11 Plus Exams Forum

The rumour mill in Canterbury is saying Simon Langton Girls is following the boys Langton down the semi superselective route from 2014.

Anyone else heard anything?

When the boys initially went that way the Head sent parents a letter assuring us it would never follow suit.

DD1 is a useless source of information, but I guess they wouldn't tell the students

I think this is purely rumour. The headteacher at Girls doesn't approve of the ss route and runs the girls school her way and does it extremely well as far as I see. Gets fantastic results and well rounded pupils throughout. The fact she sent that letter which is still on the website should demonstrate how strongly she feels about it. Very quick to disassociate.

HOWEVER

The new KCC plans show that Langton Girls school is to be knocked down and rebuilt sharing the boys Langton site....and they are already semi superselective.

I know there is land designated to education opposite the boys school which the girls school are said to have looked at, but so did one of the Universities/colleges and there were lots of objections on account of increase in traffic and also too costly.

If you look at the plans released by Canterbury council. The girls site is designated for residential development . They have to go somewhere, and there is a new school planned next to the boys.

Still nothing from Langton itself, but one of the governor's from DD2s primary had heard the rumour too.

It doesn't affect us as DD1 is heading into year 10, I'm just nosey

If they remain separate entities with separate governing bodies , then they can keep their on super-selective status surely..

Once worked in a Junior School which shared a building with an Infant school,( we had top 2 floors, they had bottom floor) they were entirely separate, different governors , different uniform, different heads, different playgrounds and entrances...in fact all we shared was the building and the name.

Yes my primary (I know long time ago) was split into infants and juniors really all they shared was the site and the name.

The impression I got when we looked at SLB was they certainly wanted to be separated from SLG, if you mentioned the school they seemed to think they were superior!

I presume the plan is a development plan for the future? I know Ashford has one that talks about building on a golf course that isn't even for sale!

Who knows? But good to keep an ear to the ground