Secondary School Appeal

They release more places in April after people have rejected or confirmed places. Sometimes people decide to go private or move away.

Put DD on waiting list & also appeal. That bus journey sounds a lot for 11 year old.

Bristol is complicated with South Glos N Somerset etc - which school have you been given?

We lost an appeal 3 years ago but actually it's worked out for the best. So sometimes these things are fate.

6 months is lots of time?

is there no car in the house?

Could you learn to drive?

@Meadows11 If you want to appeal on grounds of SEN, you will likely need more evidence than just the diagnosis. All children with ADHD and dyslexia are different, and some may be able to cope with multiple bus journeys okay, whilst others will not. Not all students with these needs will necessarily need to access a quiet space during the day etc. There is definitely an argument that if her needs were severe enough to need a specific school, then she would have an EHCP.

I don't think it will be enough to just present a diagnosis, and say "therefore she needs xyz"- you need to evidence her difficulties in more detail. If you have the opinion of professionals that she won't cope with the journey, that carries a lot more weight than just your opinion. If you have the opinion of her current school that she needs a support space in the day, that will help.

You mention clubs, and these can be a good argument. Are there any specific clubs at your preferred school she would like to join? If these are not offered by the school you've been offered, that can strengthen your argument.

A lot will depend on how strong the school's argument is, and who else is appealing, and what their argument is.

Do you know your position on the waiting list for your preferred schools?

"Sorry but I interpreted your post as trying to dissuade parents from appealing due to the financial burden on schools also."

Yes, you mentioned that up-thread.

"The usual (and knowledgeable) posters on these boards will often say a case is weak or lacks realistic chance of success but the costs to the authorities doesn't factor."

This isn't relevant because it wasn't a "usual (and knowledgeable) poster" that made the comment I was responding to. But it doesn't matter who it was - if I see someone telling a parent that it is always worth appealing, I will disagree with them

Sorry but I interpreted your post as trying to dissuade parents from appealing due to the financial burden on schools also.

That may not have been your intention or you may have meant it in specific circumstances but that wasn't how it came across to me.

The usual (and knowledgeable) posters on these boards will often say a case is weak or lacks realistic chance of success but the costs to the authorities doesn't factor.

"Well, I guess that in an ideal world, you would say "Actually, I see your point. I didn't intend to stop parents from using their statutory right to appeal."

You have exaggerated what I said, here and in your own mind, hence your over-reaction.

I'm not trying to "stop parents from using their statutory right to appeal". In this thread I was objecting to a poster (BendingSpoons) flippantly telling a parent that it's "always worth a try", even when grounds are weak. I posted a similar view on another thread too.

People are less likely to be flippant about appeals if they understand the schools' perspective, and parents are more likely to make balanced decisions.

It's up to others what they do with the information. However, you are acting like the thought police.

Well, I guess that in an ideal world, you would say "Actually, I see your point. I didn't intend to stop parents from using their statutory right to appeal. I realise now that I shouldn't be telling parents that they shouldn't appeal to save schools money."

Barring that, you could quietly refrain from posting such statements in future threads, at which point nobody will take issue. Posting valid comments about the weakness of a case is totally fine.

"There is no way to agree to disagree with someone who is trying to discourage parents from using their statutory rights"

Yes, there is a way. You do it by drawing a line under it and moving on. If you keep going on about it, repeatedly, it pushes the thread to the top of the forum and raises its profile. By doing that, far more people have seen this post that I made on this thread at 07:17 yesterday morning than would have seen it if you or someone else had simply challenged the view once and then let it lie. I don't know what you think you can achieve by telling me you disagree with it more than once.🙂

There is no way to agree to disagree with someone who is trying to discourage parents from using their statutory rights, no matter how long a poster has been posting or who they may be. Believe me, if @prh47bridge was saying it, I'd be challenging him too. It isn't you that is being challenged. It is what you write. You are entitled to your view, but every time I read a post, from anyone, which discourages parents from using their statutory right to appeal, I will challenge it.

If you've been around a while, you will see posts from me, @prh47bridge , PatriciaHolm, and several others which say "That's not a strong case for appeal", "Those aren't good grounds", "Transport isn't a good reason to appeal", "Logistics aren't the responsibility of the LA", etc., I think we're all very responsible in encouraging parents to only appeal for reasonable grounds. But it crosses the line (in my view) when parents are discouraged because they should 'think of the school' and are made to feel guilty for considering appeal.

I've been open about the perspective I'm posting from, and I think it's helpful for parents to have a school's perspective. Why would it not be helpful to know how schools view appeals? Some of my posts have been challenged, and that's ok, but I'm not the new kid on the block who can be bullied out of the forum by people who disagree with me or claim to have more experience. Usually my views are in tune with some of the more well known "experts" here, but sometimes they're not, and that's ok too.

As I said before, repeated challenges for the same thing, that keep threads going ad infinitum, are usually better dealt with via an "agree to disagree" truce.

@tripz I don't see anyone throwing their weight around. However, you are posting through the lens of a school defending an appeal, whereas most of the people who are seeking advice are posting for advice on how to win an appeal. Having someone post that people shouldn't appeal and it costs lots of money needs to be challenged, because parents have an absolute right to appeal.

