Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Original poster

Secondary appeal - not offered place from feeder school

352 replies

JimJamJim · 04/03/2025 15:58

Trying to work out if we have the basis for an appeal.

Child attends a primary on the same site as secondary.
Primary school has been designated as a feeder school for the secondary - in practice this means children from the primary are a priority group within the oversubscription criteria (after SEN and siblings).

The published rationale for having feeder school status is talks about things like facilitating curriculum alignment between the schools and primary school children "knowing they can join [secondary] in Y7". At various points we have received written communication from the primary saying things like children will have an "automatic" place at the secondary.

Easing the adjustment between primary and secondary was a key reason we chose the primary, child has always assumed they would go there.

We haven't been offered a place! Currently no reason to believe the admissions criteria haven't been applied correctly (though we are looking into it).

There's various other secondary reasons that the school particularly suits the child in terms of ethos, curriculum etc. But would the simple fact of it being a feeder we were encouraged to assume was a guarantee, and both us and the school preparing the child for that transition, be a case we could argue?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
all5ofyou · 25/04/2025 09:27

"But on the other hand 33-34 per class seems at the max end of possible class sizes so that seems hard to argue against?"

@JimJamJim yes, this is difficult to argue against. Teachers will not like these numbers and may move to schools where they have more reasonable numbers. They may have been forced into this position by a financial deficit, as no school would do it willingly.

"I've read somewhere that schools can accept over PAN in this first round but then aren't then under any obligation to take additional children from the waiting list until they fall below PAN. So does this mean that any movement now (within the children in the PAN+20 offered a place) may not result in anything being offered to the waiting list?"

No, if they informed the council they could take the extra 20, they will need to honour that for subsequent admissions.

It is only when they have been forced over PAN by mandatory extraordinary admissions (e.g. EHCPs, FAP admissions, successful appeals) that they are able to wait until they drop back below PAN before admitting from the waiting list.

Original poster
JimJamJim · 25/04/2025 08:53

I'm back again, helpful mumsnetters!

Finally got all our paperwork in for the appeal, I think we've made the best case we can.

We've also now received the case from the school. Most of the school's argument is that it's highly disadvantageous for them to go over PAN. But also that they've accepted what they describe as "bulge class" of 20 over PAN, which they're not planning to accommodate as a separate class, but as 33-34 children per class.

I don't know if there's anything we can do to unpick their case. On the one hand it seems very contradictory - arguing that they can't accommodate over PAN, but then saying they're accepting 20 over PAN. But on the other hand 33-34 per class seems at the max end of possible class sizes so that seems hard to argue against?

Also I'm curious as to how accepting over PAN works in practice - I've read somewhere that schools can accept over PAN in this first round but then aren't then under any obligation to take additional children from the waiting list until they fall below PAN. So does this mean that any movement now (within the children in the PAN+20 offered a place) may not result in anything being offered to the waiting list?

OP posts:
Original poster
JimJamJim · 29/03/2025 15:21

@SheilaFentiman But if those things genuinely are good for DD, is it worth the extra distance?

I think comparing the two schools on the table it's probably worth it (though bearing in mind I've not even seen this school yet - I've been ringing them all week trying to arrange a visit!). But neither better for her than staying at her current school.

But yes, I entirely agree it would be absurdly high-stakes to turn down a better offer for the sake of presenting a stronger appeal case. I'm just tearing my hair out a bit now re-writing our appeal today when I thought it was all finished and ready to submit!

OP posts:
MarchingFrogs · 29/03/2025 14:17

SheilaFentiman · 29/03/2025 08:14

By the way, I think it’s right to take the appeal out of the equation. A minority of appeals are successful so I thiInk you should consider that your DD will end up at either first-offered school or new-offered
school and make a binary decision which is best or those two.

Absolutely. Far better for the DC's sake to lose an appeal, if it happens, with the alternative of a reasonable school, than one which you consider really unacceptable.

prh47bridge · 29/03/2025 10:25

SheilaFentiman · 29/03/2025 07:57

But if those things genuinely are good for DD, is it worth the extra distance?

Also - @prh47bridge will know - but if you are arguing eg that the preferred school does French and the offered scholl doesn’t, are the panel able to ask if other possible schools do French?

There is nothing to stop them asking the question, but they shouldn't in my view as it isn't really relevant.

You've got a place at school A which doesn't offer French. You want a place at school B that does offer French. Schools C, D and E may also offer French, but you haven't got a place at any of those schools, neither you nor the panel knows if those schools have places available, the panel can't give you a place at any of those schools, and those schools may be unsuitable for other reasons. Therefore, the panel should work on the basis that your child won't be able to study French unless they are admitted to school B and decide if that is enough to justify admitting them.

