City of London Girls withdrawing offers

[Leo12345]

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 I was surprised to receive an email today from City of London Girls that their offer to DD is now withdrawn.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.

Game theory is all very well but it doesn’t factor in the need to build relationships or treat children with care.

I think as someone else has put it City has chosen to make the problem of an under-enrolled school the problem of the applicants rather than their problem.

A sustainable business built on relationships and reputation cannot do this or rely on game theory to manage this process.

But as I’ve said I don’t think this process is reflective of who the school is or wants to be. So I doubt it will endure.

ChocolateWombat - let's see what happens with the accepted places. If, as some people suggest, experience with the exploding offers is previous years has encouraged a significant proportion of people (say 20-25) to accept on a "just in case" basis then City has made its problem worse. Those people drop out and it goes to its WL at a much later stage, when those it might want have financially and at least as importantly mentally committed to another school. I genuinely don't understand how that helps them. If this 75 who rushed to the door are almost all true, committed, firm acceptances (which I can see may have been the case in previous years when people hadn't twigged to the full implications of the system, but I am less sure will be the case now) then they really didn't need to over-offer by anything like the same degree. That is putting aside the inherent unpleasantness of the system (which they can choose) and it's utterly chaotic administration.

We are probably still in a place where we'd accept a City offer and give up a deposit elsewhere if it came in mid-March (and I know that is not likely). Would we still feel the same in April or May - I'm not so sure.

I should add, our own situation aside, I have got nothing but good will for the school. It gives me no pleasure to see otherwise fine institutions who do well by their students do badly. I grew up in London, attended one of those other selective schools and have good friends and who benefited from a CSLG education

Backingvocals - even in game theory, you get different outcomes when you switch from single to repeated games! And in some ways they are discovering this is more like a repeated game, where a more collaborative strategy might pay....

ChocolateWombat,

What's your proposal for CLSG to avoid parents camping out from 15 Feb 2019 (if not before)? Or do you believe this is the best way for the school to allocate places? Because that's where the current mechanism leads.

Its a highly stressful and emotive process at the best of times...can you imagine the chaos next year? Parents lining up with cheques, and then the cut off. One parent being told the last place has just gone. The issues over 'saving a space in line' for a friend.

Madness on all levels. And cruel to the children. There's no need for this - offers have always been honoured.

Why can't the independent schools get organised and use the state school allocation method, aka families with offers fill in a form stating their preference in order to be submitted after state school allocation is known. Will that not be most efficient?

I don't know what they will do next year, but suspect a re-think will have already started. You are right that they won't want people camping out. Something will have to be done to prevent that possibility, but I've no idea which direction they will go in.

Coming back to co-operation between schools or collusion or whatever you want to call it - I guess there has been a level of it, with agreed acceptance dates and offers dates etc. It has never been as developed as the co-ordinated admissions system of the state system and I can't see a system like that developing where people have to rank preferences and only receive one offer - independent schooling is a market and schools want to be able to compete for pupils.

Thinking if it in this way, City I guess has acted to break a collusive or cooperative agreement - although their official deadline for offers is still the same as the others, their exploding offers have been like one firm in a collusive agreement or cartel breaking the agreement and doing their own thing, in order to benefit themselves rather than going with the system agreed for the good of all memebers. The exploding offers have been designed to push people to accept them earlier so they don't have to use the WL as other schools might have to do. As others have said here, behaviour of consumers and other schools does adapt in relation to this, so there are only so many times such a strategy can be used ...and it does seem exploding offers won't be a workable system next year, because of the speedy way parents have responded this year .....and this is all without even getting into the moral arguments about whether it is right or not.

Interesting to observe from outside. Absolutely can see it's not interesting but has had a significant effect on some people for whom City really was their first choice and who missed out. They operated a first come first served system first, followed by a top score goes first system on the wait list. Marginal candidates who were quick off the mark may have secured a place, whereas better candidates may have missed out and other marginal candidates who missed out, probably have little chance now.

No Wombat, they can do better.

1. Go back to basics and consider how they can forecast acceptance rates better, using things like postcodes, but also interview questions. "What other schools have you applied to", "how will you get to school" "what do you like about City given all the other schools you have applied to are co-ed" etc. Talk to other Registrars. Yes they are competing for pupils, but they have an "industry" problem. If they dont do so already, hire a professional to look over past data and do some modelling.

