Primary school appeal rejected but reasons given not based on evidence presented - what to do?

[bunjies]

We have just found out that our appeal to change our daughter's school has been rejected.

The panel summarised our issues correctly (to a degree) in the letter as follows:

"E's attitude to school has changed since she has been at xxx primary school. She has found it difficult to make friends in a different community. There are not many girls in her class (8 out of 21) and she has found it difficult to integrate. X is now very unhappy at school. There have been some instances of verbal bullying. Her class has significant behavioural problems and her education is suffering because of the disruption. Y primary school is our neatest community school. The French club would be good for her because we have recently moved back from France. She has been described as a 'good influence' and she would be a positive contributor to the school".

All well and good but what they didn't mention is that one of the main reasons dd is finding it difficult to make friends is that the vast majority of children in her class live within 5-10 mins walk of the school. We live 30 mins away. There are no opportunities for dd to play with anyone outside of school as we are nowhere near them. We wanted to move her to xxx school as it will not only provide dd with a larger pool of girls (18 out of a class of 30) but will also integrate her with children who live locally.

The letter then went on to say:

"The panel expressed concern about X but did not feel that her situation was exceptional. After careful thought and discussion they regretfully came to the conclusion that the prejudice to X did not outweigh the pressures on the school."

Now, I have 2 issues with this response. The first is wtf do they mean by "exceptional"? What are they comparing her situation to? Is there a sliding scale of situations? Surely this is a subjective opinion?

Secondly, and this is more significant, when dh & I left the appeal we were both of the opinion that the LA had barely made an argument against us. She mentioned the standard response about pressure on the school but when questioned about room sizes she said that they were more than adequate, in fact, they were larger than required. She also commented that there were no significant issues wrt to special needs and that these were on a par or slightly less than the national average. She even voluntarily mentioned that we were 900m from Y school as opposed to 1900m from X school. Outside the room we even chatted to her and she started talking about if we were successful we could appeal on behalf of our other dd next term for year 3 entry, almost as if she was convinced we would be successful.

My question is where do we go from here? It is my view that not only haven't they based their decision on all the relevant facts but they have given more weight to the weaker argument. How on earth can they believe that the very real issue of a child's disengagement with school is less important than the possible additional pressure that might come from a child who has no behavioural problems and in fact is a good influence?

Thanks for getting this far. Is there anything at all we can do? I cannot put dd through another 2.5 years if this. I'be got to go to work now so apologies if I don't come back to the thread straight away.

I was heartbroken when we told dd. Devastated is not the word .

If I understand you correctly, your DD is currently at a school 1.9 km from your home and you think that this is a significant argument against her remaining there, which was overlooked in the summary?

Do you not just put your child on a waiting list for an in year transfer in these circumstances?

I imagine that what they mean by your DDs situation not being exceptional is that there is nothing uncommon about it. She doesn't have any special needs which would make her need different treatment to anyone else.

Sorry to sound mean but are these the sort of appeals that are basically wasting the time of the panels? Your dd's problems at her current school won't necessarily be solved by attending a different school. More girls doesn't equal more friends. Nearer to the school doesn't equal more playdates. Different school doesn't mean less behavourial problems. Whilst I sympathise with you and your dd, you should just go on the waiting list for now and maybe think up some strategies for helping her to integrate more. The school should help you with this. Good luck.

I suspect, OP, that you have been emphasising too many peripheral arguments in your appeal. You need one or two really strong, really well-documented arguments. The distance argument and the percentage of girls in class arguments are very weak (in fact, the percentage of girls in class argument is totally counter-productive IMO).

Think you focussed too much on issues with the curent school and not enough on positives of school Y. How old is dd ?

Yes, "exceptional" is a subjective judgement. The panel is there to make such judgements.

Friendship issues rarely make for a successful appeal. If you had supplied evidence from an independent expert saying your daughter needed to go to the nearest school it would have helped your appeal. In the absence of such evidence the panel has no reason to believe that your daughter needs to go to the local school more than other children of her age. Bullying is advanced so often that panels discount it unless there is documentary evidence to support the allegations. Similarly the criticism of the behaviour of her current class is something the panel cannot generally take into account.

The panel has to balance the prejudice to your child against the prejudice to the school. Whilst the school's case doesn't sound particularly strong they clearly showed that there would be some prejudice if your daughter was admitted. I'm afraid your case was not strong enough to overcome that.

