Grammar School offer withdrawn

[nicleah]

The appeal looms and I have a query.

The head's case is (of course I suppose!) that there's no room for more admissions. The current number due to start this year is unchanged from previous years. However, they have replaced a single storey building with a double storey building with two extra classrooms and the classrooms are bigger than the old ones.

No plans or any other documents have been sent in support of the head's case or for our information. Any comments/advice on this in relation to part 1 appreciated!

[mystery]

Etienne and the stickies are your best form of advice here. However, it's the power of your argument about why your child's need for that school is a more overhelming than any disadvantage to the school of admitting one more is what is key here. You can't be expected to argue in great detail about room sizes etc. But you will know why it is important for your child that she goes to this particular school.

[Etienne]

Stage one is discussed here:
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/appeal ... -school#c1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Net capacity is explained here:
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/appeal ... school#c13" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(Strictly speaking it doesn't apply to academies, but some might choose to refer to it.)

There are links to net capacity assessment and to building bulletin 98 here:
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/appeal ... school#c14" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It could all become very technical, though.

You could certainly ask why neither you nor the panel have been provided with any evidence about the size of rooms. Stage one is meant to be the 'factual stage', and the school seems to be making assertions rather than providing facts to prove its case.

On the whole I'd agree with Mystery that most of your efforts should be concentrated on stage two.

[nicleah]

The Appeal was today and it was tough. I didn't expect it to be easy but they didn't seem to grasp that the admissions code had not been complied with so it got into discussion about her mark on the day etc. I'm in two minds as to which was it will go so it's just waiting now!

[Fingerscrossedmum]

Sorry to hear you're feeling a bit downhearted. Do you know when you will hear?

[tobyprice]

[quote="Etienne"]
Net capacity is explained here:
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/appeal ... school#c13" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(Strictly speaking it doesn't apply to academies, but some might choose to refer to it.)

I know it is not too important, but pllease could you explain your comment about capacity and academies? Thanks

[nicleah]

We'll hear next week - there are more appeals tomorrow (Thurs) so they can't decide until those have finished.

[Alex]

I know it is not too important, but pllease could you explain your comment about capacity and academies? Thanks

As Etienne is not around I will try to answer: Maintained schools used to have to set their PAN with regard to their capacity assessment. Academies are not maintained schools and they set their PAN according to their agreement with the Secretary of State. However, "converter academies", which is probably the type of school for which you are appealing will usually have had a capacity assessment done in the last few years and probably still maintain the same PAN which was set when it was done.

[Alex]

We'll hear next week - there are more appeals tomorrow (Thurs) so they can't decide until those have finished.

Good luck.

[nicleah]

At last. I've been meaning to come back! Well, we lost the appeal but was are taking the case to the EFA.

In short, the decision letter is (as I see it) a nonsense in some respect:

“…..the panel agreed that the admission arrangements complied with the mandatory requirements of the Schools Admissions Code and Part 3 of the Schools Standards and Framework Act 1998 and that the admission arrangements were correctly and impartially applied to your daughter.”

The facts are such that this statement cannot in fact be true - if it was correct, the appeal would not have been necessary in the first place. If this statement was correct, the offer would not have been made. A further breach took place when it was withdrawn 7 days after the breach.

Also, we do not recall that at the appeal it was stated by the Chair (or either of the other two panel members) that the admissions arrangements were complied with. Presumably they would have been required to say so? They did specifically say the head had make its case about lack of space, etc etc.

In the same paragraph, following the above statement, the letter goes on: "....The panel agreed that the admission of x would be incompatible with the school's admission policy. The score of the last child to gain admission to the school this year was *** and x's score was ***." [A 29 mark gap (not 27 as I said earlier)] I'm no admissions law expert but I understand the mark is not relevant to the maladministration issue.

On the balancing of prejudice decision (which we believe was not relevant as it was a Stage 1 appeal), the Appeal Panel appears to have taken into account that the LA has offered our daughter a place at another school. This should not have been a relevant factor to the Panel’s decision at this stage.

So, I'm in the process of drafting my letter / form to the EFA. All advice welcome.