Council defends grammar schools in wake of Ofsted chief's criticism

Bucks Free Press: Sir Michael Wilshaw Sir Michael Wilshaw

A LEADING voice in education has criticised the grammar school system, operated in Bucks, saying it does not do enough to help the disadvantaged in society.

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted's chief inspector of schools in England, said grammar schools are "stuffed full of middle class kids" and do little to boost poorer students’ chances.

But education authority Bucks County Council says it works to create opportunities for all children, claiming the majority of factors affecting social mobility happen outside the classroom.

The grammar school system in Bucks is one of the most prized in the country, and a key reason why house prices are so high in the area.

Supporters of the system argue that it gives children from poorer backgrounds the chance to achieve better results at grammars than they might otherwise, as the 11+ selection test should serve as a test of ability.

However, the test has come in for increasing criticism in recent years as it has become more commonplace for children to be coached for it, with more affluent families able to spend more on private tutors.

This year the style of the test was changed in a bid to make it harder to coach.

Mr Wilshaw told the Observer that grammar schools no longer serve social mobility.

He said the situation that only three per cent of grammar school pupils received free school meals - a key indicator of poverty - was "a nonsense" and insisted that grammars only serve the top tier of society while ignoring the less affluent.

It is understood that even less than 3 per cent of pupils receive free school meals in Bucks grammar schools.

But BCC claims its research reveals 80 per cent of factors affecting children’s development happen outside school.

And the authority insists it does all it can to provide opportunities for youngsters to develop in schools, regardless of whether they passed their 11+.

Sue Imbriano, Buckinghamshire County Council's Strategic Director for Children and Young People said: "As a local authority with a responsibility for children and young people and standards in education, we work extremely closely with all schools including Grammar schools to maximise opportunities for all children.

"We carry out work and projects with a range of partners aimed at creating the right environment for children and young people to thrive and develop.”

The selective schools educate around five per cent of England’s population, including thousands throughout Bucks.

Comments (35)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:40pm Fri 20 Dec 13

Welwyn Dowd says...

More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.
More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary. Welwyn Dowd

3:10pm Fri 20 Dec 13

stir up says...

What a load of rubbish the private schools do not want the children to take the 11+ they want them to stay in the private system and often give little support to pupils who want to take it. The education system in Bucks is the envy of many. It provides opportunities and makes sure the education suits the pupils abilities, be it either best in an upper school or a grammar.
The percentage give above are made from that strong position of being based on total ignorance as usual.
What a load of rubbish the private schools do not want the children to take the 11+ they want them to stay in the private system and often give little support to pupils who want to take it. The education system in Bucks is the envy of many. It provides opportunities and makes sure the education suits the pupils abilities, be it either best in an upper school or a grammar. The percentage give above are made from that strong position of being based on total ignorance as usual. stir up

6:17pm Fri 20 Dec 13

demoness the second says...

Welwyn Dowd wrote:
More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.
Do you have evidence to back this claim up?
[quote][p][bold]Welwyn Dowd[/bold] wrote: More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.[/p][/quote]Do you have evidence to back this claim up? demoness the second

1:19am Sat 21 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

stir up wrote:
What a load of rubbish the private schools do not want the children to take the 11+ they want them to stay in the private system and often give little support to pupils who want to take it. The education system in Bucks is the envy of many. It provides opportunities and makes sure the education suits the pupils abilities, be it either best in an upper school or a grammar.
The percentage give above are made from that strong position of being based on total ignorance as usual.
The private system wants parents' money (no doubt in return for doing a good job) and will accept payment for 11+ tuition just the same as for Common Entrance tuition to private schools - that's why they advertise on the same web sites for 11+ tuition and Common Entrance tuition.

You are just repeating clichés here - you can't decide at age 10 if a kid is suited to becoming a graduate at age 21.

The education system in Bucks is the envy of the stupid, the snobbish and the ignorant - it has been mentioned by name as providing a very low standard of education to those who fail the 11+ and many parents move out of the area to avoid sending their children to local secondary moderns - such a waste. Only the hopelessly naive believe 'it provides opportunities and makes sure the education suits the pupils abilities,' - at age ten. The system has long since become a racket - that's why Mike Appleyard and others refuse to say anything about it and Council officials who normally ignore requests for information about the system have replied on this occasion with the vaguest generalisations.

I am not sure what the exact percentage is of grammar school kids who are privately educated or coached, or are from outside the area - everything about the system seems to be shrouded in secrecy - but there seem to be a great number of children getting off trains and buses in well-off areas like Gerrards Cross, Beaconsfield and Denham - something that research by the Sutton Trust and now Ofsted (again) confirms by examination of the facts.
[quote][p][bold]stir up[/bold] wrote: What a load of rubbish the private schools do not want the children to take the 11+ they want them to stay in the private system and often give little support to pupils who want to take it. The education system in Bucks is the envy of many. It provides opportunities and makes sure the education suits the pupils abilities, be it either best in an upper school or a grammar. The percentage give above are made from that strong position of being based on total ignorance as usual.[/p][/quote]The private system wants parents' money (no doubt in return for doing a good job) and will accept payment for 11+ tuition just the same as for Common Entrance tuition to private schools - that's why they advertise on the same web sites for 11+ tuition and Common Entrance tuition. You are just repeating clichés here - you can't decide at age 10 if a kid is suited to becoming a graduate at age 21. The education system in Bucks is the envy of the stupid, the snobbish and the ignorant - it has been mentioned by name as providing a very low standard of education to those who fail the 11+ and many parents move out of the area to avoid sending their children to local secondary moderns - such a waste. Only the hopelessly naive believe 'it provides opportunities and makes sure the education suits the pupils abilities,' - at age ten. The system has long since become a racket - that's why Mike Appleyard and others refuse to say anything about it and Council officials who normally ignore requests for information about the system have replied on this occasion with the vaguest generalisations. I am not sure what the exact percentage is of grammar school kids who are privately educated or coached, or are from outside the area - everything about the system seems to be shrouded in secrecy - but there seem to be a great number of children getting off trains and buses in well-off areas like Gerrards Cross, Beaconsfield and Denham - something that research by the Sutton Trust and now Ofsted (again) confirms by examination of the facts. Undercover Euro Yob

1:28am Sat 21 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

The grammar school system in Bucks is one of the most prized in the country, and a key reason why house prices are so high in the area.


Which parts of the country is it ‘prized’ in - the parts that abolished it and where it would be electoral suicide to propose its reintroduction? (Those are the same places to which Buckinghamshire parents take their children if they fail the 11+ to ensure they are not wasted.)
[/italic] The grammar school system in Bucks is one of the most prized in the country, and a key reason why house prices are so high in the area.[/italic] [/italic] [bold]Which [/bold] [/italic] parts of the country is it ‘prized’ in - the parts that abolished it and where it would be electoral suicide to propose its reintroduction? (Those are the same places to which Buckinghamshire parents take their children if they fail the 11+ to ensure they are not wasted.) Undercover Euro Yob

1:35am Sat 21 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Welwyn Dowd wrote:
More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.
They're at a disadvantage in Bucks from day one anyway - if they are being driven inevitably towards the wasteful shores of 'selection' aged ten.
[quote][p][bold]Welwyn Dowd[/bold] wrote: More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.[/p][/quote]They're at a disadvantage in Bucks from day one anyway - if they are being driven inevitably towards the wasteful shores of 'selection' aged ten. Undercover Euro Yob

1:38am Sat 21 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Sue Imbriano, Buckinghamshire County Council's Strategic Director for Children and Young People said: "As a local authority with a responsibility for children and young people and standards in education, we work extremely closely with all schools including Grammar schools to maximise opportunities for all children.
"We carry out work and projects with a range of partners aimed at creating the right environment for children and young people to thrive and develop.”


As was said in another situation ‘she would say that’.

‘A range of partners.’

Though some of them can do perfectly well in a failing special measures school - that’s their ‘right environment to thrive and develop’.

These people will defend the indefensible with the determination of soldiers in a besieged city - the dishonesty and BS this system creates is as objectionable as anything else about it.
[/italic] Sue Imbriano, Buckinghamshire County Council's Strategic Director for Children and Young People said: "As a local authority with a responsibility for children and young people and standards in education, we work extremely closely with all schools including Grammar schools to maximise opportunities for all children. "We carry out work and projects with a range of partners aimed at creating the right environment for children and young people to thrive and develop.” [/italic] As was said in another situation ‘she [/italic] would[/italic] say that’. ‘A range of partners.’ Though some of them can do perfectly well in a failing special measures school - that’s their ‘right environment to thrive and develop’. These people will defend the indefensible with the determination of soldiers in a besieged city - the dishonesty and BS this system creates is as objectionable as anything else about it. Undercover Euro Yob

2:35am Sat 21 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

But BCC claims its research reveals 80 per cent of factors affecting children’s development happen outside school.
And the authority insists it does all it can to provide opportunities for youngsters to develop in schools, regardless of whether they passed their 11+.


