Secondary School Appeal

[Meadows11]

Help this stressed out mumma!
We haven’t been given our first or second choice and have been allocated a school further away. The school we chose was about 30min walk whereas the one we have been given is 1hr 20min walk or a journey of 2 buses which will take over an hour. Most of the children have been given the one we wanted and we missed out by 85meters!
We are going to appeal not just based on distance but SEND needs. Our daughter has adhd and dyslexia. The school we want has a dedicated hub for SEND children whereas the other one doesn’t and also if our daughter had to travel on 2 buses. It would extend her day by 2 hours, and would probably prevent her taking part in extra school activities as she would be even later home. We live in a Bristol so traffic/buses are extremely busy at those times and our daughter struggles with too much going on. Has anyone had and success in appealing and getting in on these type of situations. Ant help appreciated, I really don’t want to homeschool. Lockdown was bad enough 🤣

@cantkeepawayforever
you are correct, although the school she has been given can probably accommodate our needs the school we put down certainly has better provisions and easily accessible. Whereas the other school would involve a complex journey and for most that may not be a problem but for my daughter trying to navigate it would have a detrimental negative impact and could compromise her safety. We have numerous reasons that we will include in our appeal and I am completely realistic that she may not get through but I have to try for my daughter. I will be looking at other schools out of catchment but still closer and ask to be put on their wait list.

@Meadows11 were there closer schools that you could have applied for? Generally if the distance is more than 3 miles to the allocated school you qualify for transport, but if you actually requested the school on you CAF and there were other closer schools that she would have qualified for, then it can get tricky.

tripz I would echo lougle in saying that personal experience should not always be extrapolated nationwide. I used to work in a primary school with an extreme number of in-year appeals. From that experience, I might conclude that it is normal to have an in-year appeal hearing with multiple applicants at least fortnightly and for these to be almost universally unsuccessful. I do, however, know that this is not the case for all schools; in fact I would say we were an outlier. Similarly, if all your local schools are equally good for pupils with some SEN,and thus all appeals on those grounds fail, then that is great but is not universal, and I would say that it is more normal for sone pupils with SEN to win appeals.

"All schools should be able to cater for ADHD and dyslexia, but many schools can't. They either lack the expertise or the understanding"

I'm certain you're right, but try proving it at an appeal! If offered school X says "we lack expertise and understanding of dyslexia and adhd" on their website, you're onto a winner, but they are much more likely to have SEN provision that meets statutory requirement, and an SEN report on their website that proves it (it's a statutory publication, so all schools should have one).

Yes, you can say that appeal school Y is "better", but if school X caters for the need then your case is weak.

I think also asserting that if a child has needs over and above what any school can meet they will have an EHCP is a naive statement in a climate of intense LA gatekeeping on EHCAs and subsequent plans. Schools in our LA are being asked to apply non-statutory limitations to applications, requests are being routinely rejected with up to a year’s wait for tribunals, and statutory deadlines are consistently being breached by some time. This is standard across the board. It really is not surprising that parents are very keen to find the schools that have an embedded ethos or approach that supports non-ECHP pupils better than others do.

"I think also asserting that if a child has needs over and above what any school can meet they will have an EHCP is a naive statement"

I didn't assert this. You have mis-read. I said "in principle" it is the case and that while it may not be the case in practice, appeal panels aren't generally qualified to judge.

Just to lend my support- definitely appeal.
Twenty-three years ago we were in your position, and I can still remember how worried we were about our child.
We got through on the waiting list, it took about 6 weeks.
The other thing to consider is how many students (of all situations) fail to settle in the first term of secondary school - a few places become available by the end of the first half term. Obviously you would hope not to have wait this long, for many reasons. However if you are sure this is the school for her, and don’t win on appeal, remember this and keep her on the waiting list, and keep in touch with the school.

Well, you said “Whether it is SEN or SEND, it doesn't have an EHCP so any school should be able to cope with it” and setting aside the unfortunate use of ‘it’ for a child, adding in ‘in principle’ in some of your other posts doesn’t really dilute the impression you are giving.

