Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

City of London Girls withdrawing offers

510 replies

Leo12345 · 13/02/2018 13:37

Hello! I was surprised to receive an email today from City of London Girls that their offer to DD is now withdrawn. I opened their original email with the offer and read that indeed this is their policy: first-comes-first-gets.
We are much more prone to go to LEH or if not Kingston Grammar, and now I bless this decision as I learnt something about City of London Girls character and aptitude towards its pupil.

My question is: do other schools (in particular LEH and Kingston Grammar) practice such policy?

We would accept the offer in LEH today then, though we are waiting for the tour in there.

OP posts:
AnotherNewt · 23/02/2018 21:22

Yes, I think they are the only three schools which do this.

Is someone started a thread about those schools, I expect I'd be saying much the same thing on that thread as in this.

It's a bad system, rare for good reasons.

Dragthing · 23/02/2018 21:30

@TheInvisibleHand - My DD too wrote to the school - in our case I copy-pasted her words into my first email on Tuesday 13th when our offer exploded. It ended:
"I cannot believe this. I hope you have taken time to read this letter and understand how disappointed and heartbroken I am. I know I am on the waiting list but I feel rejected and useless. Please do not ignore this and it has been my dream to come to City ever since I got the interview."
In my naivety I kept checking my email for a reply. Three more of my emails have remained unresponded to. The final straw was yesterday when I was finally told - 9 days after I had first asked - that she was 88th on the waiting list! We've asked to be taken off the list. I remain very, very upset. DD prefers not to talk about it.

TheInvisibleHand · 23/02/2018 21:53

Dragthing. My DD is a stoic by nature, but I can't believe they can ignore them in this way. Like you, we haven't had a single personal response to any of quite a few emails. Unfortunately DD sent her own message from her own account, so it is pretty obvious she is being ignored. We've stayed on the list but right now I think she needs to concentrate on excitement for her alternative.

Post edited by MNHQ

Pradaqueen · 23/02/2018 22:03

Dragthing/invisible - Something seems very much adrift with the numbers. We know city made less offers than last year. A similar thread last year revealed anywhere between 100-115 offers were made. We know there are roughly 75 spaces assuming all of year 6 move up. So I am not sure how anyone's DD is 88th on the WL unless something has gone very badly wrong this year - or the school is expecting a large number of depositors to recind?

TheInvisibleHand · 23/02/2018 22:14

But if they are expecting large numbers to rescind, how is that better than running a conventional waiting list (other than causing much unnecessary disappointment).

Dragthing · 23/02/2018 22:18

@Pradaqueen - I think you've hit the nail on the head. something has gone badly wrong. I was about to paste in the text from their email but (now that I've discovered the importance of their small print) realise that their emails must not be disseminated so you'll need to take my word for it.

I will be writing to their governors and to the HMC and ISA, in due course.

Greenleave · 23/02/2018 22:21

Drag and TheInvisible: thank you for sharing your story, and your amazing girls were brave! Shame on the school!
Now the numbers made me think that the accepted 75 might not be top scored candidates at all and the top ones were actually missed.
We met our friends tonight who sent their daughter to the school and she finished last year(studying medicine at one of the country top University now). I told them about the admission story and they were shell-shocked.

Teenmum60 · 23/02/2018 22:29

Its interesting to see those waiting list numbers...I thought originally City had accidentally sent out offers to everyone who passed the test...not to everyone who they were going to make an offer too hence the very quick response to filling the places...but who knows - they would hardly admit this !

Dragthing · 23/02/2018 22:35

Actually, I can add (paraphrasing of course) that, interestingly, yesterday's email, which told me that DD is 88th on the waiting list also noted that WL position is determined by how well they did in the exam and in the interview. So this is a different tack from last week when places were allocated by how fast parents could get a bank transfer and set of documents over to the school. And is also rather different in tone from the offer message which said (no small print on this one so I am liberty to quote directly she "performed to a very high standard in both her entry exam and interview and has done extremely well to gain a place from such a strong field of applicants".

LondonUSAmum · 23/02/2018 22:35

Pradaqueen, how do you know City made less offers than last year?

Sorry if I've missed this fact but haven't seen it in any of my information from City but granted the emails have been few and far between.

We will be taking formal action as well once all is said and done.