Is there any point then in bothering with schools if 80% of factors affecting their development happen outside school - presumably this applies to other counties that have abolished the 11+ so did it nake any difference there? What BCC claims is not an answer and what is the point of the 11+ if they do all they can to provide opportunities for youngsters to develop in schools, regardless of whether they passed their 11+?

‘…its research’ - why have so many independent researchers criticised the system then and why will BCC and Councillors never normally say anything in defence of their rotten system - even now we only have some woolly general statements? Is it because Mike Appleyard and the others all know they are defending the indefensible?
[italic] But BCC claims its research reveals 80 per cent of factors affecting children’s development happen outside school. And the authority insists it does all it can to provide opportunities for youngsters to develop in schools, regardless of whether they passed their 11+. [/italic] Is there any point then in bothering with schools if 80% of factors affecting their development happen outside school - presumably this applies to other counties that have abolished the 11+ so did it nake any difference there? What BCC claims is not an answer and what is the point of the 11+ if they do all they can to provide opportunities for youngsters to develop in schools, regardless of whether they passed their 11+? ‘…its research’ - why have so many independent researchers criticised the system then and why will BCC and Councillors never normally say anything in defence of their rotten system - even now we only have some woolly general statements? Is it because Mike Appleyard and the others all know they are defending the indefensible? Undercover Euro Yob

9:51am Sat 21 Dec 13

CatherineAB says...

Nobody states the proportion of pupils receiving free school meals, who are not in the Grammar schools, so there is no comparison. Wake up, there.
The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high, so the children do not lose out. The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities
Nobody states the proportion of pupils receiving free school meals, who are not in the Grammar schools, so there is no comparison. Wake up, there. The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high, so the children do not lose out. The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities CatherineAB

10:30am Sat 21 Dec 13

Bajina says...

demoness the second wrote:
Welwyn Dowd wrote:
More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.
Do you have evidence to back this claim up?
Welwyn Dowd,
You are right.
You probably know where the evidence is, to back up your correct claim '' More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools.''
[quote][p][bold]demoness the second[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Welwyn Dowd[/bold] wrote: More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.[/p][/quote]Do you have evidence to back this claim up?[/p][/quote]Welwyn Dowd, You are right. You probably know where the evidence is, to back up your correct claim '' More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools.'' Bajina

10:47am Sat 21 Dec 13

demoness the second says...

Bajina wrote:
demoness the second wrote:
Welwyn Dowd wrote:
More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.
Do you have evidence to back this claim up?
Welwyn Dowd,
You are right.
You probably know where the evidence is, to back up your correct claim '' More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools.''
Well perhaps he/she could share it so that we all can see.
[quote][p][bold]Bajina[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]demoness the second[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Welwyn Dowd[/bold] wrote: More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.[/p][/quote]Do you have evidence to back this claim up?[/p][/quote]Welwyn Dowd, You are right. You probably know where the evidence is, to back up your correct claim '' More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools.''[/p][/quote]Well perhaps he/she could share it so that we all can see. demoness the second

11:16am Sat 21 Dec 13

Bajina says...

demoness the second wrote:
Bajina wrote:
demoness the second wrote:
Welwyn Dowd wrote:
More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.
Do you have evidence to back this claim up?
Welwyn Dowd,
You are right.
You probably know where the evidence is, to back up your correct claim '' More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools.''
Well perhaps he/she could share it so that we all can see.
We appear to have slipped from a blogging mode, to a hard line challenging professional Scrutiny mode.
As a blogging community, have the resources and wherewithal to conduct such an inquiry?
[quote][p][bold]demoness the second[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bajina[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]demoness the second[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Welwyn Dowd[/bold] wrote: More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.[/p][/quote]Do you have evidence to back this claim up?[/p][/quote]Welwyn Dowd, You are right. You probably know where the evidence is, to back up your correct claim '' More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools.''[/p][/quote]Well perhaps he/she could share it so that we all can see.[/p][/quote]We appear to have slipped from a blogging mode, to a hard line challenging professional Scrutiny mode. As a blogging community, have the resources and wherewithal to conduct such an inquiry? Bajina

3:12pm Sat 21 Dec 13

slickchick says...

CatherineAB says...

The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high, so the children do not lose out. The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities.

This comment lacks the benefit of the true facts. I suggest CatherineAB looks at the subjects on offer to children in the grammar schools and then compares them to the limited subjects and levels taught at all versions of Bucks Secondary Modern Schools. There can be no true defense of a system that provides such a poor opportunities for a 10 year child that scores 120 and a very good opportunities for a child that scores 121 in the 11+ or Transfer test.
We want all of our children to have equal opportunities during the 11 or so years they are at school. The selective system just strips the vast majority of Bucks Junior school pupils of the an equal opportunity.

For those who question the numbers about how few children from Bucks State funded school get to grammar schools, go to the Buck C.C. web site. The majority of Bucks grammar school pupils come from private and out-of-county schools.
CatherineAB says... The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high, so the children do not lose out. The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities. This comment lacks the benefit of the true facts. I suggest CatherineAB looks at the subjects on offer to children in the grammar schools and then compares them to the limited subjects and levels taught at all versions of Bucks Secondary Modern Schools. There can be no true defense of a system that provides such a poor opportunities for a 10 year child that scores 120 and a very good opportunities for a child that scores 121 in the 11+ or Transfer test. We want all of our children to have equal opportunities during the 11 or so years they are at school. The selective system just strips the vast majority of Bucks Junior school pupils of the an equal opportunity. For those who question the numbers about how few children from Bucks State funded school get to grammar schools, go to the Buck C.C. web site. The majority of Bucks grammar school pupils come from private and out-of-county schools. slickchick

4:01pm Sat 21 Dec 13

demoness the second says...

slickchick wrote:
CatherineAB says...

The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high, so the children do not lose out. The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities.

This comment lacks the benefit of the true facts. I suggest CatherineAB looks at the subjects on offer to children in the grammar schools and then compares them to the limited subjects and levels taught at all versions of Bucks Secondary Modern Schools. There can be no true defense of a system that provides such a poor opportunities for a 10 year child that scores 120 and a very good opportunities for a child that scores 121 in the 11+ or Transfer test.
We want all of our children to have equal opportunities during the 11 or so years they are at school. The selective system just strips the vast majority of Bucks Junior school pupils of the an equal opportunity.

For those who question the numbers about how few children from Bucks State funded school get to grammar schools, go to the Buck C.C. web site. The majority of Bucks grammar school pupils come from private and out-of-county schools.
Thank you.
@ Bajjina - In a debate ( which is what this is), if someone comes out with a statement that seems to be a little dogmatic, it is normal practice to ask for evidence of their assertion.
I was not disbelieving Wellyndowd - I was merely asking him/her how they could prove this.
Slickchick has answered this for me and I am grateful as I really did not know it.
Far different from when I was at a grammar school over 30 years ago - then there were few ( if any) private school children.
I can now see why people are getting so upset.
[quote][p][bold]slickchick[/bold] wrote: CatherineAB says... The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high, so the children do not lose out. The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities. This comment lacks the benefit of the true facts. I suggest CatherineAB looks at the subjects on offer to children in the grammar schools and then compares them to the limited subjects and levels taught at all versions of Bucks Secondary Modern Schools. There can be no true defense of a system that provides such a poor opportunities for a 10 year child that scores 120 and a very good opportunities for a child that scores 121 in the 11+ or Transfer test. We want all of our children to have equal opportunities during the 11 or so years they are at school. The selective system just strips the vast majority of Bucks Junior school pupils of the an equal opportunity. For those who question the numbers about how few children from Bucks State funded school get to grammar schools, go to the Buck C.C. web site. The majority of Bucks grammar school pupils come from private and out-of-county schools.[/p][/quote]Thank you. @ Bajjina - In a debate ( which is what this is), if someone comes out with a statement that seems to be a little dogmatic, it is normal practice to ask for evidence of their assertion. I was not disbelieving Wellyndowd - I was merely asking him/her how they could prove this. Slickchick has answered this for me and I am grateful as I really did not know it. Far different from when I was at a grammar school over 30 years ago - then there were few ( if any) private school children. I can now see why people are getting so upset. demoness the second

6:26pm Sat 21 Dec 13

Bajina says...

