor - no names, please.)
5 members each had a name plate advising their role but sorry cannot remember them, one had an education background.


• 11. Was there a group hearing?
(This is where stage 1 - the LA or school case - is presented to all the parents as a group)
No

• 12. Did the appeal follow the recommended order of business?
• a. the case for the admission authority;
• b. questioning by the appellants and panel
• c. the case for the appellants;
• d. questioning by the admission authority and panel;
• e. summing up by the admission authority; and
• f. summing up by the appellants.
Yes but panel did not question the school reps about anything and school reps who are the admission authority did not question the panel about anything.

• 13a. Had your case already been considered by a Review Panel?
(sometimes applies to non-qualification)
No

• 13b. If so, were you told that, because your case had already been reviewed, the only issue for the appeal panel was whether the review had been conducted properly?

• 14. What questions were you asked about your case?
What does your daughter do outside school?

• 15. What were the panel like?
(e.g. Were they friendly? polite? considerate?)
Friendly and polite but not very vocal.

• 16. As far as you know, was the representative of the admission authority left alone with the panel at any point in time? (It's acceptable for the representative to be waiting outside the room, but he/she must not be already in the room with the panel when you arrive, or remain in the room with the panel when you leave.)
No, they came in and left with us

• 17. Were you asked at the end of the hearing whether you had had sufficient time to state your case (or words to that effect)?
Yes

• 18. Did you feel rushed?
No but the lack of questioning befuddled us.

• 19. How long did the hearing last?
(excluding the group hearing, if there was one)
About 15-20 minutes

• 20. Were you told you could telephone for the decision?
(most authorities do not allow this, although some do)
No

• 21. If you have the result, was your appeal successful?
No

• 22. How long did you have to wait for the decision, including weekends?
6.5 weeks

• 23. Success rates for appeals for this school (if applicable, and if known):
• a. on this occasion 4 succesful appeals out of approximately 50 were granted taking them 4 over PAN.
All these sucessful appeals were for inside the 8 mile catchment area, qualified girls and probably granted on distance of home from the school.

• b. in previous years
1-2 appeals successful each year over the past 4 years

• 24. Any other comments:
Appeal seemed heavily based on the written submission. We thought it would be a starting point for discussion but the panel didn't question the school case and didn't encourage us to either. This we found off putting as we thought it was etiquette that the chair would direct us as to when to speak about certain aspects of our case.
The fact that appeals were held on 3 seperate dates 2 in mid May and the last early July has extended the length of this process significantly as no one can have their results until the last appeal has been heard.

_________________

• What a journey, really hope this helps xx

Was this a school where the governors are the admission authority?
For Y8 upwards
• 5. Approx. date of appeal hearing:
July 2012
• 6. How many days in advance of the hearing, including weekends, did you receive the case papers?
3 days. I was not given 10 or 14 day notice but agreed to waive the notice as there was a panel/hearing scheduled for the school.• 7. Where was the appeal held?
Hotel
• 8a. Did your individual hearing start more or less on time?
Yes
• 8b. If not, how late was it in starting?

• 9. What sort of independent appeal panel did you have?
A panel appointed by the school - because it's an academy, foundation or VA school where the governors are the admission authority.
• 10. Who was on the panel?
(if you were told, e.g. a retired teacher, a businessman, and school governor - no names, please.)
Just introduced as 2 independant and 1 Lay
• 11. Was there a group hearing?
No
(This is where stage 1 - the LA or school case - is presented to all the parents as a group)

• 12. Did the appeal follow the recommended order of business?
• a. the case for the admission authority;
• b. questioning by the appellants and panel
• c. the case for the appellants;
• d. questioning by the admission authority and panel;
• e. summing up by the admission authority; and
• f. summing up by the appellants.
Yes• 13a. Had your case already been considered by a Review Panel?
(sometimes applies to non-qualification)
No
• 14. What questions were you asked about your case?
How DS felt when he left exam
How DS felt when he wasn’t given a place
Why when his report from comp school is outstanding did I want to move him?
Was the report based on Teacher assessment
Did he panic in exams?
What did he like doing in his spare time
If the bond between the siblings was so close then how did they cope when eldest left primary school and siblings were at different schools for a year.
If DS wants to go to GS and he doesn’t feel challenged then how is it that he is achieving good marks in his EOY report