1. Slightly over offer to their top applicants, but not to the silly degree that City did this year. Then the Head and Deputy hit the phones, flattering the parents by saying how well their DD performed and how much City would like them to accept (which they do). Then when parent is feeling warm and fuzzy ask if they are likely to accept. If parent says yes, ask them if they could do so quickly (they are likely to want to go to the offer day, but equally will want to be in the schools good books.) If they say they are on a wait list for SPGS, JAGs etc, or waiting for a Grammar place, do a bit more modelling. I assume it is even possible to phone the other schools to ask them about the likelihood of wait list movement. I know of people who have had this happen elsewhere, and who have been delighted with the personal touch.

1. Have quite a long wait list. Then try to go to it before the deadline day. Keep in active contact with those to the top of the list and their schools. Then after offer day ask whether people want to remain on the wait list, and encourage those who are towards the top or who seem most likely to accept. Good Registrars do this well. Be ready to throw the odd discount or "exhibition" the way of someone who is losing a terms fees/deposit elsewhere.

1. Work with other schools, to consider whether there is scope for a different approach perhaps involving shorter deadlines, given the number of applications people are now making.

1. Look at contingency. Perhaps a classroom in neighbouring building, say in an the office or church or one of the Barbican seminar roms, where a sixth form subject might be taught, releasing space within the school should a bulge class have to be taken on.

I have no doubt that if they continue with exploding offers, next year's parents will not want to leave anything to chance so will start queueing at 4.00am in order to be first in the queue. Perhaps the queue might even generate professional queuers who camp for several days in order to keep someone's place in line.

I think needmoresleep talks a lot of sense in that post.

And the steps she recommends are what every school except this one and two others is doing, successfully, year on year. It's not difficult or unusual, and it works (all these schools have same issues and constraints). And of course it would remove the risk of being thrown out of ISA for breaching admissions standards.

Actually, with only 75 places to fill, hitting the phone can be very useful for managing the list.

You are right that they won't want people camping out. Something will have to be done to prevent that possibility

I'll take this as your agreement that the current mechanism will not be acceptable for next year. But if the mechanism is fundamentally flawed, then it is a fundamentally bad system not just for next year, but for this year and for the past two years as well. It may have worked, after a fashion, in the past. But just because the early investors in a Ponzi scheme come out alright doesn't make such a scheme a good one even in the beginning.

On the collision/collaboration point - the private schools are competing businesses , so there will be legal limits to what is allowed, so they do compete. (There is form here, several years ago a number of private schools were investigated and forced to stop exchanging information on their intended fees - because this kept prices up). The current admissions code is permissible because it ultimately benefits applicants - if it were just for the benefit of the schools it would not be allowed. If you read the ISA code, the first thing it says is that it has been designed to comply with competiton law. It is likely that a state school style allocation system that didn't allow you to choose between competing offers would go too far and would not be allowed.

With regard to CLSG trying to secure the top candidates - I'm not convinced there is a huge amount of difference between the top and bottom of those offered places. There will be some truly outstanding girls who will be offered scholarships (probably from multiple schools), after that the differences are small surely?

I know the numbers are bigger and the competition fiercer, but Oliver Blonde, the old Head at Henrietta Barnett, said that any of the top 300 girls who made it through to Round 2 (after an initial number of over 2,000 sitting) would do fine at the school. The difference between the scores of the second round test is negligible.

On working with other schools, I meant via the industry body, and to benefit/protect the 10year old applicants. Not collusion for the schools' own gain. There is a lot of knowledge and experience out there, and all London schools are grappling with the same problems. It is almost easier for schools towards the top of the pecking order. One executive relocation might free up a place at SPGS, which frees up a place at City, which frees up a place at a GDST which frees up a place at one of the less academic consortium schools, which then frees up a place at a "fall back". If City have a problem, Portland Place, to name one urban fall back surely has the same problem but in spades, especially if they are trying to keep a reasonable boy/girl ratio.