Heads up for Welwyn Dowd, itsthepriciple and Undercover Euro Pal,
Apologies in advance if you are aware.
If not, look out for Cressex Schools results when the tables are published.
We may in for a welcomed surprise.
Heads up for Welwyn Dowd, itsthepriciple and Undercover Euro Pal, Apologies in advance if you are aware. If not, look out for Cressex Schools results when the tables are published. We may in for a welcomed surprise. Bajina

12:19am Sun 22 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

CatherineAB wrote:
Nobody states the proportion of pupils receiving free school meals, who are not in the Grammar schools, so there is no comparison. Wake up, there.
The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high, so the children do not lose out. The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities
Commonsense would suggest that the reason Sir Michael Wilshaw - a tough and highly successful former headmaster (and bête noire of the teaching unions) - went on the record with the 3% figure (actually it is even lower than that in BCC grammar schools) is that he knew that at other state schools, the figure is 17.5%.
(If you want to see confirmation of that figure and information on other aspects of the way grammar schools have become a tool of the well-off see:
http://www.theguardi
an.com/education/201
3/nov/08/grammar-sch
ools-admit-more-priv
ately-educated-child
ren

and also:

http://www.edexec.co
.uk/news/2592/free-s
chool-meal-pupils-ou
tnumbered-4%3A1-by-t
he-privately-educate
d-at-grammar-schools
/)

Wake up yourself Katie - why have so many Buckinghamshire Secondary Moderns been in special measures if: ‘The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high’?

‘The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities’ - this very naïve statement sounds a bit like the 1960s US Southern politicians who claimed ‘negroes’ liked segregation and Martin Luther King was stirring up unrest, or the Boer supporters of Apartheid who said it provided different but equal services on both communities. The two types of school impose different aspirations and their expectations become self-fulfilling prophecies - and if as you say they are nothing to do with inferior or superior abilities then what is the 11+ supposed to be establishing amongst all those ten year olds the morning they take the exam? Other posters on here who support the 11+ come out and say things like ‘whether or not you like it some children can’t do it’ - that is right bur misleading - even so it makes more sense than your stuff about separate and different but equal.
[quote][p][bold]CatherineAB[/bold] wrote: Nobody states the proportion of pupils receiving free school meals, who are not in the Grammar schools, so there is no comparison. Wake up, there. The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high, so the children do not lose out. The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities[/p][/quote]Commonsense would suggest that the reason Sir Michael Wilshaw - a tough and highly successful former headmaster (and bête noire of the teaching unions) - went on the record with the 3% figure (actually it is even lower than that in BCC grammar schools) is that he knew that at other state schools, the figure is 17.5%. (If you want to see confirmation of that figure and information on other aspects of the way grammar schools have become a tool of the well-off see: http://www.theguardi an.com/education/201 3/nov/08/grammar-sch ools-admit-more-priv ately-educated-child ren and also: http://www.edexec.co .uk/news/2592/free-s chool-meal-pupils-ou tnumbered-4%3A1-by-t he-privately-educate d-at-grammar-schools /) Wake up yourself Katie - why have so many Buckinghamshire Secondary Moderns been in special measures if: ‘The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high’? ‘The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities’ - this very naïve statement sounds a bit like the 1960s US Southern politicians who claimed ‘negroes’ liked segregation and Martin Luther King was stirring up unrest, or the Boer supporters of Apartheid who said it provided different but equal services on both communities. The two types of school [italic] impose [/italic] different aspirations and their expectations become self-fulfilling prophecies - and if as you say they are nothing to do with inferior or superior abilities then what is the 11+ supposed to be establishing amongst all those ten year olds the morning they take the exam? Other posters on here who support the 11+ come out and say things like ‘whether or not you like it some children can’t do it’ - that is right bur misleading - even so it makes more sense than your stuff about separate and different but equal. Undercover Euro Yob

12:26am Sun 22 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

demoness the second wrote:
Bajina wrote:
demoness the second wrote:
Welwyn Dowd wrote:
More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.
Do you have evidence to back this claim up?
Welwyn Dowd,
You are right.
You probably know where the evidence is, to back up your correct claim '' More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools.''
Well perhaps he/she could share it so that we all can see.
Bajina and Demoness - I don't know the figures for BCC grammar schools but on the webpage I just quoted it says that c. 12.7% of children who go to grammar schools are admitted from private schools:

(http://www.edexec.c
o.uk/news/2592/free-
school-meal-pupils-o
utnumbered-4%3A1-by-
the-privately-educat
ed-at-grammar-school
s/)

’ Grammar schools are four times more likely to admit private school children than those on free school meals, according to a report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies.
The report, sponsored by the Sutton Trust, found that in selective local authorities, 3% of grammar school entrants were eligible for free school meals. At other state schools, the figure is 17.5%, the Guardian reports.
At the other end of the spectrum, grammar schools were admitting 12.7% of their children from outside the state sector, largely from independent schools, the report said. On average, 6% of primary school children are enrolled in a private school nationally.
The findings, which form part of a larger report, Poor Grammar: Entry into Grammar Schools for disadvantaged pupils in England, indicate that even after allowing for "a wider range of factors that may depress pupils' academic achievement", sizeable differences remain between entrance rates.
The report added that on other measures of deprivation, the differences in admission "extended up the income scale".
"Four per cent of pupils in grammar schools live in the poorest fifth of neighbourhoods, around 21% come from the middle quintile and 34% live in the richest fifth of neighbourhoods," it said.’
[quote][p][bold]demoness the second[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bajina[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]demoness the second[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Welwyn Dowd[/bold] wrote: More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.[/p][/quote]Do you have evidence to back this claim up?[/p][/quote]Welwyn Dowd, You are right. You probably know where the evidence is, to back up your correct claim '' More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools.''[/p][/quote]Well perhaps he/she could share it so that we all can see.[/p][/quote]Bajina and Demoness - I don't know the figures for BCC grammar schools but on the webpage I just quoted it says that c. 12.7% of children who go to grammar schools are admitted from private schools: (http://www.edexec.c o.uk/news/2592/free- school-meal-pupils-o utnumbered-4%3A1-by- the-privately-educat ed-at-grammar-school s/) [italic]’ Grammar schools are four times more likely to admit private school children than those on free school meals, according to a report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies. The report, sponsored by the Sutton Trust, found that in selective local authorities, 3% of grammar school entrants were eligible for free school meals. At other state schools, the figure is 17.5%, the Guardian reports. At the other end of the spectrum, [bold] grammar schools were admitting 12.7% of their children from outside the state sector, largely from independent schools, [/bold]the report said. On average, 6% of primary school children are enrolled in a private school nationally. The findings, which form part of a larger report, Poor Grammar: Entry into Grammar Schools for disadvantaged pupils in England, indicate that even after allowing for "a wider range of factors that may depress pupils' academic achievement", sizeable differences remain between entrance rates. The report added that on other measures of deprivation, the differences in admission "extended up the income scale". "Four per cent of pupils in grammar schools live in the poorest fifth of neighbourhoods, around 21% come from the middle quintile and 34% live in the richest fifth of neighbourhoods," it said.’ [/italic] Undercover Euro Yob

12:28am Sun 22 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Bajina wrote:
demoness the second wrote:
Bajina wrote:
demoness the second wrote:
Welwyn Dowd wrote:
More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.
Do you have evidence to back this claim up?
Welwyn Dowd,
You are right.
You probably know where the evidence is, to back up your correct claim '' More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools.''
Well perhaps he/she could share it so that we all can see.
We appear to have slipped from a blogging mode, to a hard line challenging professional Scrutiny mode.
As a blogging community, have the resources and wherewithal to conduct such an inquiry?
'As a blogging community, have the resources and wherewithal to conduct such an inquiry?'

Dear Bajina - what are you trying to say - something about not getting heated by the general tone.
[quote][p][bold]Bajina[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]demoness the second[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bajina[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]demoness the second[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Welwyn Dowd[/bold] wrote: More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.[/p][/quote]Do you have evidence to back this claim up?[/p][/quote]Welwyn Dowd, You are right. You probably know where the evidence is, to back up your correct claim '' More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools.''[/p][/quote]Well perhaps he/she could share it so that we all can see.[/p][/quote]We appear to have slipped from a blogging mode, to a hard line challenging professional Scrutiny mode. As a blogging community, have the resources and wherewithal to conduct such an inquiry?[/p][/quote]'As a blogging community, have the resources and wherewithal to conduct such an inquiry?' Dear Bajina - what are you trying to say - something about not getting heated by the general tone. Undercover Euro Yob

12:33am Sun 22 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

slickchick wrote:
CatherineAB says...

The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high, so the children do not lose out. The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities.

This comment lacks the benefit of the true facts. I suggest CatherineAB looks at the subjects on offer to children in the grammar schools and then compares them to the limited subjects and levels taught at all versions of Bucks Secondary Modern Schools. There can be no true defense of a system that provides such a poor opportunities for a 10 year child that scores 120 and a very good opportunities for a child that scores 121 in the 11+ or Transfer test.
We want all of our children to have equal opportunities during the 11 or so years they are at school. The selective system just strips the vast majority of Bucks Junior school pupils of the an equal opportunity.

