Crypt 2018 Reallocation outcome

[Watermelon8]

That is all very well but no way is Crypt going to leave itself 25 under PAN because none of the appellants is supposedly 'the right standard'. They would lose funding for every one of those places. You can't 'prove' a reason for underperformance on the day; and equally, Crypt is not that selective that it is going to turn down a reasonably bright child who wants to be there when they have almost a whole class to fill.

If you can’t prove a particular academic level via CAT scores or school evidence validated by head/teacher then they won’t accept you & why should they! Financially of course it’s better but it’s certainly not better for the school or if they accepted children who may struggle. Academically, it is a strong school & they are selective. My ds is bright but he is surrounded by lots of brighter boys. I spoke to the head the other week, he is not expecting to be completely full in September & spoke about the financial implication. I know 2 boys appealing, both are bright but underperformed for different reasons. Why do you say ‘you can’t prove’ underperformance? It’s a well known fact that parents gain drs notes the week of the test if the child is particularly ill, if there’s been a confidence issue at sch due to severe bullying then the sch can provide a reference etc etc. Why is that difficult? I have friends who sit on appeal panels & have spoken about building a ‘case’.

[DC17C]

But, Crypt have always been oversubscribed after appeal panel allocations. Crypt had 35 successful appeals last year out of 85ish, putting them at least 34 over PAN.

The School have made it very clear that they really don't want to go over the 150 PAN.

I think the number of successful appeals last year is a bit of red herring, tbh. As per Lysander's post on another thread containing the minutes of the Crypt Governors' meeting where expansion and going co-ed was discussed, I picked up from this, that they really wanted the extra numbers from 2017 entry. I think those appeals were a way for them to gain the extra numbers they wanted ahead of the PAN formally increasing (you can call me cynical if you like and I may even answer!) I don't think there will be anywhere near the number of successful appeals this year.

Yes this year is a very different scenario...the school wanted to move to 5 form entry last year and did it through the appeals as they couldn’t change the PAN at such short notice....the school will be pretty full with 150 in the year....especially it starts to spread across the years.....

[ToadMum]

But, Crypt have always been oversubscribed after appeal panel allocations. Crypt had 35 successful appeals last year out of 85ish, putting them at least 34 over PAN.

The School have made it very clear that they really don't want to go over the 150 PAN.

I think the number of successful appeals last year is a bit of red herring, tbh. As per Lysander's post on another thread containing the minutes of the Crypt Governors' meeting where expansion and going co-ed was discussed, I picked up from this, that they really wanted the extra numbers from 2017 entry. I think those appeals were a way for them to gain the extra numbers they wanted ahead of the PAN formally increasing (you can call me cynical if you like and I may even answer!) I don't think there will be anywhere near the number of successful appeals this year.

Yes this year is a very different scenario...the school wanted to move to 5 form entry last year and did it through the appeals as they couldn’t change the PAN at such short notice....the school will be pretty full with 150 in the year....especially it starts to spread across the years.....

Well, 'throwing' an appeal is certainly one way to acquire a whole load of extra year 7s, but you risk a panel calling your bluff, finding that you have in fact made a jolly good case for the prejudice to the efficient provision of education that additionaI students would occasion and that very few of the appellants have demonstrated that their need for a place overrides this.

For a start, what school would have provided for a whole raft of extra children 'on spec'? The standard statement from a school at or already over PAN is that the number of students they have got is the number for which resources have been allocated, teaching hours organised etc. If the school is an academy and there were qualified applicants whom they had to turn away, why not add a an extra class as a temporary measure for that year group, 'with a view to seeing how it works out'?

[Amber]

That is all very well but no way is Crypt going to leave itself 25 under PAN because none of the appellants is supposedly 'the right standard'. They would lose funding for every one of those places. You can't 'prove' a reason for underperformance on the day; and equally, Crypt is not that selective that it is going to turn down a reasonably bright child who wants to be there when they have almost a whole class to fill.