Questions for the HT from panel
What was the SATs breakdown for the current yr 7. Ie level 4 and 5
How different is the 11+ to the 12+ exam
If you have managed with one extra pupil, how will one more impact the school• 15. What were the panel like?
very polite, very patient, very thorough, had a sense of humour when I fluffed my lines.
Applied their knowledge of the education system, like the question about boys underachieving in English but excelling in Maths. •
16. As far as you know, was the representative of the admission authority left alone with the panel at any point in time? (It's acceptable for the representative to be waiting outside the room, but he/she must not be already in the room with the panel when you arrive, or remain in the room with the panel when you leave.)
no
• 17. Were you asked at the end of the hearing whether you had had sufficient time to state your case (or words to that effect)?
I think so?
• 18. Did you feel rushed?
No
• 19. How long did the hearing last?
(excluding the group hearing, if there was one)
1 hour ish (my presentation took about 20 minutes) but i took evidence to show.

• 20. Were you told you could telephone for the decision?
I was given a slip with the number to call the next morning. But they rung me on the same day - late.
• 21. If you have the result, was your appeal successful?
YES
• 22. How long did you have to wait for the decision, including weekends?
same day
• 23. Success rates for appeals for this school (if applicable, and if known):
• a. on this occasion
Don’t know• b. in previous years
Sorry don’t know

• 24. Any other comments:


All in all a gruelling hour but i'd rather be quizzed so that the panel made absolutely sure they didnt have any unanswered questions. Perhaps i may have felt differently if the appeal had not been upheld. Without a doubt the volume and meaningful academic evi was key to the appeal as the HT pointed out that thats what he was most interested in.

Good Luck and i hope this can be of use to anyone out there...If you beleive your DD/DS is GS ability then DONT GIVE UP!!!
Thank you for your support and guidance! I have no doubt that this site played a key role in helping me prepare for the appeal and the outcome.
Gogi
x

Time I gave something back, having been a lurker for the past 6 months!!
Our child scored 120 / 117 in the bucks 11+, had absolutely no support what so ever from our bucks headteacher (HT) and not surprisingly our child's selection review was not successful. The IAP hearing was yesterday... we have no idea how it went, but wanted to post our experience now before our impression is swayed by the result! Hopefully others may find it of use in the future, as we have found so much of the information offered on this totally addictive, not to mention brilliant website / forum. So...

• 1. Local Authority area in which the appeal took place: Aylesbury Vale, Buckinghamshire
• 2. What you were appealing against? non-qualification (and oversubscription IF successful at 1st (FCO) & 2nd (Qualification) stage!).
• 3. Name of school you were appealing for: Royal Latin School
• 4. Was this a school where the governors are the admission authority? Yes - academy
• 5. Approx. date of appeal hearing: 10/05/13
• 6. How many days in advance of the hearing, including weekends, did you receive the case papers? 9 days
• 7. Where was the appeal held? County Hall, Aylesbury
• 8a. Did your individual hearing start more or less on time? No
• 8b. If not, how late was it in starting? 40 mins
• 9. What sort of independent appeal panel did you have?
• c. A Local Authority appointed panel acting at the request of the school? - because it's an academy, foundation or VA school where the governors are the admission authority, and they 'hired' a panel from the LA.
• 10. Who was on the panel? A retired business man (who is a Chair of Governors of a school), a mum of two (who is a parent governor) and a retired mother of 5 who has no knowledge of the bucks school system who worked for a mental health charity. (They had 6 cases to hear on the day, one every hour / 3 either side of lunch)
• 11. Was there a group hearing? No
• 12. Did the appeal follow the recommended order of business? Yes
• 13a. Had your case already been considered by a Review Panel? Yes
• 13b. If so, were you told that, because your case had already been reviewed, the only issue for the appeal panel was whether the review had been conducted properly? Yes but the panel did assure us they would be considering all the evidence put towards them in making that judgement.