Dragthing · 23/02/2018 22:42

@Greenleave Yes we''re thinking along similar lines. First-come-first-served till all places filled, and then manage the WL on performance. Interesting strategy.

expat96 · 23/02/2018 22:53

A similar thread last year revealed anywhere between 100-115 offers were made. We know there are roughly 75 spaces assuming all of year 6 move up. So I am not sure how anyone's DD is 88th on the WL unless something has gone very badly wrong this year

Pradaqueen,

I know of another girl who is in the 80's in the waiting list. We can assume that either:

  1. CLSG's admissions department does not know how to count, or
  2. More, not fewer, offers were made this year than last year, or
  3. The 100-115 estimate from last year was wildly off

I'm inclined to believe either 2 or 3, probably 3 if the PPs reports that fewer offers were made this year than last can be believed.

expat96 · 23/02/2018 23:04

if your question is pointed to am I frustrated by those hoping to take up a grammar school or equivalent place? No.

Pradaqueen,

I'm merely highlighting that some, possibly many, of the places being held by people for whom CLSG is not the first choice are being held by people who are caught in a bind not of their making and, in my opinion, who deserve no opprobrium for doing what they believe to be in the best interests of their daughters. I would extend this forbearance to those who are on waiting lists for more preferred independents as well.

CLSG chose a badly flawed approach. In my opinion, they deserve more far more blame for the subsequent problems than the parents who are forced to deal with the approach.

Heliophilous · 23/02/2018 23:17

A waiting list into the 80s seems bonkers if there are only 75 places to be filled.

expat96 · 23/02/2018 23:25

Well, if 75 places were available and if the 88th place on the waiting list is to be believed (I have no reason not to as I know another parent who received an email saying DD was in the 80's), then the minimum number of places offered was 75+88 = 163. If you assume that any parents declined places before the waiting list was ranked (I know of at least two and have read of others, and also know that CLSG called parents to ask if they wished to remain on the waiting list), then the number of places offered must have been higher. Possibly much higher.

Pradaqueen · 24/02/2018 05:12

@LondonUSAmum - posted by @backingvocals on 20/02/18 following their attendance at the offer holders Morning. " I spoke to one of the teachers who said that everyone was a bit horrified by what had happened and she thought that they would just have to change the system for next year. She said they had issued far fewer places this year and had 15pc higher take up than last year so were totally caught on the hop."

I have also been told this by another current parent. HTH

MeetieVonWrinkleSqueak · 24/02/2018 07:31

Given the low number of places on offer in the first place, 88th on the waiting list having previously been offered a place, is absolutely bonkers.

So have they over offered in error, as PPs have suggested, or ranked the waiting list wrongly?

Either way, the whole admissions process this year is a clusterfuck of epic proportions.

Firefox1066 · 24/02/2018 07:38

I'm wondering whether the 88th actually includes all offers?

In other words perhaps 88th means that in real terms she is "18th on the waiting list" I.e 18 above their desired number of 70 (or whatever the desired number is)

Other wise the 88th makes no sense at all

MN164 · 24/02/2018 07:42

*fewer offers, not less

Wink
expat96 · 24/02/2018 08:04

I'm wondering whether the 88th actually includes all offers?

LondonUSAmom indicates she knows of one in the 50's and I've been told by a parent that their DD is in the 30's. So I doubt if your interpretation is correct.

LondonUSAmum · 24/02/2018 08:07

The letters sent offering the girls spots were quite personalised, I do not think City accidentally sent offer letters to all 300 girls who made it to the interview round.

But Perhaps they did offer spots to all 300 girls who interviewed.

Firefox1066 I don’t think your theory is correct because as I previously posted my daughter is below 50 on the waiting list.

Supposedly less than 11 girls have come off their waitlists in the past few years (our head told us 6 came off last year).

Very odd numbers indeed especially if these teachers statements that the school offered less places than last year are correct.

Teenmum60 · 24/02/2018 08:16

I'd question whether they have actually filled all their places but decided to withdraw all offers on Monday because they had made a major mistake with the offers and realised this on Monday once acceptances were being received. Hence now you have a merit based wait list. I assume they could have legal action taken against them if they just withdrew offers for no reason. I remember reading a post where I think one mum said she had a thank you email for accepting a place (but she had not accepted a place) and she also had an email stating that the place had been withdrawn because places were filled all within a 24 hours period. So the whole process was a mess.

