High school appeal: Primary school appeals template: Reception and KS1

Posted on

Primary school appeals template: Reception and KS1

If your child has missed out on a place at your preferred school, use this template as a basis for your appeal.

or Register to add to your saved resources

Every year, thousands of children fail to secure a place at their chosen primary school. If your child has missed out, you have the right to appeal. 

Many authorities have forms that you need to fill out to appeal, but some require a letter instead or as well. This template will help you formulate your appeal letter.

Claim A FREE Starting School Scrapbook!

  • Packed with colourful activities
  • Focus on early English, maths & science skills
  • Support your child’s physical and social development

Download Your Free Scrapbook Today

In Reception, Year 1 and Year 2, class sizes are strictly limited to 30 pupils (or 30 pupils per teacher). You can still appeal, but bear in mind that your chances of success are limited.

You can appeal if you can show that the admission arrangements weren’t properly followed, or that the admission criteria are not legal according to the School Admissions Code, or the decision to refuse your child a place wasn’t ‘reasonable.’

Reception and KS1 admission appeal template






I would like to appeal against the decision of the admission authority not to offer CHILD’S NAME a place at SCHOOL NAME.

I am aware that the grounds for the appeal is limited by the provisions of the Infant Class Size legislation. In support of my appeal, my grounds of appeal area as follows:

The admission arrangements were not correctly and impartially applied in my case.

I believe that the admission arrangements were not correctly and impartially applied in my case and that this has effectively denied CHILD’S NAME a place at SCHOOL NAME.

Here, you can explain what error you believe has been made.

Generally, an error will result from the admission authority not taking into due consideration the information provided with the application form.

Most appeals involve a distance factor not being applied correctly, either as a main criterion or in a tiebreak situation.

You will need to provide written evidence to substantiate this. For example, if the distance criterion was incorrectly applied, you might use mapping software to prove your distance from the school.

The decision to refuse admission was not one which a reasonable admission authority would have made in the circumstances of the case.

I believe that the decision not to offer CHILD’S NAME a place at SCHOOL NAME is unreasonable for the following reasons:

Here, you can list the reasons why.

These usually relate to the admission authority not taking into consideration information that was provided with your original application: for example, if the admission authority gives priority to children with medical issues, but these were overlooked.

Additional considerations.

In addition to the above points, I would like the appeal panel to take into consideration the following points:

Here, you can include any additional points that you would like the appeal panel to consider that are not covered by the points made above.

This may include personal circumstances and any logistical difficulties that would be caused by your child attending the allocated school.

Note that the threshold for successful appeals is very high. For an appeal to be successful, the appeal panel will need to be satisfied that the decision to refuse admission was ‘perverse in the light of the admission arrangements,’ i.e. it was ‘beyond the range of responses open to a reasonable decision maker’ or ‘a decision so outrageous in its defiance of logic or of accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question could have arrived at it.’

In support of this appeal please find attached the following documents:

These could include a letter from your child’s doctor or consultant, social worker or any other professional who supports your child’s application.

I look forward to hearing from you with the details of when the appeal will be heard.

Yours truly,


With thanks to John Chard of School Appeals.

Free primary school admissions appeals letter template to download

Download TheSchoolRun’s free sample appeals letter for primary schools and use it as a template to write your own.

HS Selection


High School Selection

High School Selection

High school applicants who have completed the application during the initial application window will receive their results in early spring. The application system uses a combination of factors to attempt to give the student an offer from the highest-ranked Choice Program and/or Selective Enrollment Program on their application for which they qualify and for which there are available seats. Applicants who miss the initial window will be able to complete a registration form and add themselves to the rolling waitlist once it opens. Only programs that have space remaining will participate in the rolling waitlist.

This page will help you understand the processes and methodologies that determine how offers are issued and how you can manage them.

Selection Factors

During the selection process, the application system will try to match the student with their top-ranked Choice Program and their top-ranked Selective Enrollment Program. If all the available seats at the student’s top-ranked program are filled by students that ranked higher based on the school’s admissions process or priority preferences, the system will try to match the student with their next highest choice.

This process continues until the student receives an offer or the student is considered for all of the programs on their application and does not qualify for any.

Guide to Tie Breakers- coming soon

Students are considered for available ninth-grade seats based on a combination of the following factors:

Results from any required admissions screenings or supplementary requirements (e. g., testing, auditions, essays, etc.)

Whether any priority preferences are considered (e.g., siblings attending the school, proximity to the school, etc.)

