Primary School Appeal

[happyvez]

Hi, thank you for reading. Basically I would just like some advise. My daughter is at a RC school. Both my daughter and myself were baptised C of E (by the way I'm a single parent). Shortly after my child's baptism when she was a baby I started to attend a RC church and have been going every week for the past 3 1/2 years. I wanted to bring her up RC so went to see the priest years ago he said my daughter cannot be baptised again as it is a mortal sin and that her baptism is valid in the church and all i needed to do was attend RCIA to convert. In 2007 I started it but was unable to complete due to studies. I rejoined in 2009 and during this time I had to fill in my daughter's app form for reception. The headteacher also informed me I would be placed under criteria 2 "and those enrolled in the catechumenate" aka RCIA which obviously I am. I stated this in the application form and also enclosed a priest reference form which said I attend church every week. Therefore clearly I was devasted the morning I found out my daughter had not been accepted. They have placed her under criteria 8"Christians from other denominations in sympathy with the ethos of the church". I don't think this is a valid decision and am appealing. However, I know how hard appeals are to win. First of all what things should I say at the appeal as I am soooo bad with words and are obviously going to be so nervous. Also, is there any chance at all I could win this? I do hope so Thank you x

[prh47bridge]

I would say pretty much what you have said here. Your basic argument is that they should have placed your daughter in category 2 and that they made a mistake by placing her in category 8. I am not an RC so I may be wrong but I think whether you qualify for category 2 it depends how far you got through the RCIA process. However, the advice from the head teacher is significant. If he/she confirms that this advice was given, that will help your case. You certainly have a chance. It depends what the admission criteria say in detail but it certainly seems odd that someone who has worshipped regularly at an RC church for 3 1/2 years and considers herself to be RC is placed in a category for other denominations,

[BetsyBoop]

excellent advice from PRH as always

Just to add to that

What evidence (if any) did they ask you to submit for catechumenate? - as I know some ask for a "certificate of reception" (I think that's the right term?) - and did you submit any required evidence for it?

If you rejoined RCIA in 2009, have you completed it now? (I think it's often done at the Easter vigil service? - I'm not a RC myself, so I'm not sure)

Did you actually see the priest's reference or did he send it straight to school? (not unheard of for priest to not put enough info on reference to confirm what applicant has said)

I'm just trying to see if there is any "logic" (however flawed ir might be) for placing you in cat. 8 - as if you know what "logic" was applied it helps you build a better argument as to why that logic was flawed.

[happyvez]

That's right I completed it at the Easter vigil. The school said they would let me know if I have to provide any more documents which they didn't but no I didn't send any regarding the catechumenate. However, I think they would have checked anyway via the church. The only kind of logic is that the exact words are "baptised catholic children and those enrolled in the catechumenate" therefore it kind of sounds like the child should be enrolled but 1. Why would the head tell me my daughter would be under this criteria and 2. A 3year old cannot be enrolled. They consider the age of reasoning is 7 so they couldn't join until then.

[BetsyBoop]

Do you feel able to post all the words of the admissions criteria + any notes associated? (I don't think it will identify the school as many RC schools used similar criteria)

I think you might be right that if it says "baptised catholic children or those enrolled in catechumenate" it is (not very clearly) saying it means the child not the parent who needs to be enrolled - but you are right that children under 7 can't do it anyway, so it makes no sense.

The crux of the argument is all around if you and DD could both be considered "catholic" at the time the decision was taken, which is why the exact wording of the criteria is key.

The key points in your favour are the advice from the priest that this is what you had to do for you & DD to be considered catholic & the head saying you would be in cat 2.

I would see if your priest could draft a letter supporting your appeal, explaining what you have done & that you & DD are now fully fledged catholics in his opinion (stressing the weekly mass attendance for good measure )

The head probably won't be able to "support" your appeal (this is usually school policy) but often they won't put up much of a fight (IYKWIM ) if they agree the appeal should succeed, so I would have a chat with the head too.

As you have completed RCIA you are now a fully fledged catholic & (if I understand the "conversion" system correctly) DD is being raised catholic & is now considered catholic too (as she is a baptised christian, below the age of reasoning & you can't baptise again as RC) so also ensure that the school have you on the waiting list at cat 2 now, just in case any places come up ahead of any appeal.

There are never any guarantees at an appeal, but I think you do have a chance. Is it an infant class size appeal? (30, 60, etc in a class) these are always harder to will, if it's not ICS, I think you have a very good chance of success.

[prh47bridge]

The fact that they said they would let you know if you had to provide any documents is also significant and worth bringing up at the appeal. It undermines any argument that it was your fault because you didn't provide enough documentation.

I agree with Betsy.



The school isn't allowed to support your appeal but it is not unknown for them to effectively give a nod and a wink to the panel that they think your case should succeed.

I think there is definitely a chance. As Betsy says, ICS appeals are harder to win but if you can show they made a mistake you should be able to win even if it is an ICS case.

[happyvez]

C2..."baptised catholic children and those enrolled in the catechumenate from practising catholic families living within the parish" the note behind defining the words saying "practising catholic are those who attend a catholic church on a regular basis, which I do. The priest has written a letter to back me up, as well as a doctors note for added social grounds id rather not discuss and about 3or4 other letters supporting me from parishioners. I'm happy with this but yes it is a ICS appeal so I'm less confident now. If they start mentioning this I don't really know what to say. The head is representing the school in the appeal. I live 500 metres from the school gate so that's not an issue. Thank you very much for your help so far. I appreciate it lots

[prh47bridge]

In an ICS appeal you have to show you have made a mistake. It sounds to me like you have a good argument that they have indeed made a mistake. So don't worry about them mentioning infant class size prejudice. As long as you can show they've got it wrong you should win your appeal.

