Kent Test Appeal Question

[committed]

Hi All.

My best friends DS failed the Kent Test scoring 140, 139 and 116 in Maths. She does want to appeal but will have to do so both on non qualification and over subscription. With the non-qualification side, will she only have to concentrate on convincing the panel that he should have passed the Maths paper and give reasons why he didn’t on the day and provide evidence of his mathematical ability, including NFER scores etc, or is it best to present academic evidence on all subjects? (A really good answer here would be just Maths – as that is his best subject by far!! )

Many thanks

C.

[Etienne]

I know of someone who appealed in Kent with very similar scores, provided academic evidence only for maths, and won!

No reason to steer clear of any other strong academic arguments, but I would suggest keeping the focus on maths.

[committed]

That's great news. Many thanks Etienne.

[Kent99]

Hi
I am NOT an expert on this but I think that the question the appeal panel is asking is "Is this child best suited to a grammar school?" rather than "Should this child have passed the Kent test?".

Given that your friend's child did well in the verbal reasoning paper I think that it would be reasonable to focus on his maths and hope that they assume that this is the only potential weakness. However, if the child was the subject of a HT appeal and that was unsuccessful because the HT panel didn't think much of his written work then I do think that that needs to be addressed. I believe, but only from reading this forum not personal experience, that the appeal panel will know the reason why the HT appeal was turned down.

[Etienne]

The legal position is set out in the CoP:

The panel may then need to consider any clear evidence presented by the appellants to support their claim that the child is of the required academic standard e.g. school reports giving Year 5/Year 6 SAT results or a letter of support from their current or previous school clearly indicating why the child is considered to be of grammar school ability. The panel must not devise its own methods to assess suitability for a grammar school place unrelated to the evidence provided for the hearing. In determining to uphold an appeal, the panel must be satisfied that there is evidence to demonstrate that the child is of grammar school ability and, where applicable, that the appellant’s arguments outweigh the admission authority’s case that admission of additional children would cause prejudice.

The decision whether a child is considered to be of grammar school ability must be based on evidence, and the 11+ results, of course, form part of that evidence.

If the child is as bright as parents say, it inevitably raises the question 'Well, why didn't he or she pass?'. This is why extenuating circumstances are likely to be a relevant consideration, except perhaps in very borderline cases.

[tigger2]

Hello Etienne, Is it possible to post the link for the CoP please? Many thanks

[committed]

I think it is a very interesting point Kent99 and I have to confess that I assumed they had scores and the HT appeal evidence too... However if the Code of Practice suggests that they only examine the evidence provided by the appellants then you would think not. I hope I'm reading that right Etienne and thank you again. I can see I'm at the very start of a very steep learning curve!

However, I really do like the questions you pose because I guess that is the crux of every good appeal. You address why they didn't pass the test on the day but why they are grammar school material nonetheless - and then go on to address why this particular grammar... (getting way ahead of myself here )

[Etienne]

Hello Etienne, Is it possible to post the link for the CoP please? Many thanks

My pleasure:
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/sacode/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(second item on the left-hand side)

[tigger2]

Many thanks Etienne

[Etienne]

I have to confess that I assumed they had scores and the HT appeal evidence too... However if the Code of Practice suggests that they only examine the evidence provided by the appellants then you would think not. I hope I'm reading that right Etienne and thank you again.

I would have thought the appeal papers must refer to the scores as they will be part of the authority's case explaining why a place has not been offered.

However, I'm not sure about the HT review because in Kent (as I understand it) there is - fortunately - no attempt to argue that a "fair, consistent and objective" review has already taken place.