How to appeal for a Bucks GS place 2023

Eleven Plus (11+) in Buckinghamshire (Bucks)

Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators

Post Reply
11 Plus Mocks - Practise the real exam experience - Book Now
Etienne
Posts: 8978
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 6:26 pm

How to appeal for a Bucks GS place 2023

Post by Etienne »

This is our Guide to appealing for a Y7 Bucks GS place for September 2023 entry.
(It is usually updated in February/March for the following year.)

Index:
    • Introduction
      Foreword
      Difference between waiting lists & appeals

      Section A:
      Buckinghamshire Council guidance
      Deadlines
      Appeal forms
      The two stage process
      Decision letters
      Oversubscription

      Section B:
      Your child has qualified (either via the transfer test, or as a result of a successful Selection Review), but the school is oversubscribed

      Section C:
      Your child has not qualified, and has not been through a Selection Review

      Section D:
      Your child has not qualified, and has had an unsuccessful Selection Review

      Section E:
      How to sum up


      Abbreviations

      Final points

Introduction
(i) Foreword
• This guide is mostly our opinion and advice, based on official publications, reports sent to us by forum members, and our understanding of the appeals process. Parents are of course responsible for their own appeals, and must do their own research. Please study carefully Buckinghamshire Council's Parents Guide (see A1 below) and other official guidance relating to appeals.
• Where appropriate we will refer to information published by Buckinghamshire Council [BC], and to the DfE Appeals Code.
• Reference is also made to our own Appeal Q&As - version 12 is available here.
• This guide is a 'work in progress' and may be modified at any time. We try to keep up to date, but rely on parents and other forum members to alert us if any changes or corrections need to be made.


(ii) Waiting lists & appeals
If you have been refused a grammar school for which you applied, you can:
    • • go on the waiting list (if qualified)
      • or appeal (whether qualified or not)
Normally it is wise to go on the waiting list (if qualified) and ask for an appeal.

The waiting list is handled by Admissions, and is a completely separate procedure from appeals.
    • To summarise the key points regarding waiting lists & appeals:
      1. You can only appeal for a school you have been refused, so this means that as at March you can only appeal for your preferences as they stand in the first round
      2. You can appeal even if not qualified; the online form can be completed multiple times for schools that use the BC appeals team.
      3. You can change/add preferences for the second round, and if refused in the second round, that triggers the right of appeal. These appeals are likely to happen after the appeals triggered in the first round, but may be combined, depending on the timeline.
      4. Non qualified pupils are not included on waiting lists - they do not have to be on a waiting list to be successful at appeal. However they do have to have expressed a preference to trigger an appeal.
      5. Occasionally last year the Independent Appeal Panel decided a child should be deemed qualified for the school, but then felt the school's case for prejudice outweighed the child's case for admission, so - from the time of the appeal decision only - the child was put on the waiting list.

SECTION A

A1. Essential reading: see the Parents Guide to Appeals published by the Appeals Team at Buckinghamshire Council.

A2. Deadline for submitting appeals:
    • Completed appeal forms must be received by the Appeals Team by 12 noon on 28 March 2023
    If you miss the deadline, the likelihood is that your appeal would not be heard until the autumn term.

    A3. After allocations on the first working day in March you can appeal for any secondary school for which you have applied and been refused.
      • "You can appeal for any school which you have applied for and been refused.
        For each school you appeal for, you must complete a separate appeal form and there will be a separate appeal. [BC]
        "
    A4. An online appeal form can be found by following links in the 'Parents Guide to Appeals' published by the Appeals Team at Buckinghamshire Council (see A1 above).
    You need to complete a single form for each school you are appealing for.
    Remember - you cannot appeal before the first working day in March.

    If you need a paper form, contact Admissions, (not the Appeals Team).



    A5. BC's Appeals Team handle the appeals for most Bucks schools (whether you live in or out of county).
    • For the past few years, one or two grammar schools have chosen to run their own appeals. They're legally entitled to do this, but it's disappointing and may not be good news for appellants. Nationally the average success rate for academy run appeals is thought to have been lower than for appeals arranged by LAs - and historically there have been many more complaints about the conduct of own-admission authority appeals.

      The chair of the Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council has written:
          • "In the case of schools/academies that are their own admission authorities, it is unsatisfactory that Foundation and Voluntary Aided schools and academies run their own appeal panels. Full independence needs to be ensured, following the principle of natural justice that no-one should judge her/his own case."
      Our general concerns about own-admission authority appeals are set out in the Q&As, A6.
    The BC online process will tell you if a particular school is arranging its own appeals, in which case you must contact the school directly for an appeal pack, and will need to return the completed appeal form to the school.
    At the time of writing, as far as we are aware, the only two grammar schools that handle their own appeals are DCGS and DCHS.