For those who question the numbers about how few children from Bucks State funded school get to grammar schools, go to the Buck C.C. web site. The majority of Bucks grammar school pupils come from private and out-of-county schools.
Thank you slickchick for summing up perfectly the indefensible, inexcusable and fundamental weakness of the slective system:

'There can be no true defense of a system that provides such a poor opportunities for a 10 year child that scores 120 and a very good opportunities for a child that scores 121 in the 11+ or Transfer test.'
and the answer to the 'different but equal' people:

'...the subjects on offer to children in the grammar schools and then compares them to the limited subjects and levels taught at all versions of Bucks Secondary Modern Schools.'
[quote][p][bold]slickchick[/bold] wrote: CatherineAB says... The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high, so the children do not lose out. The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities. This comment lacks the benefit of the true facts. I suggest CatherineAB looks at the subjects on offer to children in the grammar schools and then compares them to the limited subjects and levels taught at all versions of Bucks Secondary Modern Schools. There can be no true defense of a system that provides such a poor opportunities for a 10 year child that scores 120 and a very good opportunities for a child that scores 121 in the 11+ or Transfer test. We want all of our children to have equal opportunities during the 11 or so years they are at school. The selective system just strips the vast majority of Bucks Junior school pupils of the an equal opportunity. For those who question the numbers about how few children from Bucks State funded school get to grammar schools, go to the Buck C.C. web site. The majority of Bucks grammar school pupils come from private and out-of-county schools.[/p][/quote]Thank you slickchick for summing up perfectly the indefensible, inexcusable and fundamental weakness of the slective system: 'There can be no true defense of a system that provides such a poor opportunities for a 10 year child that scores 120 and a very good opportunities for a child that scores 121 in the 11+ or Transfer test.' and the answer to the 'different but equal' people: '...the subjects on offer to children in the grammar schools and then compares them to the limited subjects and levels taught at all versions of Bucks Secondary Modern Schools.' Undercover Euro Yob

12:38am Sun 22 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

I would expect the number of privately-coached children in grammar schools to be higher than the 12.7% quoted nationally in the Guardian article as Bucks is a well-off area generally speaking and the dire reputation of secondary modern schools here would provide a very powerful incentive to well-off parents to get their child coached into a grammar school and out of 'the secondary modern swamp' (as it has been called in the past here).
I would expect the number of privately-coached children in grammar schools to be higher than the 12.7% quoted nationally in the Guardian article as Bucks is a well-off area generally speaking and the dire reputation of secondary modern schools here would provide a very powerful incentive to well-off parents to get their child coached into a grammar school and out of 'the secondary modern swamp' (as it has been called in the past here). Undercover Euro Yob

10:26am Sun 22 Dec 13

Bajina says...

Undercover Euro Yob wrote:
I would expect the number of privately-coached children in grammar schools to be higher than the 12.7% quoted nationally in the Guardian article as Bucks is a well-off area generally speaking and the dire reputation of secondary modern schools here would provide a very powerful incentive to well-off parents to get their child coached into a grammar school and out of 'the secondary modern swamp' (as it has been called in the past here).
UEY,
Privately-coached children in bucks grammar schools is higher than the 12.7%. My feeble memory says it may be as high as 40%, but let me check this out before i commit.

OMG, nice shot. You compare Bucks education with Apartheid. It is not far off the metaphorical truth, and i admire your bravery! 9/10.
[quote][p][bold]Undercover Euro Yob[/bold] wrote: I would expect the number of privately-coached children in grammar schools to be higher than the 12.7% quoted nationally in the Guardian article as Bucks is a well-off area generally speaking and the dire reputation of secondary modern schools here would provide a very powerful incentive to well-off parents to get their child coached into a grammar school and out of 'the secondary modern swamp' (as it has been called in the past here).[/p][/quote]UEY, Privately-coached children in bucks grammar schools is higher than the 12.7%. My feeble memory says it may be as high as 40%, but let me check this out before i commit. OMG, nice shot. You compare Bucks education with Apartheid. It is not far off the metaphorical truth, and i admire your bravery! 9/10. Bajina

1:38pm Sun 22 Dec 13

stir up says...

If all the statements against the 11+ are correct why is it they so many people move into Bucks for the education system. Some of these remarks sound like sour grapes. Can I suggest you have a look at the MK school results which as a separate unity authority has the comprehensive system you will be in for a very sad surprise. Many children go on from upper schools to sixth forms at grammar school and in fact many go on to Unis. Also have a look at the upper school results in Bucks to the secondary moderns across the UK.
If a pupil has more of an aptitude for the upper school and just did not make it to a grammar they are often well up at the school, instead having just got into a grammar where they may well struggle. Better to be one of the top pupils in an upper school.
If all the statements against the 11+ are correct why is it they so many people move into Bucks for the education system. Some of these remarks sound like sour grapes. Can I suggest you have a look at the MK school results which as a separate unity authority has the comprehensive system you will be in for a very sad surprise. Many children go on from upper schools to sixth forms at grammar school and in fact many go on to Unis. Also have a look at the upper school results in Bucks to the secondary moderns across the UK. If a pupil has more of an aptitude for the upper school and just did not make it to a grammar they are often well up at the school, instead having just got into a grammar where they may well struggle. Better to be one of the top pupils in an upper school. stir up

4:10pm Sun 22 Dec 13

HerculePoirot says...

stir up: "If all the statements against the 11+ are correct why is it they so many people move into Bucks for the education system". Eh? To take an example, around 7 times as many Bucks resident pupils travel to secondary schools in Oxfordshire than travel in the opposite direction.

CatherineAB: "Nobody states the proportion of pupils receiving free school meals, who are not in the Grammar schools, so there is no comparison. Wake up, there. The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high, so the children do not lose out. The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities". Please see comment above and Ofsted reports if you think the reputation of the Bucks secondary moderns is high. And actually the two types of school CAUSE different aspirations. Some FSM data for you to mull over:
Cressex: 22.2%
Highcrest; 27.1%
Holmer Green: 4.9%
William Ramsay: 10.8%

John Hampden: 0.9%
RGS: 0.9%
WHS: 2.7%

This Sue Imbriano is presumably no relation to the one who used to tell all us parents that coaching had only a slight (if any) impact on 11+ results? The other Sue Imbriano used to advise parents: "We suggest that you follow this guidance as NFER research has shown that extra familiarization or coaching makes only a slight (if any) difference to the final score.” Presumably that's why "This year the style of the test was changed in a bid to make it harder to coach"?

While I'm at it, the test was changed to CEM (University of Durham). This experiment has been tried in Warwickshire where the number of children claiming FSM and getting in to grammar schools has since FALLEN. So that's obviously the solution!

What is needed here is for one of the grammar school heads to cut the crap and move to an inclusive entrance system.
stir up: "If all the statements against the 11+ are correct why is it they so many people move into Bucks for the education system". Eh? To take an example, around 7 times as many Bucks resident pupils travel to secondary schools in Oxfordshire than travel in the opposite direction. CatherineAB: "Nobody states the proportion of pupils receiving free school meals, who are not in the Grammar schools, so there is no comparison. Wake up, there. The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high, so the children do not lose out. The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities". Please see comment above and Ofsted reports if you think the reputation of the Bucks secondary moderns is high. And actually the two types of school CAUSE different aspirations. Some FSM data for you to mull over: Cressex: 22.2% Highcrest; 27.1% Holmer Green: 4.9% William Ramsay: 10.8% John Hampden: 0.9% RGS: 0.9% WHS: 2.7% This Sue Imbriano is presumably no relation to the one who used to tell all us parents that coaching had only a slight (if any) impact on 11+ results? The other Sue Imbriano used to advise parents: "We suggest that you follow this guidance as NFER research has shown that extra familiarization or coaching makes only a slight (if any) difference to the final score.” Presumably that's why "This year the style of the test was changed in a bid to make it harder to coach"? While I'm at it, the test was changed to CEM (University of Durham). This experiment has been tried in Warwickshire where the number of children claiming FSM and getting in to grammar schools has since FALLEN. So that's obviously the solution! What is needed here is for one of the grammar school heads to cut the crap and move to an inclusive entrance system. HerculePoirot

4:13pm Sun 22 Dec 13

Bajina says...

stir up wrote:
If all the statements against the 11+ are correct why is it they so many people move into Bucks for the education system. Some of these remarks sound like sour grapes. Can I suggest you have a look at the MK school results which as a separate unity authority has the comprehensive system you will be in for a very sad surprise. Many children go on from upper schools to sixth forms at grammar school and in fact many go on to Unis. Also have a look at the upper school results in Bucks to the secondary moderns across the UK.
If a pupil has more of an aptitude for the upper school and just did not make it to a grammar they are often well up at the school, instead having just got into a grammar where they may well struggle. Better to be one of the top pupils in an upper school.
Stir up, Good to see passion for Good Bucks Education, we will only make progress if we care.
- Re-parents moving into this area - Yes, Selection System predicates on all parents wanting the best for their children. The unrealised, inbuilt injustice is, only 18-20% of our local children will pass the 11+ and get to Grammar Schools (the rest of places going to private schools and out-of-county children). The other 80% of children will Fail - this burden is passed to Secondary moderns without extra money.
- Agreed, many Secondary Modern kids do make it to Unis, both of mine climbed this hill, incidentally both rejected going on to Grammar 6th Forms.. I will suggest this is due to hard work from the Secondary Moderns schools, their Heads, teachers and SLT. THAT IS THE REASON HIGHCREST DESERVED AND GOT AN ''OUTSTANDING' AT PREVIOUS OFSTED.
- Sorry i do not know results from Secondary Moderns in other Selective Systems outside Bucks. So will shut firmly up on this.
- On more point please Stir Up, The Gap. Schools Minister Laws slammed into us in Bucks (arounf April?), for having a big Gap. This Gap in Bucks is pushed to one of the worse in UK, by the Selection System.