[BetsyBoop]

As it's ICS the way to win is to convince the panel that you should have been put in cat 2 (and would have therefore got a place) and you weren't, it doesn't matter then what arguments the school put up if you can convince the panel a mistake was made, they have to admit.

A letter from the priest to back this up is good evidence, but I'm not sure what (if any) weight the panel would put on letters from parishoners.

Did you declare the social reasons on your initial app? If not that wouldn't be a reason to win an ICS appeal on it's own as the panel look to see if the admissions authority made a reasonable decision based on the evidence they had at the time. If you did include it you could also try & argue that you should have been in the "special social and medical reasons to need a place at the school" (assuming the school have such a category, most do)

PRH - as I've limited experience of the actual hearing - what is your view on whether you it's better to stick to one argument ("DC should have been cat 2") or put up two possible arguments ("DC should have been social/medical cat or cat 2") - I wonder whether the latter would confuse things too much?


All you need to do is put down what you've told us, namely -

priest said this is how I & DD convert & I'd be considered in cat2
head said DD would be cat 2 in our circumstances
submitted app & checked with school if any futher evidence for cat 2 was needed & they said no.
Priest's reference confirmed my attendance met requiremenbts & that DD in cat 2
Further evidence in letter from priest to appeal confirms this & I have now completed RCIA.
Therefore DD was placed in wrong category & denied a place as a result of this.

[BetsyBoop]

just noticed - crossed posts with PRH whilst I was writing my essay...

[happyvez]

Thank you wo much. I did not send my social needs with my application form. But this is purely because its of a very delicate and personal nature that I do not wish to discuss if I did not need to and seeing as the head to me she'd be criteria 2, I felt that it was not needed. I am praying its successful but I know its a long shot to win.

[prh47bridge]

If you didn't put your social needs on the application form it is difficult to argue directly that this is a mistake. However, you can bring them in and say you would have given that if the head hadn't misled you as to which category you would be placed in. The panel should be able to handle two possible arguments as Betsy suggests. You should avoid a scattergun approach which leaves the panel confused as to what you are actually saying but the case Betsy has set out is pretty strong. I would add the social needs to it so that it goes:

Priest said this is how I & DD convert & I'd be considered in cat2
Head said DD would be cat 2 in our circumstances
Because of this I didn't submit evidence on my social needs because of the sensitive nature but here they are. I would have submitted this if the head hadn't told me would be cat 2
Submitted app & checked with school if any futher evidence for cat 2 was needed & they said no.
Priest's reference confirmed my attendance met requiremenbts & that DD in cat 2
Further evidence in letter from priest to appeal confirms this & I have now completed RCIA.
Therefore DD was placed in wrong category & denied a place as a result of this.

Good luck.

[admission]

The key question for this appeal is what information the school admission panel had to make the decision they did to put you in category 8. As an ICS Regs case you have to show that the school admission panel made a mistake and they only made a mistake if they had the relevant information or did not seek the relevant information to confirm your status.
If they did not have the evidence then they could not put you in cat2, so the question that needs asking is what evidence did the school request you to submit to confirm your belief that cat 2 was appropriate.
You need in part 1 of the appeal to establish by questioning the head (that wil be fun!) and getting them to confirm that the head and priest had both indicted that you would be cat2 before the cut-off date for applications. OK it is going to make the head squirm a bit but they simply need to confirm that and also who was on the school admission panel - I would assume the priest would be.

[happyvez]

Ok so first and foremost thank you all who have helped me with this. I am extremely grateful by the kindness shown. So, yesterday was the day of the appeal. I was so nervous I could barely speak. Luckily a friend came with me who is a headteacher at another RC school and he helped lots. The headteacher was there with the chief of governors but the head was suppose to be saying the statement and answering the panels questions which she didn't she left it down to the governor. The panel members grilled them and the governor on many occassions wad left stuttering and not knowing the answers they were asking. Their main reason was ridiculous. They basically said that by enrolled in the catechumenate they mean you must be baptised catholic first and blamed commissions for telling them this. It's doesn't say this in their criteria and also there were no documents stating this claim. This sent on for about 40 mins then it was my turn. I read out my statement and the panel nor opposition had any questions for me. We concluded then left. I hope I'm not misunderstanding as I now think its been successful. I'm so relieved its over with but know the next few days where I have to await the results will be a real drag. Do they post it or hand deliver does anyone know? Once again, thank you all so much!

[BetsyBoop]

thanks for updating us

Fingers crossed your appeal is successful, if the school were struggling to answer the panel's questions adequately, that sounds like a good sign (from your perspective, not theirs of course!)

In our area they normally post the appeal results out within a few days, but I don't know if it's the same everywhere.

Good luck, let us know how you get on.

[admission]

The normal process is to send the letters out by post. In my main LA they will not give out answers over the phone as they had an incident where a parent was adviced they had been given a place when in fact it was another parent with a similar name who had got in. Red faces all round and an extra pupil in the school over an above those from the appeal.

Hence they are now rather cautious about how they advice the appealants of the result of the appeal.

[happyvez]

So... the post came today about the appeal and I WON!!!!!!!!!! I'm sooo happy Thank you all so much for your support and advice regarding this matter!!! It's good to know there are some genuinely kind people out there!! Once again thank you!!

[BetsyBoop]

great news

[prh47bridge]

Well done!