• 14. What questions were you asked about your case?
Questions relating to special needs - evidence which could not be produced in time for the review.
Questions relating to progress and levels of attainment - specifically relating to the accuracy of the evidence supplied by the HT for the review / recommendation.
Were there any siblings, (Yes eldest of 4)
Did we have any concerns regards the pressure put on children at a Grammar school. (no)
Were all the test questions answered / how did our child feel after the test/ was there time to go back and check the answers ?

• 15. What were the panel like?
Official but friendly and seemed genuinely concerned by some of the evidence presented.

• 16. As far as you know, was the representative of the admission authority left alone with the panel at any point in time? No

• 17. Were you asked at the end of the hearing whether you had had sufficient time to state your case? Yes

• 18. Did you feel rushed? Yes and No – The fair, consistent and objective hurdle was a clear annoyance imposed on the panel. We could have gone into miniscule detail to argue the case and were encouraged not to do so, as we had already covered specific evidence we had relating to our specific case :-

We would not have applied for a Selection Review (SR) had we known we could wait for an Independent Appeal (IP) – misleading advice from LA / HT - had been told by the HT we would not be successful at the SR but it was the only option available, (evidenced by info sent out with test results, RLS admissions policy – section read out which is identical to wording in the HT manual) The Admissions rep conceded it was vague and not as clear as it should have been. The clerk interrupted quoting the number who were appealing who had not gone to a SR (i think 30 out of 160 cases approx.) saying some people knew! – I should have pointed out they may have been told in December they had no chance of success at a SR and accepted there child would not be going to a grammar, but now 6 months on they may have new evidence to support their case and are giving it a ‘nothing to loose attempt’... but i didn't think quick enough!! ( The clerk also asked that we did not take any notes then accepted we could by hand, but not on an Ipad!?!)

10 working days is not enough time to get an appointment with an Ed psych, to have a lengthy assessment carried out (6-7 hrs) and for the Ed psych to analyse data, write and issue a comprehensive report and so we were unable to give weight to our extenuation circumstances – Our child has high functioning autistic spectrum disorder (ASD)

The evidence supplied by the HT was not accurate and did not fairly represent our child – the SAT’s levels were lower than now expected, the language used on the review form was distinctly cold and our child was not included on the advanced recommendation form at all (4.2)! We had evidence to indicate this lack of support / recommendation was not fair or consistent with the cohort (analysis of the matrix recommendation data verses child's position within ability sets, inclusion on AGT programme – why if intellectually challenged, 2012 league table data % of children level 5 in Maths and English and also in other subjects, % passing 11+ in 2012 cohort v 2013 - over twice the number this year). We also had written evidence from the HT of a discrepancy between the yr 5 report and HT data. (HT claimed for SR her data was correct and the report was an error – now SAT’s levels indicate the report was accurate after all!)

It was clear to the IAP the reason given by the HT on the review form for not giving our child a recommendation was an excuse and totally conflicted with the matrix evidence. (The HT had stated on the review form our child was not recommended as our child was not performing in the top 25% of the year group – the matrix evidence indicated 53% received a positive recommendation with 62% included on the recommendation form (Very high performing state school!!).

We suggested the personality traits (ASD) may have been a factor in the non recommendation... yes that would be discrimination ~(we refrained from mentioning the big ‘D’ word)!!

We also quoted the ombudsman's advice that they consider the HT is acting as an officer of the LA in submitting evidence (pg. 19 HT manual). In our opinion therefore the HT is fundamentally part of the process ~ – arguing if the HT evidence was proved to be not FCO then the process as a whole could not be viewed as FCO even if later procedures had been followed.

Gently reminded the panel of their duty to ensure natural justice for our child.

We actually spent relatively little time talking about the academic evidence itself but rather the circumstance surrounding it. The chairman said our submission contained updated levels which they would consider (5B – Maths, Science, Reading and AGT - ICT) and did we have anything extra to add...

We discussed English writing, as this is the weak area (level 4) and suggested we believe specific targets were holding back progress which were linked to the ASD i.e how can a child effectively write about a characters ‘feelings’ and ‘interaction’ between characters if this is an area the child struggles with in real life (abnormalities in verbal communication and social interaction).