The order that they ranked each program on their application

The number of seats available in each program

Each program’s selection process (lottery or point system)

Selection Results

Accepting and Declining Offers

Families will have two weeks from the date of their offer(s) to log into the GoCPS Online portal and accept or decline them. Remember that an applicant can only accept one offer at any given time and accepting an offer will decline all other offers.

Accepting or declining an offer does not affect your waitlist status for any program.

If an offer is not accepted by the Accept/Decline deadline, it will expire.

If you are not able to log in and accept/decline your offer make sure to call the GoCPS Hotline and have the offer accepted/declined over the phone. Offers will not be reoffered once they expire as they will go to the student that is next on the waitlist.

Waitlist Process

If a seat becomes available at a school where a student is waitlisted, the family will receive a notification through phone or email from the Office of Access and Enrollment. Make sure this information is up to date in the applicant’s GoCPS portal. Families will have two business days to accept or decline a waitlist offer. Waitlist offers are available at 8 am and will expire at 8 am two business days later.

Students will remain on waitlists and can accept a waitlist offer any time it is received. If a student accepts a waitlist offer, they will remain waitlisted for any programs ranked higher than the program from which the offer was received. At the same time, the student will be withdrawn from the waitlists for any programs ranked lower than the program from which the offer was received.

Guide to Waitlists Guide to Rolling Waitlist

Adding New Programs to Application

Students who did Not Submit a Fall Application

Students who did not participate in the fall application window must first fill out a registration form before being able to access programs that they can then receive offers for or join the waitlist. Please see the step-by-step guide below to see how this process works.

Guide to the Registration Form

Selective Enrollment High School (SEHS) Principal Discretion

SEHS Principal Discretion is the process that allows Selective Enrollment High School principals to fill a designated number of seats, outside of the regular selection process, based on information provided through Application Packages submitted by students.

Connect With Us

what to do if you do not agree with the USE assessment — Ucheba.ru

The USE participant has the right to file an appeal of two types:

  • About violation of the established procedure for conducting the USE , submitted on the day of the exam after passing the USE forms. To do this, at the end of the exam, without leaving the PES, receive from the organizer in the audience a form (two copies), according to which the appeal is drawn up, and then transfer both copies to the authorized representative of the SEC.

If the conflict commission agrees that the procedure for conducting the exam was violated, then the result of the exam is canceled and the participant is given the opportunity to take the subject on a reserve day.

  • Disagreement with the results of the USE . Such an appeal is filed within two working days after the official announcement of the exam results and familiarization of the USE participant with them. To do this, you need to obtain from the responsible secretary of the conflict commission (for graduates of the current year — from the head of your educational institution) a form in two copies, draw up an appeal and transfer both copies to the above persons.

Having received information about the time and place of the appeal, you should, if possible, come to the conflict commission, having your passport and a stamped pass with you. Parents can be brought in to appeal. If a teenager is already 18 years old, they can only attend the commission, and if he is still a minor, then, being his legal representatives, parents can not only participate in the discussion of work, but even come to the appeal without a child.

Before filing an appeal, you need to carefully read the work. For Moscow schoolchildren, after verification, they appear in their personal account on the public services website, the addresses of sites in other regions can be found here.

After carefully reading the work and comparing it with the evaluation criteria, go to the teacher or tutor. Better yet, consult with several experts at once, who can understand what exactly the points were deducted for and whether you have a chance to prove that this is a verifier’s mistake.

pick up arguments in your favor, learn them by heart so that nothing will confuse you, speak briefly and politely

Go to the appeal with a calm and confident attitude. Be prepared to defend your point of view, but do not take it as a fight for points, and even more so as a showdown. Otherwise, this enterprise, already not the most joyful, will turn into what some eyewitnesses describe: “The situation there is like at the Wailing Wall. Children with parents are crying for a couple, and no one can do anything.

Here is another look at the situation: “Nobody humiliated or insulted me and my son, we talked calmly, to the point, without emotions. Passions boiled around, I looked around, and I got the impression that people did not come to appeal, but to sort out the relationship. Prepare well, pick up arguments in your favor, learn your position by heart so that nothing knocks you down, speak briefly and politely. And they will talk to you the same way.”

There are a lot of myths around the appeal of the USE results: someone believes that it is enough just to come to the commission, and immediately the results will increase by 15 points. Someone tells scary stories about how children end up with even lower scores as a result. But in fact, most often the result remains unchanged.

in any case, you have to go with your parents

However, there is also experience of successful appeals. Muscovite Tatyana Arishchenko shared his double experience of a successful appeal: last year, her youngest daughter managed to improve her result in literature, and the year before, her eldest daughter’s in mathematics.

“In 2015, the eldest daughter did not get one point in profile mathematics to 75, which she needed to confirm the Olympiad. She came across a very sophisticated option, where there was a problem with an economic bias, which the teachers themselves did not really know how to solve. She solved it correctly, although in some very complicated way, but made a mistake in the answer. For the so-called technical errors, one point is deducted, and she was deducted two. In our school, after the exam, they arranged a review of each work, the teachers said that they could try to challenge this score. Since the child was already 18 years old at that time, I could only go as an escort — that is, be present at the appeal, but not say anything. But in any case, you need to go with the parents, the appeal is much calmer, the experts are much more restrained in talking to the children, they put less pressure. When we came to appeal mathematics, the teacher, who rechecked the work, for a long time could not understand how her daughter solved the problem, revised the solution several times, called the chairman of the commission. She looked and decided that the error was technical and only one point was deducted for it.

you are preparing for an appeal, but the experts are also preparing for it

The next year, a similar story happened to the second girl. “She also had to confirm the Literature Olympiad, and she also did not get to 75 points,” says Tatyana. — With literature, everything is more complicated, since here you can prove anything. The daughter was analyzing Bulat Okudzhava’s poem «The Blue Trolleybus», in one of the tasks it was necessary to choose epithets, she wrote «blue», «midnight», etc., but the inspector assessed this as a mistake. Before going to the appeal, we consulted with several experts, and they all told us that there was no mistake. And a very aggressive expert got caught on the appeal, he immediately said that the score had been taken correctly, and put a statement for the girl to sign that she agreed. It’s good that I was with her and asked to call the chairman of the commission. The point was returned to us, and in terms of secondary points, it weighed as much as five. And this result not only confirmed the Olympiad, but would also allow me to pass the competition at Moscow State University. So you need to try to fight, but only if you have confidence. And do not overdo it — if the expert and the chairman of the appeal do not agree with the arguments, and the child continues to insist, then he will be sent to the commission, which includes several teachers at once, and there it is impossible to prove anything at all. In general, on appeal, a lot depends on the teacher. It is important that the child speaks calmly, confidently, and is not afraid of pressure.”

Having successfully passed two appeals, the woman also advises checking in advance, even before the start of the exam, whether it is possible to enter the applicant’s personal account. “Time is very critical in this matter — after all, there are only two days to file an application for an appeal,” she explains.

Elena Buzina,

USE expert, candidate of pedagogical sciences,

host of the VKontakte group “I am writing for a hundred”

“If you have applied for an appeal, of course, you need to prepare for it. Read the work, check with the requirements of each criterion again. If your disagreement with the points given by the experts on one (or several, as you think) criteria is actually justified, formulate the question you want to receive an answer to on appeal. It is not easy for many to do such work on their own, and therefore it is worth asking a teacher or tutor for help. If the scores for all criteria are set correctly, and you were convinced of this in a conversation with the teacher, you will have to make a decision to refuse the appeal.

An important point in the appeal procedure is the choice of the correct intonation and line of conduct. You should not set yourself up only for a positive outcome for you: the word «appeal» is derived from the Italian. appellatio (“appeal”), and this appeal for clarification may not always result in an increase in the score for one or more criteria. You are preparing for an appeal, but the experts are also preparing for it. Before the appeal, your essay is rechecked again, in accordance with all requirements. Nothing personal. Your charm will not affect the judge’s decision to increase the score if, according to some criterion, this score cannot be increased.

In the Unified State Examination in the Russian language, an appeal is accepted regarding assignment No. 25, that is, an essay-reasoning. Most often, the subject is a discussion of the points assigned according to criterion No. 4 (“argumentation”). Many graduates, unfortunately, are convinced that just mentioning the name of the author and the title of the work allows you to get the maximum score for this criterion. But this is not so. Argumentation is a part of the essay, and it is built to prove and reveal the thesis that the graduate formulated independently. If the wording of the thesis and the arguments do not match either logically or in meaning, it will not be possible to challenge the points.

Criteria for task No. 25 are arranged in such a way that the presence of the necessary work elements is easy to check. General reasoning is excluded. If a mistake was really made at the verification stage, which is extremely rare, it will be corrected. Appeal about something that cannot be confirmed in terms of criteria is simply pointless.

There are many myths in school life. One of the most stable is the cruelty of experts in appeals and the reduction of points for those who come to it. This is wrong. Appeals are always calm and business-like, as they are attended by trained graduates who care about getting a qualified answer to a question that has arisen, and not winning the battle for points at any cost.

I believe that there is only one case for an appeal: if you are convinced that an error or inaccuracy was made during the review of your work that needs to be corrected, and the criteria confirm this.

«Experts included fools.» How a graduate raised his scores for the Unified State Examination from 90 to 96 on appeal Although he scored 90, it would be a shame not to compete for points withdrawn without explanation. The appeal was like a psychological thriller, but with a happy ending.

“I was a zero and didn’t know the structure of the Unified State Examination”

At the Unified State Examination I took social studies, Russian and biology — such a set is necessary for admission to the Faculty of Psychology in Moscow. Of the universities, I am currently considering RUDN University, Russian State Humanitarian University and Moscow State University, in them I have every chance to get into the budget.

I have been preparing for the exams for a year. I won’t say that this period was difficult, I always had 7–9 hours of sleep, I never worked out at night or late in the evening, I walked a lot and set aside time for other things. I prepared for the Unified State Examination on a regular basis: I simply distributed which subjects I pay more attention to during which period of the graduating class. I have never crammed, there has never been such a thing that I sit down at the material and start memorizing the necessary information. It was more important for me to fully understand the topic and consolidate my knowledge with the help of tests.

My first tests in the 11th grade were not very good in all subjects: 34 points in biology, 36 in society, and 50–60 in Russian. I was zero and did not know the structure of the exams at all. Then I started taking online courses — it seems to me that this is currently the coolest format for preparing for the Unified State Examination. With Russian and society, everything immediately went well: in the second subject every month I had progress by 10 points, and I spent 8-10 hours a week on it. Only biology has turned into a roller coaster: either I really like it, or I don’t have the strength to do it. This is the only subject that made me upset. I had a sample for 70+ only once, although I devoted the most resources to biology and studied every day, except for weekends.

The hardest part of preparation is not seeing your progress, as it was with biology. Although, apparently, I just did not notice my growth. In any case, such moods and states are very demotivating. Sometimes I didn’t have the strength to do something and decide, but at these moments I just pulled myself together and continued to study further.

As a result, I passed Russian with 91 points, biology with 89, and social science with 90. First, with 90. After the appeal, my points were raised to 96, but I had to fight for them.

“I wanted to go through this experience”

When the results came in and I saw the number 90 in the line with secondary scores, it immediately appeared in my thoughts: “I will go to the appeal.” I understood that I had taken a lot of points in the second part, although I was sure that my detailed answers were almost perfect. The next day, the forms arrived: I looked through them and saw that I had been deducted points for the 19th task, where you need to illustrate a social object or process with three examples; for the 23rd issue, where knowledge of the Constitution is tested, and for the 25th issue, in which you also need to give examples on a given topic.

When I looked through my answers, I did not notice any gross errors or shortcomings. Therefore, I sent the forms to the group of social studies courses where I studied, and the curator said that it was possible to compete for all three primary points taken (that’s six secondary ones).

I didn’t even worry — on the contrary, I wanted to go to the appeal and experience this experience. I was curious about how the procedure was going, how I would behave in a similar situation, so I gladly filled out an online application for an appeal, I received a quick call and an appointment two days later.

When I arrived at the school where everything was supposed to take place, I saw the sign «Remote Appeal» on the door and realized that I would not be face to face with experts and a commission. I was seated in front of a computer and connected to a conference with social science experts. A couple of technical moments — checking the forms and the correctness of the test part, checking the handwriting — and I am met by the first expert, with whom we began to figure out why I was lowered.

I immediately said that I had questions about all points taken

We began to analyze the 19th task, where we need to illustrate the influence of certain factors on the political behavior of a citizen. The task was simple: you model the situation, describe the factor, and select the behavior.

I began to explain how I did the task, why I illustrated in a certain way, and I argued my position. They listened to me, but they could not explain why the point was taken off. Then a second expert joined the conference, and together they began to look for where the error had crept in. In the end, I was told that the point was deducted for the example about the teacher Sergei, his dissatisfaction with wages and demonstration as political behavior.

According to these inspectors, I did not answer questions like “what, where, when”: where is Sergey from, what square did he go to with a demonstration, what school he teaches. However, there is no such requirement in the criteria. I immediately noted this: in the task they only ask to name the factor and its influence on the political behavior of the individual. We argued for several minutes, they already began to dismiss me and repeat the same thing: «not localized, not specified.» It was clear that they just wanted to lose me on this assignment and not raise anything.

