Wycombe Labour party attack new 11+

Bucks Free Press: Val Letheren Val Letheren

THE Wycombe Labour party has attacked a county cabinet minster and asked her to prove why she thinks the revamped 11+ test has given more pupils the chance to go to grammar schools.

At a Bucks County Council cabinet meeting last month Cllr Val Letheren reported back on her review of narrowing the attainment gap in Bucks - the disparity between the success of pupils from wealthier backgrounds and those from less affluent families.

As chairman of the Education, Skills and Children’s Services Select Committee she reported on how the county council would tackle the issue, and said: "It sounds like, I know it’s not published yet, there are more children from schools where children who haven’t been to grammar schools are now going."

But the Labour party in High Wycombe has attacked this assertion about the new 11+, which was introduced last September and aimed to make the test harder to tutor.

They said BCC has published no evidence about the tests and neither has the Bucks Grammar Schools’Association, which was responsible for setting the new test. BCC says final, confirmed figures on pass rates will not be published until later this year.

However, Wycombe Labour Party says it has analysed, reviewed and published information from BCC and said it shows more pupils (47 per cent) from out of county are passing the 11+ under the new test. Not all these pupils will get a grammar school place, however, as they go to Bucks pupils first who have passed the test.

The Labour figures show 4,811 pupils from Bucks state schools took the test, and 948 passed, while 753 took the test from Bucks private schools, and 367 passed.

Mark Ferris, secretary of Wycombe Labour Party said "The information provided so far by BCC shows that the new 11+ is even worse than the old one in favouring pupils from private schools and pupils from outside Bucks.

"If you go to a Bucks state school you now have about a 20 per cent chance of getting into a grammar school. If you go to a Bucks private school you stand about a 50 per cent chance. How is that letting in a wider range of children?"

Wycombe Labour would like further information to see whether the new 11+ is fair, including the Race Equality Impact Assessment.

Cllr Letheren said the correct figures were not yet available for proper scrutiny.

She said: "I suggest Wycombe Labour Party looks again at my original statement to the Cabinet meeting in which I said 'it sounds like'. We won't know figures until the details are published by the grammar schools. I suggest they wait for this to happen."

Comments (24)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:26pm Fri 11 Apr 14

HerculePoirot says...

"I suggest Wycombe Labour Party looks again at my original statement to the Cabinet meeting in which I said 'it sounds like'. We won't know figures until the details are published by the grammar schools. I suggest they wait for this to happen."

The more I read the original quote the more ridiculous it looks. 'it sounds like'. You mean Bucks Grammar Schools’Associatio
n told me, and I'm naive enough to believe them and also stupid enough to then go and make a statement to the newspapers about it..

Anyway, we do know the figures for how many children scored 121 or more in this "new" test, and we can compare these figures with previous years. Arguably this is a more direct measure of the test than the award of grammar school (swoon) places, since it doesn't include reviews by the heads or appeals etc.
"I suggest Wycombe Labour Party looks again at my original statement to the Cabinet meeting in which I said 'it sounds like'. We won't know figures until the details are published by the grammar schools. I suggest they wait for this to happen." The more I read the original quote the more ridiculous it looks. 'it sounds like'. You mean Bucks Grammar Schools’Associatio n told me, and I'm naive enough to believe them and also stupid enough to then go and make a statement to the newspapers about it.. Anyway, we do know the figures for how many children scored 121 or more in this "new" test, and we can compare these figures with previous years. Arguably this is a more direct measure of the test than the award of grammar school (swoon) places, since it doesn't include reviews by the heads or appeals etc. HerculePoirot
  • Score: 12

10:16pm Sat 12 Apr 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

… there are more children from schools where children who haven’t been to grammar schools are now going."
What does that mean?
[italic] … there are more children from schools where children who haven’t been to grammar schools are now going." [/italic] What does that mean? Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 10

11:13pm Sat 12 Apr 14

slickchick says...

It is possible that some new private schools have succeeded in coaching their pupils through the new exam. The grammar schools will benefit by ensuring that only wealthy children will mix with their pupils.
It is possible that some new private schools have succeeded in coaching their pupils through the new exam. The grammar schools will benefit by ensuring that only wealthy children will mix with their pupils. slickchick
  • Score: 3

11:21pm Sat 12 Apr 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Why are Buckinghamshire ratepayers waiting on the grammar schools to make public their data? It should have been made public when they first had it - the grammar schools are, or ought to be, in the role of public servants keeping their masters informed about they are doing with their masters' money
Why are Buckinghamshire ratepayers waiting on the grammar schools to make public their data? It should have been made public when they first had it - the grammar schools are, or ought to be, in the role of public servants keeping their masters informed about they are doing with their masters' money Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 10

11:25pm Sat 12 Apr 14

allrightnow2 says...

slickchick wrote:
It is possible that some new private schools have succeeded in coaching their pupils through the new exam. The grammar schools will benefit by ensuring that only wealthy children will mix with their pupils.
This was always the case. There was always a number of children from Godstowe who then transferred to Grammar school rather than Wycombe Abbey. I have to say though that those whose parents paid for private primary education / tuition then struggled and most left at the end of year 11 to go to college instead. They were taking up spaces that children whose parents couldn't afford the private education could have had. There's no perfect system.
[quote][p][bold]slickchick[/bold] wrote: It is possible that some new private schools have succeeded in coaching their pupils through the new exam. The grammar schools will benefit by ensuring that only wealthy children will mix with their pupils.[/p][/quote]This was always the case. There was always a number of children from Godstowe who then transferred to Grammar school rather than Wycombe Abbey. I have to say though that those whose parents paid for private primary education / tuition then struggled and most left at the end of year 11 to go to college instead. They were taking up spaces that children whose parents couldn't afford the private education could have had. There's no perfect system. allrightnow2
  • Score: 6

1:15pm Sun 13 Apr 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

allrightnow2 wrote:
slickchick wrote:
It is possible that some new private schools have succeeded in coaching their pupils through the new exam. The grammar schools will benefit by ensuring that only wealthy children will mix with their pupils.
This was always the case. There was always a number of children from Godstowe who then transferred to Grammar school rather than Wycombe Abbey. I have to say though that those whose parents paid for private primary education / tuition then struggled and most left at the end of year 11 to go to college instead. They were taking up spaces that children whose parents couldn't afford the private education could have had. There's no perfect system.
'There's no perfect system.'