We highlighted no additional support has been given at the current school to date (taken off IEP in yr3 when our child joined the school as our child was / is not disruptive and was / has made good progress – we explained in hindsight our child should not have been taken off the IEP (ASD doesn't just go away!) and explained up until yr 6 it had not been necessary to give a label.

We suggested with extra support all levels including writing may have been higher.

We highlighted our child’s poor handwriting (common with many ASD children). Our child's school is totally inflexible – ALL KS2 children write in pen therefore it’s not easy to re-structure sentences without work looking a total mess. We suggested our child had learnt to prioritise presentation over content. Extra hand writing lessons were given as a solution (in yr 3,4,5 and 6!) no alternatives were offered i.e to use a pencil or a keyboard (even though our child has been able to touch type since year 3/4!) We highlighted that the mechanics of writing – grammar, punctuation , spelling were sound and took the target book, literacy & big write book for evidence.

We highlighted Bucks grammar schools don't consider English writing a measure of ability but rather a measure of attainment ( CEM consultation Q&A – no 46)

We highlighted the RLS SEN policy which confirms literacy catch up sessions for sub level 5 literacy students - which suggests some students regularly pass the test with lower levels in this subject. Therefore we believe it would not be consistent (relative to children who pass the test) to refuse qualification purely on writing.

We also looked at the test analysis - the panel confirmed no areas of weakness just one too many silly mistakes (VRTS 120 / 117) and we linked the results back to the new extenuating circumstances evidence (ASD – changes to routine at home – dad called away suddenly, school timetable changed due to tests and start of a new academic year - still adjusting to new teachers, worrying in test situations - confirmed by teacher etc)

Discussed exceptional progress - in KS1 (under the circumstances – very poor speech and language skills and disruptive). In KS2 has made 2 full and 2 sub levels since KS1 in all subjects, in the middle sets (which don't progress as well as top and bottom – evidenced by league tables)

We thanked the panel for their time, apologised that the case was so complicated and that their lunch break would be very short as a result! We confirmed we had asked the HT to provide updated evidence and a few lines in support of our case (on headed paper) but that the school had been unable to accommodate our request and so we had no option but to include the entire email thread relating to our child’s current academic data, as it was our only evidence (to which they smiled!).

• 19. How long did the hearing last? 1hr 20mins
• 20. Were you told you could telephone for the decision? No – by letter within 5 working days
• 21. If you have the result, was your appeal successful? Don't know the result yet! Successful at FCO stage but unfortunately not successful at qualification... writing level just too low I guess !

• 22. How long did you have to wait for the decision, including weekends? TBC
• 23. Success rates for appeals for this school (if applicable, and if known):
• a. on this occasion no idea
• b. in previous years no idea

• 24. Any other comments: Regardless of the outcome of our case my advice would be...... be realistic of your child's abilities but also trust your instinct. Mistakes and misjudgements do happen even by very experienced and well respected professional members of the teaching community! Professionals are people and some people will never admit when they have made a mistake! I would hope our child's case is exceptionally rare! With regards to the 11+ always follow up any verbal discussion had with the school by email to confirm what was said and always query any discrepancies you believe to exist in writing / by email. You really don't know at the time how important a hasty, poorly conceived reply will be! As the moderators of this forum continually say evidence, evidence, evidence!

1) Kent
2). Non qualification
3) boys grammar school
4) ?
5) 13 may
6) 2-3 weeks
7) Village hall
yes
9) panel by appointed by school?
10)
11) no
12) format: - official stuff said first
- school explained why did not qualify
,,- I gave my case
- questions
- school responded


13) no
14) I felt many of the questions were to determine what type of boy my son is. Did he like sport, music etc? did he like reading, and if so,what? If he had a lot of homework,,how would that affect his clubs? What was ds he like as a person? His personality? It seemed they wanted to determine his general nature.

15) the panel were friendly. They introduced themselves at the beginning, and shook hands at the end. I didn't find them too intimidating.

16) no - and he told me he wasn't allowed in the room.

17) can't remember.

