Bucks: Headteacher not supportive

Consult our experts on 11 Plus appeals or any other type of school appeal

Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators

11 Plus Mocks - Practise the real exam experience - Book Now
Chairboyssupporter
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2021 11:24 pm

Re: Bucks: Headteacher not supportive

Post by Chairboyssupporter »

Thanks Etienne. I did email the Council the other day and they said they would forward the Clerk's notes so hopefully they will come in due course.

I think I will write to the ESFA, just so that I have the peace of mind knowing I tried. Thank you.
Etienne
Posts: 8978
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 6:26 pm

Re: Bucks: Headteacher not supportive

Post by Etienne »

Chairboyssupporter wrote:I think I will write to the ESFA, just so that I have the peace of mind knowing I tried. Thank you.
The advantage of getting the clerk's notes is that they might reveal something that would help with a complaint.
In our presentation, we proved that the school's process (as administered by the LA) specifically says if an educational psychologist's report is submitted as evidence, then the case would be reviewed by a panel supported by an educational psychologist - and this was not the case. The representative from the LA agreed to this fact, and the Chair of the Panel noted this and said to "trust her and leave that point with her".
It will be interesting to see if the clerk's notes explain (as they should do) how the panel dealt with this point.
Etienne
Chairboyssupporter
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2021 11:24 pm

Re: Bucks: Headteacher not supportive

Post by Chairboyssupporter »

I received the clerk's notes today. They are a broadly accurate reflection of the Appeal hearing (doesn't capture the comment made by the Chair to "leave it with me"!). It does note that the school's representative acknowledged that an educational psychologist should have been present at the SRP, but wasn't. There are no additional comments reflecting any further deliberations or conclusions.

Whether the following is a relevant point to the IAP's position, I'm not sure, but at the IAP, it was apparent that the record of the SRP that was sent to me was slightly different to the version sent to the IAP. Whilst in my version, the WISC report was mentioned in the "extenuating circumstances", the IAP's version did include a comment that it was submitted as evidence for ability. Although there was no mention of the mark or contents of that report, or the NFER results. I would still contend that an educational psychologist being present at the SRP, reviewing the WISC results alongside the STTR, would have helped the panel to consider the possibility that DS had a previously unidentified learning difficulty that accounted for the slight shortfall in marks for the STTR.

Thanks, as always, for any thoughts. If I do write to the ESFA, should I include a copy of all the Appeal documentation, or would the reviewer look to request that themselves, if they choose to do so?
Etienne
Posts: 8978
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 6:26 pm

Re: Bucks: Headteacher not supportive

Post by Etienne »

at the IAP, it was apparent that the record of the SRP that was sent to me was slightly different to the version sent to the IAP.
Just checking - is this the clerk's record of the SRP? I don't see how there could be two different versions.
Whilst in my version, the WISC report was mentioned in the "extenuating circumstances", the IAP's version did include a comment that it was submitted as evidence for ability.
Is this based on something said at the hearing, or something in the clerk's notes?
I would still contend that an educational psychologist being present at the SRP, reviewing the WISC results alongside the STTR, would have helped the panel to consider the possibility that DS had a previously unidentified learning difficulty that accounted for the slight shortfall in marks for the STTR.
Be very careful to keep the focus on what the IAP did that was incorrect.

To sum up:
As confirmed in the clerk's notes of the appeal hearing, the school's representative acknowledged that an educational psychologist should have been present at the Selection Review Panel, but wasn't. This was a breach of the SRP's own guidelines, and it is not clear how the IAP dealt with the error, even though the IAP chair said at the hearing "Leave it with us" (a comment which is not recorded in the clerk's notes).

We accept that the IAP was entitled to dismiss the matter if it had reasons for doing so, but it was an important part of our case that the review was not fair and consistent, and so the IAP should have made clear what view they took of it and why.

