Can a secondary school prioritise first choice applications

[Runoutofideas]

I have just seen a draft of the admissions procedure and policy for a new secondary school which a group of people are trying to open close to my house. The process gives priority to people who have put them as first choice on the form co-ordinated by the council. This would accept first choice children over and above special needs, siblings and distance. The school would be a free school, but even so, is this allowed? I thought that, certainly for primary school applications, the first/second/third choice made no difference to whether a place would be offered. Any experts know? Thanks

They shouldn't actually know where on an applicant's list they fall, so no I don't think they can.

Hopefully an expert will be along to confirm though.

"Ordinary" state schools can't.

Different rules apply to Free Schools and Academies- maybe they can? Another reason to oppose them!

Thanks Tiggytape. Do you know where I can find the wording of the admissions law to quote at them?

Thanks everyone else too - you are confirming what I thought. Worrying that they don't seem to have a grasp of the law which directly affexts what they are trying to do.

affects even

Thanks tiggytape. That's exactly what I was looking for.

This is part of their draft statement which I believe to be illegal:

"X is an independent, state funded school which has an agreed Published Admissions Number of 120 per year for admission into year 7 and shall admit up to this number each year. Where the school receives more applications for year 7 than it has places available the criteria listed below will apply.

Admissions Criteria
 Children with a statement of Special Educational Need (SEN) where X Senior School is named on the statement must, by law, be admitted to X Senior School.

Where multiple options have been listed for schools priority will be given to those placing the school as first choice. Only when all of the first choice places have been issued according to the listed over-subscription criteria will we issue places to those listing the school in either second or third place. After this requirement has been met, places will be allocated in line with the following objective over-subscription criteria in this order:

 Any request for the allocation of a place for children looked after or formerly looked after1 by the Local Authority and adopted children who were formerly looked after by the Local Authority will be admitted next.

 Children with a strong social or medical reason. This must be supported by written evidence from a professional such as a doctor or social worker involved in the case and must demonstrate why the school is the only one which the child can attend as a result of the social and/or medical need.

 Siblings of children who will be attending the school in the year of admission i.e. brothers or sisters including step, adopted or foster brothers or sisters living in the same family unit at the time when the child would be due to start at the school (note this criteria could not be applicable for the first round of applications forSenior School in 2015).

 Children whose names have been entered on the schools expression of interest prior to December 2013."

Thanks so much for your help

Their final paragraph is illegal too!

Wow!

I'm intrigued. Who are these people? Are any of them actual teachers? You only have to read the Ed boards on MN here and there to know that theit criteria are way off mark

So, expression of interest, first choice and looked after children not coming first (I'm right aren't I that, quite rightly, LAC get first dibs everywhere?).

titchy - I thought that too.

I don't know who the people are - I believe they are a group of parents from an existing primary school, but they are clearly a bit out of their depth I think.

I am certainly no expert, but it didn't look right to me, so I thought I'd check and you have all confirmed my suspicions. I have emailed them and told them it is time for a re-think as what they are suggesting is illegal. I will let you know what response I get. (I may have just caused my dd's name to be removed from their list though.......ho hum!)

The Code is published on the Internet so it's not as if it's some unobtainable document held in a vault somewhere in Westminster. You'd have thought they could have at least Googled!

It does sound as if they're out of their depth. I imagine the "expression of interest" thing is so they can guarantee places for their own children

I am really shocked.

I don't think they are so much out of their depth, as blatantly trying to ensure their children, and the children of their friends, get places. These policies are cleverly engineered to maximise their chances, so I am struggling to believe they are not aware of the issues around them, previous controversy, and that there is a law regulating them.

They specifically say that they "will act in accordance with the Schools Admissions Code (as revised February 2012), the School Admissions Appeals Code and admissions law as they apply to Academies" - maybe for some reason they don't feel this bit does apply to academies.

It is not an academy anyway - it is a free school.

Their proposal wouldn't work. The schools themselves do not know the order of preference given by the parents as the LEA don't pass this information onto schools.
Suspect I know which free school group this is. There is already a primary academy on the site and a group of parents have been campaigning for a few years for a secondary free school on the same site. A previous bid to set up an all age academy was turned down in favour of a primary school as there is a shortage of primary places locally.
Given that the council own the site and buildings and there is already another secondary free school fairly nearby, I doubt whether this plan will work.

A free school is an academy that hasn't converted from an existing school.

They cannot give priority to people who named the school as first choice.

Looked after children must come ahead of everyone apart from children with a statement of SEN naming the school.

They cannot give priority based on the date on which someone applied.

I would expect the Schools Adjudicator to reject these admission criteria. Hopefully someone will point out the error of their ways before it gets that far.

Yes crazymum you've got the right one. I heard that parents of the primary school were initially trying to give children attending the primary priority when it came to secondary spaces, but I'm not sure if these current people are the same ones as previously. I am not involved in it at all, just on their email contact list and received their draft proposal which raised my initial questions. As I live very close, I was interested to see distance as the lowest criteria.

I have pointed out their error to them. it remains to be seen if this makes any difference at this stage.

Feeder schools can be a legit criterion.

But what would worry me here isn't simply that they've made a balls up of this. It's that if they can get it so badly wrong to the point of illegality on something where accurate underpinning information is readily available and fairly well known, what else might they be getting disastrously wrong?

Innit tho, Med.

Silly buggers - have they any idea how much admin any organisation requires, let alone a school?

Even doing away with red tape and tick boxes, someone still needs to remember to order loo roll.

Agree completely meditrina.

I have had a reply form them "Thank you for your information - the draft policy has been amended accordingly"

They are still including the bit about children whose parents have expressed an interest prior to Dec 13, coming above distance in the criteria. Is the only bit in the admissions code which concerns this, the bit about the length of time on waiting lists, or is that not the same thing?