Bucks Appeal for BlueBerry22

[Etienne]

It's a perfectly legitimate question to ask about FCO.
They've used the word "thrive" rather than "academically suitable".
Why?
Are they saying that the child has got to be more than academically suitable?
What were they looking for to determine whether a child would "thrive"?
And if they didn't have clear criteria for this, how could their decisions be FCO?

That's the FCO bit (the first part of your case).

In the second part of your case, you need to show academic suitability - you don't have to set out to prove that your child will "thrive".
However, the more evidence of high ability, the better!

[BlueBerry22]

Thanks Etienne -

I do find it a bit annoying to have to present the academic bit again when the SRP already agreed he was going to achieve the required standards - there is no new info to present on the academic side - he is on track to achieve what is predicted - this will be enforced by recent mock SATS tests (5A, 5A, 5B and 4 marks off of L6 for one paper) confirmed by school but that's about it - frustrating springs to mind.

[Etienne]

I do find it a bit annoying to have to present the academic bit again when the SRP already agreed he was going to achieve the required standards

Problem is - there's no set criterion for grammar suitability other than the 11+ score.

The Appeals Code gives one or two examples of the sort of evidence parents could present (SATs results, letter of support from school), but there is no precise specification there.
Nothing - not even CATs - is the same as the 11+.
See:
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/appeal ... ication#b4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(Although there needs to be some caution about alternative reasoning scores, I found MostHappyDad's evidence very persuasive. More importantly, so did his appeal panel!)

SATs are a completely different measurement - and when it comes to headteacher recommendations, there is no consistency between schools!

Although your review panel accepted that three level 5s are expected, I assume that nowhere did they concede that this was sufficient evidence of academic suitability?

I'm afraid this is a battle you still have to fight .......

Alternative evidence requires interpretation (and I'm not convinced that can be an objective process, which is a real problem for review panels who are required to be 'fair, consistent & objective'!)

Regarding interpretation, see:
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/appeal ... aneous#e24" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[BlueBerry22]

Thanks you are right the key thing to focus on is the fact that 121 was not achieved and almost put SRP behind us and move forward with academic evidence and the newly discovered extenuating circumstances.

[BlueBerry22]

Hi Etienne,

Quick question - in your reply to Cockleshell about dyslexia - you tell her to be sure to mention that DC is severely dyslexic - is this an official term and if so how is it defined ?

Does falling in the exam access range (as diagnosed by specialist teacher/assessor) constitute severaly dyslexic or is it a label that can only come from an Ed Psych report.

Thanks

BB22

[Etienne]

Hi Etienne,

Quick question - in your reply to Cockleshell about dyslexia - you tell her to be sure to mention that DC is severely dyslexic - is this an official term and if so how is it defined ?

There are big arguments about that!
See:
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/ ... ia#p379045" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Does falling in the exam access range (as diagnosed by specialist teacher/assessor) constitute severaly dyslexic

That looks like a matter of interpretation ......

I was just looking at it from what might be the panel's perspective.
(They do get an awful lot of cases where the dyslexia seems pretty mild.)

To qualify as a disability the Equality Act says the impairment has to be "substantial" - and it defines that as more than minor or trivial.

I'm inclined to think, therefore, that an appeal panel will sit up and take more notice if the dyslexia is moderate or severe. I don't mind where the label comes from - so long as it's from an EP or other appropriate professional who's carried out an assessment.

[Etienne]

It was an interesting question, and I've added it to the links to extenuating circumstances:
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/appeal ... ation#b10b" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[BlueBerry22]

Etienne,

If I can it to work I am posting a quick question to you via the appeals board -

Thanks

BB22

[BlueBerry22]

Hi Etienne,

Am posting another quickie to the appeals board.

Cheers

BB22

[BlueBerry22]

End of the road here too - JHGS recognise DC is performing well in a cohort of grammar school qualified children however are unwilling to overlook poor maths and nvr score as these not likely to be effected by dyslexia - although EP report clearly says he has poor sequencing skills as a result of dyslexia and can't hold a string of 4 digits in temporary memory.

Feel very disappointed - don't think the panel really got our arguement that everything done to date has been compromised by dyslexia therefore we only have classroom results and "working at--" levels to present.

Thankfully DS knew nothing about the process so can't be disappointed by the outcome but nevertheless is still devastated to be the only 1 in a G&T group of 20 not going to GS with his friends- it is heartbreaking.

I also worry about him at an US - he hates being noticed so going in with L6 English & L6Maths - he will just want to be a middle of the road kid - so I am afraid I am not sure about "cream always rising to the top" - sometimes it needs something to aim for.

Anyway that is it for us. Good luck to those of you that had good news today -

BB22