Needmoresleep Sat 24-Feb-18 11:36:39 has got it exactly right. Use the "normal" system of moderate over-offering (guided by bottom-up forecasts of probability of acceptance if offered) and use very proactive management of and communication with both offer-holders and people on the waiting list.

It is not simply a choice of system or even the number of offers, it is also just as importantly about how it is executed!

Many London independents already do this very well - and often go to their WL before deadline day, because they already have a good number of responses in early, so great visibility several days before the deadline. This way they face a negligible risk of overfilling, they enable parents to see all of their offers including state before deciding, and they fill up their spaces by first accepting the top performers and secondly by still-keen WL-holders.

When my DD1 had two WLs four years ago, both of those registrars were excellent at this! We stayed in touch, communicated our keenness and willingness to accept immediately, and received an offer from the WL before the common deadline day (I think the offer arrived ca 3 March, with the same ca 5 March deadline that all the original offerholders had, and we accepted the next day).

This approach also enabled us to avoid wasting a deposit at another school (we also received two offers) whilst accepting our preferred school - much appreciated.

Invisible, when we were looking at girl's schools for DD we were surprised to be shown round one by a former prep school class mate of DS'. We thought she had gone to a nice well respected GDST, not the more selective and academic school we were viewing.

It turned out that the place had only come up three weeks before the start of term, after she had bought school uniform for the other school. She had also received a non academic scholarship. (She talked a bit about it on the tour and the implications in terms of school representation.) If you were offered a late place, it might be worth asking if City could help you. After all they will be sitting on a terms fees and deposit from the family who have dropped out. And given the chaos, may be very happy to pass it on to ensure the place is filled by a good pupil.

Why are the offers given out before state school allocation day? Surely if they waited until the same day a lot of the problems would be solved because everyone would have all their offers and there would be less need to hedge bets just in case the state school did/didn't come through?
It would be helpful whatever system they used, surely?

Creates a demand though. No one knows what they’ve got so create a sense of urgency by dangling this sure bet in front of anxious parents’ noses. I can’t see any other reason.

@Needmoresleep thank you. That is helpful and will think about it if that is how things pan out. Things obviously go that way in the state sector (I know someone who did that twice, in one case moving a child when a place came up after a term). It is as much about turning emotionally on a sixpence at that point as the finances.

"Why are the offers given out before state school allocation day?"

So that people have a chance to mull them over, attend offer holders day etc, and get their thinking straight.

Acceptance deadline - if you follow ISA rules - has to be after state offers date. Most schools follow this practice because it is good for the actual children in the middle of this, that parents get to choose between offers in a stable, predictable system that all schools (except three) use, and use successfully.

Offers are given before state school offers day, because this simply makes people more likely to take the place.

Schools know that if people have a couple of weeks to be pleased about getting an offer (lots of sucking up in the offer letters about how well DC has done to get a place against the competition) then they feel more positive about it. If they attend one of the offer holders days, some will become even more positive or swayed in dithering between state and independent because the day will showcase the shiny facilities and be a big marketing exercise. Of course some people will still be keentnobhave the free option, but for those who are really undecided, having the offer earlier gives the independent school a better chance of selling itself and tipping them in that direction. Notice independents never offer after state schools.
Some people like to think they are being kind and giving people lots of time to choose - well they are recognising a right to choose by having the deadline set after national offers day (if they do set it then - lots actually set it in offers day or before) and they are accepting that some will go for the state option, but their choice not to offer at the same time, does mean people know have longer to think about the positives of the independent. Essentially, the main reason is to benefit the schools.

And yes, lots of schools go to WL before the deadline. If they see they aren't likely to fill from first round of allocations they will start to do this because they fear the loss of good candidates to other schools. The schools who do this often have some flexibility over numbers - if some WL people take places and then there is a sudden bigger surge than expected of first round offer people accepting right at the deadline, they can run a bulge class. Some schools like City would find this very difficult - people don't seem to beer stand the space restrictions and being at absolute capacity issues - it is very different to being on a green site with lots of acres, or a town based school which has more space - many of Citys competitors simply do have more space and so more capacity to deal with suddenly having extra numbers. No-one would look to building classrooms in an underground carpark otherwise...but even this will take several years to be on line.