KHFC2018 · 24/02/2018 08:45

I guess the reason why CLSG did not just offer less and ask those families to reply quicker is that they will be officially changing the acceptance deadline and the ISA will not like it. By exploding offers however, their deadline on paper has not changed.

The acceptances they have got will be a real mix if they have over offered so much.

ChocolateWombat · 24/02/2018 09:46

If there was a traditional system without exploding offers, a school like City may well need to offer twice as many places as places exist. Many schools will need to do this in urban areas. It might seem like massive over offering, but once you consider that many have applied to 4 or 5 schools and can only accept one, you see how many declines each school will get.

So if City offered to say 200, it could be that 100 at best would accept.

Regarding the WL, no doubt there will be many on it for whom City was never their top choice and still isn't - but people like to think that they are keeping their options open. If and when City goes to WL, they may well find that they make offers and people decline - because they never had it as top choice, or they did but have accepted another offer they received. All of this is totally common with traditional waiting lists. What City has done is to try and reduce the no of places they need to fill from WL, hoping that the vast majority of the 75 acceptances are genuine. It's not so bad to have to fill 10 or 15 places from WL, from a pool of candidates who met their required standard. With the traditional system, they may have decided they could only over offer slightly to avoid the bulge class - perhaps 100 places, but then there is a possibility that the majority of these have one of their other 4 or 5 choices top, and acceptances are only 30 - so then there's a big need to use the WL and to go far far down it. This is what they have avoided.

Re WL and not being especially high on it, I would say that they won't need to fill huge numbers of places from it this year - some will have paid £1500 deposit and not take up the place, but they will be fairly small in number. A few places will become available, but they may have to go quite far down the list to fill them in actuality as many have take others, so not being at the absolute top might not matter. How have they ranked the list ? Is it by speed to get on the list or score in exam?

One final thing, it may well take longer to get to WL this year - those who paid £1500 to secure a place who later give it up, may take longer to do so - right up until Easter, when they would owe a full term of fees. Why? Because, having paid, they feel no obligation to be speedy in releasing it and may well sit on the City place, as well as another independent they have accepted and intend to take, or a state Grammar place. Having accepted and paid, and especially if they felt pressured to do so, they may delay releasing the place until the very last minute, meaning only then can City go to WL if they decide to do this.

Quite a few schools don't use WLs. They know that over the next term or so, people move into the area and contact the school about admissions and that they can test them, find people of a good standard and give them the places - these schools though tend to be more flexible about space and numbers and so can take an extra few late comers if they are great candidates, or not bother and just have a smaller year group if they're not so good.

In the end, what does this mean for people waiting? There will probably be a longer wait than previously. The consequences of not getting those forms in are perhaps more significant than people first thought, if they are still holding out for City. Not what people want to hear, who still really want City despite everything, I know, but likely. Other schools will go to WL on 5 March if they need to. City might not get their declines until Easter.

ChocolateWombat · 24/02/2018 10:01

So here's another thought about different ways of allocating places and the risks for a school of the different ways.

  1. Slightly over allocate to the very top candidates. Positives - you could end up with a cohort of the most able. Fantastic. Downsides - you may find that many of these decline to go elsewhere and you have to go to WL and that by the time the declines are in and you go to WL, many on the WL never wanted you anyway and decline or did want you but have accepted somewhere else and you have to go far down the WL to candidates of not such a good standard. Result - fairly widespread of ability.
  1. Significantly over offer, including anyone who has reached a standard op above whatever the minimum acceptable is judged to be. Positives -you are more likely to fill and whilst you might or might not get lots of the very top candidates saying yes, you know you are full and everyone is of a decent standard. Downsides - risk of over offering and too many accept - big problem for City, so this one isn't really an option for them.
  1. Significantly over offer using exploding offers. This brings the same advantages of system 2 but removes the risks of ending up with too many candidates and a bulge class which cannot be accommodated.

Option 3 is a form of '2nd best'. In Game Theory, businesses often go for 2nd best options because the ideal scenario involves too many uncertainties and risks. The school would like to offer to the top 75 candidates and all accept. However, they know this will never happen, so they have to find another way to get good candidates and avoid the risks of bulge classes. Exploding offers is their 2nd best system.

They have decided it's better to be full or close to full with girls who are of either a very good or at least acceptable level of ability, with certainty of numbers and control to prevent a bulge class, than to deal with the risks of over filling which they cannot accommodate, or having to use a long WL.

Swipe left for the next trending thread