I would really appreciate the advice of the MN admissions specialists on this one. It is a rather complicated case and takes some explaining. DS has a diagnosed autistic spectrum disorder and anxiety disorder. He met the criteria for going into Year 12 of his super selective grammar. At the end of Year 12, having been predicted AAAB grades, he got CCDE. The school let him go into Year 13, although he did not meet the entrance criteria of CCC grades, as they recognised his underperformance was due to his special educational needs - and was not indicative of his ability. (The School had told us all year that he was on target for his predicted grades.) DS began studying A2 Maths ( with E grade AS), Physics (D) and Economics (C) - the first 2 subjects of particular importance because he wants to do an engineering degree.
However, at the very start of term we came under pressure to 'think carefully' whether DS should continue with Maths. This then became a refusal to teach him Maths, and then the School withdrew A2 Maths tuition mid September 2011. They said he could only do AS Maths retakes at the School. We made formal complaints to the Head, then the Governing Body to no avail. It became too late in the term to reinstate tuition, so we asked for DS to be allowed to return to the School this September 2012 to do the A2 Maths, having done his AS retakes. The answer was no. We got the school to hold a Governing Body Appeals Commitee which took place in Feb and they recommended that DS should be allowed to return this Sep. The Head said he wouldn't be bound by their recommendation.
So we made a claim to the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal (SENDIST) in March claiming disability discrimination because the School didn't take account of the effects of DS's disability when they made the decision to withdraw A2 Maths. When the Head got the claim, his response was to say that DS could return to the School this Sep to do A2 Maths (and asked if we would still proceed with our claim). The Head said it was the School's 'professional opinion' that DS now had 'sufficiently good grades' to be allowed to return in Sep - DS had just got the results of his AS maths retakes - an overall A grade. We did continue with the claim because we were worried the Head would go back on his offer and because we considered that the School was exercising its 'professional judgement' in a discriminatory way.
In July we contacted the School to clarify the arrangements for DS's return. We were eventually told that DS would be an 'external' student and would have to register at reception for each Maths lesson he came too. We were also told he would receive no SEN support. We were not happy with this and reported these statements to the tribunal.
We had the Tribunal hearing last week. (There was a long delay becuase at one stage our case was struck out, but we got it re instated.) At the hearing we learnt that the Tribunal couldn't give the main remedy we were seeking of DS being allowed to study A2 Maths at the School as a full pupil with support, rather than his current 'visitor' status.We were told this was because, technically, DS left the School at the end of his Year 13 and returning for a year 14 would count as an 'admissions issue' and therefore the tribunal had no jurisdiction. The judge told us they we would need to go (or may 'should have gone' due to time limits) to an Independent Appeals Admissions Panel.
I can't find any information on this rather unusual 'admission appeal' situation and whether it is indeed a route open to us. Our view is that in March the Head offered DS a place for a Year 14 to do A2 Maths, on the basis that he achieved an A grade in his AS resit. We did not expect DS only to allowed back as a 'visitor' (being handed a badge to wear each time he goes in). The Tribunal explained that DS does have 'rights', but only to have reasonable adjustments made for him as a 'visitor', and not as a pupil. Our chief concern is that DS as a 'visitor' is only there at the 'invitation' of the School and they could decide not to have him 'visit' any more and we would have no recourse.
Any advice gratefully received. We are still awaiting the outcome of whether there was discrimination against DS, but even if the tribunal find in our favour they can't order the remedy Ds needs.