18 ) no

19) approx 30 minutes

20) I was informed i would recieve the result at the end of the week







B b

Further details:

Evidence provided :
-11+ scores
-Evidence for why just missed score ( family illness in preceding months)
-Academic evidence why suitable for grammar score - Sats predictions/ levels, teachers reports, head teacher report, examples of work, school reports
-specialism of school -examples of why ds would suit this school - school reports, certificates

My planned presentation was going through all the above. However, the main panel member said that they had read all this through, and was there anything else I could add. That flummoxed me, and I felt I stumbled a little. However, the panel member was very good at asking questions and drawing information out of me. I didn't feel under pressure. I was nervous, but okay. In a bizarre sort of way, I found the whole process fascinating.

Result - ds got offered a place at Gs!

(Also got place in grammar stream of non grammar. We've now got the top-of-non Gs (mixed opinions of school, some do very well, others not,), versus Gs (ds at lower academic level, outstanding Ofsted, tatty buildings) dilemma!

• 1. Local Authority area in which the appeal took place:
SOUTHEND ON SEA
• 2. What you were appealing against?

• c. both non-qualification and oversubscription - AS SCHOOL NOW FULL

• 3. Name of school you were appealing for:
SHSG

• 4. Was this a school where the governors are the admission authority?
(e.g. academy, foundation or voluntary aided)
NOT SURE

• 5. Approx. date of appeal hearing: 20.05.13

• 6. How many days in advance of the hearing, including weekends, did you receive the case papers?
APPROX 14 DAYS

• 7. Where was the appeal held?
LOCAL FUNCTION ROOMS

• 8a. Did your individual hearing start more or less on time? on time YES

• 8b. If not, how late was it in starting? N/A

• 9. What sort of independent appeal panel did you have?
• a. A panel appointed by the Local Authority? - because (i) it's dealing with a community school for which the LA is the admission authority, .
• b. A panel appointed by the school? - because it's an academy, foundation or VA school where the governors are the admission authority. -I THINK SO
• c. A Local Authority appointed panel acting at the request of the school? - because it's an academy, foundation or VA school where the governors are the admission authority, and they 'hired' a panel from the LA.
• d. Some other panel acting at the request of the school? - because it's an academy, foundation or VA school where the governors are the admission authority, and they 'hired' a panel not from the LA but from a commercial organisation, charity, or some other body.

• 10. Who was on the panel?
(if you were told, e.g. a retired teacher, a businessman, and school governor - no names, please.)
2 LAY MEMEBERS , CLERK AND CHAIR WAS FROM EDUCATION


• 11. Was there a group hearing?
(This is where stage 1 - the LA or school case - is presented to all the parents as a group) YES

• 12. Did the appeal follow the recommended order of business?
• a. the case for the admission authority;
• b. questioning by the appellants and panel
• c. the case for the appellants;
• d. questioning by the admission authority and panel;
• e. summing up by the admission authority; and
• f. summing up by the appellants. YES

• 13a. Had your case already been considered by a Review Panel?
(sometimes applies to non-qualification) NO

• 13b. If so, were you told that, because your case had already been reviewed, the only issue for the appeal panel was whether the review had been conducted properly?

• 14. What questions were you asked about your case?
lots of info regarding extenuating circumstances / DD's medical condition
HOW WAS SHE AFTER TEST
DID SHE FINISH PAPERS
WHY SIT TEST IF POSSIBLY NOT 100%
HOW WAS SHE ON RESULTS DAY
MORE BUT CAN'T RECALL ALL



• 15. What were the panel like?
BASICALLY FRIENDLY - HARD TO READ / KNOW WHAT THEY WERE THINKING!

• 16. As far as you know, was the representative of the admission authority left alone with the panel at any point in time? (It's acceptable for the representative to be waiting outside the room, but he/she must not be already in the room with the panel when you arrive, or remain in the room with the panel when you leave.)
NO

• 17. Were you asked at the end of the hearing whether you had had sufficient time to state your case (or words to that effect)?
YES

• 18. Did you feel rushed? NOT REALLY

• 19. How long did the hearing last?
(excluding the group hearing, if there was one) 45 MINUTES

• 20. Were you told you could telephone for the decision?
(most authorities do not allow this, although some do) NO

• 21. If you have the result, was your appeal successful? NO UNSUCCESSFUL

• 22. How long did you have to wait for the decision, including weekends? 3 DAYS

• 23. Success rates for appeals for this school (if applicable, and if known): NOT KNOWN
• a. on this occasion