“Experts turned on the fools”

Without solving the 19th task, we moved on to the next one, about knowledge of the Constitution. Here things went faster: the experts consulted and returned with a verdict that they did not agree with the colleagues who checked my work, so I was given the initial score for it. There remained the last task and at least some clarity on the situation on the 19th, which I still wanted to hear. But suddenly they say to me: “Well, everything, in principle, right?” — it feels like they already wanted to send me home with this score, as if that was enough for me, but I said that for the 25th task, the score does not suit me either.

We moved on to the last question, and I was struck that either experts behave this way on purpose, turn on fools and pretend that they do not know the assessment criteria, or they do not have access to them. In the 25th task, it was necessary to illustrate the activities of social institutions in Russia and give — as it seemed to me — three examples of their effectiveness. I wrote everything, everything is correct, but the experts, again looking for moments to catch on, said that they asked for only two examples in the assignment, and I wrote three, and they «can’t help me with anything.»

I was shocked. In terms of? Even if I gave more examples and if there are no errors in them, the maximum score should be given for my work.

The experts re-read the criteria and, it seems, did not immediately understand that I was right.

Then I began to explain that I can write at least ten examples and, if everything is correct in them, they do not have the right to deduct points for allegedly exceeding the limit. They turned off the microphone and started conferring. When they returned, they answered that I was right and as a result, for two tasks — the 23rd and 25th — they add two primary points to me, these are four secondary ones.

They wanted to send me home again and asked ingratiatingly whether I agreed with the decision of the examination committee. As if they were preparing to say goodbye to me, but I reminded that I was not satisfied with the assessment of the 19th task and the lack of an explanation why the score was lowered.

And then it began: “We have already explained everything to you. What do you not understand?» It’s good that I had FIPI documents with evaluation criteria for subject commissions with me. I deliberately brought everything I could: the specification, theoretical materials — I wanted to be warned and armed. I ended up with a fragment where it is written how an expert should check 19th task. There it is written in black and white that a different degree of specification of the example is allowed, without the obligatory “what, where, when”. I read this excerpt aloud once, twice, more…

I was hinted: «You’ve already raised four (secondary) points, it’s time to stop, already a lot»

They wanted me to leave, but the argument continued. I again struggled with explanations and arguments that everything was right with me. I went to the end and asked to the bitter end to be explained to me what the mistake was.

Expert microphone is switched off again. The next meeting starts. Another member of the commission sits next to the experts and introduces himself as the senior one. She said hello, said that she had been watching our battles for a long time, and tried to finish me off: “Of course, we can raise your grade by one point for this task, but you understand that your work will be rechecked by federal experts and almost Kotova and Liskova themselves will watch it.”

At that moment, I thought it was such an honor: the compilers of the dorm collections would read my work. I replied to the senior expert that I understand everything and agree that my work be sent anywhere and to anyone. I need to increase my points, because they were withdrawn for an unknown reason and they can’t explain anything at the appeal.

The battle is finally over. I was told that they would add points for all tasks to me. As a result, my second part of the assessment turned out to be perfect, the mistakes remained only in the test part — offensive, but there was no way to win them back, I really miscalculated there.

A recipe for a good appeal

For those who are going to appeal, I can personally advise you to take all the documents and important pieces of paper that you can rely on. If you prove your case without official sources, the commission will generally be on the drum what you say. They just don’t seem to understand words.

Add perseverance, courage and repetition of the same thing 15 times to the pieces of paper. When I was told again and again that I had the wrong example, I again and again asked to explain why this was considered a mistake and where they found such criteria. At some point, the experts went so far as to simply say: “Well, this is how we see this task” — and how to react? I continued to stand my ground and repeated that I could use varying degrees of specificity.

If you know you’re right, go to the end

When I went to appeal, I thought that even if something doesn’t work out, it’s not scary. I was warned that in the worst case, they would simply not add anything to me and nothing would be removed. I understood that this experience would be cool for me. It would be great to win at least something, and as a result, instead of the number 90, I now have 96.

If we talk about the USE system in general, I like it. Ironically, in the 25th task, I analyzed the effectiveness of such a social institution as education, and in the example I illustrated the function of a social lift through the Unified State Examination. A smart and diligent child from the region, thanks to these exams, can afford to enter cool universities. The only annoying thing is the uneven distribution of the complexity of the USE options across the country.

By alexxlab

Similar Posts