I completely understand the way an appeals panel is required to approach appeals, and the considerations they must apply. But SEN provision is not as clear cut as you are making out - maybe it is in your own experience but certainly provisions for children on support plans can vary wildly between schools.

But SEN provision is not as clear cut as you are making out

I'm not making it out to be clear cut. You are barking up the wrong tree. I'm explaining the argument that many schools will use to successfully defend appeals similar to the op's.

And I fully understand the point you are making, as I stated in my last post. I am simply saying that actually there are shades of grey that mean dividing consideration of SEN provision into EHCP and ‘other’ will not be so simple for some appeals panels, even if it is for yours. Our own school provides interventions for children on support plans that other local schools don’t.

I think that if we say ‘you are presenting arguments many schools may use in cases like the OP’s, often successfully depending on the strength of the applicant’s case ‘ that’s fine. It’s the implication - in all of your posts, not just here - that parents shouldn’t appeal because it’s expensive for the school and never successful anyway, that is being challenged. One way in which you are making this implication is by stating or implying that things are always universally the case when in fact they are much more variable.

(The technique is taught in primary school English lessons on the black arts of persuasion as ‘opinion disguised as fact’; it’s quite fun to see it used in real life like this)

"It’s the implication - in all of your posts, not just here - that parents shouldn’t appeal because it’s expensive for the school and never successful anyway, that is being challenged."

I never said that. I have said:

• Appeals have a cost to the school, and I think that parents should be aware of that when deciding to appeal.
• Checking appeals stats will give some context about the strength of the school's case.
• There are reasons why some schools don't put up strong appeals and others do.
• Appealing for something at school Y that the defence can easily prove is offered by all local schools is not going to give you a strong case (even if school Y does it better than your offered school)

None of that is controversial, and I hope it will help the op.

Btw, if you disagree with me, the best way to see my opinion drift off the bottom of the forum and into into oblivion is to stop attacking my posts. Sometimes agreeing to disagree is the best solution.

From personal experience, I would strongly disagree with this. The school (or LA - it is often the LA for community and VC schools) has put up a good, solid defence in every single case where parents have been successful that I have been involved in. And the LA cannot stop community and VC schools increasing PAN. If the PAN set by the LA is lower than the school wants, they can appeal to the Schools Adjudicator, where there is a strong presumption in favour of giving the school the increase it wants.

"And the LA cannot stop community and VC schools increasing PAN. If the PAN set by the LA is lower than the school wants, they can appeal to the Schools Adjudicator, where there is a strong presumption in favour of giving the school the increase it wants."

This is true, but it's an adversarial move that can create conflict with the LA and the other local schools that the LA is trying to protect. In contrast, a weak appeal defence is a neutral act. In fact, if the school believes it does have space for more students, it would be dishonest of them to do otherwise.

"The school (or LA - it is often the LA for community and VC schools) has put up a good, solid defence in every single case where parents have been successful that I have been involved in."

This may be your experience, but it's only fair to make clear it is your experience as an admissions lawyer. Parents are likely to be using your services in cases where schools appear to be good at defending appeals.

Parents don't need a lawyer.

In Infant Class Size appeals, success is virtually impossible. In my LA the success rate is quoted as 0.4%. I have sat on appeals where two children are allocated schools in opposite directions, starting at the same time, with only a motorway bridge with stairs as the route between them, mum having a small baby in a buggy and travelling on foot. We were still forced to deny the appeal.

In all other appeals, the admissions code sets out the rules very clearly. The only thing that parents need to understand is that 'unreasonable' doesn't mean unreasonable as plain English would suggest, and actually it is a very extreme situation that should be regarded as 'unreasonable'. They also need to understand that prejudice is a balancing act, so if the admitting authority has 4 points of prejudice, they need 5 (assuming they are equally weighted). Appeals can be won by presenting several small things that would benefit the child, not just one big thing.

If only the message got out that logistics and transport, and friendship groups, is incredibly unlikely to win an appeal, we'd be fine. Barring those children for whom there is evidence that these things are important.

I didn’t have my ADHD diagnosed until last year (in my 40s).