• b. in previous years


• 24. Any other comments: WE HAD OUR HEAD TEACHER WITH US TO ANSWER QUESTIONS - SHE SAID AFTER SHE WISHED THEY HAD ASKER HER MORE.
THE SCHOOL REP WAS GIVEN A CHANCE TO ASK US A QUESTION - NOT SURE IF THAT WAS OK OR NOT.
WE HAD TRIED TO BASE OUR CASE MAINLY ON ACADEMIC EVIDENCE BUT THEY KEPT STEERING IT TO BEING ABOUT DD'S MEDICAL PROBLEMS. NOT SURE IF THIS MEANS THEY WERE SATISFIED WITH ACADEMIC CASE AND CLARIFYING THE BIT THEY WERE MOST INTESESTED IN





If your appeal has yet to take place, please would you consider posting a report at the appropriate time?

• 2. What you were appealing against?
• a. non-qualification only?
• b. oversubscription only?
• c. both non-qualification and oversubscription?
Non qualification only
• 3. Name of school you were appealing for:
(if a specific school was involved)
Simon Langton Girls Grammar School

• 4. Was this a school where the governors are the admission authority?
(e.g. academy, foundation or voluntary aided)

Not sure
• 5. Approx. date of appeal hearing:
beginning of May

• 6. How many days in advance of the hearing, including weekends, did you receive the case papers?
approx 10 days

• 7. Where was the appeal held?
(e.g. council offices)
In the local community centre

• 8a. Did your individual hearing start more or less on time?
Yes, we were the first in the morning
• 8b. If not, how late was it in starting?

• 9. What sort of independent appeal panel did you have?
• c. A Local Authority appointed panel acting at the request of the school? - [i

• 10. Who was on the panel?
(if you were told, e.g. a retired teacher, a businessman, and school governor - no names, please.)
The didn`t tell us, all I know were they were unconnected to the school


• 11. Was there a group hearing?
(This is where stage 1 - the LA or school case - is presented to all the parents as a group)
No

• 12. Did the appeal follow the recommended order of business?
• a. the case for the admission authority;
• b. questioning by the appellants and panel
• c. the case for the appellants;
• d. questioning by the admission authority and panel;
• e. summing up by the admission authority; and
• f. summing up by the appellants.
Yes

• 13a. Had your case already been considered by a Review Panel?
(sometimes applies to non-qualification)
No

• 13b. If so, were you told that, because your case had already been reviewed, the only issue for the appeal panel was whether the review had been conducted properly?

• 14. What questions were you asked about your case?

Very little, they asked all sorts of questions I considered irrelevant " is she a team player, what outside interests does she have. "



• 15. What were the panel like?
(e.g. Were they friendly? polite? considerate?)
Friendly enough, slightly patronising

• 16. As far as you know, was the representative of the admission authority left alone with the panel at any point in time? (It's acceptable for the representative to be waiting outside the room, but he/she must not be already in the room with the panel when you arrive, or remain in the room with the panel when you leave.)
No
• 17. Were you asked at the end of the hearing whether you had had sufficient time to state your case (or words to that effect)?
Yes

• 18. Did you feel rushed?
Yes

• 19. How long did the hearing last?
(excluding the group hearing, if there was one)
30 minutes

• 20. Were you told you could telephone for the decision?
(most authorities do not allow this, although some do)
No

• 21. If you have the result, was your appeal successful?
No we were unsuccessful

• 22. How long did you have to wait for the decision, including weekends?
4 days

• 23. Success rates for appeals for this school (if applicable, and if known):
• a. on this occasion
Don`t know, I know of one

• b. in previous years
The year we appealed for my other DD there were 6 successful, which seems average


• 24. Any other comments:

Having appealed to this school previously, with a slightly above borderline child and a borderline fail ( successfully) this time I was achieving with an above average child with a catastrophic fail and extenuating circumstances.
I feel that they had already made the decision, as her mark was so low, that she was not an option, they deflected away from our academic evidence several times and asked random questions, unrelated to her levels or the extenuating cirucimstances.
I came out of the appeal feeling frustrated, as did my friend who came with us. I knew we were unsuccessful when we left. I felt like we weren`t listened too and we were being `humoured`. In stark contrast to my last appeal at this school. Which is in the stickys somewhere.
This may sound like I`m bitter, but really I`m not, its how I felt.