The fact that the IAP omitted to consider properly this issue is contrary to natural justice (para. 2.21 of the Appeals Code);
or, if they did give it proper consideration, they have failed to give clear reasons for whatever conclusion they reached, which would be a breach of para. 2.25 of the Appeals Code: "2.25 The panel must ensure that the decision is easily comprehensible so that the parties can understand the basis on which the decision was made. The decision letter must contain a summary of relevant factors that were raised by the parties and considered by the panel. It must also give clear reasons for the panel’s decision, including how, and why, any issues of fact or law were decided by the panel during the hearing."
should I include a copy of all the Appeal documentation, or would the reviewer look to request that themselves, if they choose to do so?
It doesn't matter too much, but in the past I think they've been happy to receive any relevant documentation from parents, such as the decision letter and the clerk's notes.
Etienne
Chairboyssupporter
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2021 11:24 pm

Re: Bucks: Headteacher not supportive

Post by Chairboyssupporter »

With apologies in advance that I don't know how to quote text from your previous response. But in reply to the question relating to the 2 different versions of the SRP....

In the SRP decision letter sent to us in Feb 22, the WISC report we submitted is mentioned only in the Extenuating Circumstances section ("WISC report dated X").

In the version of the SRP decision letter submitted as evidence to the IAP by the Council, the WISC report is mentioned in the Academic Section (albeit no record of any of the marks/detail).

At the IAP, the AA rep said:
"The panel did consider the educational psychologist report even though it is not in the letter. A statement from the head of admissions:
It appears that for this appellant where for some reason when the original decision letter was downloaded by the parent in Feb, the letter did not import the reference to the academic evidence provided.
The duplicate letter that was downloaded from the system to include the appeal paperwork was dated X March and the content should have been exactly the same. However, in this case there is the error of the missing text. Therefore the letter included in the appeal paperwork is the correct letter. Owing to the way the system works it can only date letters on the day it was downloaded. It must be noted that this is purely a letter generation error and has no bearing on the decision of the selection review panel, who considered all submitted evidence in this case when coming to their conclusion. Our records show that the academic evidence provided by the parent was indeed considered by the panel and therefore it is simply a listing of these documents that was missing from the outcome letter provided by us."

You may recall that my original written submission to the IAP, was that insufficient weighting had been given to the WISC report, as it wasn't mentioned (to me) in the academic evidence. On receiving the AA's evidence, which specifically listed that if a psychologist's report was submitted as evidence, an educational psychologist would help inform the SRP, I adapted my verbal update to the IAP to be that of their non-presence.


Your summing up note is very helpful - thank you.
hermanmunster
Posts: 12817
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 9:51 am
Location: The Seaside

Re: Bucks: Headteacher not supportive

Post by hermanmunster »

re the quoting of bits of previous posts

- hit reply and then you have a blank box to type in
- scroll down and the previous post is visible underneath
- highlight the text you want to quote
- hit "quote" (top right of the previous post)
- and it will appear as a quote in your new post
- can quote multiple bits if wanted
Chairboyssupporter wrote:With apologies in advance that I don't know how to quote text from your previous response.
Chairboyssupporter
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2021 11:24 pm

Re: Bucks: Headteacher not supportive

Post by Chairboyssupporter »

hermanmunster wrote:re the quoting of bits of previous posts

- hit reply and then you have a blank box to type in
- scroll down and the previous post is visible underneath
- highlight the text you want to quote
- hit "quote" (top right of the previous post)
- and it will appear as a quote in your new post
- can quote multiple bits if wanted
Hoping this works..... Thank you!
Etienne
Posts: 8978
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 6:26 pm

Re: Bucks: Headteacher not supportive

Post by Etienne »

Our records show that the academic evidence provided by the parent was indeed considered by the panel and therefore it is simply a listing of these documents that was missing from the outcome letter provided by us.
It is not clear what is meant by "our records". What records are these, I wonder?
The "Selection Review - Record of the decision" states:
"The independent clerk made an electronic record of the main reasons for the Panel's decision. The decision-making process was not recorded. This electronic record is the only record of the decision."

Even if there had been a simple listing of all the documents, the school's representative (as confirmed in the clerk's notes of the IAP hearing) acknowledged that an educational psychologist should have been present at the Selection Review Panel, but wasn't. This was a breach of the SRP's own guidelines, and it is not clear how the IAP dealt with the error, even though the IAP chair said at the hearing "Leave it with us" (a comment which is not recorded in the clerk's notes).

