Voluntary Aided School - Governers Statement for Upcoming Appeal

[GirlInASwirl]

PN : School name and any identifying details have been omitted for Data Protection reasons

So I got a statement today from The Governing Body of my DS's Secondary School preference (voluntary-aided school handling their own appeals). I am a little confused.

School is on the PAN of 168

Numbers in each year

11+ 168 pupils
12+ 168
13+ 163
14+ 171
15+ 170

6 mixed ability forms of 28 in upcoming year 7

Excerpts as such:

'Any increase in the number of pupils in year 7 would give an imbalance in the school's ability bands in future years leading to some pupils not being given the pastoral care or high ability teaching each pupil is entitled to, thus diminishing an d diluting the standard of education the school wishes to provide'

'Whilst the addition of a single pupil might not be considered to be a problem when viewed on its own, one has to look at the cumulative effect this leads to when future school years have to accommodate the addition pupils it may receive'

'Parts of the school designed when the school had an admission number of only 96 which in consequence leads to congestion within corridors and queuing problems at break and meal times'

'Increased numbers would lead to safety concerns within school laboratories where in later years dangerous chemicals and equipment are used'

'Exceeding the admission number for this year group would place additional pressures on staff and the resources available in the specialist and practical areas'

No other detail provided.

1.) Is this statement detailed enough?
2.) What do you think of the reasons given?
3.) What would you ask to clarify issues behind this statement.

Over to you

1. Yes

2. Looks pretty standard to me. I would regard this as beatable if you have a good enough case

3. I wouldn't aim to clarify the issues. That is for the panel. You want to challenge their case

Starting with the numbers, Y10 and Y11 are currently over PAN. This suggests they can cope with going over PAN so highlight this.

Overall it looks like they are below capacity. Do they give the net capacity figure? If so that is worth highlighting. If you haven't done so already I would ask for the calculated capacity figures. That gives a range and the official capacity must be set somewhere in that range. If the official capacity is towards the bottom of that range you should bring it up as it suggests the school can handle more pupils.

I don't personally see why an increase in numbers in Y7 would lead to an imbalance in ability bands in future years without, apparently, leading to an imbalance in Y7. I would challenge that. But to be honest that whole paragraph looks unconvincing to me. Many secondary pupils are in classes with more than 28 and other schools cope so this one should be able to as well.

Congestion within corridors and queuing at breaks and meal times crop up a lot in cases to refuse admission. Ask if there have been any reportable accidents directly attributable to overcrowding. The answer will almost certainly be no. Similarly ask if any pupils have missed out on lunch due to the number of pupils. Not entirely sure why there would be queuing at break times unless they mean for the loos. If that is what they mean, have any pupils been unable to go to the loo due to overcrowding?

Safety concerns in labs - given that they are over PAN in Y10 and Y11, how are they dealing with this now? They are presumably coping somehow.

Additional pressures on staff and resources - well yes, of course this is true. But that doesn't mean they can't cope. And since Y10 and Y11 are over PAN they clearly can cope.

I would ask some questions about what they mean by 6 mixed ability forms of 28. My suspicion is that this is 6 mixed ability forms for pastoral reasons but that they actually teach in different group sizes and that there are probably 7 or 8 actual teaching groups for most subjects. If they confirm 6 teaching groups who are mixed ability in year 7, ask about year 8 and 9. They are talking about ability bands, so at some stage they set by ability.

The use of labs and dangerous chemicals is a bit of a joke. Of course they do science and of course they use chemicals but actually the whole point is that they do it safely. The usual class numbers in such lessons is 20 so ask about that because you can then turn the quote around and say well surely as you have really small classes in science that it makes it even safer.

This is a very typical school case and you should be able to ask questions around the results the school gets. Hopefully going up so you can make the claim (even if it is a bit dubious) that the school is getting good results whilst the numbers of pupils is increasing, so no problem about taking more pupils. Also just worth asking what is the largest number over PAN that they have had in the last 5 years, just in case they have had a very large intake for some reason

Just to add that future admissions are of no concern. No-one knows what they will be. The school could become unpopular. Refute this claim.

