objection to Watford Grammar Schools
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
objection to Watford Grammar Schools
I've just heard from WGGS that 21 parents have lodged an objection with the Schools Adjudicator regarding some aspects of their admissions criteria (they didn't say which), and that they feel that all aspects of their criteria are under threat. (See the letter they suggest parents send to the adjudicator.)
According to the Admissions Code (4.17), individual parents have the right to object to violations of mandatory parts of the Code, and 10 or more parents have the right to object to partial selection, but there is no right of parents to object regarding non-mandatory parts of the code (like sibling criteria). I also understand that the adjudicator may also alter any part of the arrangements he/she considers to violate a mandatory provision, whether the objection is upheld or not (s47(2) of the Education and Inspections Act 2006), but there is no other power to alter criteria not objected to. Still, the cross-sibling criterion used by these schools has no support in the Code, and may be vulnerable. (Mrs Hyde did seem to linger on that one.)
PS: an anonymous source tells me that the objection is to the cross-sibling criterion.
According to the Admissions Code (4.17), individual parents have the right to object to violations of mandatory parts of the Code, and 10 or more parents have the right to object to partial selection, but there is no right of parents to object regarding non-mandatory parts of the code (like sibling criteria). I also understand that the adjudicator may also alter any part of the arrangements he/she considers to violate a mandatory provision, whether the objection is upheld or not (s47(2) of the Education and Inspections Act 2006), but there is no other power to alter criteria not objected to. Still, the cross-sibling criterion used by these schools has no support in the Code, and may be vulnerable. (Mrs Hyde did seem to linger on that one.)
PS: an anonymous source tells me that the objection is to the cross-sibling criterion.
Thanks for drawing this to people's attention WP.
The schools seem concerned that whatever specific issue has been objected to, that the adjudicator has the right to call into question ALL aspects of the schools admissions criteria.
Anybody who wishes to express concern at this, and ensure that a small group of parents don't disenfranchise potentially larger groups, might like to visit the Boys Grammar website, down load the letter (see the link in WP's post above) and register as an interested party.
The schools seem concerned that whatever specific issue has been objected to, that the adjudicator has the right to call into question ALL aspects of the schools admissions criteria.
Anybody who wishes to express concern at this, and ensure that a small group of parents don't disenfranchise potentially larger groups, might like to visit the Boys Grammar website, down load the letter (see the link in WP's post above) and register as an interested party.
Reading paragraph 47(2) of the Education and Inspections Act again, it seems they're right:watttyg wrote:The schools seem concerned that whatever specific issue has been objected to, that the adjudicator has the right to call into question ALL aspects of the schools admissions criteria.
It's a very broad power. In practice, the adjudicators used it last year only where they thought arrangements were unclear or illegal. Unfortunately I think an argument could be made that the cross-sibling criterion contravenes a mandatory part of the code. But changing the other criteria as well would be a radical step. The schools will argue that they were just knocked down from 35% to 25% last year, increasing the number of local places, and there is no need for further change. It may be that writing to the adjudicator might be helpful on that score.Where the adjudicator or the Secretary of State is required by virtue of subsection (3)(a) or (b) or (5)(c) to decide whether to uphold an objection to admission arrangements, he may consider whether it would be appropriate for changes to be made to any aspect of the admission arrangements, whether or not he would be required to do so for the purpose of determining the objection.
-
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:00 pm
- Location: Hertfordshire
These are a boys' school and a girls' school with a common history. Each of them gives high priority to children with a sibling already in the same school, but lower priority to children with a sibling at the other school. The latter is the "cross sibling criterion".mad? wrote:sorry to be dim but what is the cross sibling criteria?
I have recently heard that the objection refers to the Inner and Outer zones of the Grammars too.
It seems to me that these objections might have a 'knock-on' effect on the other schools in the consortium. Surely it is possible that more people will apply to Parmiter's, Queens, or Rickmansworth if they are guaranteed a place for their cross siblings ?
I have sent in WB's letter, and hope that as many people as possible will do the same.
It seems to me that these objections might have a 'knock-on' effect on the other schools in the consortium. Surely it is possible that more people will apply to Parmiter's, Queens, or Rickmansworth if they are guaranteed a place for their cross siblings ?
I have sent in WB's letter, and hope that as many people as possible will do the same.