    A6. If you feel you need more time to prepare your case, you can submit late information up until the date specified.
    "For secondary appeals submitted by 28 March – your evidence must be received by the Appeals Team by 5pm on 12 April."

    However, we do not think it is fair on the Appeals Team, who are already dealing with many hundreds of appeals and masses of paperwork, if you keep on and on submitting various bits and pieces of information from early March onwards.
    If you are able to submit your full case by the deadline near the end of March, please do so.


    A7. Appeal hearings will take place online.
    Each appeal will consist of two stages.

    A8. For stage one the admission authority will put forward its case in writing.
      • (i) The case will include an explanation of the transfer test and selection review arrangements. This will be the same for every grammar school because they all followed the same process.

        (ii) There will also be information about how the allocations for that school have been made in accordance with its published admission arrangements, and a case for prejudice (if the school is oversubscribed). Each school's case for prejudice will be different - to take account of its particular circumstances.
        See our guidance: Appealing for an oversubscribed school - stage one.

        (iii) Parents who've been through an unsuccessful review will have the opportunity to ask general questions about the review process (whether it was fair, consistent & objective), and - if the school is oversubscribed - all parents will be able to question the school's case for prejudice.

        (iv) At the end of stage one there is a decision by the panel on whether or not the school has made its case for prejudice (assuming the school is oversubscribed).

        Whether or not reviews were FCO ('fair, consistent and objective') is handled differently: there is no 'overall decision' on FCO - because FCO can only be decided with reference to individual cases.
        The reason for this is that para 3.13(b) of the Appeals Code specifically refers to "whether each child’s review was carried out in a fair, consistent and objective way", so there is no provision for the school's case for FCO to be considered as a whole.
        It follows that no decision on FCO can be taken until after your individual case has been considered, and it will only apply to your case (i.e. it will have no bearing on other cases).



    A9. Each parent's individual written case will be considered at stage two.
    There will be three possible parts to stage two (depending on the bits in brackets below), and all parts will be considered at the same time:
      • (i) 'Fair, consistent & objective' (any points you have raised, if you've had an unsuccessful review)
        (ii) Qualification (your academic case, if unqualified)
        (iii) Your reasons for wanting a place (if the school is full, or likely to become so)
    A10. Most parents will be appealing for more than one grammar school (and it is in their interests to do so because it will maximise their chances).
    There will be a separate decision letter for each appeal after all the cases for that particular school have been decided.
    Decisions are not communicated by phone or email.
      • • Because panels are completely independent, be prepared for the possibility that different panels could reach different decisions on your case with regard to 'fair, consistent & objective' and to qualification. If your first GS appeal is unsuccessful, you may have better luck with a second.

        • In 2013 Sally-Anne summed up the situation very well:
          • "It's also worth saying that panel members are very independent-minded - so much so that different panels could come to completely different conclusions about 'fair, consistent and objective'. That has happened in other areas of the country in the past.
            The wording in the Appeals Code about "fair, consistent & objective" is pretty minimal and open to interpretation by individual Independent Appeal Panels.
            "
    A11. It will depend on the number of appellants, and on how the hearings are spaced out - but be prepared for the possibility of a long wait for the panel's decision on your case.
    The Appeals Code does not allow any decisions to be released until the panel has heard all the appeals it is handling for a particular school.
    Decision letters would normally be sent out within one week of the last appeal.

    A12. Oversubscription
    You must work on the assumption that the school will be oversubscribed, and you must argue against the prejudice of admitting another child by putting forward good reasons for wanting a place.
    Prejudice needs to be addressed in all three sections B-D below, not just section B. The importance of "outweighing the prejudice" often seems neglected by those to whom section C or D applies.

    If submitting an educational argument, be sure to research the individual grammar school so that you can prove why that particular school would best meet your child's needs.

    Which of the following cases do you think is strongest?
      • 1. "I've heard it has a good SEN department."
        2. "The Ofsted report some years ago said it has a good SEN department."
        3. "It was very busy at the Open Evening, but I did manage to have a few words with someone from special needs."
        4. "I made an appointment to see the SenCo at both schools, showed them what my son's needs are (see attached evidence), and found out exactly what they could offer him."