"For LA schools, the case to refuse admission is usually put together and presented by the LA as they are the admission authority."

Yes, but not always.

"I therefore think it is likely that my experience and that of the other experts who offer advice on here is broadly reflective of the national picture."

Nobody giving advice on Mumsnet has had their credentials checked, but you have been around long enough for people to trust you. I have been around a long time too, and have been on many of the same threads as you, though I change my username more frequently to protect my anonymity.

If anyone disagrees with anything I post, I'm happy for it to be challenged on the specific detail, and to admit when I get things wrong, but I don't buy the "I'm more of an expert than you" argument or the "I've been around longer than you" argument because I know I've helped many people on these threads over many years too. 🙂

For LA schools, the case to refuse admission is usually put together and presented by the LA as they are the admission authority.

Parents use my services for free through Mumsnet. I do not offer a paid service for admission appeals. I almost invariably start advising parents long before the admission authority submits its case to refuse admission. I therefore think it is likely that my experience and that of the other experts who offer advice on here is broadly reflective of the national picture.

I didn’t have my ADHD diagnosed until last year (in my 40s).

I went to school 4 miles from home and frequently missed the bus. I walked to school if that happened - over fields at all times of the year - from the age of 11.

My DD is 13 and was also diagnosed last year. I see my role as a parent to understand her difference but to equip her to exist in the world. With exposure to difficulty she becomes more resilient and able to problem solve. Eg, she has a tendency to read the first 3 letters of every word and guess what the sentence means rather than slowing down and reading carefully. This is an issue during tests that the usual “extra time” won’t help. So I’m helping her to consciously slow down and read everything twice or three times to make sure she understands the question.

I appreciate not all ADHD is the same but I’m not convinced bubble wrapping kids is the way to go.

Parents don't need a lawyer.

In Infant Class Size appeals, success is virtually impossible. In my LA the success rate is quoted as 0.4%. I have sat on appeals where two children are allocated schools in opposite directions, starting at the same time, with only a motorway bridge with stairs as the route between them, mum having a small baby in a buggy and travelling on foot. We were still forced to deny the appeal.

In all other appeals, the admissions code sets out the rules very clearly. The only thing that parents need to understand is that 'unreasonable' doesn't mean unreasonable as plain English would suggest, and actually it is a very extreme situation that should be regarded as 'unreasonable'. They also need to understand that prejudice is a balancing act, so if the admitting authority has 4 points of prejudice, they need 5 (assuming they are equally weighted). Appeals can be won by presenting several small things that would benefit the child, not just one big thing.

If only the message got out that logistics and transport, and friendship groups, is incredibly unlikely to win an appeal, we'd be fine. Barring those children for whom there is evidence that these things are important.

"And the LA cannot stop community and VC schools increasing PAN. If the PAN set by the LA is lower than the school wants, they can appeal to the Schools Adjudicator, where there is a strong presumption in favour of giving the school the increase it wants."

This is true, but it's an adversarial move that can create conflict with the LA and the other local schools that the LA is trying to protect. In contrast, a weak appeal defence is a neutral act. In fact, if the school believes it does have space for more students, it would be dishonest of them to do otherwise.

"The school (or LA - it is often the LA for community and VC schools) has put up a good, solid defence in every single case where parents have been successful that I have been involved in."

This may be your experience, but it's only fair to make clear it is your experience as an admissions lawyer. Parents are likely to be using your services in cases where schools appear to be good at defending appeals.

From personal experience, I would strongly disagree with this. The school (or LA - it is often the LA for community and VC schools) has put up a good, solid defence in every single case where parents have been successful that I have been involved in. And the LA cannot stop community and VC schools increasing PAN. If the PAN set by the LA is lower than the school wants, they can appeal to the Schools Adjudicator, where there is a strong presumption in favour of giving the school the increase it wants.

Btw, if you disagree with me, the best way to see my opinion drift off the bottom of the forum and into into oblivion is to stop attacking my posts. Sometimes agreeing to disagree is the best solution.

"It’s the implication - in all of your posts, not just here - that parents shouldn’t appeal because it’s expensive for the school and never successful anyway, that is being challenged."

I never said that. I have said:

• Appeals have a cost to the school, and I think that parents should be aware of that when deciding to appeal.
• Checking appeals stats will give some context about the strength of the school's case.
• There are reasons why some schools don't put up strong appeals and others do.
• Appealing for something at school Y that the defence can easily prove is offered by all local schools is not going to give you a strong case (even if school Y does it better than your offered school)

None of that is controversial, and I hope it will help the op.

(The technique is taught in primary school English lessons on the black arts of persuasion as ‘opinion disguised as fact’; it’s quite fun to see it used in real life like this)

I think that if we say ‘you are presenting arguments many schools may use in cases like the OP’s, often successfully depending on the strength of the applicant’s case ‘ that’s fine. It’s the implication - in all of your posts, not just here - that parents shouldn’t appeal because it’s expensive for the school and never successful anyway, that is being challenged. One way in which you are making this implication is by stating or implying that things are always universally the case when in fact they are much more variable.