Letter out yesterday:

"Statutory Consultation on the proposed increase to the admissions arrangements and Published Admission Number (PAN) for Ribston Hall High School for 2020 from 120 to 150. All admission authorities are obliged to consult on changes to their admissions arrangements. As the Admissions Authority for Ribston Hall High School, the Governors are consulting on changes to the admissions arrangements and proposed PAN for the school, starting in September 2020. The proposal to increase the Year 7 intake would not affect the size of the other groups or impact on class sizes. The school would increase progressively year on year until 2024.

The Governing Body and Sarah Colombini, Headteacher, welcome your views on the proposed change to the Published Admission Number (PAN) and admission arrangements for Ribston Hall High School. "

The new Head has arrived!

What a surprise (not).

When STR announced it was increasing its PAN, it gave as one reason the decision by Crypt to go co-ed, thereby effectively or at least theoretically decreasing the available GS places for boys in the county. STR received three letters about the new policy. I seem to recall that Crypt had a few more, from local non GS-heads concerned about the impact on their intake. I wonder what Ribston will say, and what local reaction will be. If you have a daughter and want a GS above any other reason for choosing a school, I would say that things just got even easier.


https://strschool.co.uk/admissions/consultation

Reasons given (pretty much the norm!)

- Rising demand for secondary school places. GCC has projected a need to increase numbers of secondary school places from this year onwards; 
- Ribston is currently oversubscribed. Over 450 students met the qualifying standard for entry in each of the last three years (2016-455, 2017-535, 2018-570) and demand for places at Ribston Hall High School remains high; the number of appeals that have increased from 28 in 2016 to 46 in 2018 . 
- A strong commitment to challenging the view held by some that grammar schools are ‘bastions of privilege’ and ‘stuffed full of middle class children’, (Sir Michael Wilshaw, ex-Chief Inspector of Schools) by ensuring fairer access for disadvantaged pupils;
- A change in our admissions policy will enable us to provide more opportunities for students to apply and be admitted into Ribston Hall High School from more disadvantaged backgrounds; this will be supported by forging strong links with primary schools in of the city of Gloucester including those in GL1.

Interestingly not being open about the real reason - money. Dressing it up as some kind of service to the community is disingenuous but I suppose understandable.

All schools are being progressively starved of funding under this punitive government and those who feel they can increase their funds by increasing numbers are quite understandably doing so. Grammar schools are in a good position to do that, potentially offsetting some of the funding cuts which they say they have unfairly borne. STR was slightly more open about the money thing (see link); Crypt less so but it was in the governors' minutes that the reason for going co ed was financial. It is a shame imho that schools aren't more open about it as it might force a debate which needs to be had on when the funding issues will be addressed by fairer means than this. No one really believes that these increases in PAN are good for schools per se, but it is the least worst option for them.

Surely this is a very slanted view of how many actually wanted Ribston places though. If they are saying that 450 reached the standard but not addressing the fact that they set the standard at a point so as to make sure they get a full house?!

This year Ribston had 158 first CAF preferences for 120 places. This may have been skewed by Cryptgate; but last year it was 150. So they could just fill another class out of qualifiers who chose them first. The 450 is, as you state, a red herring designed to sell the policy. The more you qualify, the greater the pool eligible to name you on the CAF.

Not to mention a practical requirement because so many will choose other schools..

I agree - if they qualify more pupils then they will get a full house (which is obviously what they want).

Or to look at it another way...

I disagree - because more girls opted for Ribston this year (PAN=120, 1st choice =158, total choice=432), than HSFG (PAN=150, 1st choice=153, total choice=331). Considering Ribston have 30 less places than HSFG, are parents/pupils becoming disillusioned with HSFG? Contributors to this forum have stated they have chosen Ribston over HSFG.

I know everyone does not share with all schools but looking at statistics wildly, historical pecking-order would have meant = approx. top 70 girls opt for Pates, then next 150 girls for HSFG = 220, therefore by qualifying to 450 would leave 230 girls for 270+ places (150 places at SHS, 120 for Ribston and ??? for Crypt).

There is no point opting for a school you’re not qualified for. So there will be a lot of parents able to choose Ribston but not HSFG. This works for all schools from Pates ‘down’ and explains why the total number of CAF preferences is higher for schools lower down the hierarchy. That said, my feeling is that HSFG did suffer a dip in popularity which was not reflected in the pass mark. In other words they may have overreached themselves slightly but luckily for them they still just about filled their places with first preference qualifiers.

That's interesting - it comes close on this years appeals finishing last Friday.

I wonder if it counts as the 'significant new information' which would allow parents to request a second appeal (assuming that not all 39 appeals were allowed)? The school would have already considered the implications of raising the PAN and agreed that they could cope before putting it out to consultation.