    SECTION B:
    Your child has qualified (either via the transfer test, or as a result of a successful Selection Review), but the school is oversubscribed


    B1. You must put forward reasons for wanting a place, hoping that they will be strong enough to outweigh any prejudice to the school.
    See our guidance: Appealing for an oversubscribed school B2. Ideal length of your submission: the equivalent of ½ to 1 page of A4. Any supporting evidence would be additional to this, and should be attached as appendices.

    Remember - it's not what you write that matters.
    What really matters is the evidence.

    B3. If you need more time to prepare, you could as a minimum write on your form:
        • (i) We would very much like a place at the school for reasons which we hope the panel may consider sufficient to outweigh the prejudice to the school.
          We are currently collating evidence, and will forward it before the deadline.


          or

          (ii) We would very much like a place at the school for the following reasons which we hope the panel may consider sufficient to outweigh the prejudice to the school:
          ............
          ............

          Please see attached evidence:
          • 1. ...........


          We may wish to submit additional evidence before the deadline.


          or

          (iii) We would very much like a place at the school for the following reasons which we hope the panel may consider sufficient to outweigh the prejudice to the school:
          ............
          ............

          We are currently collating evidence, and will forward it before the deadline.



    SECTION C:
    Your child has NOT qualified, and has NOT been through a Selection Review


    C1. Despite the misleading statements in 2013 of those who said it was not possible to bypass a review and go straight to appeal, the advice we consistently gave on this forum has been proved correct - anyone who did not have a Selection Review is legally entitled to a full and 'unfettered' hearing of their case in front of an independent appeal panel.
    The current arrangements now comply with 3.13 (a)(i) of the Appeals Code which says:
      • "3.13 An appeal panel may be asked to consider an appeal where the appellant believes that the child did not perform at their best on the day of the entrance test. In such cases:
        a) where a local review process has not been applied, the panel must only uphold the appeal if it is satisfied:
        i) that there is evidence to demonstrate that the child is of the required academic standards, for example, 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; and
        ii) where applicable, that the appellant’s arguments outweigh the admission authority’s case that admission of additional children would cause prejudice." [DfE]
    C2. Evidence
      • You must provide .....
        ..... evidence to demonstrate that the child is of the required academic standards, for example, 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. [DfE]
      • See our guidance: Appealing against non-qualification.

        You need a letter from the school confirming that your child is on target to achieve scaled scores of 111-120 in Reading and Maths and “greater depth” for Writing, plus evidence to support these predictions (e.g. a Y5 report showing "greater depth" - or excellent/well-above average achievement - for Reading, Maths, and Writing). Very good results in recent SATs practice tests could be helpful.

        Note the discussion of extenuating circumstances here.
        I'm sceptical about arguments from parents regarding the effect of covid, but if the primary school were to make out a special case regarding the impact of covid on the child in question, it might carry some weight. Evidence is needed.

        What matters most is the Academic evidence.

        See also any relevant bits of the Miscellaneous Section (for example: letter of appeal for Mary)

    C3. Oversubscription

    Because the school may already be oversubscribed - or might become oversubscribed as a result of appeals - you must also give good reasons for wanting or needing a place.

    C4. You were under no obligation to go through a review, but if there was a good reason for not doing so, it would be worth mentioning.
      • For example:
        (i) "We needed more time to prepare our case."
        (ii) "We wanted the opportunity to have our case heard in full by an independent panel."
    C5. To summarise Section C:
      • There should be two parts to your written case, clearly set out with headings:

        (i) The case for qualification:
          • Your academic case plus (briefly) any extenuating circumstances.
            (Ideal length of your submission: anything up to the equivalent of ½ a page of A4. Supporting evidence would be additional to this, and should be attached as appendices.)
        (ii) Reasons for wanting or needing a place.
        (Ideal length: up to the equivalent of ½ a page of A4. Supporting evidence would be additional to this, and should be attached as appendices.)

        Remember - it's not what you write that matters.
        What really matters is the evidence.
    C6. If you need more time to prepare, you could as a minimum write on your form:
          • (i) We believe that our child is suitable for a grammar school place on the basis of a range of alternative academic evidence / evidence of extenuating circumstances which we are collating. Full details to follow shortly.

            or

            (ii) We believe that our child is suitable for a grammar school place on the basis of the alternative academic evidence / evidence of extenuating circumstances.
            We attach:
            • 1. Letter from ......
              2. Most recent school report
              3. ........


            Any additional evidence will be submitted before the deadline.