That's right and 'the best is the enemy of the good' but the system we have at the moment is maintained in a highly imperfect condition to benefit one group of children at great cost to the majority of children.


The fact that there is no perfect system is not a justification for inactivity when the existing system needs improvement and people are in wilful denial about this.

I have to say though that those whose parents paid for private primary education / tuition then struggled and most left at the end of year 11 to go to college instead.

Where did you get those figures from - the word ‘struggling’ is a bit of a giveaway - ‘struggling’ is what children who are tutored for the 11+ do because they are ‘out of their depth’ - rather as if the 11+ was based on accurately-measured pure reason and if you try to manipulate it you come to a sticky end.
[quote][p][bold]allrightnow2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]slickchick[/bold] wrote: It is possible that some new private schools have succeeded in coaching their pupils through the new exam. The grammar schools will benefit by ensuring that only wealthy children will mix with their pupils.[/p][/quote]This was always the case. There was always a number of children from Godstowe who then transferred to Grammar school rather than Wycombe Abbey. I have to say though that those whose parents paid for private primary education / tuition then struggled and most left at the end of year 11 to go to college instead. They were taking up spaces that children whose parents couldn't afford the private education could have had. There's no perfect system.[/p][/quote]'There's no perfect system.' That's right and 'the best is the enemy of the good' but the system we have at the moment is maintained in a highly imperfect condition to benefit one group of children at great cost to the majority of children. The fact that there is no perfect system is not a justification for inactivity when the existing system needs improvement and people are in wilful denial about this. [italic] I have to say though that those whose parents paid for private primary education / tuition then struggled and most left at the end of year 11 to go to college instead. [/italic] Where did you get those figures from - the word ‘struggling’ is a bit of a giveaway - ‘struggling’ is what children who are tutored for the 11+ do because they are ‘out of their depth’ - rather as if the 11+ was based on accurately-measured pure reason and if you try to manipulate it you come to a sticky end. Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 5

1:25pm Sun 13 Apr 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Is this article concerned with the attainment gap, or the supposedly new and more-difficult-to-tu
tor-to 11+ ?
Your article above says:

THE Wycombe Labour party has attacked a county cabinet minster* and asked her to prove why she thinks the revamped 11+ test has given more pupils the chance to go to grammar schools.

In fact the WLP don’t seem to be doing that - the article does not explain how the Labour Party ‘attacked’ Councillor Val Letheren (for it is she who is the ‘minster’) but refers back to the vague-sounding report by Rebecca Cain in last month’s BFP where Ms Cain said: … Cllr Letheren said the new 11+ test appears to have also let in a wider range of children.

Not ‘more pupils’ but ‘a wider range’ and your article above goes on to quote Mark Ferris of WLP saying: How is that letting in a wider range of children?" .
When Philip Wayne made his meaninglessly vague statements of approval for the revamped 11+ in October 2013 Wayne said:
Data is being analysed, but early feedback from our primary headteacher colleagues is that the test was appropriate for the purpose for which it was designed.
This sounded suspiciously vague and a number of people asked him what it actually meant. I wondered if Mr Wayne was waiting for public interest to die down and then at some future date - like the spring of 2014 - he would be able to vaguely say that the test had been reviewed and found fit for purpose, back in October 2013 - however we are apparently still waiting for a final judgement on it today, while the grammar schools sit on data that should be in the public domain as it is paid for by all our council taxes (and not the council taxes of people from well-off areas in west London and elsewhere whose children commute to Bucks grammar schools from out of county).
When I see these vague statements to the BFP and the Observer (though the Observer later qualified them to the point of withdrawing them) I wonder what Ms Letheren and Mr Wayne have up their sleeves - the figures used by WLP are obtained from BCC and according to your reporter:
The Labour figures show 4,811 pupils from Bucks state schools took the test, and 948 passed, (19.7%) while 753 took the test from Bucks private schools, and 367 passed (48.7%).

This fits in closely with the statement by Mark Ferris, secretary of WLP:
The information provided so far by BCC shows that the new 11+ is even worse than the old one in favouring pupils from private schools and pupils from outside Bucks.

When we are being told to wait for ‘finalised’ figures the way BCC ideologues are telling us, I cannot help wondering if Val Letheren and others are waiting to pull some rabbit out of the hat - are they going to reduce the pass score to get through the 11+ and exclude out of county pupils or are they just waiting for us to fall silent? I suspect they are going to reduce the number of out of county pupils and then say that the WLP was wrong in saying 47% of pupils were from outside Bucks.
In the meantime I would be interested to know if Ms Letheren or Mr Wayne could tell us if the success threshold of a score of 121 on the 11+ is a notional figure that varies from year to year so that child A can reach it and pass the 11+ one year and the following year Child B can fail it although they have got a higher score than Child A.
http://www.bucksfree
press.co.uk/news/111
08724.Proposals_to_c
lose_educational_gap
_between_rich_and_po
or/?cmpid=cmt )
http://www.bucksfree
press.co.uk/news/107
51891.New_11__hailed
_a_success_by_gramma
r_schools/

