mkmum2011 wrote:
if the panel agreed with the july 2019 predictions which were 111-120 for English and maths
and then gave the following reason for being unsuccessful : did not qualify in two elements verbal 117 and nvr 105 ( maths was 143)
I do not find this a convincing argument because there is no requirement to achieve a pass in each element of the test.
If grammar school heads wanted a minimum score in each element of the transfer test, it was open to them to make it a requirement for qualification.
Quote:
...... which was in line with academic profile..
to me that is contradicting? what do you think? this is my reason for FCO
Their reasons for turning down a review can be a bit woolly ("
The academic evidence presented is in line with the test profile"), and it is far from clear exactly what criteria were being used.
See D4 (vii):
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=57343 Quote:
also we did not use extenuating circumstances on the advice of the head as he was so close to 121
Was this a Bucks primary/partner school or an MK non-partner school?
Quote:
Is it worthwhile to now show we did have extenuating circumstances but chose not to use.
Yes
Quote:
can I ask at the appeal how many other children with the same score were successful and if they all had extenuating circumstances?
See D4 (v):
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=57343As far as your appeal form is concerned, I would suggest:
Quote:
"We don't think the review process was 'fair, consistent & objective', because of the lack of criteria used in assessing academic evidence. We would also question how 'exceptional circumstances' were defined so as to enable the SRP to make consistent judgements, and whether all successful reviews with scores of 116-120 normally had exceptional extenuating circumstances.
There may be further points we shall wish to raise at the hearing, but we have not yet had sight of the Admission Authority's case for FCO.
Moreover, we would respectfully point out that para. 3.13b of the Appeals Code puts the onus on the admission authority to prove its case for 'fair, consistent & objective', not on parents to disprove it."
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
