High school appeal

[Icloud54]

Can you appeal high school place for year 7 students on the grounds of GCSE options?

I mean you could but there’s no guarantee. The appeal committee could take the view that options offered may well change - which they might.

I think if (say) your dc is very musical (evidence - orchestra, lessons etc) and the school has no orchestra and does not offer music GCSE and hasn’t for the past five years, then that would be reasonable.

But if it’s more “my dc wants to do Macbeth but the school always studies R&J” then not so much.

What subject?

It's unlikely to succeed, because GCSE options are transient. For example, if your preferred school currently has a GCSE Computer Science /Latin / Mandarin option, and the teacher leaves the school before your child gets to Year 4, the option may be shelved.

That happens at our school all the time - optional subjects with teacher-shortage issues like Comp Sci and Food Tech come and go from year to year.

Art, craft & design, they also do computer science which he's really into, other choice doesn't do either of these.

You'd be better off looking at what the year 7 and 8 curriculum, and after school clubs relating to those subjects is, rather than relying on them still offering those as options in 4 years time. Alongside your evidence that your dc is genuinely interested in those subjects.

It would be a very weak case I'm afraid. There is no guarantee that any option offered now would be available in three years time, and it's likely the missing options are ones that could be taken up at A level if required, so the detriment to him would be very minor.

Thanks for input so far, just trying to think of points for appeal when it comes to it.

Annoying we're 0.8 miles from the high school but out of the catchment area.
Some areas of the catchment area are 1.3 miles away from the high school but IN the catchment area.
Wondering if I could use this reason too or am I fetching?

The time to argue about the catchment area was when the admissions arrangements were determined - the admissions authority has to consult on arrangements either when they change, or every 7 years anyway.

Is there any reason to believe the catchment area does not meet the admissions code requirement of being "reasonable and clearly defined"? It's normal for it not to be set at equal distance around the school though, there are many reasons for that.

No, that won't work. Assuming the admissions policy is aligned with the national admissions code, and they have applied it to your application correctly, there is no grounds for appeal on this basis.

I tried (alongside another issue) and failed.

@Icloud54 you may just need to accept that you don't have solid grounds for appeal, especially if the school has a strong track record of defending appeals (you can ask them for their stats on that if they're not on their website).

Bear in mind that every appeal has a significant cost to the school in both time and money, so while it is tempting to "have a go", it is irresponsible to appeal without solid grounds (unless you have reason to think they might put up a weak defence).

11 is very early to commit to subject choices and it may not be possible to take them all. Check that they definitely all run each year, they may offer it but only run if numbers and staffing permit. Check the options system , some schools require one from each block which restricts choice so not a free choice of all subjects anyway. Make sure you have other arguments too.

No one is under any obligation to forego their democratic right to appeal, or anything else, in order to save an organisation money.

Depends on their morals I suppose. Just because someone has a democratic right to be a pain in the arse and waste the school's precious time and money, doesn't mean they should.

Depends on their morals I suppose. Just because someone has a democratic right to be a pain in the arse and waste the school's precious time and money, doesn't mean they should

It's nothing to do with morals. Don't be so sanctimonious. No one can judge whether the appeal is a waste of time until after it's been heard. YOU may regard it as a waste of time. The panel may disagree with you.

Disagree. It's a waste of time if your grounds for appeal are weak, and you have reason to assume the school's defence will be strong, e.g. because their stats show that very few of their appeals succeed.

The op does have the right to waste the school's time and money, but may prefer not to.

Disagree. It's a waste of time if your grounds for appeal are weak, and you have reason to assume the school's defence will be strong, e.g. because their stats show that very few of their appeals succeed.

You don't know anything about previous appeals though so can't use that to assess how strong their case will be this year. They could have had a new building since last year for example, but still put forward a case that is weaker than an appellant's apparently weak case. The point is no one knows until the appeal is heard. except you with your crystal ball

Plus OP hasn't actually said anything about previous appeals - you are assuming.

"OP hasn't actually said anything about previous appeals - you are assuming"

No, I'm not assuming anything - I suggested that she checks the stats before deciding whether to appeal, which is good advice.

If there is reason to assume previous stats may not be relevant, e.g. a new building that has created new capacity, then she can factor that into the decision too.

You've gone into attack-mode Titchy, and it's it's causing you to mis-read things. You are also infantilising the OP by implying that she is incapable of gathering information before making an informed decision.

The fact that appeals represent a significant cost to the school in both time and money is a relevant piece of information. Schools have no control over this cost. Our cost was £15k last year, plus a significant amount of staff time, and not a single appeal was successful. I think it's important for people to be aware of the impact.

You are also infantilising the OP by implying that she is incapable of gathering information before making an informed decision

lol. And you telling her she's immoral to waste their money by appealing isn't remotely infantilising I suppose?

You need to work on your comprehension Titchy. I said "it is irresponsible to appeal without solid grounds (unless you have reason to think they might put up a weak defence)." You then implied that she should ignore me and appeal anyway, because it is her "democratic right". I then implied that to ignore the impact on the school would be immoral. I did not say that the OP is immoral - I gave her the information so that she can make an informed decision.