Having said that, appeal panels don't always get this right. I helped a parent once when there were genuine safeguarding concerns about her child going to the allocated school due to her line of work. She appealed for three schools on the basis of these concerns. The appeal panels all rejected the appeals on the basis that there were other schools her child could attend where there were no safeguarding issues. Of course, none of these other schools had places available, so her child was left with no option other than to attend the school with safeguarding concerns.

This is why it is important that the appeal panel focus only on the offered school and the appeal school. They should not bring other schools into the process. If I am representing parents and a question like this is asked, I would not answer it. I would shut it down immediately and point out that what may or may not be available at other schools is not relevant.

SheilaFentiman · 29/03/2025 08:14

By the way, I think it’s right to take the appeal out of the equation. A minority of appeals are successful so I thiInk you should consider that your DD will end up at either first-offered school or new-offered
school and make a binary decision which is best or those two.

SheilaFentiman · 29/03/2025 07:57

But if those things genuinely are good for DD, is it worth the extra distance?

Also - @prh47bridge will know - but if you are arguing eg that the preferred school does French and the offered scholl doesn’t, are the panel able to ask if other possible schools do French?

Original poster
JimJamJim · 29/03/2025 07:52

SheilaFentiman · 28/03/2025 15:01

If you would rather go to the offered school over the allocated school, accept the place. Because that is a guarantee, where an appeal cannot be

I’m trying to take the appeal out of the equation when deciding whether to accept the offer.

There are pros and cons of the school we’ve been offered - the cons are all things that won’t be relevant to an appeal panel (eg the school is further away), but the pros all weaken our appeal (fewer objective differences between the two schools when it comes to things a panel will care about)

So we might accept the new offer on the basis it is marginally better for DD on balance but in doing so I think we significantly reduce our chance of winning an appeal.

Sigh. It’s so stressful!

OP posts:
prh47bridge · 28/03/2025 16:57

JimJamJim · 28/03/2025 15:51

Ok so probably the best thing we can do now is put in a short appeal focused on the central argument (which doesn’t hinge on a direct comparison with any other school as it’s about features which are entirely unique to the school).

Then once we’ve settled on whether to accept this alternative offer or not, we can submit further evidence with any supplemental arguments which are relevant when comparing the school we have accepted to the school we are appealing for.

Does that sound sensible?

Show quote history

Yes, that's absolutely fine.

Lougle · 28/03/2025 16:34

Your work isn't undone. You know why you want your preferred school. That's half the battle.

Original poster
JimJamJim · 28/03/2025 16:04

Lougle · 28/03/2025 15:10

@JimJamJim I can feel your stress. Let's break it down a bit.

Is the newly offered school better than the offer you currently hold? If so, accept the place.

For appeal, imagine a seesaw. At the very start of the appeal, before any argument has been stated, the seesaw is level. The LA will have presented their argument. The fact that the school has reached its PAN, so is 'full' goes on their side. They will argue that classrooms only have so many spaces, computers are planned for 30, there are no extra seats in the science labs, the corridors are death traps, etc., etc. That all goes on their side of the seesaw. Some bits will carry more weight than others.

So you need to pack your side of the seesaw with your arguments. If your current allocated school doesn't offer French, and your DC wants to study French, but your preferred school does offer French, that goes on your side. If there's an extra curricular offering that is unique to your preferred school - add it in. It's always stronger if you can show some evidence of why your child wants to do it (for example, they are attending a digital art group outside of school, the preferred school offers a Creative iMedia qualification, but the offered school only offers a generic Art GCSE).

The key is that you don't need one 'killer argument'. You can win an appeal with lots of smaller arguments that all add up, and you can win by chipping away at the arguments of the LA - showing that they've previously taken extra children, or that the school isn't full, or that they are full in year 7 but years 9 and 10 are 20 kids under, so the corridors aren't that full, etc. Or asking how many accidents have been recorded in the corridors in the last 5 years (likely none!).

I don't really know if the new school is better or not yet - we're trying to get a visit in as we've never so much as even driven through the area it's in. On paper, it could be better.

I'm feeling quite thrown as I've spent the past few weeks finding out everything I can about the school we're appealing and the school we were offered so I can stack our side of the see-saw with all the arguments, and now I might have to tear half of it up and start again.

OP posts:
Original poster
JimJamJim · 28/03/2025 15:51

prh47bridge · 28/03/2025 14:38

If I am, say, making the point the school we are appealing for offers a specific GCSE that's relevant, is it necessary to demonstrate the school we have been offered doesn't provide that GCSE? Or just that this GCSE is important for the child because xyz?

You are trying to show that your child will be disadvantaged if they don't attend the appeal school. Saying that they want to study X and the appeal school offers it does not show any disadvantage. Saying that they want to study X which is offered by the appeal school but not by the school your child will go to does show disadvantage.