PS. Secondary Moderns in a Selective system do not achieve the same results as Comprehensive.....ou
r Moderns can't, too many hurdles, not enough money.
Quote from http://www.nfer.ac.u
k/nfer/PRE_PDF_Files
/02_28_03.pdf says ''there are
other aspects of selection which need to be taken into account
(for example, the impact on children’s self-esteem of failing
the selection test).''
[quote][p][bold]stir up[/bold] wrote: If all the statements against the 11+ are correct why is it they so many people move into Bucks for the education system. Some of these remarks sound like sour grapes. Can I suggest you have a look at the MK school results which as a separate unity authority has the comprehensive system you will be in for a very sad surprise. Many children go on from upper schools to sixth forms at grammar school and in fact many go on to Unis. Also have a look at the upper school results in Bucks to the secondary moderns across the UK. If a pupil has more of an aptitude for the upper school and just did not make it to a grammar they are often well up at the school, instead having just got into a grammar where they may well struggle. Better to be one of the top pupils in an upper school.[/p][/quote]Stir up, Good to see passion for Good Bucks Education, we will only make progress if we care. - Re-parents moving into this area - Yes, Selection System predicates on all parents wanting the best for their children. The unrealised, inbuilt injustice is, only 18-20% of our local children will pass the 11+ and get to Grammar Schools (the rest of places going to private schools and out-of-county children). The other 80% of children will Fail - this burden is passed to Secondary moderns without extra money. - Agreed, many Secondary Modern kids do make it to Unis, both of mine climbed this hill, incidentally both rejected going on to Grammar 6th Forms.. I will suggest this is due to hard work from the Secondary Moderns schools, their Heads, teachers and SLT. THAT IS THE REASON HIGHCREST DESERVED AND GOT AN ''OUTSTANDING' AT PREVIOUS OFSTED. - Sorry i do not know results from Secondary Moderns in other Selective Systems outside Bucks. So will shut firmly up on this. - On more point please Stir Up, The Gap. Schools Minister Laws slammed into us in Bucks (arounf April?), for having a big Gap. This Gap in Bucks is pushed to one of the worse in UK, by the Selection System. PS. Secondary Moderns in a Selective system do not achieve the same results as Comprehensive.....ou r Moderns can't, too many hurdles, not enough money. Quote from http://www.nfer.ac.u k/nfer/PRE_PDF_Files /02_28_03.pdf says ''there are other aspects of selection which need to be taken into account (for example, the impact on children’s self-esteem of failing the selection test).'' Bajina

7:44pm Sun 22 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

I think people like Mike Appleyard, the Conservative party in Bucks, and the well-off supporters (for miles around) of free high level education for their children, will never respond to statements like the ones here or change the selective system - there is no response they can make and the present system is satisfying to them psychologically as it is a supposedly accurate and unprejudiced test of children's merit and financially as other people contribute a lot towards it - instead they will always behave as if the system's rationality and efficiency were beyond doubt, beyond improvement, and the system's merits are so obvious they are not worth discussing. Shaw also pointed out that silence is the most perfect expression of contempt.

The only way parents will ensure a rational and fair deal for their children is to force BCC's hand with an online petition or by using the difficult and time-consuming procedure established by the Blair government.
I think people like Mike Appleyard, the Conservative party in Bucks, and the well-off supporters (for miles around) of free high level education for their children, will never respond to statements like the ones here or change the selective system - there is no response they can make and the present system is satisfying to them psychologically as it is a supposedly accurate and unprejudiced test of children's merit and financially as other people contribute a lot towards it - instead they will always behave as if the system's rationality and efficiency were beyond doubt, beyond improvement, and the system's merits are so obvious they are not worth discussing. Shaw also pointed out that silence is the most perfect expression of contempt. The only way parents will ensure a rational and fair deal for their children is to force BCC's hand with an online petition or by using the difficult and time-consuming procedure established by the Blair government. Undercover Euro Yob

9:14pm Sun 22 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

stir up wrote:
If all the statements against the 11+ are correct why is it they so many people move into Bucks for the education system. Some of these remarks sound like sour grapes. Can I suggest you have a look at the MK school results which as a separate unity authority has the comprehensive system you will be in for a very sad surprise. Many children go on from upper schools to sixth forms at grammar school and in fact many go on to Unis. Also have a look at the upper school results in Bucks to the secondary moderns across the UK.
If a pupil has more of an aptitude for the upper school and just did not make it to a grammar they are often well up at the school, instead having just got into a grammar where they may well struggle. Better to be one of the top pupils in an upper school.
Can you give us some figures to back up all of this?

It’s no wonder that Mike Appleyard and the rest of them maintain a snooty silence when there are people available to parrot clichés - you have provided us with some fine ones here - the only one missing is the one about a close family member/friend/neighb
our who passed the 11+ and became the first member of their family to go to university - but all the others including the child who ‘struggles’ and would be better off in the top form of a secondary modern school are back.
Possibly the child who you imagine struggling was one of the ones who was from a private school and who passed when the success figure of 121 was set at a lower level than in other years - the amount of talent required to get through from year to year varies.



If all the statements against the 11+ are correct why is it they so many people move into Bucks for the education system.

Can you tell us how many such people there are and where you obtained the figures from?

Some of these remarks sound like sour grapes.
Do you include the remarks of Sir Michael Wilshaw and the Sutton Trust or the Ofsted report published some months ago which criticised Bucks County by name for the extremely low quality of education it gives children who fail the eleven-plus - an exam that has been abolished in most counties, including Conservative ones. (see: http://www.independe
nt.co.uk/news/educat
ion/education-news/s
chools-in-welloff-ar
eas-are-failing-poor
er-pupils--who-get-b
etter-exam-results-i
n-deprived-areas-858


Why is it ‘ Better to be one of the top pupils in an upper school’? If a child gets to grammar school and they have to work hard (or ‘struggle’ as you would call it) to keep up then they will grow in knowledge and character - education in Secondary moderns schools seems to be the only area of human activity where conservatives think it is acceptable for working-class people to cruise along and not try too hard - if someone were in a sporting environment you wouldn’t say it was ‘better’ for them to be playing football against an old people’s home or against all the weakest sportsmen in the locality than to be ‘struggling’ against athletic-minded young people their own age would you?

Sai Diva
- were you the person on the ill-fated ‘Bucks Banter’ site who quoted figures for parents who shunt their children to schools in Oxfordshire to avoid local secondary modern schools?
If you were then can you point me to the web site or other source where you obtained the figures?
[quote][p][bold]stir up[/bold] wrote: If all the statements against the 11+ are correct why is it they so many people move into Bucks for the education system. Some of these remarks sound like sour grapes. Can I suggest you have a look at the MK school results which as a separate unity authority has the comprehensive system you will be in for a very sad surprise. Many children go on from upper schools to sixth forms at grammar school and in fact many go on to Unis. Also have a look at the upper school results in Bucks to the secondary moderns across the UK. If a pupil has more of an aptitude for the upper school and just did not make it to a grammar they are often well up at the school, instead having just got into a grammar where they may well struggle. Better to be one of the top pupils in an upper school.[/p][/quote]Can you give us some figures to back up all of this? It’s no wonder that Mike Appleyard and the rest of them maintain a snooty silence when there are people available to parrot clichés - you have provided us with some fine ones here - the only one missing is the one about a close family member/friend/neighb our who passed the 11+ and became the first member of their family to go to university - but all the others including the child who ‘struggles’ and would be better off in the top form of a secondary modern school are back. Possibly the child who you imagine struggling was one of the ones who was from a private school and who passed when the success figure of 121 was set at a lower level than in other years - the amount of talent required to get through from year to year varies. [italic] If all the statements against the 11+ are correct why is it they so many people move into Bucks for the education system. [/italic] Can you tell us how many such people there are and where you obtained the figures from? [italic] Some of these remarks sound like sour grapes. [/italic] Do you include the remarks of Sir Michael Wilshaw and the Sutton Trust or the Ofsted report published some months ago which criticised Bucks County by name for the extremely low quality of education it gives children who fail the eleven-plus - an exam that has been abolished in most counties, including Conservative ones. (see: http://www.independe nt.co.uk/news/educat ion/education-news/s chools-in-welloff-ar eas-are-failing-poor er-pupils--who-get-b etter-exam-results-i n-deprived-areas-858 [italic] Why is it ‘[italic] Better to be one of the top pupils in an upper school’[/italic]? If a child gets to grammar school and they have to work hard (or ‘struggle’ as you would call it) to keep up then they will grow in knowledge and character - education in Secondary moderns schools seems to be the only area of human activity where conservatives think it is acceptable for working-class people to cruise along and not try too hard - if someone were in a sporting environment you wouldn’t say it was ‘better’ for them to be playing football against an old people’s home or against all the weakest sportsmen in the locality than to be ‘struggling’ against athletic-minded young people their own age would you? [italic] [bold] Sai Diva [/bold] [/italic] - were you the person on the ill-fated ‘Bucks Banter’ site who quoted figures for parents who shunt their children to schools in Oxfordshire to avoid local secondary modern schools? If you were then can you point me to the web site or other source where you obtained the figures? Undercover Euro Yob