We accept that the IAP was entitled to dismiss the matter if it had reasons for doing so, but it was an important part of our case that the review was not fair and consistent, and so the IAP should have made clear what view they took of it and why.

The fact that, on the evidence available, the IAP omitted to consider properly this crucial issue is contrary to natural justice (para. 2.21 of the Appeals Code);
or, if they did give it proper consideration, they have failed to give clear reasons for whatever conclusion they reached, which would be a breach of para. 2.25 of the Appeals Code: "2.25 The panel must ensure that the decision is easily comprehensible so that the parties can understand the basis on which the decision was made. The decision letter must contain a summary of relevant factors that were raised by the parties and considered by the panel. It must also give clear reasons for the panel’s decision, including how, and why, any issues of fact or law were decided by the panel during the hearing."
You may recall that my original written submission to the IAP, was that insufficient weighting had been given to the WISC report, as it wasn't mentioned (to me) in the academic evidence. On receiving the AA's evidence, which specifically listed that if a psychologist's report was submitted as evidence, an educational psychologist would help inform the SRP, I adapted my verbal update to the IAP to be that of their non-presence.
Understood, but I'm a bit wary of "insufficient weighting" because it could sound like a comment on how the SRP exercised its judgement, whereas I think your point needs to be that the SRP were unable to give proper consideration to the academic results of the EP report in the absence of their educational psychologist, and this is the issue the IAP should have addressed.


I hope I've got all the facts correct above.
I'm assuming there's nothing in the clerk's notes of the individual IAP members' decisions that explain what view they took of the EP issue.

Good luck explaining all this to the ESFA! Don't assume they will understand everything. I doubt that they get many cases involving reviews, so absolute clarity will be needed.
Etienne
Chairboyssupporter
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2021 11:24 pm

Re: Bucks: Headteacher not supportive

Post by Chairboyssupporter »

Thank you, again, Etienne.
Etienne wrote:I hope I've got all the facts correct above.
You have all the "facts" recorded as I have understood them and relayed to you!
Etienne wrote:I'm assuming there's nothing in the clerk's notes of the individual IAP members' decisions that explain what view they took of the EP issue.
Correct. The clerk's notes contain nothing more than a partial recording of the Appeal itself at which this point was acknowledged, then not further discussed.
Etienne wrote:Good luck explaining all this to the ESFA!
Thank you so much for clarifying the salient points that I should include. I will send the letter this week.

Just as an FYI, I did email the contact (Admissions Officer) at the relevant grammar school to thank her for all the support and information she had provided to help me prepare for the Appeal. She had received a copy of the Appeal decision and noted that the outcome seemed "harsh". She mentioned that it would have been better to go to Appeal rather than SRP - which I do agree with yet I couldn't have done differently - it's been an evolutionary journey to get to the current position. It was consoling to have her support, though.

Separately - I, and many others, are very grateful for all your wisdom and experience that you share so openly and freely. Do you have something like a charitable giving site, that individuals can give to as a token of appreciation?
Etienne
Posts: 8978
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 6:26 pm

Re: Bucks: Headteacher not supportive

Post by Etienne »

Chairboyssupporter wrote:I will send the letter this week.
In case you haven't seen it, there is an online form:
https://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/appeals/ombudsman#d6" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Point 25.
Let me know if you're not sure about any of their questions.

The very best of luck.
Just my opinion, but I'm afraid I do not feel complaints reported on here have been handled with the same rigour and independence as by the ombudsman.
I did email the contact (Admissions Officer) at the relevant grammar school to thank her for all the support and information she had provided to help me prepare for the Appeal.
It's really good to hear she was so helpful.
I, and many others, are very grateful for all your wisdom and experience that you share so openly and freely. Do you have something like a charitable giving site, that individuals can give to as a token of appreciation?
That is such a kind offer. We get asked occasionally and usually say that, if you would like to send a donation to a charity of your choice, it would be very much appreciated.
Etienne
Post Reply