Parmiters Appeal/Continuing Interest List

[AlisonR]

watfordmum66... haven't Queens usually revealed their lowest score in the past? I wonder why the change of policy.

Alison

[watfordmum66]

I know that they issued the lowest score last year but I am unsure at what point in the process.
My understanding is there is movement on the CI list so maybe they state at the end of this.
Im sure we will find out as lots of parents trying to find out

[tense]

AlisonR

The sibling rule is "under threat" in that someone could object to it and an adjudicator could decide to uphold the objection.

Personally I think (& hope) it unlikely. Not many schools (apart from true grammars which we don't have in Herts) don't have a sibling policy & most people would support one, regardless of where their children go to school. Remember that no sibling places would not equal more academic places - the cap is set at 25% regardless.

I'm sure WP has said that the recent revison of the Admissons Code no longer criticises sibling criteria at partially selective schools, therefore reducing the "threat".

[watdaddy]

Thats right Tense, there used to be more best practice guidance - by that I mean there were plenty of "Should not" comments about the sibling rule in conjunction with partial selction (Should /should not are best practice, Must / must not are mandatory in the code).
There was no one thing to hang your hat on but the arrangements as a whole could be more open to critisism and indeed in the WBGS adjudication I referred to earlier the adjudicator said the schools "exhibited all the symptoms to be avoided" in the code. It will be much harder to pin down going forward.
However it does still say:

2.24 As with other oversubscription criteria in giving priority to siblings, admission authorities must ensure that their admission arrangements as a whole do not unfairly disadvantage other families.

I would say the higher the selective proportion in a school, the more risk there is that a challenge will come in over the sibling rule because the combination of the two can severly restrict places to local families. The 10% on distance in some top schools is an attempt to square off the "as a whole" part of this rule but there will be some interesting tussles I suspect if the school is above the 10% partial selection rule i.e. it has chosen to retain a higher level of selection than is available for new schools then there could be a grounds for challenge although this may simply reduce the selective proportion whilst leaving the siblings alone.

I quite understand why the sibling rule appeals to some families but if your eldest has just been allocated BH then it leaves a pretty nasty taste in the mouth. Some are more equal than others ... where have I heard that espression ?

WD

[Wellwellwell]

Thanks for your reply and of course I was fully aware of the sibling rule and the limited academic places at Parmiters in 2008 when their criteria was published, but as I initially said I want to make sure I have done my very best as a parent for their child and the only other avenue now is to go to appeal! I am therefore just trying to find out if anyone out there has any ideas on what this can be based on because Parmiters really have left no room for appeal, everything they have done is impeccable and am therefore wondering whether it is worth trying to state the sibling rule has been unfair in my instance. Thanks for your info. though it made interesting reading.

[watfordmum66]

I sympathise wellwellwell, I am toying with the idea of appeal as well but
the success is slim.

Is your third choice of school ok ?

Will you get in on CI list for your second ?

Wishing you good luck

[watdaddy]

Yes, good luck Wellwellwell but I doubt there is much you can do if they have applied their criteria as published.

I am sure you are doing all the necessary research and as you say parents want to feel they have done all they can.

WD

[tense]

because Parmiters really have left no room for appeal, everything they have done is impeccable

I think it's clear appealing because the published rules are "bizarre" won't get anyone anywhere - so long as those rules have been applied correctly. Should anyone be considering appealing I strongly recommend popping over to the appeals section of this site - lots of good advice there.

[watdad]

I do not think you will win an appeal on those grounds apart from everything else Parmiters is actually a mixed ability school. As I have said on another post I think you should appeal so at least you can say you tried but please do not get your hope up. Getting a decision in the post feel as bad as when you realise you did not get the school you wanted.

In my experience the only appeals that tend to work are if you can prove the rule have not been applied correctly or if you can prove they prejudice against you child in some way. Go over to the appeals board but be mindful of the fact that none of the moderators have a lot of experience in Watford. I went through 3 appeals last year, and lost I am happy to share my experiences and those of others but I know of Academic, social, medical and impact on life appeals and all have failed in Watford.

It is interesting that the lowest score is not on the audit report. I think you should be able to request this under the freedom of information act but might be wrong.

[Yves]

My middle child has a statement of special needs, do I send him to Parmiters (as would be his right) just so I could then, 2 years down the line, get my third child into Parmiters - basically prejudicing my special needs child's needs for a correct school for him just so my third child will gain entry to Parmiters (to which I know he would be a capable student)?

So tell me, if you could trade in a place for your eldest somehow by eliminating the sibling rule, and lose the guaranteed place your 3rd child would get as a sibling, would you be happier?

You admit you are `prejudicing' your 2nd child's needs for your 3rd's - doing one's best as a parent isn't necessarily about twisting the system to get what you feel you ought to have. So what about the needs of your 2nd child?

I have been through it myself - my eldest did not pass the academic test for Parmiter's. Of course we were gutted, but the criteria was there, clear as anything, and there really was no excuse other than she didn't do as well as 65 (as the numbers were in those days) other kids on the day. My 2nd child did get in (as one of 45 last year), which means that if we still have the siblings rule, my 3rd child will get a by. Not fair perhaps and definitely messy; I hear that it is technically possible to get the eldest one in as a sibling now, but that would not be appropriate in our case.

Can I just make a case for the status quo: I know that from the point of view of those having to do the entrance exams, it seems like a ferociously competitive school to get into. Once in, I have been pleasantly surprised what lovely, WELL ADJUSTED place it is, and I put that down to the careful mix of selective entries, siblings and local intake. There is an almost perfect balance of high expectation, good morale, genuine acceptance of ALL abilities and strong family ethos. I gives me much pain to think of my eldest missing out on this, but that's life, and when we tinker with these things, we risk losing the very quality we find so desirable. The lottery of birth gave me my least academic child first. I would not consider dismantling a system that works so well for so many for one very short term personal gain.