Which admissions policy applies to an in-year application?

[flabbergastta]

I've applied for an in year transfer to year 9. The school has a determined admissions policy for year 7 and year 12. I've read the Admissions Code, and it says schools need to have policies for the main entry points. But what about if your're applying to year 9? Will they use the current year 7 policy, or the year 7 policy that was in place two years ago?

If a place is available, it must be offered. If no place is available and they operate a waiting list, they will use the current Y7 policy to determine your child's place on the waiting list.

Thanks. I'm not expecting any place to be available, as I know there's a waiting list, so already thinking about appealling. First part of appeal checks admissions policy has been lawfully applied, so it's important to know which admissions policy. Which bit of the admissions code says that it is the current y7 policy that should be used? I couldn't see that anywhere.

The waiting list is held in the same order as the oversubscription criteria, so if (say) your child is the sibling of a current pupil, they will go into that category on the waiting list; if you’re going into the “distance from school” category and live 30 metres from the school, you’ll be above a child in the same category who lives 500m away, and so on.

These are the sorts of things you can check, but with an in year application that’s been refused because the school’s already at PAN in that year group, then the refusal is correct.

And, for clarity, it’s always the current policy.

But why? I mean, where is that made clear in the admissions code, or anywhere else?

Because the current policy will reflect the current position of the school? Is it a maintained school or an academy? Why do you think you won't get in? On what criteria do you think you'd move up the waiting list?

Because the current policy will reflect the current position of the school?

Your question mark suggests you realise that's not a completely solid answer.🙂The current policy only formally reflects their position for year 7. The title is "Year 7 admissions policy" and it says nothing about other year groups.

Because, if there has been the required consultation on changing the admissions criteria, the new criteria will be adopted and will apply from the given date in all situations. I don’t have the admissions code in front of me and stand ready to be corrected, but I’m sure there’s nothing to say or imply that the school should apply two sets of criteria - the new for Y7 and the old for applications to join other year groups - as that would be counter to the spirit of the code.

Do you want to say more about why you are concerned about this?

Because part one of the hearing will verify whether the admissions policy is legal and has been lawfully applied. I'm not convinced it has been, but to make that case I need to be sure which admissions policy we're talking about. I think it should be the year 7 policy, but I suspect the school might argue otherwise, so I want a solid reference, such as a clause in the admissions code. (Unfortunately "Mumsnet said it should be the year 7 policy" won't wash). 😁

I am afraid you are barking up the wrong tree here.

If the school is full, there is no point attempting to make a case that the admissions policy has been applied unlawfully. That is only relevant if applying it lawfully means your child would have got a place. As the school is full, the admissions policy could be totally unlawful with multiple breaches of the Admissions Code and it wouldn't make any difference to your appeal. Regardless of whether the admissions policy is lawful, your child wouldn't have got a place. Similarly, there is no point in worrying about whether the policy has been administered correctly. The only arguments worth making are around prejudice, i.e. showing that the disadvantage to your child from not being admitted outweighs any problems the school will face if they are admitted.

If the school is full, there is no point attempting to make a case that the admissions policy has been applied unlawfully.

They will say they're full, but only because they're at their original PAN. I'm sure you know that schools are no longer allowed to use that their only line of defence - they have to say why they don't have space and resources for more, so it is not as clear cut as you're suggesting.

If the application is refused, the refusal should give details of how you can appeal.

I think I agree with PRH here, You are trying to create a case when there is no case. Your appeal should be based mainly around why you believe that you child is best suited to go this school which is part 2 of the appeal. In part 1 the school are arguing that they are full and yes they cannot now rely solely on they have reached PAN. However all schools are able to talk about class sizes, the number of pupils in corridors etc that would mean it is much more likely than not that the school can make a strong enough case for the panel to agree.
In my experience the vast majority of schools are able to make a case at part 1 of an appeal.

In my experience the vast majority of schools are able to make a case at part 1 of an appeal.

This school has had some recent renovations which will weaken its case, so its not typical.

If anyone does have an answer to the original question, that would be great, but it sounds like there isn't a reference I can point to. If there was, then someone would probably have mentioned it by now.

Question for the experts as I wonder if this is what the OP is getting at.

Suppose when the current y9 were admitted their pan was 240.
But current admissions info say 280 for y7 . Can the OP argue the pan for y9 should also be 280?

(I think the pan moves up with the year group and doesn't change just because another year has a different value, but I'm not an expert)

I surmise from this that the PAN for the year group you’re applying for has been reduced, you expect to be refused because the year group is full, but you want to rely on the old PAN and argue that the year group isn’t really full because up until recently the PAN would have been higher.

Anyway, I agree with admission and prh47bridge that you’re aiming at the wrong target here. In my now quite long experience, the school will invariably say that it is full and will explain at some length why it can’t squeeze in another pupil; they never (in my experience) simply state that they’re full. Your best approach here is to set aside this non-productive argument about the PAN and focus on the prejudice arguments about why your child needs a place at this school and will face detriment if they don’t.

I surmise from this that the PAN for the year group you’re applying for has been reduced ...

That's not the main argument, no. There's something else, which I haven't gone into, and don't intend to. But with all due respect, I didn't ask for advice on the strength of my case - just a factual answer to a question.

Fair enough. I’ve tried to give you advice not on the strength of your case (which you haven’t described in any detail) but on how to present it in the way most likely to hit the spot and give the panel reason to allow your appeal. But, frankly, you’re coming across as rude and snippy so I’m walking away now.

You are applying for a place in the 21/22 school year, so the admissions code in force in that year is the one that is applied, because it’s essentially the only one in place now.

Sorry, I meant the policy in place for this school year is the one that applies. Not the code.

Wow you are very rude op whilst asking for free advice.

They have never been able to use that as their only line of defence. They have always had to show that the school will experience problems if it admits another pupil. But the point remains. Illegal admission arrangements or mistakes only help you if the child would have been admitted had the arrangements been legal and administered correctly. As the school is full, this is clearly not the case.

You can use changes the school has made to weaken their case, but that is about the detriment to the school of admitting another pupil, not about the legality or otherwise of their admission arrangements.

You have had the answer to your question. The current Y7 admission arrangements apply. But it makes no difference which set apply. As the school is full, arguments about the arrangements are not relevant.

Applications in-year must be processed in accordance with the school's in-year admission procedures. Admissions Code paragraph 3.18. The school must set out on its website by 31st August each year how in-year admissions will be dealt with from 1st September to the following 31st August. Admissions Code paragraph 2.26. It is therefore clear that the current admission arrangements apply. But please take the advice of the three admissions experts who have posted on this thread. We know what we are talking about. Arguments about the legality or otherwise of the admission arrangements will not help you.

In year admissions are always tricky op. I've been to appeal and did get a place (primary) but only because they messed up the appeal

Not rude - sorry if it came across that way - just tired, and slightly fed up of people making wrong assumptions and asking for more information than I want to provide.

But its bedtime, so time to sign off.