Secondary Faith School Appeal - Admission Criteria not Followed

[TwinMum67]

Does anybody have experience with a Faith School not correctly applying their own criteria.

We believe we are on Criteria 4, which is 3 years of 24 weekly church attendances.

I phoned the school to find out where we are on the waiting list and I was told that we are not on any criteria as the Governors have amended the supplementary form and decided we have only completed 2.5 years of church attendance. Therefore, we are in the random pool on the waiting list with 160 above us.

We dispute this point as outlined below:

1. Our supplementary form has been signed by the Vicar showing we are on Criteria 4.

Wording on the supplementary form clearly demonstrates that the clergy form and signature is taken as proof of Criteria.
Given that our Vicar has signed us at Criteria 4 we see no reason why the Governors should amend this.

2. On our supplementary form we put church attendance as between Jan 16 and Aug 18 – with over 24 weeks in each year.
3. We have attended church sufficiently to qualify for the Admission Criteria 4.
a. Year one we attended church 26 weeks
b. Year two we attended church 24 weeks
c. Year three we attended church 25 weeks
4. It is not stated anywhere at what point in the year the church attendance needs to start.
5. Additionally, it not stated anywhere how the church attendance should be distributed throughout the year.
6. Further, whilst it does state fortnightly. “Fortnightly” is very usefully defined on the supplementary form as:
A worship attendance of not less than fortnightly over the period of three years (between 1st September 2015 and 31st August, 2018). “Fortnightly” means attendance of at least 24 weekly services per year.
7. The Admission criteria downloaded from the school website states:
4) a worship attendance of not less than fortnightly over a period of three years as of 31st August 2018. “Fortnightly” means attendance of at least 24 weekly services per year.

Our argument is that we have qualified in criteria 4 and should not have been'downgraded'.

The school has informed us that, based on criteria 4, my twin boys would be in place 7 and 8 on the waiting list.

Therefore, they have not been denied a place per se, however, i feel they have been denied a reasonable chance of a place from the waiting list.

Anybody know how an appeal panel is likely to view this?

Or the best way to tackle this?

I agree with Patricia.

An appeal panel will weigh up the prejudice (detriment) to your children in not having places against the prejudice to the school in having to admit extra pupils, but I think your best chance of success is focussing on reasons why they would benefit from attending this school. My hunch is that most panels would come to the view that you need to demonstrate church attendance spread over 36 months and, as you can’t, the decision that you didn’t fulfil that criterion was not unreasonable (and anyway it did not cost your children a place so couldn’t be remedied via appeal).

@Aquifolium yes they use distance. Thank you for your info though, it may prove helpful. thx

@PanelChair thank you. I think we will focus more on our childrens need to be part of a faith school but maybe touch on the unfairness of the interpretation. I do understand that it isn't worth labouring that point though.

What you say to the panel is of course up to you. It’s often suggested on here that one should avoid antagonising or alienating the panel, because one wants them to give the benefit of the doubt if arguments are finely balanced. My view is that you risk doing that if you persist in arguing that 3 years is anything other than 3 x 12 months, especially as your (in my view unreasonable) interpretation would only have put you higher on the waiting list, not got you a place. Far better to home in on other reasons - curriculum, clubs, pastoral care or whatever - that make this the right school for your children.

@PanelChair

I do understand you have experience and therefore your advice is def appreciated but i don't agree that we did not fit the criteria. It isn't stated anywhere when the church attendance should start. We were only delayed due to my cancer treatment otherwise we would have been on the top criteria as we are regular church attendees.

The vicar has signed us as criteria 4 on our attendance and we could have put Sept down on the form but we simply put the first date that we attended.

I had hoped that the admission policy not being followed would be an easier appeal but i do see that it isn't now, thanks to your input and also Patricia's. As Patricia stated, the .gov wording ref admission criteria appeals is very misleading :-(

I was in a similar situation a few years back. Even down to the cancer!

I thought we had followed the admissions criteria for a reception place at our local school. I was certain we would get a place. When offer day came round and there was no school place for my child I was shocked. We knew if we hadn’t gone to church this is the situation we would be in as we were in a school black hole. It was really odd as other church children had got in as had siblings-we should have got in over siblings.

We found out that we had been put in the wrong admissions criteria. The school, who were the admitting authoritiy, didn’t believe they had made a mistake. We went to appeal stating that the admissions criteria had been incorrectly applied. We won our appeal as did another family.

It turned out that the school had been managing their own admissions based on what they wanted to happen rather than following the admissions criteria they had written.

The appeals panel looked at the admissions criteria and decided that it was clear, we should have had a place.

I wonder if that’s the same as your case? The admissions criteria are clear but not what the school meant to happen? Or maybe the admissions criteria are clear and you interpreted them incorrectly? I think you’ll only find out by going to appeal.

The appeal planes aren’t there to decide if you believe in God, or why you only did the minimum ( if you did) they just need to make sure the admissions criteria are followed correctly.

I would offer my opinion that whether the admission criteria did or did not and what was the governing board's interpretation is immaterial in that even if your were in cat4 , your twins would not have been offered a place at the school. Any appeal panel will work on the basis of any mistake having lead to the appellant having been denied a place before they will admit because of the mistake, so do not use that as the basis for appeal.
Your best course of action is to appeal and appeal on the basis of the catholic nature of the school, your issues around ill-health and your twins needing the comfort of a catholic education. I do have to say that this is not a particularly strong argument for admission at appeal, though hopefully you can add to that.
Whether you introduce the issues over the admission criteria is up to you but all panels are warned about taking no notice about where somebody is on the waiting list, so saying that if they were accepted as cat4 would have meant they were near the top of the waiting list would carry no weight at appeal.
Looking at what you have said about the admission criteria I do think that it is potentially open to different interpretations but would like to see the official school and LA admission criteria before saying more about than that. I wonder whether your best course of action is to actually write to the Chair of governors saying that you believe that this admission criteria is open to different interpretations and that you believe that you do fill the criteria. Ask that the admission panel of governors reconsiders given the circumstances of your illness and that you be placed on the waiting list in cat4. You should say that if they insist in not accepting this potential for interpretation that you will take the admission criteria to the School Adjudicator for their opinion. I think the school given the apparent complexity of the admission criteria may feel it is better to concede to your request than risk the whole of their admission criteria being reviewed and reconsidered for legality by the School Adjudicator. If you wish me to look at the official definitions of admission for the school please PM the school and LA involved.

To add to what admission says, you may find your parish priest will carry more weight if he is in a position to approach the school and ask them to put you in cat. 4. For the waiting list.

In our case it was a priest who gave the ‘say so’ for my dd to be moved up into the correct category (our denomination of Christianity had been overlooked). They did this fairly promptly once I alerted them to this error.

Your priest will be able to vouch for you not just ‘gaming the system’ and that may satisfy them.

Good luck

Sorry, I see it is vicar, not priest.

Surely a vicar is a priest.

I'd definitely get your vicar to have a word - he can confirm your attendance and say that your attendance is now even more regular so that it shows you're not playing the system (as so many sadly do). Given that faith is the important part it makes more sense to have a vicar going out to bat for you than you trying to justify it on dates etc.

Rather than being angry, you need to get the form amended to say sep 15 then a * saying you missed attendance due to medical treatment.

I don’t see how it matters if OP is gaming the system or not? Either she qualifies under criteria 4 or she doesn’t. She has read and interpreted the criteria as though she does fit criteria 4: the school have read and interpreted the criteria as if she doesn’t.

Would your children have gained a place during The first round of offers if they had been criteria 4 OP? Or would they have got in on the waiting list by now?

My school didn’t believe me either. So not only did they have to pay for appeals they also had to hold meetings with the School Adjudicator. The school had a large class that year and also had to amend their admissions criteria.

@stucknoue I'm not being angry. Just trying to figure out the best way forward

@eddiemairswife technically they are interchangeable to a degree but colloquially there are accepted differences and different faiths use different titles

@Debenhamshandtowel thank you for your posts, they are definitely helpful. I think my main difference to your situation is that they wouldn't have got a place on the correct criteria. However, they would have been 7 & 8 on the waiting list.

Given that there is still room for movement to grammar schools, movement following appeals, and that the waiting list runs until Christmas i think it is a fair argument to say that they stand a good chance of a place. As opposed to being in the random pool with 160 above the random ie NO chance whatsoever.

Combined with our need for Pastoral Care following the cancer and ongoing worries ref recurrence etc i hope we have a chance.

Currently they have been put in our nearest school which wasn't one of our 6. It is in special measures, is known to be 'rough' and i genuinely don't think my boys will cope there. I would have accepted any of our 6 but it's awful to make children believe they have choice and then deny any choice.

I'm just hoping beyond hope, thank you for your supportive and non judgemental post, i really appreciate you taking the time xx

You may very well be incorrect in your interpretation of the admissions criteria. Certainly very experienced MNs feel you may be.

You however felt you interpreted the criteria correctly to put your children in criteria 4. At least one other person, the vicar, interpreted the criteria in the same way as you.

If you’re wrong you’re children have a school place. It might not be the one you would have chosen but it is a place. Have faith in them that they can make it work. I went to a school so rough it would set MNers clutching all their pearls! There were a lot of lovely children there. Even the really troubled kids had some amazing qualities and I’d be happy to bump into any of them.

Cancer is a b@stard. Try not to give it any stress to feed on. I remember feeling awful that I’d been struggling with cancer, something I couldn’t control, to be “beaten” by the wording of a school admissions criteria, sonethhing I thought I’d understood (I had!) and could control. Do your best and do enough.

This is bonkers.
Had you put Sept 15 as the start date you would have fulfilled the 3 year criteria even with no attendances until January. So within that first year, you have fit the criteria.

Simply stating that between Sept 15 and the end of the first year you had 26 attendances would have satisfied the governors.

I take the point that you can’t appeal on these grounds yet because even in Cat 4 you would have been higher up the waiting list, not admitted.

However, waiting lists can move fast in secondary schools, so this decision by the governors could end up losing you places.

Within a 3 year period, starting Sept 15, you had the required attendance. That the actual first attendance wasn’t til Jan 16 is immaterial because they define ‘fortnightly’ as a number of weeks throughout the year.

OP, I would write to the governors, copying in the vicar, challenging their interpretation.
Appeal the places based on the arguments you make, but I would include details as to how you have been unjustly downgraded on the waiting list.
Go on waiting lists and appeal all your other schools on your list
Go on the waiting list for any other schools you would consider.

@InceyWinceyette yes that's how i see it too.

I really can't imagine that the 245 children who got places, or the 160 allocated to a church attendance criteria ALL started church on 1st September.

I have submitted further evidence to my appeal paperwork explaining the criteria 'adjustment' and why i believe it is wrong but i have been very clear to say it has not prevented a place currently but it has a chance to affect a placement by the time the waiting lists end in December 2019 - clearly there could be significant movement over 8 months!

I have said that, fundamentally, the basis of my appeal is unchanged as my boys will need pastoral care offered at the school which is unavailable elsewhere. However, i do feel the criteria adjustment is relevant and should also be considered.

Hopefully i have done enough but what will be will be.

Have any other children obtained a place at the school via criteria 4 who didn’t attend church on 1 September of that year?

You could find that out yourself if the church or churches of attendance is stated. You’d just ask the churches to see their registers for that day. More difficult if attendance at any church is the criteria. Not impossible though, you could ask the school for the information. Sort of win win really. If they have the info they have to give it to you and I bet you’ll find out that not all the children did attend church in that day. If the school don’t have the information, and cant give it to you, then how can they say a requirement of criteria 4 is church attendance on September of a particular year? So ( maybe stretching things....) there may be 9 children who got in on criteria 4 who also didn’t go to church in September AND live further than your children therefore your children should have had the place over them?

Does that make sense?

Indeed, for the ‘3 year clock’ to have started ticking the way the governors have interpreted it, the other families in that category would have had to have attended on that very date.

Remember in your appeal you need to demonstrate exactly the pastoral care that this school can offer against evidenced lack of the same care at the allocated school. But alongside that you are appealing for this school, not against the other.

‘The allocated school is rough and has bad ofsted ‘ (or more subtle ways of expressing it, of course) is not an admissible argument and could alienate the panel.

I’m rubbish at being succinct! I meant what Incey said!

I wonder if the children ( or was it parents, or both) could attend any time in that September, not just 1st. Did it have to be Sunday attendance or any mass or just anything g at church?

I really can’t imagine that the 245 children who got places ALL started church on 1st September
That’s a fairly bizarre statement to make about a faith school intake. A large proportion of them had probably been attending their whole lives, actually. Not just waiting for the clock to start ticking.

I would go see your vicar. Not being able to attend because you are ill is totally unfair (as is the faith school system but that's for a different thread).

What was your attendance like outside the times specified? I letter from a vicar saying you attended weekly until you were ill is going to be better than if you suddenly started attending when your children were 8.

Good luck with the appeal.