Yes, the offered school may change between now and the appeal. If it does, you can update your written case if necessary. Don't worry about the deadline. That is only the deadline for starting your appeal. You can still change your case after the deadline.

Ok so probably the best thing we can do now is put in a short appeal focused on the central argument (which doesn’t hinge on a direct comparison with any other school as it’s about features which are entirely unique to the school).

Then once we’ve settled on whether to accept this alternative offer or not, we can submit further evidence with any supplemental arguments which are relevant when comparing the school we have accepted to the school we are appealing for.

Does that sound sensible?

OP posts:
Lougle · 28/03/2025 15:10

@JimJamJim I can feel your stress. Let's break it down a bit.

Is the newly offered school better than the offer you currently hold? If so, accept the place.

For appeal, imagine a seesaw. At the very start of the appeal, before any argument has been stated, the seesaw is level. The LA will have presented their argument. The fact that the school has reached its PAN, so is 'full' goes on their side. They will argue that classrooms only have so many spaces, computers are planned for 30, there are no extra seats in the science labs, the corridors are death traps, etc., etc. That all goes on their side of the seesaw. Some bits will carry more weight than others.

So you need to pack your side of the seesaw with your arguments. If your current allocated school doesn't offer French, and your DC wants to study French, but your preferred school does offer French, that goes on your side. If there's an extra curricular offering that is unique to your preferred school - add it in. It's always stronger if you can show some evidence of why your child wants to do it (for example, they are attending a digital art group outside of school, the preferred school offers a Creative iMedia qualification, but the offered school only offers a generic Art GCSE).

The key is that you don't need one 'killer argument'. You can win an appeal with lots of smaller arguments that all add up, and you can win by chipping away at the arguments of the LA - showing that they've previously taken extra children, or that the school isn't full, or that they are full in year 7 but years 9 and 10 are 20 kids under, so the corridors aren't that full, etc. Or asking how many accidents have been recorded in the corridors in the last 5 years (likely none!).

SheilaFentiman · 28/03/2025 15:01

If you would rather go to the offered school over the allocated school, accept the place. Because that is a guarantee, where an appeal cannot be

NeverDropYourMooncup · 28/03/2025 14:59

JimJamJim · 28/03/2025 10:58

Sorry to impose on the generous advice from @prh47bridge and other mumsnetters once again.

I know that in writing the appeal we need to make the case FOR the school we want and not AGAINST the school we don't. Does that make the school we have been offered irrelevant to the appeal?

I ask because we've now been offered a waiting list place for another school (not the school we are appealing for a place at). We don't know yet whether we'll accept this place or not and won't know until after we've submitted our appeal.

Although I've drafted our appeal entirely focused on the school we are appealing for and I don't mention the school we have been offered at all, what I know about the relative differences between the school we were offered and the school we are appealing for underpins some of the arguments.

For example. - hypothetically let's say we were arguing that the school we are appealing for is small, is that only relevant if the school we have been offered is larger? What if in the interim we accepted a place at a school that is smaller?
Or is the comparison not relevant at all?

And would the appeal panel conclude anything if we'd accepted a waiting list place at another school since we appealed?

They'll not be able to hold the place open for you for that long and acceptance has absolutely no bearing upon the appeal.

Lougle · 28/03/2025 14:54

all5ofyou · 10/03/2025 08:04

The code of practice uses the phrases "behind expected levels" and "behind their peers". They obviously have to be significantly behind. Two years is the usual benchmark for significance.

Edited
Show quote history

This is off-topic somewhat, but there is no benchmark for EHC Needs Assessments other than:

  1. Has (or may have) Special Educational Needs
  2. May need Special Educational provision to be made through an Education Health and Care Plan.

All 3 of my children have EHCPs. One is demonstrably behind her peers, working at level 1 at the age of 19. One of them was fairly 'average' ability but struggled to access GCSE level work due to the barriers of her ASD on communication. One of them was on track for grade 8/9 in all her GCSEs until her mental health plummeted.

There is no criteria for 'being 2 years behind'. Just as there is no requirement for several terms of 'Assess, plan, do, review' cycles to demonstrate that the normal provision of the school isn't enough. For both of my younger daughters, the absence of APDR cycles was evidence in itself that they needed the provision of a plan.

Original poster
JimJamJim · 28/03/2025 14:49

all5ofyou · 28/03/2025 14:40

You could say something like "none of the other local schools that we have a realistic chance of getting a place at offer this GCSE". That is stronger than just saying the appeal school offers it. But even if you did just say the latter, you could qualify it verbally on the day to give it appropriate emphasis.

