ADA3524 Lawrence Sheriff Academy Warwickshire 17 January 2020

Determination Case reference: ADA3524 Objector: An individual Admission authority: Lawrence Sheriff Academy Trust Date of decision: 17 January 2020 Determination In accordance with section 88H(4) of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998, Dr Slater and I do not uphold the objection to the admission arrangements for September 2020 determined by the governing board for Lawrence Sheriff School, Warwickshire. The referral 1. Under section 88H(2) of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998, (the Act), an objection has been referred to the adjudicator by an individual (the objector), about the admission arrangements for Lawrence Sheriff School (the school), a grammar school for boys aged 11-18, for September 2020. 2. The local authority (LA) for the area in which the school is located is Warwickshire County Council. The LA is a party to this objection. Jurisdiction 3. The terms of the Academy agreement between the academy trust and the Secretary of State for Education require that the admissions policy and arrangements for the academy school are in accordance with admissions law as it applies to maintained schools. These arrangements were determined on 13 February 2019 by the governing board on behalf of the Lawrence Sheriff Academy Trust (the trust), which is the admission authority for the school, on that basis. The objector submitted an objection to these determined arrangements on 23 March 2019. I am satisfied the objection has been properly referred to me in accordance with section 88H of the Act and it is partly within my jurisdiction to the extent explained below. 4. Joint adjudicators have been appointed to deal with this and other objections by the same objector, Dr Bryan Slater and Tom Brooke. I am the lead adjudicator for this matter and have drafted this determination which is agreed by Dr Slater. Specific provision is made in the Education (References to Adjudicator) Regulations 1999 for the chief adjudicator to allocate a case to more than one adjudicator and to appoint one of them to be the lead adjudicator. Procedure 5. In considering this matter I have had regard to all relevant legislation and the School Admissions Code (the Code). 6. The documents I have considered in reaching my decision include: a. a copy of the minutes of the meeting of the governing board at which the arrangements were determined; b. a copy of the determined arrangements; c. the objector’s form of objection dated 23 March 2019 and supporting documents; the comments of the trust on the issues raised in the objection. Background 7. The school is a boys’ grammar school in Rugby with a co-educational sixth form. It has a Published Admission Number (PAN) of 120 places in Year 7 for 2020. Admissions are by selection based upon children’s academic ability. The school opened on its present site in 1878, and became an academy in September 2014. It was rated by Ofsted as Outstanding in 2017. In Rugby there is also a girls’ grammar school (Rugby High School) and a mixed school (Ashlawn), which offers selective and nonselective places. There are a number of other non-selective secondary schools. The school is part of a consortium of schools using a common entrance test for entry to Y7 in September 2019. The consortium includes the other grammar schools in Warwickshire as well as Ashlawn School and the eight grammar schools in Birmingham. Oversubscription Criteria The school’s oversubscription criteria for 2020 are as follows: “Category 1 - Looked After Children2 and all previously looked after children (previously looked after children are children who were looked after, but ceased to be so because they were adopted (or became subject to a child arrangements order or special guardianship order)) who achieve the Automatic Qualifying Score or above for this school for this particular year of entry, or between one and twenty marks below the Automatic Qualifying 2 Score, or who achieve the minimum score or above for the waiting list, whichever is the lower. Category 2 - Up to 10 places will be allocated to children who were in receipt of the Pupil Premium6/Service Children Premium at the point of registering to sit the entrance test living in the Eastern area of Warwickshire or the priority circle (the centre of which is the Rugby Water Tower and has a radius of 10.004 miles), who achieve the Automatic Qualifying Score or above for this school for this particular year of entry, or whose scores are between one and twenty marks below the Automatic Qualifying Score for this school, for this particular year of entry, or who achieve the minimum score or above for the waiting list, whichever is the lower (including any re-offers which are made from the waiting list in this category after Monday 2 March 2020). Category 3 - Up to 55 places will be allocated to children living in the Eastern Area of Warwickshire who achieve the Automatic Qualifying Score or above for this school for this particular year of entry. Category 4 - Up to 55 places will be allocated to children living in the priority circle (the centre of which is the Rugby Water Tower and has a radius of 10.004 miles – this also includes the Eastern Area) who achieve the Automatic Qualifying Score or above for this school for this particular year of entry. Category 5 - Other children living inside or outside of the priority areas who achieve the Automatic Qualifying Score or above for this school for this particular year of entry. Category 6 - Other children living inside or outside of the priority areas who achieve the minimum score or above for the waiting list for this school for this particular year of entry.” Definitions as appropriate of the terms used in the arrangements are provided and the areas used (the Eastern Area and the priority circle) area is also defined. Consideration of Case Matters not within our jurisdiction 8. The jurisdiction of adjudicators under section 88H of the Act relates only to valid objections about the school’s admission arrangements. In this case, we have concluded that there is no jurisdiction to consider the following matters: i. The process following withdrawal of a school place. This is not a matter which requires specific provision in the admission arrangements. ii. The issues raised in relation to setting the “Automatic Qualifying Score”. This aspect of the objection raises the same or substantially the same issues in relation to the admission arrangements of the school as were dealt with in the decision of the adjudicator in Determination ADA3395 dated 27 September 2018 and was made within two years of that decision. Consequently these issues may not be referred to adjudicators under section 88H(2) by reason of the provisions of section 88H(5)(d) and Regulation 22 of the School 3 Admissions (Admission arrangements and Co-ordination of Admission Arrangements) (England) Regulations 2012. iii. Issues relating to admission appeals. iv. Issues relating to allegations of wrongdoing. v. Issues relating to the application of the admissions arrangements to applicants. Matters that are within our jurisdiction 9. The matters which are within our jurisdiction are set out below. The objector has referred a large number of objections to the Schools Adjudicator under Section 88H of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 (the Act) over the past several years. Each of the objections relates to a school which is a designated grammar school or a bilateral school with selective places. Each school objected to requires applicants to have sat a test of ability. In every case that test is set by the Centre for Evaluation and Monitoring (CEM). Many, although not all, of the objections relate to grammar schools situated in Warwickshire. The same issues have been raised in numerous of the objections. 10. The objector has referred 14 objections to the Schools Adjudicator in 2019, which follow the pattern described above and raise issues that have been the subject of the previous determinations. In order to ensure the efficient the use of public money and resources which this gives rise to, while also ensuring that we discharge our statutory duties properly in dealing with these multiple objections, the joint adjudicators have decided to adopt a broadly common format for considering the issues that the objector has raised. 11. I have set out our conclusions and the reasons for those conclusions in a table attached to this determination as Appendix 1. When setting out the conclusions and reasons on each point dealt with below I will refer, where appropriate, to the relevant paragraphs of text in Appendix 1. 12. The objector has raised procedural points relating to documents filed in High Court actions to which he refers and previous test papers. These points are dealt with in Appendix 1 part 1. Whether use of the same test for selection by ability for later additional sittings is compliant with the provisions of the Code and the law relating to admissions. 13. Our conclusions in relation to this issue and the reasons for those conclusions are set out in part 2 of Appendix 1 to this determination. The objection is not upheld on this point. The use of the same test for late applications and an applicant’s resulting position on the waiting list. 14. Our conclusions in relation to this issue and the reasons for those conclusions are set out in part 2, paragraph 15 of Appendix 1 to this determination. The objection is not upheld on this point. Setting a score for applicants in receipt of pupil premium in order to qualify under 4 Category 2 of the admission arrangements which is lower than the score required of applicants under Categories 3 to 6.

Load more