9:19pm Sun 22 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Bajina wrote:
stir up wrote:
If all the statements against the 11+ are correct why is it they so many people move into Bucks for the education system. Some of these remarks sound like sour grapes. Can I suggest you have a look at the MK school results which as a separate unity authority has the comprehensive system you will be in for a very sad surprise. Many children go on from upper schools to sixth forms at grammar school and in fact many go on to Unis. Also have a look at the upper school results in Bucks to the secondary moderns across the UK.
If a pupil has more of an aptitude for the upper school and just did not make it to a grammar they are often well up at the school, instead having just got into a grammar where they may well struggle. Better to be one of the top pupils in an upper school.
Stir up, Good to see passion for Good Bucks Education, we will only make progress if we care.
- Re-parents moving into this area - Yes, Selection System predicates on all parents wanting the best for their children. The unrealised, inbuilt injustice is, only 18-20% of our local children will pass the 11+ and get to Grammar Schools (the rest of places going to private schools and out-of-county children). The other 80% of children will Fail - this burden is passed to Secondary moderns without extra money.
- Agreed, many Secondary Modern kids do make it to Unis, both of mine climbed this hill, incidentally both rejected going on to Grammar 6th Forms.. I will suggest this is due to hard work from the Secondary Moderns schools, their Heads, teachers and SLT. THAT IS THE REASON HIGHCREST DESERVED AND GOT AN ''OUTSTANDING' AT PREVIOUS OFSTED.
- Sorry i do not know results from Secondary Moderns in other Selective Systems outside Bucks. So will shut firmly up on this.
- On more point please Stir Up, The Gap. Schools Minister Laws slammed into us in Bucks (arounf April?), for having a big Gap. This Gap in Bucks is pushed to one of the worse in UK, by the Selection System.

PS. Secondary Moderns in a Selective system do not achieve the same results as Comprehensive.....ou

r Moderns can't, too many hurdles, not enough money.
Quote from http://www.nfer.ac.u

k/nfer/PRE_PDF_Files

/02_28_03.pdf says ''there are
other aspects of selection which need to be taken into account
(for example, the impact on children’s self-esteem of failing
the selection test).''



I thought the Selection System predicates on all parents wanting the best for their children.


I thought it was predicated on the idea that every year all the ten-year olds in the locality could have their intelligence and academic ability measured with great accuracy and year-on-year consistency to guess the best education for them for the rest of their lives.
[quote][p][bold]Bajina[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stir up[/bold] wrote: If all the statements against the 11+ are correct why is it they so many people move into Bucks for the education system. Some of these remarks sound like sour grapes. Can I suggest you have a look at the MK school results which as a separate unity authority has the comprehensive system you will be in for a very sad surprise. Many children go on from upper schools to sixth forms at grammar school and in fact many go on to Unis. Also have a look at the upper school results in Bucks to the secondary moderns across the UK. If a pupil has more of an aptitude for the upper school and just did not make it to a grammar they are often well up at the school, instead having just got into a grammar where they may well struggle. Better to be one of the top pupils in an upper school.[/p][/quote]Stir up, Good to see passion for Good Bucks Education, we will only make progress if we care. - Re-parents moving into this area - Yes, Selection System predicates on all parents wanting the best for their children. The unrealised, inbuilt injustice is, only 18-20% of our local children will pass the 11+ and get to Grammar Schools (the rest of places going to private schools and out-of-county children). The other 80% of children will Fail - this burden is passed to Secondary moderns without extra money. - Agreed, many Secondary Modern kids do make it to Unis, both of mine climbed this hill, incidentally both rejected going on to Grammar 6th Forms.. I will suggest this is due to hard work from the Secondary Moderns schools, their Heads, teachers and SLT. THAT IS THE REASON HIGHCREST DESERVED AND GOT AN ''OUTSTANDING' AT PREVIOUS OFSTED. - Sorry i do not know results from Secondary Moderns in other Selective Systems outside Bucks. So will shut firmly up on this. - On more point please Stir Up, The Gap. Schools Minister Laws slammed into us in Bucks (arounf April?), for having a big Gap. This Gap in Bucks is pushed to one of the worse in UK, by the Selection System. PS. Secondary Moderns in a Selective system do not achieve the same results as Comprehensive.....ou r Moderns can't, too many hurdles, not enough money. Quote from http://www.nfer.ac.u k/nfer/PRE_PDF_Files /02_28_03.pdf says ''there are other aspects of selection which need to be taken into account (for example, the impact on children’s self-esteem of failing the selection test).''[/p][/quote][italic] [quote] [/quote][/italic] [italic] [quote] [/quote][/italic] I thought the[italic] Selection System predicates on all parents wanting the best for their children. [/italic] I thought it was predicated on the idea that every year all the ten-year olds in the locality could have their intelligence and academic ability measured with great accuracy and year-on-year consistency to guess the best education for them for the rest of their lives. Undercover Euro Yob

11:40pm Sun 22 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...



Sue Imbriano, Buckinghamshire County Council's Strategic Director for Children and Young People said: "As a local authority with a responsibility for children and young people and standards in education, we work extremely closely with all schools including Grammar schools to maximise opportunities for all children.
"We carry out work and projects with a range of partners aimed at creating the right environment for children and young people to thrive and develop.”


This followed a dialogue which concluded along the lines:


Oh … I don’t know what to tell them Sue - tell them to eff off - tell 'em we’re not going to get rid of the bloody grammar schools are we? Tell them ourresearch shows - oh I don’t know what percent - big-up the percentage as much as you can - are dependent on the home environment - that’s why parents who are better than people on council estates do better - they are better. Make it sound intelligent - say something managerial-sounding like ‘A range of partners.’ - tell them the whole system is “excellent” and the thick workers’ kids do well in the secondary moderns just like the grammar school kids - that’s how excellent it all is!.
[italic] [/italic] [italic] [/italic] [italic] Sue Imbriano, Buckinghamshire County Council's Strategic Director for Children and Young People said: "As a local authority with a responsibility for children and young people and standards in education, we work extremely closely with all schools including Grammar schools to maximise opportunities for all children. "We carry out work and projects with a range of partners aimed at creating the right environment for children and young people to thrive and develop.” [/italic] This followed a dialogue which concluded along the lines: [italic]Oh … I don’t know what to tell them Sue - tell them to eff off - tell 'em we’re not going to get rid of the bloody [bold] grammar schools[/bold] are we? Tell them [bold] our[/bold]research shows - oh I don’t know what percent - big-up the percentage as much as you can - are dependent on the home environment - that’s why parents who are [bold] better [/bold]than people on council estates [bold] do [/bold] better - they [bold]are [/bold]better. Make it sound intelligent - say something managerial-sounding like ‘A range of partners.’ - tell them the whole system is “excellent” and the thick workers’ kids do well in the secondary moderns just like the grammar school kids - that’s how[bold] excellent [/bold] it all is!. Undercover Euro Yob

12:00am Mon 23 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

CatherineAB wrote:
Nobody states the proportion of pupils receiving free school meals, who are not in the Grammar schools, so there is no comparison. Wake up, there.
The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high, so the children do not lose out. The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities
The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities


Then what does the 11+ test? Surely it doesn’t segregate ten-year olds on the basis of their aspirations - how can an exam establish people’s 'aspirations', particularly at that age?


I always thought the assumption underlying the 11+ was precisely that it did separate ten year olds on the basis of inferior or superior abilities.