    If you need more time to prepare, see also B3 for the minimum you could write on your appeal form with regard to oversubscription.
    (Remember - you must counter oversubscription by having reasons for wanting or needing a place.)



    SECTION D:
    Your child has NOT qualified, and has had an UNSUCCESSFUL Selection Review


    D1. This is going to be the most complicated section.

    According to the Appeals Code:
    • "3.13
      b) where a local review process has been followed, the panel must only consider whether each child’s review was carried out in a fair, consistent and objective way and if there is no evidence that this has been done, the panel must follow the process in paragraph 3.13(a) above."
      [3.13(a) can be found in Section C further up this page]
    D2. Admission authorities are free to use this provision in the Code. They don't have to do this, but they are legally entitled to, as the quotation above makes clear.
      • (i) Whatever anyone may feel about the system, there is absolutely no point attacking the principle of Selection Reviews at an appeal.

        (ii) It is important to distinguish between 'judgement' and 'process'. You cannot challenge the review panel's judgement - but you can question whether the process was flawed. If an appeal panel decides that your review was not 'fair, consistent & objective', it is then free to take a completely fresh look at your case for academic suitability.

        (iii) When raising concerns, ultimately what matters is how the review process was applied in your particular case.

        (iv) We suspect many parents will be arguing that without clear, objective criteria, no one can actually tell whether their particular review was 'fair, consistent & objective'.
        In addition, if there are any omissions, inaccuracies or contradictions in the clerk's notes, such errors could cast doubt on the process.

    D3. What not to do!
      • (i) Do not claim the review was flawed because you now have evidence that was not available at the time.
        For example, sometimes an educational psychologist's report is obtained after the review, and a learning disability is discovered.
        This does not mean that the review panel was at fault. They could only consider the evidence put in front of them.

        (ii) Just because your review was unsuccessful, do not try to argue "They couldn't possibly have considered my case properly" (subtext - "or they would have agreed with me")!
        Assertions won't help. What is needed is proof - for example, a serious error in the clerk's record of your review.

        (iii) Do not question the review panel's judgement. Focus on the process.

    D4. The LA appears to have improved their review paperwork in recent years, and the chances of a review being found not to be fair, consistent and objective seem very low compared with the earlier years of selection reviews.

    Nevertheless we think there are a number of grounds on which the process might be challenged where applicable in a particular case.
    For example:
      • (i) Does the clerk's record clearly show:
        • that all the important points of your case were considered,
        and
        how the Review Panel reached their decision.

        The reasons given for the Review Panel's conclusions are critical.
        If an appeal panel cannot understand how the decision was arrived at, then arguably they ought to find that the review was not FCO.
      • (ii) The review process restricted what evidence could be taken into account by refusing to consider school work.
          • • Home schooled children, and others who have been out of the system and lack the 'normal' sort of evidence, may well have been disadvantaged if they were prevented from letting the panel see what work they had been doing.
      • (iii) If the review clerk's notes state:
        "Extenuating circumstances are not sufficient to explain the shortfall in marks." .....
          • ..... it would be worth contrasting this statement with the policy on special needs, because elsewhere the LA has written:
            "We cannot offer extra marks to compensate for any special needs your child may have. This is because each child's case is different. It is impossible to say exactly how many marks would be appropriate."
            How then is it possible for a review panel to determine objectively whether any exceptional circumstances are sufficient to account for a shortfall of x number of marks in a particular child's case?
      • (iv) Did Review Panels follow their own rules? For example, the headteachers' manual refers to a normal expectation of 'exceptional extenuating circumstances', and the LA has stated "The Panel will also want to see evidence of any exceptional reasons to explain why your child may not have done as well as you, or their headteacher, had expected in the Secondary Transfer Test" - and yet parents on here have reported winning a review without any exceptional circumstances.
        If the exceptional circumstances rule wasn't strictly applied, how could the process have been consistent?
      • (v) What academic guidelines were review panels operating under?
          • For example, what KS2 predictions and what alternative reasoning test scores were deemed 'acceptable' for grammar school entry?
            Without some objective criteria for academic evidence, how could the process have been consistent?