Show quote history

Ugh it's tricky then as the school we're currently offered and the offer we might accept are quite different (so e.g. one might offer the GCSE and the other doesn't)

OP posts:
all5ofyou · 28/03/2025 14:40

JimJamJim · 28/03/2025 14:30

To turn it around then, does it weaken the argument if we're not making a comparison to an offered school in our written appeal?

Because I don't know right now which school will be our offered school by the time of the appeal hearing.

Show quote history

You could say something like "none of the other local schools that we have a realistic chance of getting a place at offer this GCSE". That is stronger than just saying the appeal school offers it. But even if you did just say the latter, you could qualify it verbally on the day to give it appropriate emphasis.

prh47bridge · 28/03/2025 14:38

If I am, say, making the point the school we are appealing for offers a specific GCSE that's relevant, is it necessary to demonstrate the school we have been offered doesn't provide that GCSE? Or just that this GCSE is important for the child because xyz?

You are trying to show that your child will be disadvantaged if they don't attend the appeal school. Saying that they want to study X and the appeal school offers it does not show any disadvantage. Saying that they want to study X which is offered by the appeal school but not by the school your child will go to does show disadvantage.

Yes, the offered school may change between now and the appeal. If it does, you can update your written case if necessary. Don't worry about the deadline. That is only the deadline for starting your appeal. You can still change your case after the deadline.

Original poster
JimJamJim · 28/03/2025 14:30

all5ofyou · 28/03/2025 14:19

You're overthinking this a little. When people say you should focus on appealing for a school, rather than against the offered school, they just mean don't expend energy on slagging off the offered school because it won't help your case and may offend the panel members (e.g. if they have a connection to the offered school). Clearly they won't be offended by you saying they don't offer a particular GCSE (provided it is accurate information).

Show quote history

To turn it around then, does it weaken the argument if we're not making a comparison to an offered school in our written appeal?

Because I don't know right now which school will be our offered school by the time of the appeal hearing.

OP posts:
all5ofyou · 28/03/2025 14:19

JimJamJim · 28/03/2025 13:56

Thanks for replying!

I still don't think I've quite wrapped my head around where the comparison comes into it within the structure of the appeal.

If I am, say, making the point the school we are appealing for offers a specific GCSE that's relevant, is it necessary to demonstrate the school we have been offered doesn't provide that GCSE? Or just that this GCSE is important for the child because xyz?

Show quote history

You're overthinking this a little. When people say you should focus on appealing for a school, rather than against the offered school, they just mean don't expend energy on slagging off the offered school because it won't help your case and may offend the panel members (e.g. if they have a connection to the offered school). Clearly they won't be offended by you saying they don't offer a particular GCSE (provided it is accurate information).

Original poster
JimJamJim · 28/03/2025 13:56

prh47bridge · 28/03/2025 11:18

What matters for comparison purposes is the school you've got at the time of the appeal. And no, accepting a place off the waiting list does not lead the panel to conclude anything. In that situation, you clearly think the waiting list place is better than the one you were initially offered, but it doesn't mean you think it is as good as the school for which you are appealing.

Thanks for replying!

I still don't think I've quite wrapped my head around where the comparison comes into it within the structure of the appeal.

If I am, say, making the point the school we are appealing for offers a specific GCSE that's relevant, is it necessary to demonstrate the school we have been offered doesn't provide that GCSE? Or just that this GCSE is important for the child because xyz?

OP posts:
prh47bridge · 28/03/2025 11:18

What matters for comparison purposes is the school you've got at the time of the appeal. And no, accepting a place off the waiting list does not lead the panel to conclude anything. In that situation, you clearly think the waiting list place is better than the one you were initially offered, but it doesn't mean you think it is as good as the school for which you are appealing.

Original poster
JimJamJim · 28/03/2025 10:58

Sorry to impose on the generous advice from @prh47bridge and other mumsnetters once again.

I know that in writing the appeal we need to make the case FOR the school we want and not AGAINST the school we don't. Does that make the school we have been offered irrelevant to the appeal?

I ask because we've now been offered a waiting list place for another school (not the school we are appealing for a place at). We don't know yet whether we'll accept this place or not and won't know until after we've submitted our appeal.

Although I've drafted our appeal entirely focused on the school we are appealing for and I don't mention the school we have been offered at all, what I know about the relative differences between the school we were offered and the school we are appealing for underpins some of the arguments.

For example. - hypothetically let's say we were arguing that the school we are appealing for is small, is that only relevant if the school we have been offered is larger? What if in the interim we accepted a place at a school that is smaller?
Or is the comparison not relevant at all?

And would the appeal panel conclude anything if we'd accepted a waiting list place at another school since we appealed?

OP posts:
Original poster
JimJamJim · 20/03/2025 18:58

The LA won’t tell us anything about waiting lists until mid April so a while to wait. Though I am not holding out much hope, given the same banding rules apply to the waiting lists.

OP posts: