We didn’t get any of our choices - appeals & what next

I'm sorry you've felt interrogated on this thread. Your situation is highly stressful and i really feel for you!

I was wondering, is the school you've been allocated your catchment school?

And what is the tie break criteria for school 3, the religious school? If it is distance do you know the last year's data for how far they went to? I was thinking this hopefully is your best shot if they now accept the paperwork and you might be very high on the waiting list.

I hope you're all doing ok. I can totally understand how unfair it feels. We live in a village with an ok local school but wanted a school which we are just out of catchment for. Postcode data from previous years showed we had about a fifty fifty chance of getting in each year - if my DD passed the 11+. So I helped her and she did pass it and then we crossed fingers and were lucky that she got in. Now we're facing the exact same thing for my younger DD (as out of catchment siblings don't have priority). We could move house but our whole lives and support structure are in this village so we're not going to move. If she doesn't get in I'll feel awful. But it's a hard choice to uproot your whole family and make everyone's lives harder just to increase the chance of getting the school you want, when if you stayed put you might get the school plus have your home life continue.

Hope it works out somehow.

I also think you should find out more about the allocated school and what they do offer, should your appeals etc not succeed.

Why did they get RI, and when? Have they made changes and how is this going?

Do they offer drama on the syllabus and/or through after school clubs, for example? And are creative or performance subjects widely offered, or only to students who started studying music etc young and are more likely to get top grades?

Yeah I've come across numerous HTs and other senior teachers who have no or very little idea of the admissions process ("put us first or you certainly won't get a place" and "he got a place even tho we are out of catchment as he's really sporty"*)

*Not an admissions criterion at the school

Hmm...

I've known senior members of staff turn up to present their school's case at appeals with obviously not much familiarity with their own school's oversubscription criteria (let alone the Admissions Code), so I wouldn't necessarily expect the HT of a primary school - even one in the same area - to be up to speed with the admissions policies of the secondary schools. (The only presenting officer I've felt sympathy for on this score was someone literally days into her new job, thrust into an appeal on her own with a copy of an admissions policy 'for' the school in question which was significantly different from the one in the appeal pack, not to mentioned that it eventually turned out that neither document was the right one).

Agree, it’s confidential, but he could manage his DW’s expectations and explain that although their DC attends his school because they live so far away she should not expect their DC to secure a place in the same schools as their classmates.

If he is party to such information he cannot disclose it though.

Am I correct in understanding your DC attends the primary where his dad is head? If that is the case your DH will have a good knowledge of leaver destinations and where the DC live and how they are likely to have qualified against the oversubscription criteria, e.g. Tom is a previously looked after child, Mary qualified for Pupil Premium and has passed the 11 plus, Joe has an EHCP naming that school etc. if this is the case, does he know of any child attending the primary from your village without special priority / siblings who gained a place at your named preferences?

I’m confused about why your DH is on the electoral roll at his DF’s rather than at home. Is he also registered as living there for Council Tax purposes? I know some families seek to protect having their parents home being sold to pay for care, and one of the ways they do this is having an older relative live there.

Ah, isn't that encouraging. I imagine the appeals panel will also decide that the school should roll out a red carpet!

Did you say that parents can download your essential guide for just £24.99? Amazing value!

Did you say they can get their money back when they follow your advice and lose, as they almost certainly will?

Asking for a friend.

Me too. Some of the advice given out on some of this posters other posts - all linking to the same page plugging a paid for guide - is also very misleading.

There is no reason for anyone to pay for Appeals advice. There are plenty of us here - including very experienced panelists, and governors - who will give a lot of free advice, even on personal messages if people don't want to share the full story.

I've reported your post @SchoolAppeal2026 as it is incorrect and misleading to the OP and anyone else who reads it; and I suspect you are simply advertising your FB page and the guide you are plugging.

In my LA, I provided a list of schools with which I had a connection (e.g. 'my child attended' or 'I was a governor there', and in my case, 'my husband works there').

However, as @SheilaFentiman says, the appeal is for school A. Not against school B. So it may be that the admin team exclude someone who has declared a connection with School A and School B, but they won't be able to exclude someone because they know someone who works at school B, or have a neighbour whose child goes there, etc.

Regardless, the panel is not allowed to deem any school 'bad'. If they are a registered school and are open (i.e. haven't been closed by Ofsted) then they are good enough for pupils.

The only good reason to argue against a school is if there are no schools with places within commutable distance, and the allocated school would put the child at risk. For example, a police officer who serves the community in which the school is located and regularly makes arrests may argue that being the child of a local police officer would make the child a target. The appeal may succeed because there are no alternative schools with places so the child has to go somewhere other than the offered school. Even then, it would be better framed as "X school is essential for my child because I serve as a police officer in the catchment areas of schools A, B, C and D. My child was offered school B, which ordinarily I would be content with. However, the fact that I regularly arrest people in the catchment area of school B puts my child at risk by attending there. School X does not present this risk because it 10 miles away from the nearest edge of my patch."

That's irrelevant in terms of appeals. If the person representing your nephew didn't present a strong case for how a school would benefit him and why not admitting him would be detrimental, and the person representing your DD did present a strong case, then your DD would win the appeal and your nephew would lose.

In fact, it could be argued that your nephew's needs are so significant that it doesn't matter which school he goes to because wherever he goes will need to give him bespoke teaching with a dedicated staff member, etc. It could be argued that your DD's needs are such that differences between schools will seriously impact her ability to be independent, to learn, and to manage the school environment.

