City of London Girls withdrawing offers

So exactly the same system as state schools ... they could even include state schools, so each child genuinely got the highest preference school they qualified for ... and there could be a single allocation date...

Would need 11+ exams might need to be earlier, though.

Having read the threads this year and being about to go through the 11+ nightmare with DS, surely what we need is some sort of central system. Not sure it would ever work but.......
parents could be allowed to nominate the order in which they ranked the schools (and variables such as X school if scholarship but not otherwise). Schools could do their usual thing and rank the candidates then feed the into into the system. Some clever computer algorithm could then work out from the preferences who was going to get the places

No doubt impossible to implement - but worth a thought!!

This happened last year and City closed their offers 12 days after offer day with regular communications from the registrar about capacity. Some girls did lose a place and now it has created a panic unlike anything I’ve seen or heard of before. On the positive side I do know some girls who have taken up the offer at City only to hold the place whilst contemplating other schools or awaiting a WL offer elsewhere, so I do hope that in the end some of the girls who have now been WL’d at City will get a place again. The shame in all of this is that it puts those waiting for Grammar school offers at a distinct disadvantage, unless you can afford to throw away the £1,500 deposit at City.

For those who are now going to SHHS, my DD is in year 7 and we couldn't be happier. There is so much going on at the school, and so far the teachers are excellent with no obvious pressure, yet the GCSE and A Level results last year were on a par with City.

Whilst CLSG may have particular space issues for their policy, I am rather dubious about some of the schools' motives. Is there an element of showing off about how in demand they are, whilst turning a blind eye to the 11 year old's whose hard-won offer has been pulled away? Even if the message to parents is be quick, if there are more offers than girls then there will always be some who're told they had a place and then had it taken away- possibly those who were less informed by their school of the process and for whom a deposit of £3k in Channing's case is a lot of money. We would not tolerate it with a job or university offer, yet somehow it's OK to do that to a 10.11 year old?

"It might not be this at all, but precisely due to the need to honour offers under the traditional system."

The fuck up is that they made the wrong number of offers. Most schools which honour their offers do not run bulge classes year after year. Many have needed none whatsoever.

And of course The Spectator article is flawed. Because they are not really looking at how schools which run their lists successfully are doing it. Just how it can be done badly.

CLSG is offering to a pot of people, and exploding under some, so they are getting the girls within that pot whose parents responded in 9 hours (or whatever ridiculously short time it was) and others who remain interested go on a waitlist - and will be extremely likely to accept another school rather than hang around for a school which they know has filled its places, so the WL really doesn't work well if they do have drop outs.

OTOH if you have offered more prudently, maybe to same total number of prospective pupils, but with your actual preferred pupils receiving definite and the rest WL from the outset, you will not have the same outflow from WL should you need to use it. Yes, it takes skill, good communication with prospective parents (probably easier for schools who interview after exam) and communication between registrars (to try to work out the actual numbers of children behind the application numbers across schools), and continuing communication with prep heads.

There are plenty of examples of wildly oversubscribed schools in London who do not explode offers and who have not needed any bulge classes. Of course those who will not rescind offers still carry the risk of having to live with the consequences if they get it wrong - which is of course a significant incentive to get it right, and that is what almost invariably happens. If your 'offer' is simply 'place in the race to respond fast enough' then you have changed your risk into yet another parental stressor.

Offer Holders Days are very useful when still deciding between offers. Utterly useless when deadline (either normal or explosion) has passed - may as well skip ahead to the Joiners events

Or perhaps they will follow the boys route and do an online test to get the numbers down for interview. That could be annoying.

I don't think it will lead to fewer applications to CLSG necessarily - you apply quite a while before the final decision has to be made (3 months? - quite a long time in a 10 yr old dc's development and 'growing up') so I think dparents will think it's worth the £100 fee (is it that?) on the basis that if by Feb they want the place it was money well spent, and if not, well it's not a disastrous amount to lose.

Interesting that some regard the offer holder days as pointless - I think a lot of dparents, and even more to the point, dcs, find them useful. Yes the intention may be to persuade people to accept the place! - but that doesn't mean they're not informative. Presumably schools think they're useful and have been popular in the past or they wouldn't put them on.

That's another point I suppose - if in fact the offer holder days would result in a dc not choosing a school, it's in the school's interest as well as the dc's that that happens. The schools do all want students who are going to be happy there. All the schools involved here will be capable of getting the students very good results. So it comes down to 'feel' as to where a dc will be happy. An offer holders day can be quite useful in clarifying those feelings.

It wouldn't need to be withdrawn if it was moved (e.g. to the day after offers were sent out) OR if offers didn't explode until afterwards.

If the intention is to allow those who are likely to take up offers to have a further insight into the school - otherwise why hold it? - then setting the ticking time bomb from the day after the event would be much more logical and much more humane?

I agree that the time has come to re-name that Offer Holders day to something else, as its existence after offers have exploded just rubs salt into the wound, and perhaps suggests to people that places won't fill and offers explode until beyond that point.

