Stage 1 appeal – expert advice on challenging school’s case

[Putneyparent]

Good morning, I’d really appreciate some advice from MN’s experienced and helpful appeal panellists on Stage 1 of a secondary school appeal I have coming up.

The school is oversubscribed and, in its case, argues that admitting even one additional child would cause prejudice. They say going over PAN would significantly limit extracurricular activities and place a strain on teaching staff.

However, I’ve found that in a recent Ofsted report (when the school was already over PAN), inspectors actually praised the breadth of extracurricular activities and noted that staff felt well supported in managing their workload.

To me, that suggests that going over PAN may not have the level of negative impact the school is claiming.
In addition, a building report states the school is largely suitable, although it does highlight some issues (e.g. inadequate changing facilities).

My question is: how can I best use this information to challenge the school’s case at Stage 1?
I understand panels don’t respond well to a combative or “cross-examination” style, and that Stage 2 is ultimately more important. However, I’ve also read that it can help to test the strength of the school’s arguments where possible.
Given that questions are submitted via the chat function, what would be the most effective way to frame these points? Are there specific questions I should ask to highlight these inconsistencies without sounding overly adversarial?
Any advice would be very gratefully received. Thank you.

You can use the information you have to point out that going over PAN will not impact the schools ability to teach children effectively and safely. The “unable to go over PAN” is a standard response to an appeal. Your response is to point out that this is not necessarily the case.So use the OFSTED report, (which they have accepted) , and also find out if they have gone over PAN in other years.

So if for example they say that an extra child will cause dangerous overcrowding at lunchtime ask if they have evidence of dangerous incidents caused by overcrowding at lunchtime. If they come back and say yes there was an incident ask how they then looked at the issue, changed their practice and ensured safety for children at lunchtime.

What you do need to do is focus on what the school could offer your child that other schools do not, eg curriculum and/ or extra curriculum opportunities that your child already shows promise or ability in

ie

Maths club
Science club
Drama
Orchestra
Sports facilities
Languages

etc

These are how you will show that the advantage to your child of being offered a place outweighs the disadvantage to the school of going over PAN.

Thank you very much @viques 🙏

@Putneyparent being praised by Ofsted for breadth of extracurricular activity tells you nothing about the impact of an additional child. You can bring this up if you want, but it is likely to be a waste of everyone's time. Everyone knows Ofsted visit schools for 2 days, and teachers put their best foot forward. They certainly will not be mentioning the impact of being over PAN to the inspectors.

Schools are under financial pressure. If they felt able to admit additional students they would do so in a heartbeat in order to help relieve that financial pressure. Sometimes appellants get lucky - they appeal for a school that wants additional students but has been prevented from raising their PAN for some reason (e.g. because the LA would object to the impact on other nearby schools). In these cases the schools may put up a weak defence. However, it doesn't sound like your school is one of them. If not, you may need to accept that the school is full and, rather than trying to unpick their case, rely on the strengths of your own case to outweigh theirs.

If the school was genuinely full, no amount of strong arguments would enable OP’s child to be admitted. It’s a question of balance - it may be difficult for the school to admit one more, but if the greater prejudice is to OP’s child, they’re in. So the point of stage 1 is to work out where the prejudice of the school lies, and to chip away at the points it raises. Not to accept on face value that they’re full.

It isn’t just schools that want more kids to get the funding that have successful appellants.

The panel will use their experience to chip away at the school's case (including their knowledge of other schools' cases). Parents can ask whatever questions they like, but unless there is an obvious gotcha they would be wise concentrate their effort on the strength of their own case.

Yes, but remember that stage 1 is about the strength (or not) of the school’s arguments. The arguments relating to that particular child are aired in stage 2.

First, I’m surprised that questions are submitted via the chat function. Usually the panel would ask each parent in turn to state any questions for the school about their case, orally not using chat. Are there very many parents appealing for the same school ?

Second, I agree with a pp that Ofsted’s praise has nothing to do with capacity to take an extra child. Unless it praises the roomy classrooms and high staff ratios- then it might help you.

What is helpful on capacity arguments is asking whether they have gone over PAN in previous years and if so did it cause any problems in practice. Often you will find that schools have gone over by a small number in prior years (sometimes due to appeals) and whilst it’s no doubt been tricky, they have actually managed ok. If so, this weakens their case somewhat.

You can also ask if any other years are under PAN - if so then you can say that the overall burden on staff and space is reduced.

A decent panel should ask this kind of thing themselves however.

So your energies are best spent on why your own child really needs this particular school (stage 2). Especially if there are many children appealing for the same school - even if the panel finds the school could take 2/3 more, you will have to show it should be your child.