If you can’t prove a particular academic level via CAT scores or school evidence validated by head/teacher then they won’t accept you & why should they! Financially of course it’s better but it’s certainly not better for the school or if they accepted children who may struggle. Academically, it is a strong school & they are selective. My ds is bright but he is surrounded by lots of brighter boys. I spoke to the head the other week, he is not expecting to be completely full in September & spoke about the financial implication. I know 2 boys appealing, both are bright but underperformed for different reasons. Why do you say ‘you can’t prove’ underperformance? It’s a well known fact that parents gain drs notes the week of the test if the child is particularly ill, if there’s been a confidence issue at sch due to severe bullying then the sch can provide a reference etc etc. Why is that difficult? I have friends who sit on appeal panels & have spoken about building a ‘case’.

Erm, I didn't say you couldn't prove underperformance (though that is hard). I said you couldn't prove a reason for it. I am fully aware of all the doctor's notes/extenuating circumstances (which range from genuine issues to the death of the next door neighbour's granny's gerbil) which appeals panels have to sit through. Of course children are affected by many things but you can neither quantify nor prove the effect of an event or series of events on the score of a particular child on a particular day. If an appeals panel has to hear about hundreds of such issues they will be more than overwhelmed at the end of it.

I am also aware that the CAT score needed to get into Crypt is around 110 - so not stellar - and many if not all of the children who are appealing will have that. My point is that Crypt will not leave 25 empty desks unless it does not have 25 children who want to fill them. It is in the best interests of the school to take the right number of children and if they possibly can, they will.

[Watermelon8]

That is all very well but no way is Crypt going to leave itself 25 under PAN because none of the appellants is supposedly 'the right standard'. They would lose funding for every one of those places. You can't 'prove' a reason for underperformance on the day; and equally, Crypt is not that selective that it is going to turn down a reasonably bright child who wants to be there when they have almost a whole class to fill.

If you can’t prove a particular academic level via CAT scores or school evidence validated by head/teacher then they won’t accept you & why should they! Financially of course it’s better but it’s certainly not better for the school or if they accepted children who may struggle. Academically, it is a strong school & they are selective. My ds is bright but he is surrounded by lots of brighter boys. I spoke to the head the other week, he is not expecting to be completely full in September & spoke about the financial implication. I know 2 boys appealing, both are bright but underperformed for different reasons. Why do you say ‘you can’t prove’ underperformance? It’s a well known fact that parents gain drs notes the week of the test if the child is particularly ill, if there’s been a confidence issue at sch due to severe bullying then the sch can provide a reference etc etc. Why is that difficult? I have friends who sit on appeal panels & have spoken about building a ‘case’.

Erm, I didn't say you couldn't prove underperformance (though that is hard). I said you couldn't prove a reason for it. I am fully aware of all the doctor's notes/extenuating circumstances (which range from genuine issues to the death of the next door neighbour's granny's gerbil) which appeals panels have to sit through. Of course children are affected by many things but you can neither quantify nor prove the effect of an event or series of events on the score of a particular child on a particular day. If an appeals panel has to hear about hundreds of such issues they will be more than overwhelmed at the end of it.

I am also aware that the CAT score needed to get into Crypt is around 110 - so not stellar - and many if not all of the children who are appealing will have that. My point is that Crypt will not leave 25 empty desks unless it does not have 25 children who want to fill them. It is in the best interests of the school to take the right number of children and if they possibly can, they will.

Well, I can only speak from experience but my ds is inspired & thriving at Crypt. He is surrounded by bright boys & the school is lovely. Some dc may get in with slightly lower CAT scores but as is the case for 11+, they are an indication of aptitude but are affected by many other factors so aren’t really a true representation of that child. Also, many children pick schs based on location & ‘feel’. Without thinking too hard about it, I know of 10 at least who picked Crypt over Pates or Tommies.

[ToadMum]

That is all very well but no way is Crypt going to leave itself 25 under PAN because none of the appellants is supposedly 'the right standard'. They would lose funding for every one of those places. You can't 'prove' a reason for underperformance on the day; and equally, Crypt is not that selective that it is going to turn down a reasonably bright child who wants to be there when they have almost a whole class to fill.

But Crypt is turning down lots of apparently perfectly 'suitable for grammar school' DC (as evidenced by the number who were qualified by one or more of the other grammar schools), by having set its standard for entry where it did. And the Admissions Code is clear that grammar schools don't have to admit to PAN if there are not that number of suitably qualified applicants. The school set its standard, it's not a Gloucestershire pass mark thing - hoist by its own petard, one might say?