I think the school itself has been surprised by how quickly places have filled - both gratifying and creates difficulties in its own right with things like offer holders day and what to do the following year.

Surely - I am outside this syetem, so am looking at it from a dispassionate angle - if you are going to go for 'exploding offers' you MUST have the exploding AFTER the offer holders day?

So it is fine to say 'we have an offer holder's day on 20th February; after that day we will ask you to confirm your place within 3 days'. That is asking for a firm commitment on the basis of full information.

(If they genuinely believed in themselves, they would of course have the offer holders day on or just after the state school allocation day, as that would then allow parents to choose where they genuinely felt was best, rather than feeling forced down a potentially unnecessary private route - but that's another matter).

Sending fake offers, with an offer of a further visit to the school, then withdrawing those fake offers before the visit date seems, from the outside, cowardly and bizarre.

I disagree that 3 years of needing to run a bulge class is always because of a big fuck up in admissions. It might not be this at all, but precisely due to the need to honour offers under the traditional system.

So schools look at past patterns of acceptance rates to offers given when deciding how many offers to make. Some schools see more patterns than others. When there are lots is similarly ranked schools in a small geographical distance, there are less likely to be patterns that can easily be used to base offers on. As the no,s of schools families apply to have increased, these patterns become even less easy to see or don't even exist as the no,s who have a given school as their first choice vary significantly year to year.

So it's perfectly possible to have 1 year when you are a bit cautious with your offers and don't fill. So the following year you are a bit more generous and not only fill but also need a bulge class so you can honour the offers accepted. This was unpredicted. Given tight space, timetabling becomes more difficult and some classes have to be taught in less than ideal rooms. So the next year you are a bit more cautious again to avoid a bulge.....but guess what, you more than fill, because that particular year you were first choice for a much bigger percentage, although that was impossible to know given the applications were the same. Given the building restrictions and space, that bulge class starts to create even bigger difficulties. So the next year, sensibly you only offer very slightly more places than you actually have. You've looked at the numbers carefully and can't believe there will be another bulge with the careful offering.....but guess what....it happens again. Very serious problems fitting them in now. So the following year, exactly the right number of offers are made - there really cannot be a bulge this year as it simply won't be manageable.....and guess what, this year loads decline their offers and go to the other schools they applied to, although the same numbers applied. And the school has to go to its WL.

I read an article in The Spectator today from a couple of years ago, which talked about the difficulty of WL for schools. Parents don't really see the issue - for them, WL is just another chance for a possible place at perhaps 2 or 3 or 4 schools they didn't get offers from - one might be their top choice, but it could be that none were. They don't really think about actually using a WL to fill a school or what's involved and the implications. As The Spectator said, schools can find a sizeable WL delivers very few people who would actually say yes to a place, because WL get used after the deadline for offers - this is the key thing. So some of those phoned never wanted the school which is now offering a place anyway, and the next few would have been interested but have already accepted another offer which they've totally come to love now, so by the time someone is found to take a place, they are actually significantly lower in ability than the last person offered to originally. And if you have to take quite a few of them, well exam result in that year group will drop. And worse can happen, a school can't fill from WL but has to start ringing candidates who never even got interviewed. There are threads here at the moment about top schools doing this last year - of course they keep it very quiet, becaue it doesn't fit with the image they want to project. But it happens.

So if you were that school which had loads of applications but 5 years of a roller coaster of bulge classes and not filling, might you not just look for a way to regain a bit of control - probably reluctantly because you know it won't be popular, but because it is better for the school.

If CIty hadn't used exploding offers this year and last, perhaps they would be facing more bulge classes, despite very careful offering.....and it's just not possible to accommodate them. Don't they have a duty to existing pupils to make sure they don't end up with too many pupils that have a negative effect on others already in the very space limited and restricted school?

There is more to this than parents having 3 weeks to choose between schools.

"where a school made too many offers which were all accepted and bulge years 3 years in a row"

That really is a major fuck up by the head and registrar. A school might be unlucky one year, but three in a row is incompetence and is not an inherent feature of honouring offers.

Giardiniera - I also remember cdstandingnow posting that her DD had not gained a place at SPGS last year

I have seen the other side of honouring your offers where a school made too many offers which were all accepted and bulge years 3 years in a row meant cramped locker rooms,
confusing alternate timetables, insufficient facilities etc all because the head didn't want to get stuck with " low quality candidates " from lower on the waitlist when others took offers elsewhere.

I agree that exploding offers means you will get more girls for whom that school is first choice. We visited our schools once or twice on open days and on the exam and interview days. That, and geography, is ample to form preferences.

Cdstandingnow you were very down on SPGS this time last year I seem to recall! Wondered what changed your mind!