Perhaps it would help people to think about the motives for the actions of schools in their admissions processes to think of them more as a firm recruiting staff. What is a firm interested in if setting up - getting the best staff they can and making sure they have enough staff to fill every role so they can operate. And of course, they don't wantbtonfind they have hired more than they need. Will some people who apply be disappointed? Yes, some won't get an interview and others will get an interview and be rejected. Some might even apply and be told they have been successful but once it comes to paperwork, the business says regretfully they aren't actually recruiting now. Sometimes they even use exploding offers. I know it's not the same thing and I know that we are talking about children here with school offers - all I'm saying is that this idea that the schools are in it to be as lovely as possible to the hundreds who apply, simply isn't their main or sole purpose - they are looking to the future of the school, and sometimes that means some decisions which won't make everyone happy to achieve that. I'm not condoning unkindness or the poor communication that City has shown, nor not making policies clear and transparent, but I think I'm just saying that many people seem to struggle to see any of the process from a school point of view and only from the viewpoint of their individual situation. The decisions which are made are simply more complex than people often realise.

Do I think they've got it wrong this year? In terms of publicity, it seems yes, although I doubt applications will be down next year. In terms of clarity of communication - yes, because they didn't make it clear enough far enough in advance how they would offer - saying the process for acceptance will be made clear in an offer letter received the day before half term doesn't give people time enough to realise they needed to be around or the urgency of the decision this year. If they had made it clearer, earlier this year it would have probably been okay. Some people might have been disappointed, but they always are when things are first come first served. Can it work again another year - probably not because people will be camping out to get the places and that's not appropriate.
Perhaps they will return to the traditional system, but I suspect not. Bwhatbi do hope is that it is all through the through carefully and communicated to people at every open day from now on and in every piece of paperwork going out, so there are no doubts.

If I was applying to any school for next year, I would be checking in writing with all of them exactly what their policy is on making offers and deadlines etc. It seems you can't be too careful.

Wombat I had not noticed much green around Queens College, Portland Place, Francis Holland SS, Queensgate, More House etc. Many of these are now oversubscribed and will also be fall-back for many. Predicting numbers to offer must be tough so I don’t see why City is so special.

I have never been to Channing, but if Highgate sometimes use exploding offers, it would by your argument be absolutely inexcusable.

I think any school can choose it's own admissions policy - it should be made crystal clear - which this wasn't, but if they choose something different to others, it is up to them. It maybe that they choose something different to others.
You may think other schools are in a similar position and so City shouldn't do what they have done. Regardless of if they are in the same position or not geographically, each school can decide what to do - they should make it clear, but simply one admissions system being different to another or most doesn't make it wrong in absolute terms.
I have simply tried to explain some of what Citys thinking is in this - some of the reasons behind it and why their situation is more complicated than most schools. Their thinking may also be about getting an advantage that they know other schools don't have, in terms of not needing to use the WL so much. Again, it's a different choice, but as long as it's clear, I think it is okay.

Parents should be able to apply for schools in full knowledge of the admissions process. If they aren't in full receipt if info this is wrong. However, if the info is clear, any system can be used and it is up to parents to decide if they want to apply or not.

People might not like the approach CIty decides to use next year. They can then decide if that will mean they don't want to apply or to go ahead anyway. I suspect they will have plenty apply next year too - suggesting their behaviour hasn't been abhorrent enough to make people decide it is a shocking place to be avoided at all costs.

I agree that the communication hasn't been acceptable. However, I don't think the system in itself if communicated clearly is abhorrent. It might not be workable again for next year, but as a principle and approach, for a year or 2 if communicated clearly could be fine, if different to what others do. You clearlydo think it is awful.. We just have to differ on that. It's one of the good things about MN, that we can express different views and agree to differ.

I'm afraid CLSG has most likely just been taken by surprise this year and not handled it efficiently. I'm sure they will have a different system next year. There is another (junior) school far from CLSG that for many years had always had a 'first come first served' system that usually took a few weeks to fill the places, all very relaxed. Then suddenly one year they were faced with a stampede of parents waving cheques on day one and some people missed out because all the places were taken within an hour or so. Parents were furious, school management was mortified and they immediately changed the allocation system to make sure this couldn't happen again.