Tiffin Girls Admissions Consultation 2016

[Snowdaddy]

tiffin is right.

Priority for the 30 places will go:
1. FSM+local
2. local
3. FSM and in the wider designated area.

Then 150 places get allocated to everyone else in rank order who live anywhere in the designated area

Yes, and also says if more than 30 qualify would still be eligible for the other 150 places on ranking.

My hunch is that 1st category, FSM + local, wont be that many, yes it might allow a genius DD who wouldn't have been able to afford tutoring, but some parents will try and give their DD every chance, sacrificing something else to afford it so some poorer children make it anyway.

I suspect in practice the second category (local) will fill the balance of the 30 and third category FSM in wider area wont ever be triggered. My reasoning is the inner area covers about 30+ primary classes scattered over about a dozen schools, and assuming half are girls is about 500 potential pupils (some of these schools are much better than average). I can't work out an exact number as it is based on electoral wards and some schools eg Surbiton are near boundaries so might have some living within the inner boundary, but some living in wards outside.

I'm pleased about the concept of some places for local children. I suspect any controversy will be about the boundaries, but it is clever to have have used wards rather than pure distance (clearly those in Richmond Hill and Hampton Wick wont like the boundary choice but they are not the areas of deprivation highlighted on the map). Keeping the 150 other places unchanged means others can't complain so easily. Well done TGS.

Just out of interest I have looked at the class lists again for current year 7, (the first of the 150 PAN) and about 15 would have been in the new 30 (based on living in those wards) so actually would have allowed about 165 instead of 150 on normal rank as 15 would have been eligible for the new category so could have shifted off the main 150 rank list. (Before anyone checks my quick glance of 15, I have done it based on area address, but not checked it precisely)

[tiffinboys]

Quite agree with your analysis, Snowdaddy. I suspect that other than the fsm from inner area, the rest of the 30 places will be filled from nearby 2 or 3 primaries alone. Perhaps, Latchmere could alone will fill the balance, if there are as many girls in the year group as in our local primary.

[Peridot]

Interesting bit in the Q and A section of the document:

"Q. What is the Tiffin Test? Is it the same as the test now?
A. The Tiffin Test is the test that will be used to determine entry to the School for Year 7 in 2016. The School is currently considering joining a consortium of selective schools to co-ordinate the first stage of testing. Therefore in 2016 it may not be exactly the same as the current testing procedure. The Tiffin Test in 2016 is however likely to be similar to the current Stage 2 test. It is also likely that the only tests that will count towards the final ranked mark will be the second stage Reading, Writing and Maths tests. If these changes are to be made then the School will consult within the usual admissions consultation period (December 2014 to February 2015)."

Well hallelujah to both of those possibilities! There is still a huge flaw in the current testing process in that the stage 1 test score forms 30% of the final ranked scores. This is still leading to anomalies such as the girl my DD knows who is constantly bragging about her incredibly high stage 1 test score, but whose English skills are very poor according to my DD. I will watch this space with interest.

Presumably by referring to the test as the "Tiffin Test" rather than the "Tiffin Girls' School Test" this might include the boys' school too... Interesting times lie ahead.

[tiffinboys]

I hope they do look at their tests in details. I, in consultation with other local parents, had following comments recently in response to TS and TGS consultations.

On the subject of Tiffin tests, here are extracts from my response to Tiffin School and Tiffin Girls School - with acknowledgement of help from other parents from our primary school in writing these up.

Entrance Tests:
In my view, the Tiffin School’s entrance tests have outlived their purpose. Extreme coaching and hard practice would help even parrots get into your School. I have seen and gone through the NVR/VR tests and what it requires to achieve highly in these tests.

TGS has done well to introduce English and maths tests as stage 2 tests. But the flaw is that these tests are done after NVR/VR tests – so basically the drawbacks are carried on. They are trying to choose more ables among the over-coached candidates in the first place. I also don’t agree to their policy of taking stage 2 tests after CAF deadline. This is against the spirit of the Schools Admissions Code, which require full and meaningful information to be available before filing CAF. Calling stage 2 tests by ranking or other name does not hide the fact these are still the entrance tests and admission is largely based on these stage 2 tests.

Most grammars have now abandoned GL Assessments prepared tests. All five Sutton grammar schools have now 2 stage tests. First Numeracy/literacy common tests and then specific English/Maths tests. I am positive that these schools would be able to select better candidates and that too mostly from their local area. The Berkshire schools in Slough and Reading and Buckinghamshire schools are going for CEM tests from this year, instead of GL based NVR/VR tests. Even Kent is changing their tests, though still prepared by GL. QE (Barnet) and Henrietta Barnett are other examples.