            A grammar school headteacher was once asked at a group hearing: "Without clear guidelines, how could the process have been objective and consistent?"
            The gist of the exchange was as follows:
                • Question from parent: "What objective criteria were used?"
                  Response by headteacher: "There is no tick list. It's a 'weighing up' of the evidence."
                  Question: "Isn't that subjective then?"
                  Response: "The information needed is clear."
                  Question: "Yes, the form specifies what school results should be given, but it does not set out what thresholds are required?"
                  Response: "There is no tick list or list of criteria but a 'weighing up' of the information provided which is different in each case."
                  Question: "So it's a subjective judgement?"
            At another group hearing, the presenting officer was reported as giving an unusually direct and frank answer:
                • Question: "Was the decision making process objective?"
                  Response: "No!"
      • (vi) What evidence is there that headteacher recommendations are reasonably consistent across all schools?
          • It is widely believed that the standard of headteacher recommendations varies from school to school, with some heads being relatively optimistic, while others are much stricter.

            How can a process that uses such subjective recommendations possibly be 'fair, consistent & objective'?
      • (vii) If certain primary heads sat on review panels, did it not put their own schools at an advantage (even though they wouldn't have heard cases involving their own pupils)?
        They knew exactly how the system works, and how to put forward the best possible case in support of their own pupils.
        Fair, consistent & objective?

        (viii) Does the school's written case set out clearly and convincingly why it is being claimed that the review process was fair, and consistent, and objective?

        These and other issues, if applicable to your case, could be raised.
          • There is no guarantee that any particular argument will succeed, but if the admission authority cannot come up with satisfactory answers, it is open to the appeal panel to reject the admission authority's contention that there has already been a fair, consistent and objective review.

    D5. Academic evidence
      • (i) You must provide .....
        ..... evidence to demonstrate that the child is of the required academic standards, for example, 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. [DfE]
        (ii) See our guidance: Appealing against non-qualification.

        Note the discussion of extenuating circumstances here.
        I'm sceptical about arguments from parents regarding the effect of covid, but if the primary school were to make out a special case regarding the impact of covid on the child in question, it might carry some weight. Evidence is needed.

        What matters most is the Academic evidence.

        See also any relevant bits of the Miscellaneous Section (for example: letter of appeal for Mary)

        (iii) Consider how to re-do and submit an improved case, bearing in mind that "The child’s review paperwork and decision letter will be provided to the Independent Appeal Panel should an appeal subsequently take place", so the evidence you submitted previously - which didn't satisfy the review panel - will be included in the appeal papers.

        (iv) Be prepared to address any significant weaknesses in the component parts of the transfer test (VR, Maths or NVR), as the panel might well look at these. For example, if the VR score was weak, can you prove that this was a blip on the basis of an excellent VR score from CATs or from an educational psychologist, plus strong support from the school with regard to progress in English? (Additional evidence can be provided nearer the time of the appeal hearing - see A6.)

        (v) Consider whether there is any other additional evidence you could gather in support of your appeal. For example, a letter of support from school showing a significant improvement in a previously weaker subject area such as Reading, Writing or Maths. Schools are permitted - but not obliged - to provide additional evidence (additional to what they supplied for the review) before an appeal. This could be very helpful:
        • if there is something in the review paperwork that needs clarifying
        • if there has been recent rapid progress, perhaps as a result of greater maturity in Y6
        • if they can confirm that the child really is on target to achieve 111-120/GDS in Reading, Maths and Writing, and perhaps provide some supporting evidence such as recent SATs practice test results.

        (vi) Looking at some of the review submissions parents have previously shared with us, we feel that many were much too long, lacked impact as a result, and focused too much on extenuating circumstances.

        For appeal purposes, our current advice is that usually the only thing you should write about extenuating circumstances is "Please see attached evidence"!!!
    D6. Late evidence
      • With regard to any update from the school (e.g. a letter to confirm the prediction of 111-120/GDS in Reading, Writing and Maths), you may want to leave this as late as possible so that there is time for the child to make further progress.
        This presents a problem because the deadline for late evidence has been moved closer and closer to the deadline for submitting an appeal. If the deadline for an appeal is 28th March, and the deadline for late evidence is 12th April, it doesn't allow much time for the child to demonstrate further progress, especially when 12th April is in the Easter holiday, while the parental appeal isn't going to be heard until May or even June/July.
        You could consider submitting any new evidence 7-10 days before your hearing so that it is as up-to-date as possible. This carries a slight risk because it will be up to the discretion of the panel whether or not to accept late evidence submitted after the deadline. However, we have never heard of an appeal panel declining to accept late evidence. See: Q&As, A7 - Can we submit late evidence?
    D7. Last - but not least - do not neglect the final hurdle.
      • You must assume the school will be oversubscribed, and counter the admission authority's case for prejudice, which you do by putting forward good reasons for wanting or needing a place at the school in question.
        See: Reasons for wanting a place.