It really isn't about pitting different SEN against each other. It's about making sure that if a child would be disadvantaged by being refused a place at a specific school, that they get the opportunity to present their reasons to an impartial panel, who decide if their need for the place overcomes the difficulties that the school in question will face by having an extra pupil.

I am talking about saying negative things about the allotted school (North Road High, say).

But all appeals are for a school (South Road Comp, say) not against a school. So possible conflicts would only be flagged if the panel members for South Road Comp had kids/siblings etc at South Road Comp; North Road High would not be relevant.

If Appeal panel member has connections to the school that's in the appeal, and they potentially make a decision based on their personal feelings/involvement with the school - isn't that conflict of interest?

@the7Vabo OP didn’t post to vent, though - she posted to outline her appeal cases and get comments on any points she could add.

apologies this is very long, but just wanted peoples feedback or experiences.
can I boost appeals or add anything?
for example would a letter from his teacher or head teacher help, if added to supporting evidence.
is it worth mentioning in the appeal that we didn’t receive any of our choices and have been allocated an unsuitable school.

And it is good (and frequent) advice not to say negative things about the allocated school - after all, panel members may have kids who go there!

Some people were picking apart the OP’s “unsuitable language” etc.

Maybe she doesn’t have a realistic chance of appeal (I don’t know as I’m not in the UK), and I agree about being positive in front of the child.

She wasn’t given much of a chance to vent though.

Much like you & the OP my choice of schools is very limited mainly due to religion in my case. I find it very difficult that my child can’t go to the “good school” because of religion, and that I have to listen to all my friends constantly talk about how amazing it is. It makes me feel like my child isn’t getting the same experience (extra curriculars in particular) or even opportunities. And as positive as we have to be for the kids, it sucks. I’ve paid tax since I was 16, I want my kid to have the same opportunity as his friends.

My daughter has ASD but is high functioning academically and her issues are on the social side. My ASD nephew is non-verbal, still in nappies, tube fed, has no sense of danger, has sensory challenges with school uniform etc.

One of the above children’s ASD impacts absolutely everything about their experience of the world and how they access education. For the other, much fewer interventions are required. Treating them the same because they have the same headline diagnosis would be deeply unfair.

Not necessarily. It's about disadvantage to the individual child. "Because: Autism" won't win an appeal. But 'Jane struggles with crowded environments. At her current primary school, she has adjustments to reduce the stress of break times. She sits in the library, which is normally closed to pupils, and she has her lunch brought to her so she doesn't have to queue in the school hall. Our preferred school has 1000 pupils, staggered break times to limit the number of pupils on break at any one time, a quiet zone for SEN pupils, and the option to go to the canteen 10 minutes early so that they don't have to queue with the other pupils. The allocated school has 1600 pupils, all pupils are on break at the same time, and there is no quiet zone or early lunch option.' would be much stronger.

@Lougle SEN isn't even strong enough now. I just ended a phonecall with a Council Special medical team and they refused our application saying that 'autisam isn't strong enough reason and every school is trained to deal with it '.
It's just so exhausting and heartbreaking.

Dreading facing the Appeal panel now

I agree. Nobody is saying that @Switchy111 shouldn't try to get her preferred school on appeal. What they are saying is that her current arguments, which seem strong to her because she loves her DS and thinks he deserves a good school, aren't arguments which panels can consider.

Logistical issues are very, very, rarely considered by a panel. In the absence of SEN, a Secondary School age child is expected to travel independently and it's reasonable to think they can stay home for short periods.

Therefore, if the OP wants to win at appeal, she has to find things about the school that really matter and will make a difference to her DS, so that she can present that to the panel. Then they can consider the strength of that case.

It was really heartbreaking when I was a panellist and parents would come with a huge bundle of evidence about LA transport strategies, philosophy statements about local schools for local pupils, etc., because although we listened to everything they were saying, we knew that it wasn't evidence we could consider when weighing the strength of the case.

I don't think anyone is saying the OP shouldn't have preferences for specific schools. Rather they are saying that the case for appeal isn't the strongest and it likely that the allocated school won't change. There is little to be lost by appealing and there is always the possibility they may win. However, as I stated in my first post unless you are sure you will home school or use private the only option is to be positive and supportive about the allocated school. I understand that the OP has (potentially justifiable reservations), but if (as for many people) this is the only possibility then you have to work with it. My DD had a single realistic option for secondary. She has to make the best of the opportunities there because there is no 'choice'.
Parents can state a preference, but they can't make a choice. Across England most secondaries set their own admissions. There are a myriad of criteria (siblings, religous observance & rites, priority areas, 'fair banding', nearest school, distance, aptitude and attainment tests of many flavours, social and medical needs ....). Different schools allocate using different criteria. There is no co-ordination some young people will have a good chance of being allocated several schools if placed first on their preference list. Others may have a realistic chance of one that may not even be their closest school.

It is a system that generally favours informed parents with higher attaining children who have religous parents and/or parents who have the time, knowledge and resources to engage in religious activities or research and apply (and potentially prepare for) 'aptitude tests'/'attainment tests'. If people are allocated a preferred school they tend to be happy with the admissions system, when they aren't they tend to question it more.
We could move to a more co-ordinated and standardised system, but there appears to be no will to do so. For there ever to be true choice for the majority of parents, we would have to fund spare capacity. I can't see that happening any time soon.

Ok - you quoted me so I thought you were replying to me.

I was more referring to the thread in general

I’m not blaming any parent - not sure what about my post makes you think I was?

I simply said that I didn’t think it was likely to be a good basis for an appeal because it wasn’t specific to any given child.