David Laws to Grammar School Heads Association (19th June)

Discussion of the 11 Plus

Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators

11 Plus Mocks - Practise the real exam experience - Book Now
loopylou
Posts: 403
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 9:08 am

Re: David Laws to Grammar School Heads Association (19th Jun

Post by loopylou »

The Sutton Trust has done some research. Their report is called Poor Grammar. They found that the barriers can be aspiration, attitudes of teachers and parents and the cost and commitment of tutoring. Our local grammar schools are superselective and everyone tutors. That isn't an exaggeration at all - I mean literally every single person taking the test will have undertaken between 2 months and 4+ years of study for it. Those who say they don’t tutor mean they don't pay for tutoring - they still do the same preparation at home. This fact alone is very offputting to people who cannot or will not prepare children sometimes years in advance for these tests.

As for tutor-proof exams, grammar schools are constrained by costs and by the law which prohibits conducting any form of interview as part of the selection process. Any reasonably priced, easy to administer, non personalised test is never going to be tutor-proof. Highly unpredictable tests simply require broad preparation so that all eventualities are covered. Highly time sensitive tests just require months of extra mocks to improve timing and minimise errors. I agree with pippi totally- coaching works. There may be test formats that limit that impact but, for the 11+ coaching not only works but is absolutely essential to stand any chance when 1000+ other level 5 children have all been coached for it.
tiffinboys
Posts: 8022
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 11:00 pm
Location: Surrey

Re: David Laws to Grammar School Heads Association (19th Jun

Post by tiffinboys »

I think government is being approached from the wrong end.

Instead of pressurizing grammars into taking more PPCs, government should consider allowing primary schools in providing orientation courses for 11+ plus tests as well as strengthening teaching in core subjects. That way more of the able children, PPCs or otherwise, will qualify for grammars, without the need for private coaching.
mystery
Posts: 8927
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 10:56 pm

Re: David Laws to Grammar School Heads Association (19th Jun

Post by mystery »

If I understand David Law's speech correctly, he is trying to turn this on its head too. He is surely, in a very roundabout way, saying that there aren't enough FSM pupils achieving level 5 and this is a bigger issue than the current difference in the proportion of FSM level 5 pupils getting into grammars and non-FSM level 5 pupils getting into grammar (he's ignoring all the rest [the level 4 and below children] as he's making the broadly correct assumption that grammar school pupils are selected from the segment of pupils that get level 5 by the end of year 6 at the latest).

So he ends by saying that the government's job is to improve the attainment of all pupils. The focus of the new national curriculum documents are saying this too - they are driving at the point that a low 4 is not a good enough base for senior school entry and are an attempt to drive up standards in primaries to reduce the percentage of pupils on low 4s and less just to those truly with learning difficulties which prevent higher attainment at this age.

It's right that Government's job is to help all pupils attain more and close the gap between FSM and non-FSM attainment - not focus on the (relatively) minor issue of grammar schools. It's only a small proportion of the country that has grammar schools and as others have said, it's pretty much impossible to come up with a cheap and fair test of ability. (Which leaves me wondering again about the part of his speech where he talks about some research into selection tests done by Uni of Durham .... I'd rather my money was spent on teaching some level 3 FSM children!).
pippi
Posts: 320
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 12:33 am
Location: Bucks

Re: David Laws to Grammar School Heads Association (19th Jun

Post by pippi »

tiffinboys wrote:Let GSHA find out if the number of PP children has increased or decreased in the schools which adopted CEM tests. The way it looks as if coaching has increased with the introduction of CEM tests.
Warwickshire at least have the figures for this going back to before the CEM tests (eg: http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/ ... =5&t=35293" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;). If anything it looks like the latter (decreased) to me.

According to their webpage "Since 1999 CEM has developed assessments with the aim of creating a fair selection process and has achieved this by drawing from research identifying the best predictors of later achievement" which shows how long they have been working on this - how much longer is this going to take?! But also, frankly, the utter naivety of their approach. They tell us that they are looking for the best predictors of later academic achievement. But as David Laws said: "the best way to predict a child’s exam results is to look at their family income and social background". This is exactly what these tests do.

I don't think the situation that loopylou describes is limited to superselective areas. We live in Bucks and tutoring (professional or DIY - it's still tutoring) is endemic.