Thank you for those ideas so far...my partner and I sat down last night and charted questions using the statement. I am awaiting further information including the Nett capacity calculations. Some of the body's arguments we had already pre-empted and this was in my original application paperwork. The challenges we would forward are as follows....

1.) In years over the PAN - there is no discernible drop in results. All results are significantly over the national average for schools of this size and character. In the last 10 years the school has had a total of population of between 1000 and 1100. Despite the extra 100 pupils; grades have not gone down. However they haven't risen significantly either - does this last point show that there could be a concern?
2.) How schools arrange ability bands is a logistical/practical concern which we feel should not impact on how many children the school takes. I am primary trained and we are used to having 30 children of different abilities every day in one class and provide for these with differentiated activities (separately levelled activities for differing abilities). Secondary teachers also have this training.
3.) There are no mentions of overcrowding/health and safety concerns in any of the OFSTED reports for the school. We will be asking for documented proof from the accident book/incident reports that there have been problems. The school talks about parts of the building being designed for an intake of 98. In which case; why are they accepting 168 in a year? And how have they managed the capacity challenges? I also have extensive evidence of a rolling programme of building/development. For example; in a recent vacancy advert the same governors say....

‘We are fortunate to have excellent buildings in which to work, many have been built within the last ten years. Most recently, the science laboratories have undergone major development and a new Independent Learning centre and suite of classrooms were completed in 2011. It is a modern and attractive campus surrounded by playing fields, a wooded area and open land. We have also just received news of a £128,000 grant to further improve our main building. Given our voluntary-aided status and the healthy state of the premises, there are no plans to seek Academy status in the foreseeable future’ (Information from Vacancy Article at tes.co.uk, 2013)
4.) Science labs have been re-designed (see above) surely this would be with extra capacity in mind? Again this is a question of how the school control their health and safety and teacher monitoring during actual lesson times. Awaiting a floor plan so that we can compare the square meterage with new requirements from DFE (Building Bulletin 103 - April 2014)
5.) As far as resources go; I agree with prh - inevitably this is affected by having more children. But again there is no written evidence to say that school is struggling. The tour of the school showed that there were more than enough resources to provide for the school aims
6.) Future numbers - yes they can go down as well as up. From looking at new government figures and financial plans. There are new statutory projects coming in to try to raise the number of educational places in relation to rising birth rates. This could mean that the school at some stage would have to consider how they will accommodate more children anyway. This along with the continual building development to raise capacity.

How am I doing?

Thank you for your ideas so far.Please keep them coming.

Yes I will ask about class sizes for actual subject lessons - this is a good idea.

1. No. You have enough there to deal with any suggestion that an increase in numbers results in a reduction in grades.

I think you are doing fine. As far as possible you should aim to use this material as questions to the LA's/school's representative.

The article you are quoting from is a cracker. I would let the school talk about what they say and then ask them how they believe the statement they have made for the appeal is compatible with the article from TES when advertising for teachers. Have a few copies of the advert for the panel and the school's reps and see them wriggle. It will not be a knock out blow but it will seriously weaken their case.
You will not find any references to health and safety issue in Ofsted reports unless there is a really major issue that needs immediate attention - I know of only one in recent Ofsted reports and that shut down one department of the school with immediate effect - it has to be of that seriousness. What you can ask is whether there have been any reportable accidents that were caused by overcrowding. You will be very unlucky if they say yes.
The panel will take no consideration of future plans into consideration, only if there is new building opening in September, so I would not concentrate on this at all.
The quotes around a capacity of 98 are just quotes and "fluff" to try and make it look worse then it is. If the school push that I would just ask the school to confirm what their PAN actually is - 168 and then you can say so this number of 98 is a complete red herring then, it has no relevance to the current situation in the school.