Appeal criteria Judd

[Bat120]

My son did not obtain a place at Judd with a score of 406. 140 NVR 138 VR 128 maths. He was expected to get higher for maths (got level 5 for Y5 sats, etc). I actually think he was a bit overconfident as he said it had been pretty straightforward when he came out!

Against (I suspect) many people's views on this forum he received no tutoring as he was zooming along at Primary school (and I wanted to ensure he got in to a grammar school with no private coaching and therefore would hold his own once there).

So basically my main thrust is that he was competing against many kids at both primary and prep schools who have been tutored to within an inch of their lives. Is this worth my while saying this at appeal? Or will the panel just think I was naive in not arranging extra tuition? Or do they think that no tutoring happens?!

He is very keen to go to Judd as its our nearest grammar and he is an able musician (about to take grade 5) and Judd obviously is a music specialist.

Thoughts please!

[capers123]

Hi,

Sorry you've found yourself here, but hopefully you'll find it useful.

"my child wasn't tutored" is quite a problematic statement at an appeal.

For a start, how will the panel know you're telling the truth? One of my colleagues used to ask "was your child tutored" at appeals, and quite often parents answered "No". Now I remember a friend chatting to me one year after that batch of appeals, and she said 'I hear you allowed the appeal for little X' (a child at the same school as her daughter). "Yes, we felt sorry for him as he'd had no tutoring". "Like **** - he was down at the tutors at least once a week, and in school holidays". What could I say - we'd been duped - parents will often do anything to get a place, including lying to a panel.

It's probably worth mentioning in passing, but you won't be able to base your appeal round it. Panels are not there to judge the parents.

If the school has a specialism and your child is talented / interested in that, then certainly that's good to mention. So with G5 music, a 'photocopy of the latest exam certificate would be nice, but not copies of every grade certificate he's had or programmes from concerts (too much information). Likewise if a child is G&T at say rugby (and the school specialises in sports), then a mention that they're playing in the county squad is good. Having achieved a high score on Wii Fit might not be so useful

Make sure you get together the academic reports - such as the L5 in Y5 SATS that you mention - you need to show that the exam result was not typical of your sons capabilities.

There's a child in my daughters class who has exactly the same problem as your son - bright enough, but not tutored, and just missed a place. Make sure your son is also on the waiting list if he passed the exam but the school was oversubscribed.

[Etienne]

Dear Bat120

I like the level 5 maths standard in year 5, the imminent grade 5 music, and even the overconfidence!

I agree with Capers. I don't believe the panel would judge you to be naive, but I can't see them seriously taking into account the tutoring argument because quite simply it can't be substantiated - how are they to know who really hasn't been tutored? In my experience panel members were always neutral on the question of tutoring and gave no weight to it (except perhaps if it could be shown the family had only just moved into the area).

[catcool]

T Capers -quoting from your posting " hear you allowed the appeal for little X' (a child at the same school as her daughter). "Yes, we felt sorry for him as he'd had no tutoring". "Like **** - he was down at the tutors at least once a week, and in school holidays". What could I say - we'd been duped - parents will often do anything to get a place, including lying to a panel."

As clerk for school admission appeal panels, it worries me knowing you are a panel member that your opening discussing parent's cases with outsiders. One of things I always say to parents before an appeal begins is that "any personal information provided during the appeal is treated confidentially and only shared further on a lawful basis".

[Looking for help]

Hi
I find it distressing that appeals panels do not take into account the tutoring factor.
I know (after the fact ) that many children who passed the 11 plus in our area were tutored intensively by a well know company
I also know that the children who sat from our primary school were not tutored in this way. None of our children were succesful.
The GS website suggests that 6 weeks familiarisation is all that is required in terms of preparation - so these intensively tutored children are having much more preparation than those who paid attention to the instructions from the school.
I understand that it would be very difficult for a panel to know whether a parent is lying about it or not, but if the evidence of the head teacher and the year 6 teacher is that the child in question is without doubt suitable for a GS education then what more evidence do the panels require?
I am really struggling to understand what they use to make up their minds as to whether a child who has missed by a few marks is suitable or not and having three children pass previously I am very well aware that my youngest would cope quite admirably in the same environment.
I also know without a doubt that the reason that he has not passed is because I didn't send him to this tutoring company, and believe me if I could have my time again.....
LFH

[capers123]

As clerk for school admission appeal panels, it worries me knowing you are a panel member that your opening discussing parent's cases with outsiders. One of things I always say to parents before an appeal begins is that "any personal information provided during the appeal is treated confidentially and only shared further on a lawful basis".

This was a quite a few years ago - we'd not been properly trained at that point, and several things about the way we conducted appeals then make me cringe. It's all done proper, by the book now. That said, the decisions we made back then were sound ones, and although two recent cases from my panel were taken to the Ombudsman, they were thrown out as we'd heard them correctly.

[Etienne]

I find it distressing that appeals panels do not take into account the tutoring factor.

Dear LFH

I understand how strongly you feel about this issue, and anyone who wishes to raise it at an appeal is entitled to do so. With my old IAP hat on, however, I'm just cautioning that I think it doubtful a panel would give the argument any weight when there's no way of substantiating the facts.

if the evidence of the head teacher and the year 6 teacher is that the child in question is without doubt suitable for a GS education then what more evidence do the panels require?
I am really struggling to understand what they use to make up their minds as to whether a child who has missed by a few marks is suitable or not

That's an entirely separate matter, to which there's no simple answer!
(If there were an easy answer you could probably dispense with appeal panels and just run the appeal forms through a computer to check for ticks in the boxes indicating support from school!)

We do try and give some advice in the Q&As. For example:
B10
B11
B12
B30
E24

[Looking for help]

Sorry Etienne and everyone else its just that the tutoring thing really winds me up, and the closer we get to our appeal, the more I either feel really annoyed at the panel, bless them, when its not their fault or annoyed at myself for not doing the tutoring right, which is my fault.
I have to try to remain and figure out the best way forward.
Please ignore my rants,
LFH

[Etienne]

No problem, LFH. Everyone is permitted at least one rant.

Welcome to Appeals, catcool. It must seem like home from home?

[Bat120]

Hi LFH. I know exactly what you mean - although I had sound reasons for not sending my son to a tutor, I wonder if I was actually doing the right thing, or should I have hopped him on to the tutoring bandwagon along with every other parent hoping for Judd.

I just don't know if the argument that the primary school thinks he will do well there will make any difference to the panel - the fact is that Judd want the top 125 boys who apply and he wasn't one of them in terms of his score on the day - together with many other boys who got 400 plus on their scores but still did not achieve a place.

Sadly, with Judd and Skinner's oversubscription criteria not being distance, it leaves children living North of Tonbridge in no man's land.

Hey ho - we live and learn!