This year's offer email mix up aside which seems pretty awful, in prior years only girls who met the required standard received an offer. Outside of the school itself, no one knows which girls had the 'best' scores nor who were 'the brightest' (whatever that means). They all met the required standard to receive an offer from the school. Therefore, on the basis that no one knows for certain if there is indeed any marginal difference between those who accepted a place early and those whose parents went to mull it over and missed out, it is not correct (or fair) to suggest that City somehow loses the 'best' candidates and other schools gained them. The only real measure will be the league tables 5 and 7 years from now. A bit like finding the perfect house/car/ any other 'big ticket' item, some people are happy to commit quickly. They get the house/car car that they wanted. Others need time. But if you accept your need to take time you must accept that there are others able/prepared to take the decision ahead of you. You cannot somehow blame the school for that - as mentioned upthread there are many reasons why the school takes this approach.

There was a suggestion earlier that the previous (excellent) registrar had to leave after last year's exploding offer. This is not the case, she accepted a promotion to become a Bursar elsewhere.

Good luck to all girls starting year 7 wherever they choose. As a pp said, there is life outside of this one particular School but no need to denigrate the achievements of successful applicants to City this year or any other.

"How do they award them, and are you notified when you get the offer?"

Scholarships are awards for merit, whether academic, music, sport, drama or art (or occasionally all rounder, and there are probably others). For academic scholarships, it is usually assessed by highest scores on the regular entrance exam, and you do not have to apply as such as all entrants are assessed, followed by interview. Some schools have an additional exam/assessment for academic scholarships, and this should be clear in the entrance bumf.

For the other scholarships, there is typically a requirement for some sort of additional assessment day, audition or portfolio. You need to fill in an additional form to apply for these scholarships and need to give more details of the activity (teams, club references, orchestra memberships, etc)

You would be offered the scholarship at the same time as the place is offered. (Another reason for waiting for all offers to arrive before deciding!)

Do bear in mind that the trend if for scholarships to have a lower cash value - indeed some have only a nominal amount or are entirely honorary.

If you need financial support, you would also need to apply for a bursary.

Lotsofsighing for what it’s worth I think cdstandingnow is spot on wrt to the type of candidates the exploding schools will be getting ( those where the school in question is their strongest / only offer ). I think Shhs is a no brainer here . Their behaviour has been considerate and kind, their fees are extremely competitive, results fantastic and the heads ( both senior and junior) extremely impressive. We had experience w them for 7+ and they were extremely accommodating to us when we had an interview conflict and also to a friend’s dd who was ill during the first round . Contrast that to our experience with City ( unanswered emails, complete disregard for prospective parents anxiety and wellbeing of prospective pupils ) and it seems like a very good decision has been made for you .

"As they say 'it's not a situation they set out to be in' - ie the many many applicants who have no real intention of choosing the school, which then make it almost impossible for them to correctly offer without either over or under filling"

So, no different a situation to any other central(ish) London school. But the others manage without exploding offers. They are not in unique difficulties, and that they face the same issues as all other schools is not a justification for choosing to tackle it in the way they have. It is a rare policy choice, unpopular with parents and not adopted by others who manage processes without rescinding offers.

Slightly off topic, so with apologies, would anybody mind explaining the scholarships to me? We could love to send our dd's to City, to the extent that it's probably the only independent I would apply for, with our local outstanding girls-only comp being our other excellent option (SHHS is a bit far, and I'm not convinced about Channing), but we would only be able to manage it with assistance.

How do they award them, and are you notified when you get the offer? DD1 is only yr4, so we're not there yet, but it will creep up.

And Channing has exploded too now...

Ironically I thought we might opt for it over the more prestigious SHHS because I felt it might be gentler, kinder, more pupil-focussed.

And perhaps over the (potential) hefty scholarship at another school that we’re waiting on.

I feel so sorry for all kids and parents caught up in this. I can't help feeling that the children's best interests are not being served.

Completely agree with Firefox regardless fake offers issued by schools low on integrity . Of all the schools dd sat for 7+ we found city to be least pleasant wrt to attitude and communication.
Seems that City’s loss of top girls is SHHS’s gain as I know some very clever girls taking SHHS instead of City as a result .

I guess it depends how seriously parents take the decision of where their DC will spend their next 7 years ChocolateWombat. And what they will be spending upwards of £100k on.

I agree that in most cases there is no need to sit for more than 3-4 schools. But 2 is too few. Kids of 10 or 11 can easily have a bad day for whatever reason and it's very difficult to gauge exactly where a DC sits in the cohort, especially if they're not coming from a school with a lot of expertise in the 11+ process.

Sometimes it's easy; my DD had a very clear first choice, was offered a place, and we accepted quickly with no need for offer holders days. We certainly weren't going to trawl round schools again for the sake of it.

With my DS it was less straight-forward. He did better than we expected. He's dyslexic and we weren't sure how he would do/what schools were really looking for and what they were prepared to overlook. We wanted to be sure about things like SEN support, which we hadn't been able to properly ascertain at open days. We went back to 2 schools, having released his other 2 offers. I don't think that's unreasonable and we're more than capable of seeing through the marketing, thanks.

I disagree that City will be happy if applicant numbers drop substantially. If that happens I suspect they'll abandon exploding offers. Time will tell.