Feedback - HJC66

[HJC66]

Oops forgot to mention that the admission authority's representative was left alone with the panel on more than one occasion. The first time was after all the parents left the room following the group presentation. Thereafter the representative remained in the room with the panel in between individual hearings. The Clerk did however leave the room in order to call individual parents in for their hearing.

I've just realised that I did not include Appendix 1 as referenced in my previous post. I don't want to overload you with information but will post it here if you have time to look at it. Kind Regards

[Etienne]

Dear HJC66

Thanks for providing a copy of the authority's case.

Generally speaking, the case looks quite well set out, although I can't see the school's net capacity mentioned. If so, this would technically be a breach of the Code.

I trust that the Appendix includes not just the admission criteria, but how many children have been offered a place under each heading.

My main concern, however, is that the authority's rep. appears to have been regularly alone with the panel. The only time this can legitimately happen is if a case is being heard in the absence of the parents - but the clerk would have to be present throughout. Otherwise, the rep. can only enter the room with the parents, and must leave the room at the same time as the parents. To make sure that I have understood correctly, can I double check that you do mean "in the room" and not "waiting outside the room"?

[HJC66]

Dear Etienne

We are truly thankful for your time and consideration.

I've checked through the authority's documents and can find no reference to net capacity figures.

The appendix gives details of assessment arrangements for community grammar schools, not admissions criteria or how many children have been offered a place under each heading. I seem to recall that these details were given to us during the group presentation but not sent to us by post in advance of the appeal.

With regards to the Authority representative, I can confirm that I mean the rep was in the room with the panel, without the presence of the clerk or parents. When the Clerk came out to the waiting area for us, we followed him into the room and the authority representative and panel were sitting waiting for us. At the end of our hearing, the Clerk escorted us out of the room, the authority representative remained seated with the panel!!

[HJC66]

I've just noticed that there are two Appendix 1's. One gives details of Assessment Arrangements for community Grammar Schools the second gives details of what will happen when your appeal is heard.

Neither describes the criteria which the authority uses to determine priorities for admission to oversubscribed schools or how places were allocated in accordance with the criteria as described in the Statement of the Director of Children’s Services

What a shambles. It's all so confusing.

[Etienne]

Glad to offer an opinion.

If oversubscription was part of the authority's case, then the Code specifies that you must be given the net capacity.

Ideally, I think you should also have been given the numbers on roll for next year's Year 8 and above (so that you and the panel can see if the school is used to coping with numbers above the published admission number).

In my view you should not have been told at the hearing exactly how places had been allocated under each criterion - the LA should have sent this information in advance because the Code states that the authority should not introduce significant new information at the hearing.

However, I have no doubt that the most serious matter is the LA rep. being regularly alone with the panel. I am flabbergasted!

The Code is quite clear.

Where both parties [parents and admission authority] are in attendance, one party must not be left alone with the panel in the absence of the other.

The rep. should have known better than to make such a basic error, and the chair and the clerk should never have allowed it. The ombudsman is likely to take a dim view of this.

[Y]

Sorry if I've missed this somewhere in the message string - but please could you give a definition of 'net capacity'?

Thanks

[Etienne]

Details can be found here:
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/11plus ... rs.php#c13
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/11plus ... rs.php#c14
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/netcapacity/

[Looking for help]

Etienne,
Can you clarify something for me? If we were appealing on non qualification only but then places at appeals were given out to mean that the PAN was reached, does then the oversubscription come into play?
Should we have been given a chance to explain why prejudice to the school was not as bad as prejudice to the child or does the rejection of our appeal for non qualification mean that the school did not have to justify to us the numbers they were taking?
Thanks
LFH

[Etienne]

Dear LFH

I'm afraid I don't know enough about how they were structuring their appeals. The ombudsman would have to decide whether their procedure was correct.

Just out of interest, the following is a good example of how an own-admission authority school might proceed:

Appeals will be in two parts if the child has not qualified, and if the school is full (or might become full if a sufficient number of children are deemed qualified during the appeals). Both parts will be heard at the same time.

1. Admission authority must make its case that the child does not have the required ability (done on the basis of the test results).
2. Appeal against non-qualification – this is where you present your alternative evidence of academic ability and mitigating circumstances.
3. Admission authority must make its case that the school is full and that taking extra pupil(s) would cause prejudice (i.e. harm) or increase the prejudice if the school is already in a prejudiced situation.
4. Parental reasons for needing a place – this is where you present your evidence about why this is the best school for your child.

Parents will need, therefore to submit evidence for both parts of the appeal, but bear in mind that the evidence about the suitability of the school in terms of ethos, curriculum etc will only be considered when the panel takes its decisions if the child is deemed to be qualified.

[Looking for help]

Thank you Etienne -the admissions authority made no case for an oversubscribed school in our appeal, no mention was made of prejudice to the school in taking an extra pupil, however we did state reasons why we needed a place at the school.
Thanks again,
LFH