And it's not the school which has the power to admit or not admit any given appellant, it is for the Independent Appeals Panel either to uphold an appeal, or not. If the panel don't believe that the number of appellants which would take the school up to PAN (and therefore full funding) have made their case to be admitted, then the school will be left with places unfilled.

[Amber]

Well, I can only speak from experience but my ds is inspired & thriving at Crypt. He is surrounded by bright boys & the school is lovely. Some dc may get in with slightly lower CAT scores but as is the case for 11+, they are an indication of aptitude but are affected by many other factors so aren’t really a true representation of that child. Also, many children pick schs based on location & ‘feel’. Without thinking too hard about it, I know of 10 at least who picked Crypt over Pates or Tommies.

I am not sure why you keep telling me how marvellous the school is, how lots of people prefer it to other grammars etc. I have no beef with the school at all - don't know it other than a look round many years ago when DS1 qualified for it - I am sure it is great. My points relate only to the fact they have royally messed up their admissions this year by overestimating their likely popularity; and that merely pitching into the mixed gender market was never going to allow them to leapfrog others in the perceived heirarchy of grammars in Gloucestershire.

As you probably know from my posts, I don't like selection at all and consider the 11+ a nasty thing to do to kids at 10. I do not believe that any test is 'a true representation of a child' nor do I see value in chasing that down. If you want to do tit for tat, I know off the top of my head 5 people whose DC qualified for Crypt last year (none this) who chose local non-selective schools over it and two who took their sons out because they didn't like it. I also know 2 who took their sons out of STR because they didn't like it and several who took their children out of Pates, a school I also have experience of and personally could not recommend at all, though many would stridently disagree with me. As you say, we are all different and different factors come into play when choosing a school. I hope for everyone's sake, and especially those waiting on Marling, that they sort this out asap.

ETA - TM - one of my favourite phrases ' hoist by their own petard'. And apt here.

[Watermelon8]

Well, I can only speak from experience but my ds is inspired & thriving at Crypt. He is surrounded by bright boys & the school is lovely. Some dc may get in with slightly lower CAT scores but as is the case for 11+, they are an indication of aptitude but are affected by many other factors so aren’t really a true representation of that child. Also, many children pick schs based on location & ‘feel’. Without thinking too hard about it, I know of 10 at least who picked Crypt over Pates or Tommies.

I am not sure why you keep telling me how marvellous the school is, how lots of people prefer it to other grammars etc.

Because you constantly seem to put Crypt down.....whether that is your intention or not! Therefore I feel the need to counter argue your posts!

[Amber]

Well, I can only speak from experience but my ds is inspired & thriving at Crypt. He is surrounded by bright boys & the school is lovely. Some dc may get in with slightly lower CAT scores but as is the case for 11+, they are an indication of aptitude but are affected by many other factors so aren’t really a true representation of that child. Also, many children pick schs based on location & ‘feel’. Without thinking too hard about it, I know of 10 at least who picked Crypt over Pates or Tommies.

I am not sure why you keep telling me how marvellous the school is, how lots of people prefer it to other grammars etc.

Because you constantly seem to put Crypt down.....whether that is your intention or not! Therefore I feel the need to counter argue your posts!

Sorry that is not true - just checked back and the only criticism I have ever made of Crypt, ever, is that they messed up this year's admissions. That is hardly contentious and has been said by many others. I am honestly glad for you that you have found a school you are so uncritically happy with. Most of us never attain that so great for your children that it suits them so well. I can't be bothered to play ping pong with you so will leave you to get on with it.


Good luck to all who are awaiting reconsideration for Crypt or any of the other schools affected by this year's fiasco. I hope that you all have good news on it soon.

[RedMaple]

We have had an offer for Marling just now (DS was 10th on WL 2 weeks ago)! No need now to go to appeal there or at Crypt.
Can't wait to tell him. I knew there would be movement eventually, but I think GCC have done well to move it along speedily.

Thank you to everyone for their advice and supportive comments - having become slightly obsessed by this forum I will stick around and hopefully help others.