You can refer the matter to the Local Government Ombudsman if you feel the appeal was not conducted correctly, for example that the panel did not consider all the evidence properly. Based on what you have written I doubt you will succeed but you are entitled to try.

Thank you all for the replies.

My main problem with the judgement is that they appear to have given more weight to the LA's case which, as you rightly say prh47bridge, was weak. If they gave no evidence to prove there would be additional pressure how can the panel refer to pressures on the school when none were put forward ?

Bonsoir - we didn't specifically focus on the distance, the LA did! I don't think we put forward too many arguments. We focussed on the fact that she has been unable to make any friends at the current school due to the composition of the class and the locality of where we live in relation to the school and also on the fact that as a result she has changed from someone who really enjoyed school to someone who doesn't want to be there. The school we were appealing for would address both these issues.

LeeCoakley -what you say is true but what if moving her DOES make a difference? Is it right the panel have taken the view that the school will be under pressure if she is admitted when no such argument was proven?

SoupDragon - she is on the CI list but movement at the school is very low so she is unlikely to get a place this way.

Am I allowed to ask for a transcript/minutes of the meeting?

Whilst I genuinely feel for you having a daughter who is so unhappy, I don't really see how you can dismiss the LA case as "weak" if their case is based on the school you want being full. In effect you are arguing that the education of all the children in the chosen class should be considered as less important than that of your dd. If my LA admitted extra children into my dd's class simply because they couldn't make friends in their current school (or for any reason actually) I would be really miffed. 30 is enough for one class. I'm honestly sorry if I'm being blunt, but sadly that's the truth in it.

Also I'm not sure why being farther away from the other girls should mean no play dates? Many families use after school clubs because both parents work, which seems much more of a hindrance to an after school social life that a few extra minutes walk.

Without seeing the LA's case I can't comment in detail but I would have expected it to put forward some arguments to suggest that the school would have problems, however minor, in coping with an additional child. If the panel had decided that the school would not suffer any prejudice at all through admitting your child they would have been required to find in your favour. However, it is very unusual for a panel to arrive at that conclusion. The year for which you are appealing must be full to PAN otherwise there would be no need for an appeal. PAN is set to stop the school becoming overcrowded. So there is likely to be some prejudice, however minimal, if your daughter is admitted.

Once they have decided there is some prejudice they then have to look at the prejudice to your daughter and decide whether that outweighs the prejudice to the school. On the assumption that you did not provide evidence of bullying that would have been discounted - unfortunately far too many parents falsely claim their child is being bullied in an attempt to win an appeal so panels cannot just take the parents' word for it. Similarly, in the absence of independent expert evidence the friendship issues would have been discounted and the behaviour of the current class would not be considered at all. The panel would therefore almost certainly have concluded that your daughter will not suffer any prejudice if she is not admitted to this school. So the prejudice to the school, however minimal, outweighs that and the appeal fails.

I understand your concerns for your daughter but I'm afraid, based on what you have written here, I would have expected your appeal to fail.

If you refer the matter to the LGO they will look at the clerk's notes to ensure that the correct process has been followed, that the panel has considered all the matters it should have considered and that it has not considered any matters it should have ignored.

If I was on this panel then I would have been far more questioning about the LA's case not to admit and I would on the evidence of your posts not been that convinced that the LA had made their case.
However it is for the panel to make that decision. Having decided in part 1 that they have found prejudice to the school in admitting a further pupil, it is all about the strength of the personal case that you put forward. It is completely for the panel to decide how much weight to give to the LA's case and how much weight to give to each strand of your reasons to admit. They obviously felt that these did not have the same weight as the weight given to the LAs case. The LGO will not usually get involved in any case that is around the weight given to different parts of the evidence, only if the panel did not take into consideration issues.

Thank you all for your comments.

Wow, curtainrail, 4 years! That's tough. Dd is in y4 so we've got another 2 years and a bit to get through before secondary but I'm worried that unless things change for her she'll become mire and more disengaged from the school to the point where her education suffers. She's such a bright girl and this could make or break her future as far as I'm
concerned.

Anyway, we've had a long talk with dd about things. She's been quite philosophical about it. I'm still going to follow up issue of the panel not considering the evidence presented, but I am under no illusion that anything will result fron it. Maybe our case was weak but I wasn't about to sit back and do nothing however much of a waste of the panel's time people think it was.

bunjies, please do not believe that your appeal was a waste of time. It does not matter how weak your case was or is, you have the legal right to appeal and in wanting to do the best for your child you should appeal.

How long has your DD been at the school?