*The OED says a ‘minster’ is ‘The church of a monastery …’
Is this article concerned with the attainment gap, or the supposedly new and more-difficult-to-tu tor-to 11+ ? Your article above says: [italic] THE Wycombe Labour party has attacked a county cabinet minster* and asked her to prove why she thinks the revamped 11+ test has given more pupils the chance to go to grammar schools. [/italic] In fact the WLP don’t seem to be doing that - the article does not explain how the Labour Party ‘attacked’ Councillor Val Letheren (for it is she who is the ‘minster’) but refers back to the vague-sounding report by Rebecca Cain in last month’s BFP where Ms Cain said: [italic] … Cllr Letheren said the new 11+ test appears to have also let in a wider range of children. [/italic] Not ‘more pupils’ but ‘a wider range’ and your article above goes on to quote Mark Ferris of WLP saying: [italic] How is that letting in a wider range of children?" [/italic]. When Philip Wayne made his meaninglessly vague statements of approval for the revamped 11+ in October 2013 Wayne said: [italic] Data is being analysed, but early feedback from our primary headteacher colleagues is that the test was appropriate for the purpose for which it was designed. [/italic] This sounded suspiciously vague and a number of people asked him what it actually meant. I wondered if Mr Wayne was waiting for public interest to die down and then at some future date - like the spring of 2014 - he would be able to vaguely say that the test had been reviewed and found fit for purpose, back in October 2013 - however we are apparently still waiting for a final judgement on it today, while the grammar schools sit on data that should be in the public domain as it is paid for by all our council taxes (and not the council taxes of people from well-off areas in west London and elsewhere whose children commute to Bucks grammar schools from out of county). When I see these vague statements to the BFP and the Observer (though the Observer later qualified them to the point of withdrawing them) I wonder what Ms Letheren and Mr Wayne have up their sleeves - the figures used by WLP are obtained from BCC and according to your reporter: [italic] The Labour figures show 4,811 pupils from Bucks state schools took the test, and 948 passed, (19.7%) while 753 took the test from Bucks private schools, and 367 passed (48.7%). [/italic] This fits in closely with the statement by Mark Ferris, secretary of WLP: [italic]The information provided so far by BCC shows that the new 11+ is even worse than the old one in favouring pupils from private schools and pupils from outside Bucks. [/italic] When we are being told to wait for ‘finalised’ figures the way BCC ideologues are telling us, I cannot help wondering if Val Letheren and others are waiting to pull some rabbit out of the hat - are they going to reduce the pass score to get through the 11+ and exclude out of county pupils or are they just waiting for us to fall silent? I suspect they are going to reduce the number of out of county pupils and then say that the WLP was wrong in saying 47% of pupils were from outside Bucks. In the meantime I would be interested to know if Ms Letheren or Mr Wayne could tell us if the success threshold of a score of 121 on the 11+ is a notional figure that varies from year to year so that child A can reach it and pass the 11+ one year and the following year Child B can fail it although they have got a higher score than Child A. http://www.bucksfree press.co.uk/news/111 08724.Proposals_to_c lose_educational_gap _between_rich_and_po or/?cmpid=cmt ) http://www.bucksfree press.co.uk/news/107 51891.New_11__hailed _a_success_by_gramma r_schools/ *The OED says a ‘minster’ is ‘The church of a monastery …’ Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 5

1:54pm Sun 13 Apr 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

You’ve got to hand it to Ms Letheren - she refuses to rely on her good looks the way a younger woman might - she employs pure wit and intelligence and is obviously a master wordsmith who has missed her vocation as a stand-up comedian - firstly she is a mistress of the deadpan one-liner as in your earlier report - hilariously turning a blind eye to ‘selection’ she says straight-faced:

"In Bucks we do have a larger gap than most authorities and we explored why this is.”

In fact according to the Guardian, Buckinghamshire is the Education authority with almost the largest gap in the country at 39.6%. (The smallest gap is in the capital – Kensington and Chelsea at 4.2%)

(By the way - these are interesting statistics - Mike Appleyard told me in email two years ago last month:

The impact of this (‘selective’) policy is that Bucks remains in the top three authorities academic performance at all levels. Age 11, age 16 and age 18. The most common measure used is the GCSE examination, in which Bucks has the highest performance when Maths and English are included, proving that our rounded performance is strong at a fraction under 70%.

I've quoted Mike's words in full in case anybody can suggest an explanation for them particularly the second part.)

Ms Letheren (probably with a roguish twinkle) also says:

I suggest Wycombe Labour Party looks again at my original statement to the Cabinet meeting in which I said 'it sounds like'.

These Labour people - they ought to look at things a bit more closely!

However if you look up her original words it says:

It sounds like, I know it's not published yet, there are more children from schools where children who haven't been to grammar schools are now going

It sounds like - to me the phrase:

there are more children from schools where children who haven't been to grammar schools are now going doesn’t actually mean anything but clearly the ideologues at BCC are trying to say that everything they say is provisional - don’t take too much notice of it until we have finessed the figures even further.

Why are Val Letheren and Philip Wayne giving reassuring statements to the Observer, the BFP and the rest of us, if the figures are still at too unprocessed a stage to be relied on?

http://www.theguardi
an.com/education/201
4/jan/28/pupil-premi
um-gcse-attainment-g
ap
You’ve got to hand it to Ms Letheren - she refuses to rely on her good looks the way a younger woman might - she employs pure wit and intelligence and is obviously a master wordsmith who has missed her vocation as a stand-up comedian - firstly she is a mistress of the deadpan one-liner as in your earlier report - hilariously turning a blind eye to ‘selection’ she says straight-faced: [italic]"In Bucks we do have a larger gap than most authorities and we explored why this is.” [/italic] In fact according to the Guardian, Buckinghamshire is the Education authority with almost the largest gap in the country at 39.6%. (The smallest gap is in the capital – Kensington and Chelsea at 4.2%) (By the way - these are interesting statistics - Mike Appleyard told me in email two years ago last month: [italic] The impact of this (‘selective’) policy is that Bucks remains in the top three authorities academic performance at all levels. Age 11, age 16 and age 18. The most common measure used is the GCSE examination, in which Bucks has the highest performance when Maths and English are included, proving that our rounded performance is strong at a fraction under 70%. [/italic] I've quoted Mike's words in full in case anybody can suggest an explanation for them particularly the second part.) Ms Letheren (probably with a roguish twinkle) also says: [italic] I suggest Wycombe Labour Party looks again at my original statement to the Cabinet meeting in which I said 'it sounds like'. [/italic] These Labour people - they ought to look at things a bit more closely! However if you look up her original words it says: [italic] It sounds like, I know it's not published yet, there are more children from schools where children who haven't been to grammar schools are now going[/italic] It sounds like - to me the phrase: [italic] there are more children from schools where children who haven't been to grammar schools are now going [italic] doesn’t actually [italic] mean [/italic] anything but clearly the ideologues at BCC are trying to say that everything they say is provisional - don’t take too much notice of it until we have finessed the figures even further. Why are Val Letheren and Philip Wayne giving reassuring statements to the Observer, the BFP and the rest of us, if the figures are still at too unprocessed a stage to be relied on? http://www.theguardi an.com/education/201 4/jan/28/pupil-premi um-gcse-attainment-g ap Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 4

2:04pm Sun 13 Apr 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Italic on


Italic off.
[italic]Italic on[/italic] Italic off. Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: -2

2:10pm Sun 13 Apr 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

You’ve got to hand it to Ms Letheren - she refuses to rely on her good looks the way a younger woman might - she employs pure wit and intelligence and is obviously a master wordsmith who has missed her vocation as a stand-up comedian - firstly she is a mistress of the deadpan one-liner as in your earlier report - hilariously turning a blind eye to ‘selection’ she says straight-faced:

"In Bucks we do have a larger gap than most authorities and we explored why this is.”

In fact according to the Guardian, Buckinghamshire is the Education authority with almost the largest gap in the country at 39.6%. (The smallest gap is in the capital – Kensington and Chelsea at 4.2%)

(By the way - these are interesting statistics - Mike Appleyard told me in email two years ago last month:

The impact of this (‘selective’) policy is that Bucks remains in the top three authorities academic performance at all levels. Age 11, age 16 and age 18. The most common measure used is the GCSE examination, in which Bucks has the highest performance when Maths and English are included, proving that our rounded performance is strong at a fraction under 70%.

I've quoted Mike's words in full in case anybody can suggest an explanation for them particularly the second part.)

Ms Letheren (probably with a roguish twinkle) also says:

I suggest Wycombe Labour Party looks again at my original statement to the Cabinet meeting in which I said 'it sounds like'.

These Labour people - they ought to look at things a bit more closely!

However if you look up her original words it says:

It sounds like, I know it's not published yet, there are more children from schools where children who haven't been to grammar schools are now going

It sounds like - to me the phrase:

there are more children from schools where children who haven't been to grammar schools are now going doesn’t actually mean anything but clearly the ideologues at BCC are trying to say that everything they say is provisional - don’t take too much notice of it until we have finessed the figures even further.

Why are Val Letheren and Philip Wayne giving reassuring statements to the Observer, the BFP and the rest of us, if the figures are still at too unprocessed a stage to be relied on?

http://www.theguardi

an.com/education/201

4/jan/28/pupil-premi

um-gcse-attainment-g

ap
You’ve got to hand it to Ms Letheren - she refuses to rely on her good looks the way a younger woman might - she employs pure wit and intelligence and is obviously a master wordsmith who has missed her vocation as a stand-up comedian - firstly she is a mistress of the deadpan one-liner as in your earlier report - hilariously turning a blind eye to ‘selection’ she says straight-faced: [italic] "In Bucks we do have a larger gap than most authorities and we explored why this is.” [/italic] In fact according to the Guardian, Buckinghamshire is the Education authority with almost the largest gap in the country at 39.6%. (The smallest gap is in the capital – Kensington and Chelsea at 4.2%) (By the way - these are interesting statistics - Mike Appleyard told me in email two years ago last month: [italic] The impact of this (‘selective’) policy is that Bucks remains in the top three authorities academic performance at all levels. Age 11, age 16 and age 18. The most common measure used is the GCSE examination, in which Bucks has the highest performance when Maths and English are included, proving that our rounded performance is strong at a fraction under 70%. [/italic] I've quoted Mike's words in full in case anybody can suggest an explanation for them particularly the second part.) Ms Letheren (probably with a roguish twinkle) also says: [italic] I suggest Wycombe Labour Party looks again at my original statement to the Cabinet meeting in which I said 'it sounds like'. [/italic] These Labour people - they ought to look at things a bit more closely! However if you look up her original words it says: [italic] It sounds like, I know it's not published yet, there are more children from schools where children who haven't been to grammar schools are now going [/italic] It sounds like - to me the phrase: [italic] there are more children from schools where children who haven't been to grammar schools are now going[/italic] doesn’t actually [italic] mean[/italic] anything but clearly the ideologues at BCC are trying to say that everything they say is provisional - don’t take too much notice of it until we have finessed the figures even further. Why are Val Letheren and Philip Wayne giving reassuring statements to the Observer, the BFP and the rest of us, if the figures are still at too unprocessed a stage to be relied on? http://www.theguardi an.com/education/201 4/jan/28/pupil-premi um-gcse-attainment-g ap Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 2

9:49am Mon 14 Apr 14

HerculePoirot says...

"Why are Val Letheren and Philip Wayne giving reassuring statements to the Observer, the BFP and the rest of us, if the figures are still at too unprocessed a stage to be relied on?"

Preemptive strike? They probably found out that a freedom of information request had been made, and would have known that the data themselves weren't exactly what they had hoped for. So put out a few rumours to muddy the waters.

When that backfires come out with: "We won't know figures until the details are published by the grammar schools. I suggest they wait for this to happen". Val: Why didn't you follow your own advice? Why didn't YOU wait for this to happne?

Sign of desperation IMO.
"Why are Val Letheren and Philip Wayne giving reassuring statements to the Observer, the BFP and the rest of us, if the figures are still at too unprocessed a stage to be relied on?" Preemptive strike? They probably found out that a freedom of information request had been made, and would have known that the data themselves weren't exactly what they had hoped for. So put out a few rumours to muddy the waters. When that backfires come out with: "We won't know figures until the details are published by the grammar schools. I suggest they wait for this to happen". Val: Why didn't you follow your own advice? Why didn't YOU wait for this to happne? Sign of desperation IMO. HerculePoirot
  • Score: 6

4:36pm Mon 14 Apr 14

BucksComment says...

Lies, statistics and numbers........

Yes the council allocates spaces to Buck pupils before out of area, BUT...
as the scores are normalised, the out of area kids have already scewed the intake. i.e. if every kids from our ot area was a genious, they would push up the normalised pass mark so the Bucks kids would not 'pass'. If no our of area kids were to take the test, then the schools would get the 'top 30%' of bucks kids.....
Lies, statistics and numbers........ Yes the council allocates spaces to Buck pupils before out of area, BUT... as the scores are normalised, the out of area kids have already scewed the intake. i.e. if every kids from our ot area was a genious, they would push up the normalised pass mark so the Bucks kids would not 'pass'. If no our of area kids were to take the test, then the schools would get the 'top 30%' of bucks kids..... BucksComment
  • Score: 0

4:37pm Mon 14 Apr 14

BucksComment says...

BucksComment wrote:
Lies, statistics and numbers........

Yes the council allocates spaces to Buck pupils before out of area, BUT...
as the scores are normalised, the out of area kids have already scewed the intake. i.e. if every kids from our ot area was a genious, they would push up the normalised pass mark so the Bucks kids would not 'pass'. If no our of area kids were to take the test, then the schools would get the 'top 30%' of bucks kids.....
Sorry for the auto correct smelling mistakes.... I'm sure you get the idea
[quote][p][bold]BucksComment[/bold] wrote: Lies, statistics and numbers........ Yes the council allocates spaces to Buck pupils before out of area, BUT... as the scores are normalised, the out of area kids have already scewed the intake. i.e. if every kids from our ot area was a genious, they would push up the normalised pass mark so the Bucks kids would not 'pass'. If no our of area kids were to take the test, then the schools would get the 'top 30%' of bucks kids.....[/p][/quote]Sorry for the auto correct smelling mistakes.... I'm sure you get the idea BucksComment
  • Score: 0

10:19pm Mon 14 Apr 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

BucksComment wrote:
BucksComment wrote:
Lies, statistics and numbers........

Yes the council allocates spaces to Buck pupils before out of area, BUT...
as the scores are normalised, the out of area kids have already scewed the intake. i.e. if every kids from our ot area was a genious, they would push up the normalised pass mark so the Bucks kids would not 'pass'. If no our of area kids were to take the test, then the schools would get the 'top 30%' of bucks kids.....
Sorry for the auto correct smelling mistakes.... I'm sure you get the idea
I don't want to be rude to a fellow crazed egalitarian ideologue but we have a very strong case - in fact we have a case and the 'selective excellence' mob doesn't - so I think you ought to make your point clear before pressing 'send' - parts of what you say above are really just not clear.


However I guess you are answering my earlier question to Ms Letheren and Mr Wayne:

'I would be interested to know if Ms Letheren or Mr Wayne could tell us if the success threshold of a score of 121 on the 11+ is a notional figure that varies from year to year so that child A can reach it and pass the 11+ one year and the following year Child B can fail it although they have got a higher score than Child A.'

(It sounds as if you are saying 'yes' - the intellectual measuring device we employ in this county varies from year to year. People become excellent or too stupid to educate at different levels from one year to the next.)
[quote][p][bold]BucksComment[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BucksComment[/bold] wrote: Lies, statistics and numbers........ Yes the council allocates spaces to Buck pupils before out of area, BUT... as the scores are normalised, the out of area kids have already scewed the intake. i.e. if every kids from our ot area was a genious, they would push up the normalised pass mark so the Bucks kids would not 'pass'. If no our of area kids were to take the test, then the schools would get the 'top 30%' of bucks kids.....[/p][/quote]Sorry for the auto correct smelling mistakes.... I'm sure you get the idea[/p][/quote]I don't want to be rude to a fellow crazed egalitarian ideologue but we have a very strong case - in fact we have a case and the 'selective excellence' mob doesn't - so I think you ought to make your point clear before pressing 'send' - parts of what you say above are really just not clear. However I guess you are answering my earlier question to Ms Letheren and Mr Wayne: [italic]'I would be interested to know if Ms Letheren or Mr Wayne could tell us if the success threshold of a score of 121 on the 11+ is a notional figure that varies from year to year so that child A can reach it and pass the 11+ one year and the following year Child B can fail it although they have got a higher score than Child A.' [/italic] (It sounds as if you are saying 'yes' - the intellectual measuring device we employ in this county varies from year to year. People become excellent or too stupid to educate at different levels from one year to the next.) Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 1

10:27pm Mon 14 Apr 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

(Don’t you admire the way Mike Appleyard, Val Letheren and Philip Wayne remain above the fray and avoid explaining or justifying anything that they say - so dignified, so serene - a bit like the Queen who is famously ‘above politics’. Philip Wayne says a bit but that has apparently been misunderstood and commented on prematurely, by the Observer and the BFP and all other people who have asked him questions.
I suppose it must be just good breeding that makes them do it - after all they could devastate our argument with some reason and facts - one can’t help but admire them.)
(Don’t you admire the way Mike Appleyard, Val Letheren and Philip Wayne remain above the fray and avoid explaining or justifying anything that they say - so dignified, so serene - a bit like the Queen who is famously ‘above politics’. Philip Wayne says a bit but that has apparently been misunderstood and commented on prematurely, by the Observer and the BFP and all other people who have asked him questions. I suppose it must be just good breeding that makes them do it - after all they could devastate our argument with some reason and facts - one can’t help but admire them.) Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 4

11:15pm Mon 14 Apr 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

… oh wait they don’t have the facts yet - just the reasoning - the facts are being held on to by the grammar schools (whose association Philip Wayne is head of) and the grammar schools are independent academies although Philip Wayne believed in this newspaper in October last year that:

… early feedback from our primary headteacher colleagues is that the test was appropriate for the purpose for which it was designed,

and on 8 February this year the Observer said:

Philip Wayne, headteacher at Chesham grammar school and chairman of the Bucks Grammar School Heads Association, has welcomed the changes and says he is "very confident" that the new test will avoid the current situation, in which many pupils who won places at his school with the help of intensive tutoring struggle to keep up with lessons once they arrive.

(http://www.theguard
ian.com/education/20
14/feb/08/grammar-se
lective-schools-exam
-tutors)

Of course since then he has told the Observer:

I cannot … make an informed comment until the process is complete. The number of candidates in 2013 was larger than in previous years, partly due to the publicity surrounding the new test. This may have had an effect on test outcomes."

And the Observer has explained:

Officially, no exam statistics are available until September, after an appeals process has been completed. Bucks county council told me that the county's grammar schools are now centrally-funded academies and are their own admissions authorities; technically, the schools own the data and the council can't release them yet.

These comments both date from 8 March this year.

(Both from: http://www.theguardi
an.com/theobserver/2
014/mar/08/readers-e
ditor-on-reporting-b
oth-sides-argument)

If the finalised figures are not due until September this year, as the Observer said on 8 March, then we will have waited almost twelve months to see the confidence that all right-thinking Englishmen have in the 11+ vindicated, and the crazed egalitarians of the WLP proven decisively wrong.

If Mr Wayne is chairman of the Bucks Grammar Schools Association why doesn’t he cut through the red tape and tell his fellow grammar school heads to get the figures more quickly or publish the raw data with identifying personal details removed to end the senseless babble of people like ‘Hercule’, ‘Slickchick’ and others?

I am sure that I speak for all level-headed people when I say that I cannot understand why BCC and Mr Wayne's Association are delaying the day when these figures are finally released to him (by the grammar schools whose association he is head of) and he is finally able to decisively rout the political ideologues of the Wycombe Labour Party totally from whom we will never hear again I daresay.
… oh wait they don’t [italic] have [/italic]the facts yet - just the reasoning - the facts are being held on to by the grammar schools (whose association Philip Wayne is head of) and the grammar schools are independent academies although Philip Wayne believed in this newspaper in October last year that: [italic] … early feedback from our primary headteacher colleagues is that the test was appropriate for the purpose for which it was designed,[/italic] and on 8 February this year the Observer said: [italic] Philip Wayne, headteacher at Chesham grammar school and chairman of the Bucks Grammar School Heads Association, has welcomed the changes and says he is "very confident" that the new test will avoid the current situation, in which many pupils who won places at his school with the help of intensive tutoring struggle to keep up with lessons once they arrive. [/italic] (http://www.theguard ian.com/education/20 14/feb/08/grammar-se lective-schools-exam -tutors) Of course since then he has told the Observer: [italic] I cannot … make an informed comment until the process is complete. The number of candidates in 2013 was larger than in previous years, partly due to the publicity surrounding the new test. This may have had an effect on test outcomes." [/italic] And the Observer has explained: [italic] Officially, no exam statistics are available until September, after an appeals process has been completed. Bucks county council told me that the county's grammar schools are now centrally-funded academies and are their own admissions authorities; technically, the schools own the data and the council can't release them yet. [/italic] These comments both date from 8 March this year. (Both from: http://www.theguardi an.com/theobserver/2 014/mar/08/readers-e ditor-on-reporting-b oth-sides-argument) If the finalised figures are not due until September this year, as the Observer said on 8 March, then we will have waited almost twelve months to see the confidence that all right-thinking Englishmen have in the 11+ vindicated, and the crazed egalitarians of the WLP proven decisively wrong. If Mr Wayne is chairman of the Bucks Grammar Schools Association why doesn’t he cut through the red tape and tell his fellow grammar school heads to get the figures more quickly or publish the raw data with identifying personal details removed to end the senseless babble of people like ‘Hercule’, ‘Slickchick’ and others? I am sure that I speak for all level-headed people when I say that I cannot understand why BCC and Mr Wayne's Association are delaying the day when these figures are finally released to him (by the grammar schools whose association he is head of) and he is finally able to decisively rout the political ideologues of the Wycombe Labour Party totally from whom we will never hear again I daresay. Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 1

11:25pm Mon 14 Apr 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

If Philip Wayne is headmaster of Chesham Grammar School I assume he must be a graduate and when I see the cool, well-reasoned, well-informed, consistent, and deeply -researched fashion in which he justifies ‘selection’ I wonder what he is a graduate in - is it Philosophy or English - possibly Modern Languages … anyway some area of study involving reasoning and language I would imagine.
If Philip Wayne is headmaster of Chesham Grammar School I assume he must be a graduate and when I see the cool, well-reasoned, well-informed, consistent, and deeply -researched fashion in which he justifies ‘selection’ I wonder what he is a graduate in - is it Philosophy or English - possibly Modern Languages … anyway some area of study involving reasoning and language I would imagine. Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 0

11:48pm Mon 14 Apr 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Before I go to bed with a hard-earned cup of cocoa I would point out that Mr Wayne said on 21 October last year:

We were pleased overall with the secondary transfer test both in terms of the process and its content. … Data is being analysed, but early feedback from our primary headteacher colleagues is that the test was appropriate for the purpose for which it was designed.

