Go to navigation
It is currently Mon Jul 22, 2019 4:41 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2019 8:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 5:26 pm
Posts: 8106
Quote:
Are you allowed to share information about a statement made by the admissions authority during the group hearing regarding the 2019 paper?

I think we would need to see what it is. Perhaps you could send a copy to the Appeals Box?

_________________
Etienne


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2019 8:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2018 6:59 am
Posts: 76
Etienne wrote:
Quote:
Are you allowed to share information about a statement made by the admissions authority during the group hearing regarding the 2019 paper?

I think we would need to see what it is. Perhaps you could send a copy to the Appeals Box?


Have done.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 10, 2019 9:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 5:26 pm
Posts: 8106
Thanks, Janita. Interesting.

The appeal panel does have a responsibility to decide whether or not the admission arrangements (which include the test paper) were "correctly and impartially applied".

_________________
Etienne


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2019 10:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 9:18 am
Posts: 56
Janita wrote:
Etienne wrote:
Quote:
Are you allowed to share information about a statement made by the admissions authority during the group hearing regarding the 2019 paper?

I think we would need to see what it is. Perhaps you could send a copy to the Appeals Box?


Have done.


Hi Janita,

Firstly, I really hope your appeal went well!!

I have been following this forum with much interest over the last few months (and, like the total geek I am, have read literally everything on this section trying to find something, anything, that might help - and believe me, it has, massively, so thank you to everyone on here who gives their time so freely and patiently to help others!) I have been planning to write up my experiences on here in the 'case history' thread once the whole thing is over, but I am reluctant to do so currently through fear of prejudicing my own DC's case. I know all the very experienced advisors on here generally caution against raising issues with 'the system' itself but, the more research I carry out in Essex, the more and more I come to the conclusion that the whole 11+ show here really does need whistle blowing - the time to be that person has not yet come for me though, and even writing this post is currently risky (obviously not physically - it's not the Da Vinci code or anything!)

However, I was VERY interested in your question re: the statement made by the authority regarding the 2019 paper - because I wondered immediately if it related to the issues we were discussing some weeks ago over on the Essex forum with regards to the Maths paper? Or, if not, I also wondered if it might relate to some other, connected, issues that I have been investigating in relation to marking and moderation? Obviously I realise you will be very reluctant to share publicly (which is why you have sent the info to the appeals box) and I totally respect and get this, and would feel the same way myself.

So my question is really for the advisors on the forum - if one of the admissions authorities in Essex (any one of the 10 consortium schools) were to raise something in their statement to their own IAP that could also potentially impact on appeals to other schools in the consortium, would they have a duty to disclose it to the other schools/appellants? Or, to put it another way, is there any way someone who was appealing to another school/s in the consortium could legitimately get their hands on this statement from CRGS?? I ask this question because anything that related to the paper itself, or the marking or moderation of the paper, would impact on every single candidate because of the way in which the results are standardised - a mistake in even just one candidate's score in one test centre would necessarily mean a mistake in every candidate's score in every test centre.

Anyway, Janita, I hope you don't feel I've hijacked your thread - and I really do hope you get a positive outcome :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2019 2:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 5:26 pm
Posts: 8106
abraham wrote:
I know all the very experienced advisors on here generally caution against raising issues with 'the system' itself
Well spotted! I would just add:
unless there has also been maladministration.

I try to define maladministration (in the context of appeals) here:
https://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/appeals/general#a57

An appeal panel does have a duty to consider the admission arrangements - but, unless there has been maladministration in a particular case, all it can do is report to the chair of governors and the LA any failure to apply the admission arrangements correctly and impartially.

Quote:
Are you allowed to share information about a statement made by the admissions authority during the group hearing regarding the 2019 paper?
Thank you to Janita for the tactful way in which this issue was raised.

My answer is that I wouldn't want the Appeals forum to get bogged down in the details of the underlying issue, but I see no objection to discussing procedure (i.e. how the matter should be dealt with at appeal).

If I've understood correctly from various sources, when parents started to challenge the school representative, the chair intervened, dismissed the statement, said it was not for the school to be interrogated, and that complaints/requests/questions should be raised with CSSE, not the school.

If this is what happened, then in my view the chair was wrong because the Appeals Code states with regard to the two stage process:
      Quote:
      First stage – examining the decision to refuse admission
      3.2 The panel must consider the following matters in relation to each child that is the
      subject of an appeal:
      a) whether the admission arrangements (including the area’s co-ordinated
      admission arrangements) complied with the mandatory requirements of the
      School Admissions Code and Part 3 of the School Standards and Framework
      Act 1998; and
      b) whether the admission arrangements were correctly and impartially applied in
      the case in question.

I think it was the responsibility of the panel to consider the admission arrangements, and the responsibility of the school representative to answer questions.
If the school representative needed to get advice, he could have asked for an adjournment.

Whether any of this would have shown maladministration (i.e. that a particular child had been deprived of a place to which he/she would otherwise have been entitled) is another matter.

abraham wrote:
if one of the admissions authorities in Essex (any one of the 10 consortium schools) were to raise something in their statement to their own IAP that could also potentially impact on appeals to other schools in the consortium, would they have a duty to disclose it to the other schools/appellants?
I don't think there's any legal duty - but if awareness of a potential issue were to spread, other school representatives would be wise to come to stage one prepared to deal with any questions from concerned appellants.

abraham wrote:
is there any way someone who was appealing to another school/s in the consortium could legitimately get their hands on this statement from CRGS?
If I've understood correctly, it was an oral statement, so it depends how detailed the clerk's notes were.

Someone could try making a Freedom of Information request for a copy of the clerk's notes for stage one, but it is quite possible it will meet with resistance.

