Go to navigation
It is currently Sat Dec 03, 2016 5:48 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2007 9:20 am 
Is this article not argument in itself for those near misses at 11+ and Level 5s at KS2 SATs to go to Grammar School?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... pils04.xml


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2007 10:54 am 
Hi Everyone,

I've been dipping into this forum every so often and am glad to see how many successes there are with bright children getting into the schools they deserve.

This article is a bit scary. I've read somewhere that 10% of children at upper schools achieved all Level 5s in their Key Stage 2 SATs.

Surely all these children should be given the chance to sit the 12+ automatically.

Thinking positively, maybe struggling children actually improve because of these mixed ability classes.

Anyone know where I could find out the % of children at Grammar School who passed their 11+ but only got Level 4s in Year 6?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2007 3:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 11:42 pm
Posts: 52
Location: Tamworth
The problem with this is how about children i.e. my sister and other forum members children that passed the 11+ yet thanks to the disgusting behaviour of LEA's and even some of the grammar schools, will not give an appeals hearing let alone a place.
With reference to the article above, I missed out on the 11+ yet got 5's back in 1998, went to a ****** comp which did affect my education mostly due to the incompitance of the teachers. Even though I;ve done very well, I would have rather spent my time in a grammar school with those of similar intellectual ability.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2007 3:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 625
Hi

This is not particularly unusual from my experience.

Primary schools target their children to attain Level 4 in KS2 SATs. They achieve about 50% of this target nationally. Of this there is a small percentage that attain Level 5s.

Where grammar schools exist children with Level 5s "tend" to be the most brightest and are those that are "most likely" to pass 11+ entrance tests and go to grammar schools. The grammar schools use a fast track approach to teaching that maintains high standards.

Unfortunately this is not the case where LEAs do not have grammar schools. The children are all grouped together in a Comprehensive school, sometimes starting at Level 3. This is because the National target for Comprehensive schools at KS3 is Level 5. It used to be Level 6 but Comprehensive schools found this target impossible to attain.

(Sometimes, due to over-coaching, a child may enter grammar school unable to cope with the high standards and there are probably cases were no forward progress is made from year 6 to year 9.)

It should be a criminal offence for a school to take a child from primary school with Level 5 KS2 results and reduce that childs performance to a Level 4 as this represents gross negligence on the part of the school.

Regards

Mike


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: solimum
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2007 4:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 2:09 pm
Posts: 874
Location: Solihull, West Midlands
In the comp my children have all attended 11-16 this would certainly not be acceptable. Children have individual targets based (initially) on their KS2 results and certainly those (including my daughter) with three level 5's at KS2 will be expected to achieve level 7 at KS3 (and level 8 in Maths) By year 8 they are in ability groups in several subjects including maths, science and languages and certainly there are very high expectations at GCSE too based on KS3 and Yellis tests or similar


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2007 10:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:07 pm
Posts: 1149
Location: Finchley - Barnet
(Sometimes, due to over-coaching, a child may enter grammar school unable to cope with the high standards and there are probably cases were no forward progress is made from year 6 to year 9.)

I have never bought this. To say that I child who is able did not pass an entry exam because he/she performed below his ability as his was on a bad day is perfectly acceptable. On the other hand to say that a child passed because he perfomed beyond his ability as he was on a good day (following overcoaching) is complete nonsense. It is equivalent to saying that someone won an Olympic medal despite not being an athlet of Olympic standards (?!). Of course he is, and his trainer (tutor) managed to get it out of him finally. His grammar school should do likewise.

Quote:
It should be a criminal offence for a school to take a child from primary school with Level 5 KS2 results and reduce that childs performance to a Level 4 as this represents gross negligence on the part of the school.


Absolutely agree.

_________________
sj355


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2007 11:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 625
Hi sj355

Sorry you don´t agree on this and although you may not have bought into it, it is a fact.

Some children who are coached intensively for 11+ entrance tests and pass do not have the academic ability to cope with the high demands of grammar schools.

If you consider your "Olympic" analogy further. No matter how much coaching a top athlete receives some of them do crack under pressure or do not achieve what is expected of them. Look at the Great Britain Olympic team results for evidence. Occassionally an outsider with no previous track record comes to the forefront, as in the case at the Athens Olympics, this is achieved through cheating.

Regards

Mike


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2007 11:39 am 
Some children who are coached intensively for 11+ entrance tests and pass do not have the academic ability to cope with the high demands of or do not achieve what is expected of them.
Quote:




I totally agree.My daughter only prepared 10 weeks before exams.I wanted her to be able to cope with the demands of a grammar school.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2007 11:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:10 pm
Posts: 8199
Location: Buckinghamshire
(Uh oh everyone - looks like they're off again!)

Image

I know of children who are at Grammar School because they passed the 11+ after fairly intensive coaching and are now not coping.

As Mike says, it is a fact, and I believe it is particularly a problem here in Bucks (and presumably also in Wirral, Mike?), where the only type of testing used is VR. Despite the assertions of Admissions and NFER, there are a small number of candidates who, with coaching, can be taught to pass a VR test, but who would never achieve the required standard for GS if they were also tested in NVR, Maths, English, etc.

Sadly, as I have found out, the opposite is also true.

Sally-Anne


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2007 11:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:07 pm
Posts: 1149
Location: Finchley - Barnet
Mike wrote:
Hi sj355

Quote:
Some children who are coached intensively for 11+ entrance tests and pass do not have the academic ability to cope with the high demands of grammar schools.


Wishful thinking and a cheap consolation for those that do not make it!

Quote:
If you consider your "Olympic" analogy further. No matter how much coaching a top athlete receives some of them do crack under pressure or do not achieve what is expected of them.


I think that re-enforces my argument rather than disproves it. The fact remains, they are able albeit sensitive! As you write, they are "top", so with with what criteria is that?

Quote:
Look at the Great Britain Olympic team results for evidence. Occassionally an outsider with no previous track record comes to the forefront, as in the case at the Athens Olympics, this is achieved through cheating.


Mmm nice try! However drugs will not do the trick in the 11+. (I hope!) Hence I admit my analogy is 100% on the spot! This makes it no less true. By the way what is overcoaching? Who gets to define what is the "over" criteria?

_________________
sj355


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
CALL 020 8204 5060
   
Privacy Policy | Refund Policy | Disclaimer | Copyright © 2004 – 2016