(http://www.bucksfre
epress.co.uk/news/10
751891.New_11__haile
d_a_success_by_gramm
ar_schools/)

However in its report on 9 March the Observer - after quoting Mr Wayne’s retraction (I don’t think that’s too strong a word) continued:

But what about the test itself? It was devised by a team from Durham University, led by Prof Robert Coe. Prof Coe said he would "absolutely not" claim that his test was "tutor-proof". "We use the best available research to try to minimise the impact of tutoring and broaden access to grammar schools, but we never claim it is tutor-proof," he said. He would not comment on that research or the content of the test.

(http://www.theguard
ian.com/theobserver/
2014/mar/08/readers-
editor-on-reporting-
both-sides-argument)


And now to my cocoa.
Before I go to bed with a hard-earned cup of cocoa I would point out that Mr Wayne said on 21 October last year: [italic] We were pleased overall with the secondary transfer test both in terms of the process and its content. … Data is being analysed, but early feedback from our primary headteacher colleagues is that the test was appropriate for the purpose for which it was designed. [/italic] (http://www.bucksfre epress.co.uk/news/10 751891.New_11__haile d_a_success_by_gramm ar_schools/) However in its report on 9 March the Observer - after quoting Mr Wayne’s retraction (I don’t think that’s too strong a word) continued: [italic] But what about the test itself? It was devised by a team from Durham University, led by Prof Robert Coe. Prof Coe said he would "absolutely not" claim that his test was "tutor-proof". "We use the best available research to try to minimise the impact of tutoring and broaden access to grammar schools, but we never claim it is tutor-proof," he said. He would not comment on that research or the content of the test. [/italic] (http://www.theguard ian.com/theobserver/ 2014/mar/08/readers- editor-on-reporting- both-sides-argument) And now to my cocoa. Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 1

12:01am Tue 15 Apr 14

HerculePoirot says...

Excellent points. I think this one is particularly important: "the intellectual measuring device we employ in this county varies from year to year. People become excellent or too stupid to educate at different levels from one year to the next". Indeed "121" and the number who are deemed "suitable for a grammar school education" are completely arbitrary. Also, apparently, an individual's suitability depends on how many apply from other regions. Completely bonkers.
Excellent points. I think this one is particularly important: "the intellectual measuring device we employ in this county varies from year to year. People become excellent or too stupid to educate at different levels from one year to the next". Indeed "121" and the number who are deemed "suitable for a grammar school education" are completely arbitrary. Also, apparently, an individual's suitability depends on how many apply from other regions. Completely bonkers. HerculePoirot
  • Score: 5

11:53pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

allrightnow2 wrote:
slickchick wrote:
It is possible that some new private schools have succeeded in coaching their pupils through the new exam. The grammar schools will benefit by ensuring that only wealthy children will mix with their pupils.
This was always the case. There was always a number of children from Godstowe who then transferred to Grammar school rather than Wycombe Abbey. I have to say though that those whose parents paid for private primary education / tuition then struggled and most left at the end of year 11 to go to college instead. They were taking up spaces that children whose parents couldn't afford the private education could have had. There's no perfect system.
‘allrightnow’

You still haven’t answered my question - where did you get this information from?
Godstowe attracts the children of the very well-off - some of them from abroad - and they go to a number of private schools afterwards - the idea that they would transfer to a local grammar school rather than somewhere like Roedean if they did not want to go to Wycombe Abbey for some reason is absurd - it’s like saying about a boys’ prep school: ‘ There was always a number of children from that prep school who then transferred to Grammar school rather than Eton or Harrow.

You are a local person with ideas of support for ‘excellence’ and only the vaguest idea of how the system works and you made up this story to have a peg to put your ‘There's no perfect system’ conclusion on to - didn’t you?
[quote][p][bold]allrightnow2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]slickchick[/bold] wrote: It is possible that some new private schools have succeeded in coaching their pupils through the new exam. The grammar schools will benefit by ensuring that only wealthy children will mix with their pupils.[/p][/quote]This was always the case. There was always a number of children from Godstowe who then transferred to Grammar school rather than Wycombe Abbey. I have to say though that those whose parents paid for private primary education / tuition then struggled and most left at the end of year 11 to go to college instead. They were taking up spaces that children whose parents couldn't afford the private education could have had. There's no perfect system.[/p][/quote]‘allrightnow’ You still haven’t answered my question - where did you get this information from? Godstowe attracts the children of the very well-off - some of them from abroad - and they go to a number of private schools afterwards - the idea that they would transfer to a local grammar school rather than somewhere like Roedean if they did not want to go to Wycombe Abbey for some reason is absurd - it’s like saying about a boys’ prep school: ‘[italic] There was always a number of children from that prep school who then transferred to Grammar school rather than Eton or Harrow. [/italic] You are a local person with ideas of support for ‘excellence’ and only the vaguest idea of how the system works and you made up this story to have a peg to put your [italic] ‘There's no perfect system’ [/italic]conclusion on to - didn’t you? Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 4

6:06pm Fri 9 May 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

The Bucks Herald report on this matter says Val Letheren threw her toys out of the pram, stamped her feet and sulked in Fuhrer-like fashion - she is quoted as saying:

'‘ … secretary of Wycombe Labour Mark Ferris has written to Val Letheren, chairman of the education, skills and children’s services select committee, to slam the report …
Mrs Letheren told the Bucks Herald she was ‘fuming mad’ to read the letter, began writing a response but decided not to send it.