The previous Appeals Code stated that the clerk’s notes are not covered by the Freedom of Information Act, but left open the possibility of making an SAR (Subject Access Request) under the Data Protection Act. (All this pre-dates General Data Protection Regulation of course.)

An SAR would apply to stage two where there is personal information about the appellant.

The wording in the current (2012) Code has changed to:

      Quote:
      2.27 These notes and records of proceedings must be kept securely by the admission authority for a minimum of two years. Such notes and records will, in most cases, be exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the Data Protection Act 1998, but admission authorities receiving requests under those Acts for information or data contained in such notes or records should obtain legal advice.

_________________
Etienne


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2019 3:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2018 6:59 am
Posts: 76
Etienne you knowledge always astounds me. Thank you.

After we left our appeal hearing we were discussing the fact about the "notes" of the clerk. As it would be quite impossible for one person to write down every single word within multiple conversations between 5 people at a time. At a stage during our hearing I glanced at the clerk who were sitting with he/his arms folded - and thought to myself...

How much does exactly get written down?

When we got home I glanced at the admissions appeal code - it seem to suggest that headings that are discussed get written down. Not every single word - as I think it is absolutely impossible. In today's day and age they should state that the appeal will be recorded. Much better than someone choosing when, and what to write down.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... y_2012.pdf


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 11, 2019 4:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2018 6:59 am
Posts: 76
Abraham

I can confirm after reading the schools case papers again that the reference to the 2019 test paper were an oral statement and it is not noted down in the schools case papers at all.

All I do suspect is that the school has an active member obviously on this forum as references were made from the school about this questions on the forum that arose since the results came out and the actual 2019 paper were bought by parents.

I do not and will not be disclosing any other information about the oral statement made.

The appeal was horrific for a lot of people there. Everyone came out upset, some sobbing and honestly it was the worst thing we as a family had to go through ever. Luckily my husband is a professional negotiator and I was (thank heavens) left to the administration duties (lol) an just confirming and nodding on many statements made. He can think on his feet, turn and steer conversations...save people's lives with those skills.

I am not one for confrontation and explanation (verbally) - There were many times I was almost brought to tears - just listening to all they had to say about our child.

Of course we would not know the outcome of the appeal yet, so have to wait the agonising 10 days.. there is alway hope - but the school clearly stated its case and that is basically as follows...

"we use the 11plus results as our first and utmost admission criteria, your child did not perform well enough on the day (fighting at the moment for 0.95 points), so therefor we do not support your appeal."

But - I must admit. We did have extenuating circumstances and a very good academic evidence - so if the luck is on our side, it might sway the decision in our favour (or not!) Sadly...if someone comes along with a stronger case, then we won't.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 10:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 9:18 am
Posts: 56
Thank you Etienne for such a detailed response. With regards to maladministration in individual cases, it must be almost impossible to evidence if you can't get access to your child's scripts - unless it's on some other grounds, such as distance to school not being properly applied etc. I may have found some evidence of maladministration in the system generally (not related to the issues raised at the CRGS Stage 1), but it would be very difficult to prove how this would have affected anyone individually - since it is more likely to have had an affect on everyone, through the standardisation process. The issues I have identified would be more impactful on borderline candidates though, where a pass/fail outcome was a factor in being refused a place (therefore only really relevant to schools in the consortium with a catchment area, where in-catchment candidates have only just missed out on places). I will leave it there though, as I don't want to hijack Janita's thread even further. Thank you also for giving us the gist of what happened at the CRGS Stage 1 - it doesn't really sound as if any new information was presented, so seems little point in trying a FOI request for the clerk's notes (which they will probably refuse anyway). It is interesting that the chair was so resistant to the school being questioned though - it seems, from my experience, that when you ask the schools for information you are referred back to the CSSE, and then, when you ask the CSSE, you are referred back to the schools . . . I think the CSSE represents an interesting dynamic (and I am not sure how similar/different the national picture is to Essex here) because the schools seem to use the CSSE as a useful collective front for the entrance test - but there is no accountability for the test iself, because of this. You can object to the admissions arrangements of individual schools (OSA) and you can complain that their individual appeal panels haven't properly followed the appeals code (ESFA) but, it seems to me, the CSSE as an organisation has no accountability at all (except to the schools themselves - who, I think it's fair to say, have little or no interest in rocking the boat).


Janita - I feel your pain! Thank you for sharing what you felt able to - I know it's difficult because we're all struggling with trying to balance our need to get help and advice, with a need to also protect our own DC's individual interests and maintain confidentiality. You are definitely right that 'walls have ears' with regards to these forums - as I have seen evidence of this myself! I suppose we all just need to remember that what we put 'out there' is then in the public domain, and is therefore vulnerable to exploitation - we all need to 'moderate' ourselves in that sense. Take care - and wishing you and your DS all the best.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2019 11:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 9:18 am
Posts: 56
Janita, I have just read your account of your appeal under the 'feedback' thread - really sorry to hear your appeal was not upheld :( Hopefully, with your DS being so close on the waiting list though, he might still have a chance of getting a place eventually (I think they keep the lists open until Dec for most schools, so there is hope at least!) Your experience at the IAP sounds horrible (though not entirely surprising as, after my own experiences at our first appeal, actually quite similar to ours!) You should definitely consider complaining to the ESFA, as we have done. They will not reverse the outcome, but they do have the power to ask the school to give you a fresh appeal with a new panel. I think it is probably pretty rare for them to do this, but at least you will feel you have been given an opportunity to formally air your concerns. Wishing you and your DS all the very best.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Privacy Policy | Refund Policy | Disclaimer | Copyright © 2004 – 2019