It is time to reflect and adopt better entrance tests. To save costs and select better candidates, it might be worthwhile to join Sutton Grammar Schools' consortium.

I hope that the Tiffin Schools would seriously consider our response.

I am happy that TGS is taking very pro-active role; from other school, I heard 'over my dead body'.

[SunlampVexesEel]

Hm... I feel that growing the school size will in the end be detrimental but given the population changes (huge housing growth in Kingston and environs) it is inevitable. DD1 already suggesting that some aspects of the school are under pressure (e.g. the house system, school/house/form identity etc).

Encouraging FSM and locals to apply is AFAIAC only a good thing. If they are really committed to serving FSM in the wider area then they might need to consider transport costs for those pupils however I believe the principle is fair.

They are choosing from the top 300 so the candidates will all be high achievers anyway. I think it is a great step in the right direction.

However, I really think they need to change the test to help non-tutored candidates have a level playing field; I'll leave it to those more knowledgeable than me to comment on that but IMHO the Verbal Reasoning score is a test of how tutored you are, not how smart you are!

Regards
SVE

[Peridot]

Love your reference to parrots, TB; in some cases sadly too true.

SVE agreed but I feel the non-verbal is just as dodgy a marker of intelligence as the verbal as regards over-tutoring these days: just learn the types of patterns and how to spot them and you're in. As for verbal, if there are children learning huge lists of vocabulary by rote with no deeper understanding or passion for this beautiful, complex language of ours then the world has become a sad place.

Whereas... I felt the stage 2 English and maths testing was properly rigorous, certainly in my DD's year anyway.

What year is your DD1 in, SVE? Interesting what she is saying: would love to hear more!

P

[tiffinboys]

It sounds as if there won't be NVR/VR for 2016 tests. Had they thought about it a little earlier, this could have been brought forward for 2015 entry.

[nat47]

I'm not sure I agree about the parrots. Children who are not academically able just don't get through VR /NVR tests no matter how much tutoring they have. They may well improve their scores, but not by enough - at least for Tiffin. I also fear the new form of testing will do nothing to discourage tutoring. Parents and tutors will simply adjust accordingly.

The idea that parents will be able to rely on the English and Maths that is taught in their state primaries just isn't realistic. Prep school children will have an immediate advantage (which they currently don't have in VR /NVR), and the children on FSM that TGS is trying to encourage will most likely be left trailing by highly tutored local children (not on FSM) who will fill those places reserved for FSM + local children. English and Maths tutoring can massively improve a child's performance in these subjects - the fact that English and Maths are taught in all schools may merely lull parents into a false sense of security.

I know a girl who failed to get through Tiffin stage 2 because she was tutored only for stage 1 (her parents didn't think she needed tutoring in English and Maths as she was top of the class at her school), while girls in her class who were far less able in both English and Maths passed both stages of the exam - they were heavily tutored for the lot.

It would be great if the proposed changes did create a level playing field - I just don't think they will.

[loopylou]

Prep school children generally do study VR and NVR so do have that advantage. The introduction of pre tests two years in advance of the common entrance exam at 13 has made this almost a requirement.
It is true though that many schools, even some prep schools, won't adequately prepare children to Tiffin test standard in maths and English in standard lessons in time for the 11+. Clever children may not be allowed to forge ahead so won't always have covered the entire Year 6 curriculum and few schools go over exam technique thoroughly. The SATS revision campaigns tend to start much later than the 11+ dates. Whilst the school remains so popular and theoretically accessible to so many, tutoring will continue just as people will move house for a school that uses distance or go to church for a school that requires faith.

I don't think it is such a bad thing that any places not allocated to children in the FSM+local category go instead to children in the purely local category (or the FSM+wider area one). Once a child has passed in the top 300, it actually matters very little to the school which of the 300 candidates they end up with. It matters very much to each child and each family and the case for admitting a local child or a disadvantaged child is stronger especially when less than 20% of slots are reserved in that way.

[nat47]

I fear I wasn't clear loopylou. I think it's fine to allocate places to local children. My point was just that those disadvantaged children on FSM that TGS is trying to help will nevertheless continue to be disadvantaged in the admissions process because they will face direct competition for those reserved places from more advantaged children from local families who have the funds to pay for tutoring.

My main point is that children can be given a huge, and often decisive, advantage in these competitive exams if they are tutored, no matter what the content of the tests. So there is never a level playing field. But whether some tests are better than others at demonstrating ability rather than knowledge, that is a matter of opinion. My own view is that there is value in VR /NVR testing because research has shown that there is a level beyond which extra tutoring will make little difference to the child's chance of success.