Do explain further - I would like to learn what you meant there.
[quote][p][bold]CatherineAB[/bold] wrote: Nobody states the proportion of pupils receiving free school meals, who are not in the Grammar schools, so there is no comparison. Wake up, there. The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high, so the children do not lose out. The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities[/p][/quote][italic] The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities [/italic] Then what [bold]does [/bold] the 11+ test? Surely it doesn’t segregate ten-year olds on the basis of their aspirations - how can an exam establish people’s 'aspirations', particularly at that age? I always thought the assumption underlying the 11+ was precisely that it [bold]did [/bold] separate ten year olds on the basis of inferior or superior abilities. Do explain further - I would like to learn what you meant there. Undercover Euro Yob

12:05am Mon 23 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

HerculePoirot wrote:
stir up: "If all the statements against the 11+ are correct why is it they so many people move into Bucks for the education system". Eh? To take an example, around 7 times as many Bucks resident pupils travel to secondary schools in Oxfordshire than travel in the opposite direction.

CatherineAB: "Nobody states the proportion of pupils receiving free school meals, who are not in the Grammar schools, so there is no comparison. Wake up, there. The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high, so the children do not lose out. The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities". Please see comment above and Ofsted reports if you think the reputation of the Bucks secondary moderns is high. And actually the two types of school CAUSE different aspirations. Some FSM data for you to mull over:
Cressex: 22.2%
Highcrest; 27.1%
Holmer Green: 4.9%
William Ramsay: 10.8%

John Hampden: 0.9%
RGS: 0.9%
WHS: 2.7%

This Sue Imbriano is presumably no relation to the one who used to tell all us parents that coaching had only a slight (if any) impact on 11+ results? The other Sue Imbriano used to advise parents: "We suggest that you follow this guidance as NFER research has shown that extra familiarization or coaching makes only a slight (if any) difference to the final score.” Presumably that's why "This year the style of the test was changed in a bid to make it harder to coach"?

While I'm at it, the test was changed to CEM (University of Durham). This experiment has been tried in Warwickshire where the number of children claiming FSM and getting in to grammar schools has since FALLEN. So that's obviously the solution!

What is needed here is for one of the grammar school heads to cut the crap and move to an inclusive entrance system.
'To take an example, around 7 times as many Bucks resident pupils travel to secondary schools in Oxfordshire than travel in the opposite direction.'

Dear Hercule -

Can you point me to the web site or other source where you obtained those figures?
[quote][p][bold]HerculePoirot[/bold] wrote: stir up: "If all the statements against the 11+ are correct why is it they so many people move into Bucks for the education system". Eh? To take an example, around 7 times as many Bucks resident pupils travel to secondary schools in Oxfordshire than travel in the opposite direction. CatherineAB: "Nobody states the proportion of pupils receiving free school meals, who are not in the Grammar schools, so there is no comparison. Wake up, there. The reputation of our local "non" grammar schools is very high, so the children do not lose out. The two types of school serve different aspirations, not inferior or superior abilities". Please see comment above and Ofsted reports if you think the reputation of the Bucks secondary moderns is high. And actually the two types of school CAUSE different aspirations. Some FSM data for you to mull over: Cressex: 22.2% Highcrest; 27.1% Holmer Green: 4.9% William Ramsay: 10.8% John Hampden: 0.9% RGS: 0.9% WHS: 2.7% This Sue Imbriano is presumably no relation to the one who used to tell all us parents that coaching had only a slight (if any) impact on 11+ results? The other Sue Imbriano used to advise parents: "We suggest that you follow this guidance as NFER research has shown that extra familiarization or coaching makes only a slight (if any) difference to the final score.” Presumably that's why "This year the style of the test was changed in a bid to make it harder to coach"? While I'm at it, the test was changed to CEM (University of Durham). This experiment has been tried in Warwickshire where the number of children claiming FSM and getting in to grammar schools has since FALLEN. So that's obviously the solution! What is needed here is for one of the grammar school heads to cut the crap and move to an inclusive entrance system.[/p][/quote]'To take an example, around 7 times as many Bucks resident pupils travel to secondary schools in Oxfordshire than travel in the opposite direction.' Dear Hercule - Can you point me to the web site or other source where you obtained those figures? Undercover Euro Yob

10:39am Mon 23 Dec 13

HerculePoirot says...

All from DFE website. "https://www.gov.uk/
government/publicati
ons/schools-pupils-a
nd-their-characteris
tics-january-2013" and look for cross border movement matrix. "http://www.educatio
n.gov.uk/schools" and look for each schools performance which lists fsm.
Happy Christmas All!
All from DFE website. "https://www.gov.uk/ government/publicati ons/schools-pupils-a nd-their-characteris tics-january-2013" and look for cross border movement matrix. "http://www.educatio n.gov.uk/schools" and look for each schools performance which lists fsm. Happy Christmas All! HerculePoirot

11:14am Mon 23 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Merci Bien et Joyeux Noel M. Poirot!
Merci Bien et Joyeux Noel M. Poirot! Undercover Euro Yob

1:28am Tue 24 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Bajina wrote:
demoness the second wrote:
Bajina wrote:
demoness the second wrote:
Welwyn Dowd wrote:
More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.
Do you have evidence to back this claim up?
Welwyn Dowd,
You are right.
You probably know where the evidence is, to back up your correct claim '' More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools.''
Well perhaps he/she could share it so that we all can see.
We appear to have slipped from a blogging mode, to a hard line challenging professional Scrutiny mode.
As a blogging community, have the resources and wherewithal to conduct such an inquiry?
This stuff is restrained and courteous combined with some of the stuff from last year - see:


http://www.bucksfree
press.co.uk/yoursay/
opinion/editorschair
/9842265.Can_the_ano
nymous_defenders_of_
free_speech_defend_w
hat_they_write_too_/



no quarter asked or given and no prisoners taken!
[quote][p][bold]Bajina[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]demoness the second[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bajina[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]demoness the second[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Welwyn Dowd[/bold] wrote: More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools. If your kids are in county primary schools they're at a disadvantage from day one as only half as many as could get in actually will. That's 15% instead of 30%. One in six or fewer. Meanwhile 100% of tax payers foot the bill for this arrangement including Sue Imbriano's £143,520 salary.[/p][/quote]Do you have evidence to back this claim up?[/p][/quote]Welwyn Dowd, You are right. You probably know where the evidence is, to back up your correct claim '' More than half of kids going in to Bucks grammar schools come from private schools.''[/p][/quote]Well perhaps he/she could share it so that we all can see.[/p][/quote]We appear to have slipped from a blogging mode, to a hard line challenging professional Scrutiny mode. As a blogging community, have the resources and wherewithal to conduct such an inquiry?[/p][/quote]This stuff is restrained and courteous combined with some of the stuff from last year - see: http://www.bucksfree press.co.uk/yoursay/ opinion/editorschair /9842265.Can_the_ano nymous_defenders_of_ free_speech_defend_w hat_they_write_too_/ no quarter asked or given and no prisoners taken! Undercover Euro Yob

4:23pm Sun 29 Dec 13

slickchick says...

stir up wrote:
If all the statements against the 11+ are correct why is it they so many people move into Bucks for the education system. Some of these remarks sound like sour grapes. Can I suggest you have a look at the MK school results which as a separate unity authority has the comprehensive system you will be in for a very sad surprise. Many children go on from upper schools to sixth forms at grammar school and in fact many go on to Unis. Also have a look at the upper school results in Bucks to the secondary moderns across the UK.
If a pupil has more of an aptitude for the upper school and just did not make it to a grammar they are often well up at the school, instead having just got into a grammar where they may well struggle. Better to be one of the top pupils in an upper school.
Stir up, you need to spend some time looking at the facts of the Bucks grammar school selection results. Children in Bucks state funded schools have the worst chance of gaining a grammar school place. Last year (for the 2013 entry) about 27% of Bucks children who took the 11+ passed or gained entry through an appeal. If your child attended a private or an out-of-county school the pass rate was 46%.
This effectively means that if you want your child to go to a Bucks grammar school, you will double your chances by living out of Bucks or by sending your child to a private school where their priority is to coach for an 11+ exam. From what I have heard about previous experiences with the new test, the results for the 2014 entry will be even worse than this, it is likely that a smaller percentage of Bucks educated children will be gaining a Bucks grammar school place.
But don't worry, Bucks County Council will issue a statement applauding the success of the new selection exam. What Bucks parents want is an education system that provides an equal opportunity for a good education for all children. That means all schools teaching the same wide range of subjects to an equally high standard that matches or exceeds the national standards. To quote David Laws the Schools Minister, "the education results in Bucks are a disgrace."
[quote][p][bold]stir up[/bold] wrote: If all the statements against the 11+ are correct why is it they so many people move into Bucks for the education system. Some of these remarks sound like sour grapes. Can I suggest you have a look at the MK school results which as a separate unity authority has the comprehensive system you will be in for a very sad surprise. Many children go on from upper schools to sixth forms at grammar school and in fact many go on to Unis. Also have a look at the upper school results in Bucks to the secondary moderns across the UK. If a pupil has more of an aptitude for the upper school and just did not make it to a grammar they are often well up at the school, instead having just got into a grammar where they may well struggle. Better to be one of the top pupils in an upper school.[/p][/quote]Stir up, you need to spend some time looking at the facts of the Bucks grammar school selection results. Children in Bucks state funded schools have the worst chance of gaining a grammar school place. Last year (for the 2013 entry) about 27% of Bucks children who took the 11+ passed or gained entry through an appeal. If your child attended a private or an out-of-county school the pass rate was 46%. This effectively means that if you want your child to go to a Bucks grammar school, you will double your chances by living out of Bucks or by sending your child to a private school where their priority is to coach for an 11+ exam. From what I have heard about previous experiences with the new test, the results for the 2014 entry will be even worse than this, it is likely that a smaller percentage of Bucks educated children will be gaining a Bucks grammar school place. But don't worry, Bucks County Council will issue a statement applauding the success of the new selection exam. What Bucks parents want is an education system that provides an equal opportunity for a good education for all children. That means all schools teaching the same wide range of subjects to an equally high standard that matches or exceeds the national standards. To quote David Laws the Schools Minister, "the education results in Bucks are a disgrace." slickchick

10:35pm Sun 29 Dec 13

Undercover Euro Yob says...

