Secondary appeal - not offered place from feeder school

[JimJamJim]

Trying to work out if we have the basis for an appeal.

Child attends a primary on the same site as secondary.
Primary school has been designated as a feeder school for the secondary - in practice this means children from the primary are a priority group within the oversubscription criteria (after SEN and siblings).

The published rationale for having feeder school status is talks about things like facilitating curriculum alignment between the schools and primary school children "knowing they can join [secondary] in Y7". At various points we have received written communication from the primary saying things like children will have an "automatic" place at the secondary.

Easing the adjustment between primary and secondary was a key reason we chose the primary, child has always assumed they would go there.

We haven't been offered a place! Currently no reason to believe the admissions criteria haven't been applied correctly (though we are looking into it).

There's various other secondary reasons that the school particularly suits the child in terms of ethos, curriculum etc. But would the simple fact of it being a feeder we were encouraged to assume was a guarantee, and both us and the school preparing the child for that transition, be a case we could argue?

They don't "pull in". They leave to go and work at a school with more reasonable class sizes.

i can’t tell you how infuriating it is that it seems to be absolutely fiiiiine for the school to voluntarily take 34 children but 35 would be inconceivable.

But is your child even top of the waiting list? How does that work with the bands?!

There's always got to be a limit at some point. The parent whose child is behind yours on the list could say the exact same about "why 35 but not 36?" I understand all of the frustration and disappointment for your DD but I'm not sure that's a reasonable form to channel it in.

Your DD was offered a waiting-list spot at another school higher on your list than the one you were allocated, right? Did you end up accepting? Have you been able to learn more about that school and how are you (and your DD) feeling about it?

I think it's probably worth pointing out that nominal class size is just one factor. There may be 34 in a form class, but practical subjects shouldn't really have above 20 students, lower sets need smaller classes, etc.

I empathise and I'm frequently seen on these threads pointing out appeal points, but I think you are very unlikely to win this and it wouldn't be in anyone's interests for you to win.

It's also infuriating having a child trying to learn without a desk. It's bad enough trying to squeeze in an extra few with a notebook balanced on their knee, or watching their peers do the science experiments because they don't have a place at the science bench. Hopefully this school is built for the extras more than ours was, but there comes a point where a classroom, the desks and the chairs, fill up. How do you even position 5 extra students with no desk or chair in the room, so that they can see the board, take part in the discussions and do all their written work? As you add in more and more students there is more and more detriment.

Thanks - I have some questions on my list already about numbers within sets (I know the school sets earlier and for wider range of subjects then is often the case so how material the nominal number per form is could be something we could argue).

I am sure you are right and our chances are very slim. But I can only put forward the best argument we can.

i’m certain that if it were system in which all children had to write a case like we have written for the appeal along the lines of “why this child, why this school?” we would have a stronger argument than the vast majority of children who have been offered a place. I know that’s not how it works but it makes it especially infuriating.

I look at our stage 2 case and think it is rock solid and then think about stage 1 and think nah, this a lost cause.

They are 2nd on the waiting list within the band but there are only 8 places in the band, all taken by siblings of existing pupils. There are no feeder school pupils or siblings on the waiting list in other bands so looking across the board we are at second top of the list.

However the waiting list is run within band so we would only get a place via the waiting list if 2 of 8 families with children already in the school move. Which is as unlikely as us winning the appeal.

But it makes it galling that, if that’s the position the school is in, they voluntarily choose to put themselves in to that position (because £££).

And that as a result, children like DD, who I think have a perfectly good case for needing to attend that school, are going to miss out.

I know it’s all down to bigger systemic things like shortage of school places and underfunding. And that there’s no perfect way to allocate school places. I’m just venting because it’s rubbish for us.

I taught at a grammar school for a while that due to appeals was in this position.

Fortunately the kids were often also doing one to one music or LAMDA lessons during the day so somehow it worked. The normal solution is to squash in some exam desks.

Students who visit from other developed countries on exchanges etc are always surprised how crammed our classrooms are.

OP, am I right in saying that you are number two on the “top band” list after a child at a different primary but with a sibling in the secondary?

If someone in the “second from top band” doesn’t take up their place and there’s no waiting list for that band, does the school go to the “top band” list or to the “third from top band” list?

We were in a similar position to you.

Number 1 on the waiting list from March due to being a late applicant. The school was 16 over PAN but nobody told us!! So we kept waiting, confused as to why we weren’t getting a space…. Eventually in the second week on September we were offered a space, actually 2 spaces: one music scholar and one regular. They only offered those two spaces so it was really on the line.

Yes that’s it - and I think the alternate band below, band above.

But there’s about 150 on the waiting list in the next band down so it’s a bit moot.

Nobody wants their child in a class size of 35. Or even 34 frankly. And there aren't enough tables/seats in classes that size in many school rooms. Including my daughter's where students had to sit on the floor because there were close to 40 in a classroom meant for no more than 30.

deleted

I have some questions on my list already about numbers within sets (I know the school sets earlier and for wider range of subjects then is often the case so how material the nominal number per form is could be something we could argue).

The reality is almost certainly that with an average tutor groups size of 33 / 34, the teaching groups for top set(s) in some subjects will be 35+ to balance the provision of smaller groups for those at the other end off the ability spectrum.

So I’ve done some more sleuthing.

The school has voluntarily admitted 20+ children over PAN over (at least) each of the last three years. In each case this has been accommodated by creating one or more additional form groups (compared to the number of form groups you’d expect for PAN divided by 30).

But according to the school this year they will be accommodating with classes sizes of 33-34.

🤨

Okay, so they've got to like the extra funding the larger year group brings with it, but have run out of extra staff members, and extra rooms to put them in...?

This was my thought too.

if the PAN is a realistic one, admitting 20+ over and making an extra class for a few years is really going to have stretched them space and funding wise. It may be they just can't manage it for another year.

A appeals panel can't direct a school on how to organise; they can ask why they have done certain things and how they plan to mitigate the impacts, but they can't tell them to change.

This accepting 20 extra a year reminds me of a case in the press last year? The school want to increase intake by an extra class but because there are other schools in the area that are not full the government will not allow them to permanently increase the PAN. Maybe this school has tried a similar aim and have been thwarted and run out of teachers/space so need to reduce demand back to official PAN. Maybe some parents won't like their kid in class of 34 without a desk and will move them elsewhere.

Do you have a link for this story? It sounds wrong. The government does not have any ability to stop a school increasing PAN. It is possible for objectors to refer the matter to the Schools Adjudicator, but there is a strong presumption in favour of an increase in PAN.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/secondary/5020630-urgent-help-please-challenging-council-re-removal-of-bulge-class?page=1

I think they may be referring to Beaumont School in St Albans. There was a thread last year about it.

Thank you, yes that is the case I was referring to.

Well it's all done, now all we can do is wait for the outcome.

There were a really high number of appellants, I get the impression many of them families who live near the school but child had a test score in the top band. Fewer than 1 in 25 places at the school go to the top band but nearly 1 in 4 children applying scored in the top band so I guess that produces lots of aggrieved families!

Out of interest, do the panel receive any information about the school other than what's in the initial pack and the questions that are asked in Stage 1? I felt if it were me on the panel I wouldn't feel I had a full picture to work with, but maybe I don't see everything the panel sees.

And thank you to everyone for all the advice and information on this thread - I don't know how much any of our questions or information helped but I think we were as well prepared as we could possibly be.