    D8. To summarise Section D:
      • On the information available to us at present, there should be three parts to your written case, clearly set out:

        (i) 'Fair, consistent & objective':

        • Remember: you cannot challenge the review panel's judgement - but you can suggest there was a fault with the process.

        • Ideal length of your submission: anything up to the equivalent of half-a-page of A4.

        • Example:
          • At the hearing we shall wish to challenge whether the Selection Review process was 'fair, consistent & objective', but at this point in time we have not seen the school's written case explaining why the process was FCO. We would 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.

            Whatever the school's case may be, we would respectfully ask the IAP to satisfy itself with regard to the following questions:

            • (a) What sort of academic standard was deemed 'acceptable' for grammar school entry, and where has this been published? Without some basic criteria for academic evidence, how could the review process have been fair, consistent and objective?

              (b) What evidence is there that headteacher recommendations are reasonably consistent across all schools? It is widely believed that the standard of headteacher recommendations varies from school to school, with some heads being relatively optimistic, while others are stricter.
              How can a process that relies on such subjective recommendations be fair, consistent & objective?

              (c) The LA has written on its website: "We cannot offer extra marks to compensate for any special needs your child may have. This is because each child's case is different. It is impossible to say exactly how many marks would be appropriate."
              How then was it possible for the review panel to determine whether or not our exceptional circumstances were sufficient to account for the shortfall in marks, and to do so in a way that is fair, consistent and objective?
            Note: The above is just an example - do not use any particular argument unless you think it could apply to your case.


        (ii) The case for qualification:
          • (Ideal length of your submission: anything up to the equivalent of half a page of A4 on academic ability, plus less than half a page on any significant extenuating circumstances. Supporting evidence would be additional to this, and should be attached as appendices.)

        (iii) Reasons for wanting or needing a place
          • (Ideal length: approx. half-a-page. Any supporting evidence would be additional to this, and should be attached as appendices.)

            Remember - it's not what you write that matters.
            What really matters is the evidence.
        Note: As all the documentation that originally went to review will automatically be included in the appeal papers, there's no point in re-sending it.
        Of course, if you are making changes or improvements, you must send in your revised paperwork.


        Section E:
        How to sum up

        E1. You are normally be asked if you wish to sum up at the end of the proceedings.
        Although we attach infinitely more importance to evidence than to presentation, think about how to sum up if you are given the opportunity. It will be your last chance to influence the panel.

        Here is an example of a simple summing up that covers (as applicable) FCO, academic evidence, and oversubscription:
              • "We’ll be quite brief. Thank you very much indeed for being so generous with your time, and for having given us the opportunity to present our case today. We do appreciate it.

                (FCO) We submit that in our child's case the Admission Authority has not provided you with evidence to satisfy all three of the criteria 'fair, consistent & objective'. The onus should be on the Admission Authority to prove its case.

                (Academic case) We would ask you to take into account the extenuating circumstances [if applicable], and to consider all the alternative academic evidence that indicates a grammar school place would be appropriate in this case.

                (Oversubscription) Our child is desperately keen to join the school. We do understand the school’s reservations about the possible impact of an extra pupil, but we respectfully ask you to weigh up the reasons we have put forward, and to consider allowing this appeal on the basis that the prejudice to our child of not being admitted would outweigh any prejudice to the school. Thank you very much.
                "
        There is further advice here: How to sum up at the end of a hearing.





        Abbreviations:
          • FCO - 'fair, consistent & objective' (with reference to reviews). This is a quote from paragraph 3.13b of the Appeals Code. See D1 above.
            IAP - 'Independent Appeal Panel'
            SRP - 'Selection Review Panel' (comprising two grammar school heads and one primary school head)
            CATs - The 'Cognitive Abilities Test' used by some schools
            EP - 'Educational Psychologist'
            AA - 'Admission Authority'
            BC - Buckinghamshire Council
    Final points

    1. Rather dated, but might be of interest: Analysis of the schools' review case 2015.
    The schools' review case has since been revised in parts, and we cannot be sure about this year's case until it becomes available in the summer term.
    The rules regarding which parental cases are eligible for moderation seem to change frequently.


    2. This thread is for general points only. If there are any specific questions about your own case, please start your own thread on the Appeals Forum
    - and please stick to your one thread, as it helps us to have everything to do with your case in one place. Thank you! :)
    Etienne
    Post Reply
    11 Plus Mocks - Practise the real exam experience - Book Now