Selection Review Advice
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
-
Tigerwoods123
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2014 12:12 pm
Selection Review Advice
Hi
Thought you might be interested in seeing the below extract that I received this year from the Bucks CC Admissions Manager.
I am "in the business" and have regular contact with Bucks on admissions issues.
I have been seeking clarification from Bucks Legal Department and Admissions Team on the manner in which "fair, consistent and objective" is interpreted post review i.e. at the Independent appeal should the SRP be lost.
The best I have been able to get out of the Admissions Manager is set out below
"There are occasions where IAPs do find that the review was not demonstrated to be ‘fair consistent and objective’ (perhaps due to an anomaly on the clerks notes) and then go on to look at the whole case, and it is expected that the panel will do this only when there is sufficient reason."
This clarified what I thought which was advice was being given to Bucks IAPs that a parent had to show that a mistake had occurred if they were to show that the FCO test had not been complied with.
This is a very narrow interpretation of the wording in the Code and is different from other counties such as Kent where much more discretion is left to the Panel.
I also discovered on an FOI request that an average consideration of an SRP case is 6 minutes i.e. they read the papers and make a decision on average in 6 minutes.
Think carefully about going down the SRP route because at Bucks CC, if you lose you may considerably weaken your chances of winning on appeal which in my view is a process you have far more chance of influencing positively
Thought you might be interested in seeing the below extract that I received this year from the Bucks CC Admissions Manager.
I am "in the business" and have regular contact with Bucks on admissions issues.
I have been seeking clarification from Bucks Legal Department and Admissions Team on the manner in which "fair, consistent and objective" is interpreted post review i.e. at the Independent appeal should the SRP be lost.
The best I have been able to get out of the Admissions Manager is set out below
"There are occasions where IAPs do find that the review was not demonstrated to be ‘fair consistent and objective’ (perhaps due to an anomaly on the clerks notes) and then go on to look at the whole case, and it is expected that the panel will do this only when there is sufficient reason."
This clarified what I thought which was advice was being given to Bucks IAPs that a parent had to show that a mistake had occurred if they were to show that the FCO test had not been complied with.
This is a very narrow interpretation of the wording in the Code and is different from other counties such as Kent where much more discretion is left to the Panel.
I also discovered on an FOI request that an average consideration of an SRP case is 6 minutes i.e. they read the papers and make a decision on average in 6 minutes.
Think carefully about going down the SRP route because at Bucks CC, if you lose you may considerably weaken your chances of winning on appeal which in my view is a process you have far more chance of influencing positively
Re: Selection Review Advice
Very interesting. Thanks for sharing this.
We know that in the first year of reviews in Bucks (2012/13), 75% of review cases were found at appeal not to have been 'fair, consistent & objective'.
Such a huge proportion suggests a very reasonable interpretation of the wording in the Code on the part of appeal panel members.
Or it might be that a very poor case was put forward on behalf of the admission authority?
However, in 2013/14, the number of review cases judged not to have been 'fair, consistent & objective' fell dramatically to around 45%.
This suggests that either appeal panels have indeed moved towards a much narrower interpretation of the wording in the Code, or that there's been a staggering improvement in the presentation of the case for the admission authority!
Or perhaps both?
From the cases we've been involved in on the forum in the past year, we sense that different appeal panels have approached the FCO issue differently. Some expect the Admission Authority to prove that the review process was 'fair, consistent & objective' (which is what the Code appears to require), whereas others seem to want the appellants to disprove the Admission Authority's case!
When we see the figure for 2014/15, we shall know whether the downward trend from 75% is continuing, and whether it is becoming significantly harder for parents to get through the FCO stage of an appeal.
In Kent, the Admission Authorities don't even seek to argue 'fair, consistent & objective' at appeal, so parents are not disadvantaged in the slightest when it comes to an appeal.This is a very narrow interpretation of the wording in the Code and is different from other counties such as Kent where much more discretion is left to the Panel.
We know that in the first year of reviews in Bucks (2012/13), 75% of review cases were found at appeal not to have been 'fair, consistent & objective'.
Such a huge proportion suggests a very reasonable interpretation of the wording in the Code on the part of appeal panel members.
Or it might be that a very poor case was put forward on behalf of the admission authority?
However, in 2013/14, the number of review cases judged not to have been 'fair, consistent & objective' fell dramatically to around 45%.
This suggests that either appeal panels have indeed moved towards a much narrower interpretation of the wording in the Code, or that there's been a staggering improvement in the presentation of the case for the admission authority!
Or perhaps both?
From the cases we've been involved in on the forum in the past year, we sense that different appeal panels have approached the FCO issue differently. Some expect the Admission Authority to prove that the review process was 'fair, consistent & objective' (which is what the Code appears to require), whereas others seem to want the appellants to disprove the Admission Authority's case!
When we see the figure for 2014/15, we shall know whether the downward trend from 75% is continuing, and whether it is becoming significantly harder for parents to get through the FCO stage of an appeal.
Etienne
