Since 2000, the Infant Class Size Regulations state that an infant class must not contain more than 30 pupils per qualified teacher, with some very limited exceptions.
However for many schools the infant admission number three year group may be 40, 45, 15 or any other figure. Mixed age group teaching sometimes leads to classes below 30 in Reception.
Admission authorities and local authorities make the argument that whilst admission to Reception may not breach the infant class size regulations, given mixed year group teaching in Years 1 and 2, the addition of one child in reception will breach the infant class size in later years.
In the case of R v (DD) The Independent Appeal Panel LB Islington in 2013 the High Court considered just such a case.
A primary school had mixed group teaching in Years 1 and 2, but was fortunate to have two qualified teachers to teach Reception and the admission number was 45. There were two classes of 22/23 children respectively.
The parents argued in front of the appeal panel and in the High Court that as their child could be admitted into Reception with no breach, the appeal panel should not have considered their case as part of the infant class size regulations, but should have considered it as part of the broader test set out in the Admission Appeal Code 2012.
The slimmed down guidance in the 2012 Admission and Admission Appeals Codes makes no reference to future prejudice. The earlier codes were quite specific about how infant class size matters should be dealt with by a panel, and looking at the impact on future year groups was specifically set out.
HHJ McKenna commented that infant class size was plainly an important government policy, saying: “It would to my mind be wholly inconsistent with the context to construe the 2012 Appeal Code as requiring panels when considering whether they would be in breach of the limit on infant class size to look only at a breach that is likely to occur during the first academic year that the child spends at the school.”
He went on further to comment that it is plainly part of an appeal panel’s obligation to consider what happens in the future, and to “not place any temporal limitation on when the breach of infant class size limit might arise”.
So, unsurprisingly, the parents’ application for judicial review and a quashing of the original decision were refused. It is important to note in this judgement that although the High Court is considering the issue of infant class size appeals, the expectation of a panel exercising judgement as to what happens in the future is an important decision and is arguably applicable to all appeals, infant class size or not.
Given the pressure on schools and admission authorities around pupil numbers, this may have an impact on how statements explaining the reasons to refuse a place for pupils are drafted and how cases are put to the independent appeal panel.
How Nelsons Can Help
Any questions around the admission and appeals process, or indeed the content and documentation for appeal panels can be discussed 0800 024 1976 or via our online form.