If your appeal has yet to take place, please would you consider posting a report at the appropriate time?

Thank you![/quote]

• 1. Local Authority area in which the appeal took place:
BOROUGH OF POOLE

• 2. What you were appealing against?
OVER SUBSCRIPTION ONLY

• 3. Name of school you were appealing for:
POOLE GRAMMAR SCHOOL

• 4. Was this a school where the governors are the admission authority?
ACADEMY

• 5. Approx. date of appeal hearing:
20TH MAY 2013 - GROUP HEARING
22ND MAY 2013 - INDIVIDUAL HEARING

• 6. How many days in advance of the hearing, including weekends, did you receive the case papers?
ABOUT 18 DAYS

• 7. Where was the appeal held?
SCHOOL HALL - GROUP HEARING
SCHOOL MEETING ROOM - INDIVIDUAL HEARING

• 8a. Did your individual hearing start more or less on time?
YES - INFACT ABOUT 15 MINS EARLY

• 8b. If not, how late was it in starting?
N/A

• 9. What sort of independent appeal panel did you have?
LA PANEL INDEPENDENT OF THE SCHOOL

• 10. Who was on the panel?
(if you were told, e.g. a retired teacher, a businessman, and school governor - no names, please.)
TWO MEN, ONE WOMAN, ONE INVOLVED IN EDUCATION, ALL VOLUNTEERS

• 11. Was there a group hearing?
(This is where stage 1 - the LA or school case - is presented to all the parents as a group)
YES - THIS LASTED FOR MORE THAN TWO HOURS!

• 12. Did the appeal follow the recommended order of business?
• a. the case for the admission authority;
• b. questioning by the appellants and panel
• c. the case for the appellants;
• d. questioning by the admission authority and panel;
• e. summing up by the admission authority; and
• f. summing up by the appellants.
YES - EXACTLY

• 13a. Had your case already been considered by a Review Panel?
(sometimes applies to non-qualification)
N/A

• 13b. If so, were you told that, because your case had already been reviewed, the only issue for the appeal panel was whether the review had been conducted properly?
N/A

• 14. What questions were you asked about your case?
WHETHER SON HAD FRIENDS AT SCHOOL?
IF HE WAS ADMITTED, WOULD HE BE GOING HOME TO AN EMPTY HOUSE?
TYPES OF ACTIVITIES OUT OF SCHOOL

• 15. What were the panel like?
(e.g. Were they friendly? polite? considerate?)
VERY PROFESSIONAL AND FRIENDLY

• 16. As far as you know, was the representative of the admission authority left alone with the panel at any point in time? (It's acceptable for the representative to be waiting outside the room, but he/she must not be already in the room with the panel when you arrive, or remain in the room with the panel when you leave.)
NO

• 17. Were you asked at the end of the hearing whether you had had sufficient time to state your case (or words to that effect)?
YES

• 18. Did you feel rushed?
NO

• 19. How long did the hearing last?
(excluding the group hearing, if there was one)
35 MINS

• 20. Were you told you could telephone for the decision?
(most authorities do not allow this, although some do)
WE WERE TOLD WE WOULD BE TELEPHONED ON THE FRIDAY EVENING - SAME WEEK, GROUP HEARING MONDAY, INDIVIDUAL APPEALS TUES TO FRI.

• 21. If you have the result, was your appeal successful?
YES

• 22. How long did you have to wait for the decision, including weekends?
JUST OVER TWO DAYS

• 23. Success rates for appeals for this school (if applicable, and if known):
• a. on this occasion
12/41

• b. in previous years
ROUGHLY THE SAME, TAKING EACH TUTOR GROUP FROM 28 - 30 BOYS


• 24. Any other comments:
GLAD IT IS ALL OVER AND THANK YOU FOR ALL THE ADVICE ON THIS FORUM, IT MADE A HUGE DIFFERENCE TO HOW PREPARED WE WERE!!