In my opinion an awful lot of time, effort and money is being wasted trying to give grammar schools exactly the sort of intake that they seem to think they need/deserve.
yoyo123
Posts: 8099
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:32 pm
Location: East Kent

Re: David Laws to Grammar School Heads Association (19th Jun

Post by yoyo123 »

Magwich's last post (plus 2 replies - one which quoted the post and one which wouldn't make sense without the original offensive comment) have been removed by moderator.
loopylou
Posts: 403
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 9:08 am

Re: David Laws to Grammar School Heads Association (19th Jun

Post by loopylou »

Maybe I will be in trouble for replying to a deleted post but I think this kind of unspoken prejudice needs to be challenged. Attitudes such as Magwich's might partially explain why very bright children from poorer families don't go to grammar schools. They are put off from even applying by the attitude that they don't belong in such schools.

Studies of children achieving the highest Year 6 SATS results show a bright child from a wealthy family is far more likely to end up in a grammar school than a child with an identical score from a poorer family in the same area. (Yes I know SAT results aren't entirely reliable but Year 6 children don't routinely do IQ tests so it is the only universal indicator that exists).

There are children from disadvantaged families who are incredibly intelligent but the system did not filter those children through to selective schools when the benefit to them from such an education would be immense. That is a real problem and one that is now currently being tackled.
southbucks3
Posts: 3579
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:59 am

Re: David Laws to Grammar School Heads Association (19th Jun

Post by southbucks3 »

Much as I hate testing children, perhaps loopy has hit on something with iq testing there.
Rather than one test in year 6, maybe several small is tests throughout ks 2 would be a fairer way to ascertain exactly who is brightest, if we insist as a nation in dividing our children at secondary level. I know there will still be parents who send kids to iq coaching every week, every year of their young lives, but the need for consistency could help genuinely bright nippers be spotted and put forward regardless of background.
CAT tests must go some way towards this?
mystery
Posts: 8927
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 10:56 pm

Re: David Laws to Grammar School Heads Association (19th Jun

Post by mystery »

They're a bit more like it, but still not the same as several hundred quid spent one to one with a psychologist fully qualified in delivering a full-blown IQ test.

Also, I'm not sure that grammars do just want the "most intelligent" - whatever that is. Otherwise, why are going overboard buying tests now which are more and more based on what a child has been taught or absorbed from an ideal environment (e.g. Kent introducing an English attainment test and CEM having so many questions which are just dependent on having a huge English vocabulary).

I think there's just a load of people trying to sound PC by changing to tests that they think sound "fairer" and really keeping things much the same because that's what that particular band of voters want. Keeping up appearances.
tiffinboys
Posts: 8022
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 11:00 pm
Location: Surrey

Re: David Laws to Grammar School Heads Association (19th Jun

Post by tiffinboys »

There are children from disadvantaged families who are incredibly intelligent but the system did not filter those children through to selective schools when the benefit to them from such an education would be immense. That is a real problem and one that is now currently being tackled.
I think it would lot fairer, if grammars reserve some places for PPCs, proportionate to their numbers in the local area, and allocate these in the rank order of these children's score in their entrance test. Rest of the places can then be allocated as per the admission criteria of the school.

Say for example if there are 20% PPCs in local area, then 20% of PAN would be reserved for PPCs and allocated in their ranked order in the entrance test. Fair, do you think?
southbucks3
Posts: 3579
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:59 am

Re: David Laws to Grammar School Heads Association (19th Jun

Post by southbucks3 »

This would work for ranked gs Tiffin, assuming a base line has to be met and spare places allocated afterwards, but what about wholly selective areas like bucks where there is simply a pass mark? Pass =grammar, don't pass or opt out = upper.
Only 4% of the gs pupils in bucks take fsm, I was shocked to hear my son use the term "benefit kids" recently, he was not deliberately trying to be disparaging, he doesn't know how, but they are such a minority they stand out. Sadly his friend is embarrassed of his fsm handle, even though it is due to terrible family circumstances.
How many of the fsm children in bucks upper schools are in the very top streams when they first transfer in year 7? The tell will surely be if this percentage is higher than 4%, it is not the heads of grammars that should be asked for figures and guideline assistance but the heads of uppers in the wholly selective areas.
Post Reply
11 Plus Platform - Online Practice Makes Perfect - Try Now