’… BCC claims its research reveals 80 per cent of factors affecting children’s development happen outside school.’
I realise that this a BFP reporter making a report on an educational topic so almost any vaguely positive-sounding statement will do* but what does this actually mean?
What does this revelation actually reveal - ‘80% of factors’ - does it include nutrition which affects the development physically and mentally of a child - or heredity which does the same thing as well? Does it include the number of siblings a child has and where the child comes in terms of age in the family’s children? Does it include things like parents divorcing or one of them dying?

‘Children’s development’ - does this refer to all types of development or just their intellectual development and if it does refer to just intellectual development then at what ages and in which ways?

What does this statement by ‘BCC’ mean by ‘factors’ and ’development’ and is it a sensible statement that reveals anything of significance concerning the 11+?
If the BFP is quoting ‘BCC’ accurately then can ‘BCC’ be a little more specific?
Who at ‘BCC’ made this claim and what does its ‘research’ consist of? Has it published this research elsewhere before?
This is vague to the point of meaninglessness.



Sue Imbriano, Buckinghamshire County Council's Strategic Director for Children and Young People said: "As a local authority with a responsibility for children and young people and standards in education, we work extremely closely with all schools including Grammar schools to maximise opportunities for all children.
"We carry out work and projects with a range of partners aimed at creating the right environment for children and young people to thrive and develop.”
This is another dodgy bit of language - we know BCC is a local authority with a responsibility for children and young people and standards in education, so it is reassuring that Ms Imbriano, who is after all ‘Strategic Director for Children and Young People’ is speaking as part of that authority - it is also gratifying that the authority on behalf of whom she speaks works closely (‘extremely closely’) to ‘maximise opportunities for all children.’ She also reassures us that the schools BCC works extremely closely with include grammar schools.

No one doubted that BCC worked with grammar schools - the whole system often seems to run largely for their benefit and if they are satisfied then everything is fine.

If BCC is succeeding in ‘creating the right environment for children and young people to thrive and develop’ then why are we separating children at age 10 and deciding that 60-70% of them are only worthy of an education that is in every way inferior to the education that is offered to the other children some of who achieved one or two more points (decided on at a varying standard each year) in the test at age ten? And why are so many schools periodically put into ‘special measures’ as ‘failing’?

(I suspect that the number of schools that are ‘failing’ is greater than just the one where Mike Appleyard was head of the governors - in the past Highcrest has been lauded at a time when it had been removed from special measures but it came 25th out of 28 in the schools listed in terms of performance at Level 2 at a time when the Misbourne School was 18th - seven places ahead of Highcrest - but in the relevant edition of the BFP there was a report that the Misbourne School was ‘failing’ despite being in ‘special measures’ since the previous year. (http://www.bucksfre
epress.co.uk/yoursay
/opinion/bfpcomment/
8948497.Data_will_be
_of_huge_value_to_pa
rents/))

* (Some months ago the BFP ran a report which quoted the principal of Highcrest saying: ‘More students have also achieved apprenticeships in incredibly prestigious and competitive companies ...’ What does that really mean? The BFP has also said in the last year: ‘IN a week when a report said there is no better place for families to live than in leafy Bucks, partly because of achievements in school grades, we should be pleased to see yet more great A Level results. A study of 350 local authorities by Savills said the Chiltern District Council area was top dog, with education standards one key factor. (See property pages for more).’ What did that really mean - what is ‘top dog’ and how far up or down the list of ’key factors’ did the factor of education come? (‘See property pages’ because this is a reference to Savills the estate agents - this is who we are being asked to accept as an arbiter on the quality of education for our children. ) The BFP has form in this way - as far back at least three years when it said Highcrest ‘… government inspectors ranked it alongside the best in the country … one: ‘whose overall effectiveness is ‘outstanding’’
?
)
[italic]’… BCC claims its research reveals 80 per cent of factors affecting children’s development happen outside school.’ [/italic] I realise that this a BFP reporter making a report on an educational topic so almost any vaguely positive-sounding statement will do* but what does this actually mean? What does this revelation actually reveal - ‘80% of factors’ - does it include nutrition which affects the development physically and mentally of a child - or heredity which does the same thing as well? Does it include the number of siblings a child has and where the child comes in terms of age in the family’s children? Does it include things like parents divorcing or one of them dying? ‘Children’s development’ - does this refer to all types of development or just their intellectual development and if it [italic] does[/italic] refer to just intellectual development then at what ages and in which ways? What does this statement by ‘BCC’ mean by ‘factors’ and ’development’ and is it a sensible statement that reveals anything of significance concerning the 11+? If the BFP is quoting ‘BCC’ accurately then can ‘BCC’ be a little more specific? Who at ‘BCC’ made this claim and what does its ‘research’ consist of? Has it published this research elsewhere before? This is vague to the point of meaninglessness. [italic] Sue Imbriano, Buckinghamshire County Council's Strategic Director for Children and Young People said: "As a local authority with a responsibility for children and young people and standards in education, we work extremely closely with all schools including Grammar schools to maximise opportunities for all children. "We carry out work and projects with a range of partners aimed at creating the right environment for children and young people to thrive and develop.” [/italic]This is another dodgy bit of language - we know BCC is a local authority with a responsibility for children and young people and standards in education, so it is reassuring that Ms Imbriano, who is after all ‘Strategic Director for Children and Young People’ is speaking as part of that authority - it is also gratifying that the authority on behalf of whom she speaks works closely (‘extremely closely’) to ‘maximise opportunities for all children.’ She also reassures us that the schools BCC works extremely closely with include grammar schools. No one doubted that BCC worked with grammar schools - the whole system often seems to run largely for their benefit and if they are satisfied then everything is fine. If BCC is succeeding in ‘creating the right environment for children and young people to thrive and develop’ then why are we separating children at age 10 and deciding that 60-70% of them are only worthy of an education that is in every way inferior to the education that is offered to the other children some of who achieved one or two more points (decided on at a varying standard each year) in the test at age ten? And why are so many schools periodically put into ‘special measures’ as ‘failing’? (I suspect that the number of schools that are ‘failing’ is greater than just the one where Mike Appleyard was head of the governors - in the past Highcrest has been lauded at a time when it had been removed from special measures but it came 25th out of 28 in the schools listed in terms of performance at Level 2 at a time when the Misbourne School was 18th - seven places ahead of Highcrest - but in the relevant edition of the BFP there was a report that the Misbourne School was ‘failing’ despite being in ‘special measures’ since the previous year. (http://www.bucksfre epress.co.uk/yoursay /opinion/bfpcomment/ 8948497.Data_will_be _of_huge_value_to_pa rents/)) * (Some months ago the BFP ran a report which quoted the principal of Highcrest saying: [italic] ‘More students have also achieved apprenticeships in incredibly prestigious and competitive companies ...’ [/italic] What does that really mean? The BFP has also said in the last year: [italic] ‘IN a week when a report said there is no better place for families to live than in leafy Bucks, partly because of achievements in school grades, we should be pleased to see yet more great A Level results. A study of 350 local authorities by Savills said the Chiltern District Council area was top dog, with education standards one key factor. (See property pages for more).’ [/italic] What did [italic] that[/italic] really mean - what is ‘top dog’ and how far up or down the list of ’key factors’ did the factor of education come? (‘See property pages’ because this is a reference to Savills the estate agents - this is who we are being asked to accept as an arbiter on the quality of education for our children. ) The BFP has form in this way - as far back at least three years when it said Highcrest [italic] ‘… government inspectors ranked it alongside the best in the country … one: ‘whose overall effectiveness is ‘outstanding’’ ? [/italic] ) Undercover Euro Yob

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