I went to school 4 miles from home and frequently missed the bus. I walked to school if that happened - over fields at all times of the year - from the age of 11.

My DD is 13 and was also diagnosed last year. I see my role as a parent to understand her difference but to equip her to exist in the world. With exposure to difficulty she becomes more resilient and able to problem solve. Eg, she has a tendency to read the first 3 letters of every word and guess what the sentence means rather than slowing down and reading carefully. This is an issue during tests that the usual “extra time” won’t help. So I’m helping her to consciously slow down and read everything twice or three times to make sure she understands the question.

I appreciate not all ADHD is the same but I’m not convinced bubble wrapping kids is the way to go.

For LA schools, the case to refuse admission is usually put together and presented by the LA as they are the admission authority.

Parents use my services for free through Mumsnet. I do not offer a paid service for admission appeals. I almost invariably start advising parents long before the admission authority submits its case to refuse admission. I therefore think it is likely that my experience and that of the other experts who offer advice on here is broadly reflective of the national picture.

"For LA schools, the case to refuse admission is usually put together and presented by the LA as they are the admission authority."

Yes, but not always.

"I therefore think it is likely that my experience and that of the other experts who offer advice on here is broadly reflective of the national picture."

Nobody giving advice on Mumsnet has had their credentials checked, but you have been around long enough for people to trust you. I have been around a long time too, and have been on many of the same threads as you, though I change my username more frequently to protect my anonymity.

If anyone disagrees with anything I post, I'm happy for it to be challenged on the specific detail, and to admit when I get things wrong, but I don't buy the "I'm more of an expert than you" argument or the "I've been around longer than you" argument because I know I've helped many people on these threads over many years too. 🙂

@tripz I don't see anyone throwing their weight around. However, you are posting through the lens of a school defending an appeal, whereas most of the people who are seeking advice are posting for advice on how to win an appeal. Having someone post that people shouldn't appeal and it costs lots of money needs to be challenged, because parents have an absolute right to appeal.

I've been open about the perspective I'm posting from, and I think it's helpful for parents to have a school's perspective. Why would it not be helpful to know how schools view appeals? Some of my posts have been challenged, and that's ok, but I'm not the new kid on the block who can be bullied out of the forum by people who disagree with me or claim to have more experience. Usually my views are in tune with some of the more well known "experts" here, but sometimes they're not, and that's ok too.

As I said before, repeated challenges for the same thing, that keep threads going ad infinitum, are usually better dealt with via an "agree to disagree" truce.

There is no way to agree to disagree with someone who is trying to discourage parents from using their statutory rights, no matter how long a poster has been posting or who they may be. Believe me, if @prh47bridge was saying it, I'd be challenging him too. It isn't you that is being challenged. It is what you write. You are entitled to your view, but every time I read a post, from anyone, which discourages parents from using their statutory right to appeal, I will challenge it.

If you've been around a while, you will see posts from me, @prh47bridge , PatriciaHolm, and several others which say "That's not a strong case for appeal", "Those aren't good grounds", "Transport isn't a good reason to appeal", "Logistics aren't the responsibility of the LA", etc., I think we're all very responsible in encouraging parents to only appeal for reasonable grounds. But it crosses the line (in my view) when parents are discouraged because they should 'think of the school' and are made to feel guilty for considering appeal.

"There is no way to agree to disagree with someone who is trying to discourage parents from using their statutory rights"

Yes, there is a way. You do it by drawing a line under it and moving on. If you keep going on about it, repeatedly, it pushes the thread to the top of the forum and raises its profile. By doing that, far more people have seen this post that I made on this thread at 07:17 yesterday morning than would have seen it if you or someone else had simply challenged the view once and then let it lie. I don't know what you think you can achieve by telling me you disagree with it more than once.🙂

Well, I guess that in an ideal world, you would say "Actually, I see your point. I didn't intend to stop parents from using their statutory right to appeal. I realise now that I shouldn't be telling parents that they shouldn't appeal to save schools money."

Barring that, you could quietly refrain from posting such statements in future threads, at which point nobody will take issue. Posting valid comments about the weakness of a case is totally fine.