She said: “I don’t think they deserve a message … I was so cross … They should read the report properly … Mrs Letheren said the overall aim of the report has been successful …’
'


Imagine if David Cameron did this at PM's Question Time:


'This afternoon in the Commons, before sitting down with his arms folded and refusing to speak, the Prime Minister told the house - "oooh! That David Miliband - he makes me so cross! Between you and me I don't think he deserves an answer - he'd only pick holes in it you know!" '

(See: http://www.buckshera
ld.co.uk/news/more-n
ews/education-report
-slammed-as-superfic
ial-but-its-author-i
s-left-fuming-mad-1-
6019492?pollIdpoll_7
_181023QuestionId0=4
&optionValueBeforeVo
ting=6&pollId=poll_7
_181023&vote=true&co
okieSet=true&pollIdp
oll_7_181023=0)
The Bucks Herald report on this matter says Val Letheren threw her toys out of the pram, stamped her feet and sulked in Fuhrer-like fashion - she is quoted as saying: '[italic]‘ … secretary of Wycombe Labour Mark Ferris has written to Val Letheren, chairman of the education, skills and children’s services select committee, to slam the report … Mrs Letheren told the Bucks Herald she was ‘fuming mad’ to read the letter, began writing a response but decided not to send it. She said: “I don’t think they deserve a message … I was so cross … They should read the report properly … Mrs Letheren said the overall aim of the report has been successful …’ [/italic]' Imagine if David Cameron did this at PM's Question Time: [italic]'This afternoon in the Commons, before sitting down with his arms folded and refusing to speak, the Prime Minister told the house - "oooh! That David Miliband - he makes me so cross! Between you and me I don't think he [bold] deserves [/bold] an answer - he'd only pick holes in it you know!" ' [/italic] (See: http://www.buckshera ld.co.uk/news/more-n ews/education-report -slammed-as-superfic ial-but-its-author-i s-left-fuming-mad-1- 6019492?pollIdpoll_7 _181023QuestionId0=4 &optionValueBeforeVo ting=6&pollId=poll_7 _181023&vote=true&co okieSet=true&pollIdp oll_7_181023=0) Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 0

6:10pm Fri 9 May 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

The Bucks Herald report also said: ‘Val Letheren: ‘ … emphasised that the report was compiled by a mixed-party select committee.’


I wonder who those committee members were - perhaps your reporter can tell us.
The Bucks Herald report also said: ‘Val Letheren: ‘ … emphasised that the report was compiled by a mixed-party select committee.’ I wonder who those committee members were - perhaps your reporter can tell us. Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 0

6:30pm Fri 9 May 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Surely a politician like Ms Letheren should expect to have holes picked in what she says especially over something that looks dishonest to say no more - did she expect Wycombe Labour Party to touch their caps respectfully?
Surely a politician like Ms Letheren should [italic]expect[/italic] to have holes picked in what she says especially over something that looks dishonest to say no more - did she expect Wycombe Labour Party to touch their caps respectfully? Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 1

6:49pm Fri 9 May 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Undercover Euro Yob wrote:
The Bucks Herald report on this matter says Val Letheren threw her toys out of the pram, stamped her feet and sulked in Fuhrer-like fashion - she is quoted as saying:

'‘ … secretary of Wycombe Labour Mark Ferris has written to Val Letheren, chairman of the education, skills and children’s services select committee, to slam the report …
Mrs Letheren told the Bucks Herald she was ‘fuming mad’ to read the letter, began writing a response but decided not to send it.

She said: “I don’t think they deserve a message … I was so cross … They should read the report properly … Mrs Letheren said the overall aim of the report has been successful …’
'


Imagine if David Cameron did this at PM's Question Time:


'This afternoon in the Commons, before sitting down with his arms folded and refusing to speak, the Prime Minister told the house - "oooh! That David Miliband - he makes me so cross! Between you and me I don't think he deserves an answer - he'd only pick holes in it you know!" '

(See: http://www.buckshera

ld.co.uk/news/more-n

ews/education-report

-slammed-as-superfic

ial-but-its-author-i

s-left-fuming-mad-1-

6019492?pollIdpoll_7

_181023QuestionId0=4

&optionValueBefo
reVo
ting=6&pollId=po
ll_7
_181023&vote=tru
e&co
okieSet=true&pol
lIdp
oll_7_181023=0)
That should have been Ed Miliband of course - one half of the Two Eds.
[quote][p][bold]Undercover Euro Yob[/bold] wrote: The Bucks Herald report on this matter says Val Letheren threw her toys out of the pram, stamped her feet and sulked in Fuhrer-like fashion - she is quoted as saying: '[italic]‘ … secretary of Wycombe Labour Mark Ferris has written to Val Letheren, chairman of the education, skills and children’s services select committee, to slam the report … Mrs Letheren told the Bucks Herald she was ‘fuming mad’ to read the letter, began writing a response but decided not to send it. She said: “I don’t think they deserve a message … I was so cross … They should read the report properly … Mrs Letheren said the overall aim of the report has been successful …’ [/italic]' Imagine if David Cameron did this at PM's Question Time: [italic]'This afternoon in the Commons, before sitting down with his arms folded and refusing to speak, the Prime Minister told the house - "oooh! That David Miliband - he makes me so cross! Between you and me I don't think he [bold] deserves [/bold] an answer - he'd only pick holes in it you know!" ' [/italic] (See: http://www.buckshera ld.co.uk/news/more-n ews/education-report -slammed-as-superfic ial-but-its-author-i s-left-fuming-mad-1- 6019492?pollIdpoll_7 _181023QuestionId0=4 &optionValueBefo reVo ting=6&pollId=po ll_7 _181023&vote=tru e&co okieSet=true&pol lIdp oll_7_181023=0)[/p][/quote]That should have been Ed Miliband of course - one half of the Two Eds. Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree