Page 2 | Secondary School Third Choice Allocated - can we appeal?

kdandml · 2024-03-02T22:13:40+00:00

Hello, I hope someone can help. We recently learned our daughter has been allocated her third choice school. This school is close to us but has a bad name, which is why we put it as third choice rather than first or second. All her current school friends are going to her first choice, and our child is distraught. We had reasons for choosing the first choice as we did and we feel there is a grounds to appeal on those bases, however I am not sure that the distance rule has been applied correctly in any case. Her friends do all live closer to <FIRST CHOICE> than us, but it seems that crucially, they don't live too close to <THIRD CHOICE>. We emailed the admissions team at the council to say we weren't happy with the offer and below is an extract from the reply, with the schools redacted. It appears that we have been penalised for living too close to a bad school, which is bizarre, Is this right? Thanks in advance. Extract from the reply: <FIRST CHOICE SCHOOL> was oversubscribed and we had to apply the oversubscription criteria in order to allocate places. The last person offered a place at this school lived 2.56 miles in the nearest school criterion and you live 1.55 miles from the school in the distance criterion. <THIRD CHOICE SCHOOL> is your closest school, therefore your application was refused on distance. <SECOND CHOICE SCHOOL> was also over subscribed and the last person offered lived 1.82 miles in the distance criterion. You live 3.41 miles from this school and this application was also refused on distance.

Original poster

kdandml · 05/03/2024 17:34

NeverDropYourMooncup · 05/03/2024 16:56

Are you still sure you want the DC to go there?

Honestly, yes. I can get over this mess and I'm trying to shield DD from it although it is difficult because having always been honest with her, we're currently unable to tell her the truth about what has happened.
The bottom line is that this school suits our child perfectly for her interests and extra activities in particular, she is a top grade child and the school performs well in her key subjects. She is a great fit.
I am determined to continue to treat this admissions shambles quite seperately from the teachers and the structure within the school itself. I think that is fair.

OP posts:

Original poster

kdandml · 05/03/2024 17:12

isthesolution · 05/03/2024 17:07

Yes that's how it would work in our area. You are closest to school 3 and therefore have been offered that school.

Yes there will be people who live further away from school 1 but that is still their closest school so they are priority.

In the area I'm in you can be 1/2 a mile from school 1 (everyone's first choice) and still not get in because you are closer to school 2. Others live 3 miles in the other direction from school 1 and get in because it's their closest school.

Thanks but different places work differently and while your location may work the same as what has been applied here, it doesn’t change the fact that the published process that the school committed to has not been followed. Plus - to be clear, the LA themselves state that the school have thwir own criteria.

OP posts:

isthesolution · 05/03/2024 17:07

Yes that's how it would work in our area. You are closest to school 3 and therefore have been offered that school.

Yes there will be people who live further away from school 1 but that is still their closest school so they are priority.

In the area I'm in you can be 1/2 a mile from school 1 (everyone's first choice) and still not get in because you are closer to school 2. Others live 3 miles in the other direction from school 1 and get in because it's their closest school.

PuttingDownRoots · 05/03/2024 17:00

I think the council and school are in an awkward position. If they admit they messed up, they could potentially have to admit quite a few extra. So ve forcing you to appeal, the decision taken put of their hands.

NeverDropYourMooncup · 05/03/2024 16:56

Are you still sure you want the DC to go there?

Original poster

kdandml · 05/03/2024 16:52

Ok so I sent an email to the deputy of the school and was asked to contact the LA.
the LA clearly have a strategy of stone walling and I expect it will work for some people, who will lose their determination to seek the fair outcome. I don’t fall into that category, not for me and certainly not when my child has been cheated.

The LA kept quoting the policy they used which is essentially different to all the suggestions above… they say the tiebreakers no longer exist, and distance and nearest school are actually the same thing. Wow, I thought. I asked for that in writing. That won’t happen.

So I asked for a copy of what was being quoted to me and was told it’s on the LA website, to which i said the LA website says that the school applies its own criteria.

Eventually, the LA said that the LA applied the correct criteria as per the schools instruction but said to contact the school because it’s the schools mistake and it’s their problem because it’s their published information.

i have emailed the head and await a reply.

OP posts:

aquarimum · 04/03/2024 21:56

In our LA, you are automatically placed on a waiting list for schools you didn't qualify for.

Original poster

kdandml · 04/03/2024 21:15

Littlebitpsycho · 04/03/2024 20:42

Have you put your child's name on the waiting list for your preferred schools in the meantime?

I have a friend whose daughter was 16th on the wait list for the school she wanted (primary feeder school but lived well out of catchment) and she still got in - granted only got the offer literally the last day of term.

No other advice as I haven't been through it myself but don't lose hope yet!

Hi, no we havent because this is what it said on the email: (valid point though, i will call tomorrow and arrange it in case the info is incorrect)

If you were not offered a place at one of your higher preference schools, it was because a place could not be offered at that school(s) as it/they received more applications than there were places available and other applicants had a greater right to places when the oversubscription criteria were applied. Your child's name will be placed on a waiting list for a place at that school(s). If you do not want your child's name to be on a waiting list(s) for a school place, please email ....

OP posts:

Littlebitpsycho · 04/03/2024 20:42

Have you put your child's name on the waiting list for your preferred schools in the meantime?

I have a friend whose daughter was 16th on the wait list for the school she wanted (primary feeder school but lived well out of catchment) and she still got in - granted only got the offer literally the last day of term.

No other advice as I haven't been through it myself but don't lose hope yet!

Lougle · 04/03/2024 20:38

@kdandml when a school is failingbecause of strategic problems, ie. weak management, then it can be forced to become an academy.

If an academy has been rated as ‘Inadequate’ by Ofsted or less than ‘Good’ in two consecutive inspections, a Regional Director who acts as a representative for the Department for Education in their local area, can decide to transfer the school to a different MAT.

In practice it means that the Board of Trustees changes. The idea is to turn the academy around with strong leadership.

Original poster

kdandml · 04/03/2024 20:28

PatriciaHolm · 03/03/2024 13:53

TBH I'm slightly surprised it's lasted this long as a single academy given it's last OFSTED, though Covid did pretty much put a stop to any academy activity. As @NeverDropYourMooncup says, I would also be thinking it's likely to end up being scooped up by a chain.

can you explain what this means and how it works? Sorry to be a pain. Thanks

OP posts:

Lougle · 04/03/2024 17:49

2.9 miles is under the statutory walking distance and as explained further up the thread, the existence of these categories are to prevent some children being left without a local school at all. If your first choice school is 3 miles away from child A and that's their nearest school, it would be unfair (in the eyes of your LA) to let children who live closer to the school but have other even closer options take the place, forcing child A to travel even further than that.

Original poster

kdandml · 04/03/2024 16:24

ThatBeverleyMacca · 04/03/2024 12:40

No, as I understand it they haven’t been penalised for putting their third choice school down, just for the first choice school not being their nearest school, as is in the admissions criteria for some of the documents for this LA (but whether it should apply for this school or not is unclear). If they hadn’t put a third choice (or any lower preferences they may have had) down it wouldn’t have affected getting their first choice, but they may not have got the third choice school either and would have been allocated their nearest school with places available after everyone’s preferences had been taken into account.

Show quote history

What it does mean, is that the existence of the third choice school has prevented her getting in though, which I find crazy.
We live in an area with two schools close by, one half a mile closer than the other, but the one that little bit further away is by far the best suited to DD - yet she’s not going to be allowed to walk the 1.5 miles to it because the nearest school rule means that children as far away as 2.9 miles walking route are accepted. Rather than 1.5m near for her.
As if they’re going to be walking that, as well. Madness.

OP posts:

Leafbuds · 04/03/2024 13:03

yes, that 'displaced sibling' rule makes a lot of practical sense. But in this case, it's the over-subscription criteria for people making their first application to schools and doesn't mention anything about siblings in that rule (in fact, the rule just before that one is "Children living outside the catchment area who have a sibling at the school at the time of admission", which should account for those cases). I suspect in reality, the rule giving priority to those who applied for catchment but didn't get it wouldn't end up being used very often, and it's probably there primarily to remind people that they should put the catchment school somewhere on the list. But it still seems somewhat dubious to me.

Lougle · 04/03/2024 12:57

Leafbuds · 04/03/2024 12:38

It's an interesting puzzle how this works in some cases, though - there are still schools in my area (at least primary, not sure about secondary) that have an over-subscription criteron of "children living outside the catchment area who have applied and been unable to gain a place at their catchment area school because of oversubscription" - which seems circular because you wouldn't really know if a child had failed to gain a place because of oversubscription until all the allocations had taken place, but in that case, your position would change, and therefore the allocations might not have taken place correctly.

I know that's not the same as the situation here, but it shows that there are some weird rules around that I'm not convinced actually do treat equal preferences equally, as they are supposed to. It might be that they just haven't been challenged yet!

In any case, I hope OP can challenge the arrangements here, or rather, the publication of the arrangements.

Show quote history

Normally it is a 'displaced sibling rule' which states that if a sibling was allocated an out of catchment school place due to oversubscription at their catchment school, then future siblings would be treated as 'in catchment' at the 'out of catchment' school, to ensure that they aren't discriminated against because their sibling wasn't given a place at their catchment school. It only lasts as long as the first sibling remains at the school, so normally until the sibling is in year 5 (because if they were in year 6 at the time of the admissions round they will have left for secondary school by the time the sibling is admitted).

Clearinguptheclutter · 04/03/2024 12:41

@ThatBeverleyMacca
ok
i’m pleased the op has help from you guys who clearly know their stuff.

ThatBeverleyMacca · 04/03/2024 12:40

Clearinguptheclutter · 04/03/2024 12:20

I can’t pretend to understand the ins and outs for this but if it isn’t just an error then surely there are grounds to appeal on the basis that their admissions criteria has changed and/or not been made clear. It certainly looks like you have been penalised for putting school 3 down which isn’t right. What would have happened if you hadn’t put a third one down at all I wonder.
Hope this gets sorted

No, as I understand it they haven’t been penalised for putting their third choice school down, just for the first choice school not being their nearest school, as is in the admissions criteria for some of the documents for this LA (but whether it should apply for this school or not is unclear). If they hadn’t put a third choice (or any lower preferences they may have had) down it wouldn’t have affected getting their first choice, but they may not have got the third choice school either and would have been allocated their nearest school with places available after everyone’s preferences had been taken into account.

Leafbuds · 04/03/2024 12:38

Lougle · 04/03/2024 11:40

@ThatBeverleyMacca I don't think you've misread, I think I was careless in my wording. The first preference wouldn't give someone priority if they were applying for a school that isn't their nearest in this situation. I was referring to 'and their first preference' because it is possible that they could put their nearest school as a lower preference but still be allowed their preference for a further away school.

The Admissions Code mandates an equal preference system for admissions. That means that each of the preferences on the CAF has to be treated as their first preference and the preference order only comes into play if the child could be offered more than one preference.

If a child lived closer to school A and ordered their CAF 1. School B, 2. School A, 3. School C, then they would be in category 4 for School A, category 5 for School B and School C. Depending on the popularity of the schools and their locations, it may be that they would be offered a place at School A because they were category 4, and wouldn't be offered a place at school B because they were category 5 and all places went for category 4 applicants, and would be offered a place at School C because although they were category 5, there were still places available at the distance that they live at. They would therefore be give preference 2.

Edited

Show quote history

It's an interesting puzzle how this works in some cases, though - there are still schools in my area (at least primary, not sure about secondary) that have an over-subscription criteron of "children living outside the catchment area who have applied and been unable to gain a place at their catchment area school because of oversubscription" - which seems circular because you wouldn't really know if a child had failed to gain a place because of oversubscription until all the allocations had taken place, but in that case, your position would change, and therefore the allocations might not have taken place correctly.

I know that's not the same as the situation here, but it shows that there are some weird rules around that I'm not convinced actually do treat equal preferences equally, as they are supposed to. It might be that they just haven't been challenged yet!

In any case, I hope OP can challenge the arrangements here, or rather, the publication of the arrangements.

AmeliaSmallhope · 04/03/2024 12:36

What would have happened if you hadn’t put a third one down at all I wonder.

Then her DC would have been offered a place at the nearest secondary school with places remaining.
That wouldn’t have been School 1 or School 2 as they’re both oversubscribed. It may have been School 3, or it may have been a completely different school further away than any of OP’s preferred schools.

(That’s ignoring the issue of the muddle around School 1’s admissions criteria, which does complicate things rather a lot)

Lougle · 04/03/2024 12:34

Clearinguptheclutter · 04/03/2024 12:20

I can’t pretend to understand the ins and outs for this but if it isn’t just an error then surely there are grounds to appeal on the basis that their admissions criteria has changed and/or not been made clear. It certainly looks like you have been penalised for putting school 3 down which isn’t right. What would have happened if you hadn’t put a third one down at all I wonder.
Hope this gets sorted

There is an error, but it will affect many children. @kdandml have you contact the school or the LA yet?

Clearinguptheclutter · 04/03/2024 12:20

I can’t pretend to understand the ins and outs for this but if it isn’t just an error then surely there are grounds to appeal on the basis that their admissions criteria has changed and/or not been made clear. It certainly looks like you have been penalised for putting school 3 down which isn’t right. What would have happened if you hadn’t put a third one down at all I wonder.
Hope this gets sorted

Original poster

kdandml · 04/03/2024 12:07

Lougle · 04/03/2024 11:40

@ThatBeverleyMacca I don't think you've misread, I think I was careless in my wording. The first preference wouldn't give someone priority if they were applying for a school that isn't their nearest in this situation. I was referring to 'and their first preference' because it is possible that they could put their nearest school as a lower preference but still be allowed their preference for a further away school.

The Admissions Code mandates an equal preference system for admissions. That means that each of the preferences on the CAF has to be treated as their first preference and the preference order only comes into play if the child could be offered more than one preference.

If a child lived closer to school A and ordered their CAF 1. School B, 2. School A, 3. School C, then they would be in category 4 for School A, category 5 for School B and School C. Depending on the popularity of the schools and their locations, it may be that they would be offered a place at School A because they were category 4, and wouldn't be offered a place at school B because they were category 5 and all places went for category 4 applicants, and would be offered a place at School C because although they were category 5, there were still places available at the distance that they live at. They would therefore be give preference 2.

Edited

Show quote history

Absolutely amazing explanation but there’s hardly a parent on the planet that knows this. So basically DD wasn’t getting preference 1 and what she put as 2 and 3 had no bearing on 1’s outcome.

Although in this particular case they haven’t followed their published criteria and have applied the LAs criteria of nearest school rather than distance, and that is what has cost my child her place, hence the thread.

OP posts:

clary · 04/03/2024 11:52

I see others have said similar, sorry.

But it’s the same as catchment - you don’t have to go to your catchment school. If you list an unsubscribed school further away, you’ll get that.

clary · 04/03/2024 11:49

roses2 · 04/03/2024 10:52

This is so confusing! 😂If the admissions criteria is based on your closest school why do they even give preference forms if this is going to be ignored and you are automatically assigned your closest school??

Because you might prefer another less close school and that school might be undersubscribed by “closest” applicants so you would get a space.

Also if the OP had not put down their actual closest school, that might have filled up with others who did and they would have been allocated another school further away.

ThatBeverleyMacca · 04/03/2024 11:44

Lougle · 04/03/2024 11:40

@ThatBeverleyMacca I don't think you've misread, I think I was careless in my wording. The first preference wouldn't give someone priority if they were applying for a school that isn't their nearest in this situation. I was referring to 'and their first preference' because it is possible that they could put their nearest school as a lower preference but still be allowed their preference for a further away school.

The Admissions Code mandates an equal preference system for admissions. That means that each of the preferences on the CAF has to be treated as their first preference and the preference order only comes into play if the child could be offered more than one preference.

If a child lived closer to school A and ordered their CAF 1. School B, 2. School A, 3. School C, then they would be in category 4 for School A, category 5 for School B and School C. Depending on the popularity of the schools and their locations, it may be that they would be offered a place at School A because they were category 4, and wouldn't be offered a place at school B because they were category 5 and all places went for category 4 applicants, and would be offered a place at School C because although they were category 5, there were still places available at the distance that they live at. They would therefore be give preference 2.

Edited

Show quote history

Gotcha, thanks