Proposed admission Criteria B'ham Grammars 2020

[JaneEyre]

I think the idea of contacting the MPs is a very good one.

For parents opposed to these proposals, feel free to write to your MP and give them well articulated arguments.

For those who do not feel confident in their use of the English language, do not shy away! Myself cannot write properly but I can till convey my logic and proofs. I will add tonight some documents to help you write with a better style and with more emphasis. But you can already write your draft.

To find your MP, just put your postcode in
https://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/mps/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[JaneEyre]

To help increase social mobility GS’s need to be openly discussed in all schools as an option.

In other words, the King Edward VI Foundation should have sent an email to the headmaster/headmistress of each primary school in Birmingham and the surrounding areas (so all the West Midlands) so that these people could inform all the parents/carers of the pupils in their school.

By contrast, we have just witnessed a parody of a consultation.

What I was meaning by the above is that GS's in general should be openly discussed in Primary Schools as the local comps are - we shouldn't get the 'sorry, it's against LA policy to talk about GS's' If more parents were aware of them, were aware of what was required to prepare for the entrance test and teachers were able to promote them to their 'more promising' pupils the diversity in the GS's would alter.

Thank you for clarifying your post, helen 0209.

I still stand by what I have written: we have just witnessed a parody of a consultation.

[guest201]

In fact, I am irked by reading that children at CHB are from affluent families. There are some, like there are some at FW and all other GS, including Handsworth boys ( because they did not obtain the right score to go to CHB)... but there are also some children who are brought up in dire circumstances.

This is exactly the attitude that the foundation wants to get rid of, it seems you are doing a disservice to your high scoring child if you don't send them to Camp Hill. It is an insult to the other grammar schools in Birmingham that you think they are unable to cater for the needs of high scoring children.

[KenR]

The fact that the CH schools could take the students which have the best score allow them to have very bright cohorts that the staff help to fly very very high. Thus CH schools are amongst the best free schools in England.

It is actually a myth that the candidates who score the highest in the 11+ exam go to KE CH grammars. It's true that historically the lowest pass mark for KECHB boys is higher that the other KE grammars but that was only because they have a lower number of places. The highest scoring candidates in the exam can put whatever Birmingham Consortium Grammar they like as number 1 choice on the CAF and often do!

I saw figures some years ago and on that particular year the 2 highest scoring candidates both chose KEFW

[quasimodo]

The fact that the CH schools could take the students which have the best score allow them to have very bright cohorts that the staff help to fly very very high. Thus CH schools are amongst the best free schools in England.

It is actually a myth that the candidates who score the highest in the 11+ exam go to KE CH grammars. It's true that historically the lowest pass mark for KECHB boys is higher that the other KE grammars but that was only because they have a lower number of places. The highest scoring candidates in the exam can put whatever Birmingham Consortium Grammar they like as number 1 choice on the CAF and often do!

I saw figures some years ago and on that particular year the 2 highest scoring candidates both chose KEFW

I didn't think this could be disputed.

I hope this is not taken the wrong way.I am sure many of us are aware of and known some extremely bright boys and girls who have not attended the Camp Hill schools.

[PettswoodFiona]

I would emphasize that if you feel strongly (whichever way that might be) about this consultation, respond to the consultation, as per the instructions in the consultation. It may not hurt to write to MPs, contribute to this forum, set up a facebook page etc but the way your voice is officially going to get heard is the consultation.

Some bodies carry more weight and may have their voice listened to slightly more loudly so for example if you have a consortium of primary schools in your area then by all means encourage them to respond, but recognize their response may not be the same as yours.

We've seen too many recent examples where people have waved placards, marched, objected on social media, but actually didn't vote or get their voice counted as they omitted to go via the official method of recording their opinion or choice.

[Manon]

I hesitate to put my head above the parapet being a Camp Hill parent…

But we’re not all against the changes! I have no problem with the introduction of catchment areas, even though, had they been in existence when DS applied, he would have been highly unlikely to have gained a place as we are well out of catchment. I fully accept that we took advantage of the situation as it was and could be seen as having ‘stolen’ the place of a more local boy. I will make the point that had he not done well enough in the exam to have achieved a place at any of the grammar schools available to us, his journey to the pyramid High School he would have gone to is only 5 minutes or so less than his journey to Camp Hill.

I do however think that individual catchment areas for each school is not the best way to go, partly because the schools are very different, a point I have made before on this forum and a point I will make in my response to the consultation. The big difference is obviously single sex as against co -ed – some parents and/or children have strong feelings about that either way but creating catchment areas for each individual school gives no choice. There are other differences – for example, CHB is a relatively small school and languages provision is, in my view, pretty dire. Fiveways, which was our other Birmingham option, is much larger and offers 4 languages at GCSE from what I can see from their website.

My other point will be that the catchment areas as drawn don’t seem to make a lot of sense – it looks as though some people are in catchment for a school further away than their nearest and some out of catchment people live closer to schools than in catchment people. The Warwickshire model seems to me to be fairer – not perfect, a circle around each school might be better than a circle around the clock tower in Stratford – but fairer than what is proposed at the moment for Birmingham.

The point has been made upthread that there are many children with scores high enough for the Camp Hill schools who attend the other grammar schools for whatever reason. And that at least part of the reason for the higher mark needed to gain a place at CHB is because it has a smaller intake. I don’t think lowering the mark needed to gain a place will have much if any impact on GCSE results – at the scores they are considering, they are all bright kids. I think CHB take 20% PP children at the moment. They needed lower scores and by the law of averages, some of them must be in DS’s class. He has no idea who they are and there isn’t anyone in his class who is struggling.

When it comes to the ‘kudos’ of the Camp Hill schools, I think it is bit overrated anyway – again upthread, someone has pointed out that employers are starting to redact the schools that applicants attended prior to CVs and application forms being passed to the people shortlisting. And, whilst local employers may know about the perceived hierarchy of the Birmingham Grammars, I’m not so sure that that those further afield are aware.

At the end of the day, the advice is always to choose the school which is the best fit for your child, which is what we did and which brings me back to the first point I shall be making to the consultation.

Maybe I’m not your average CHB parent – and I appreciate that I don’t have younger DC who might ‘miss out’ on a place because of the changes – but just wanted to let you know that we’re not all against the changes!

[Lategate]

So why did the King Edward’s grammar schools take out a rather large advert in the Wolverhampton Express and Star newspaper last year? Probably not targetted at affluent parents, but definitely not aimed at the students they wish to serve in Birmingham.

I am afraid I do not see your point Lategate.
Will poor families spend money on buying newspapers?
I think that the adverts for the GS that everyone can read on the buses are far more useful.

I joined the discussion at the wrong point Jane- apologies. I don’t understand why the KE GS were advertising in an out of catchment newspaper if there is such an incentive to serve the local community. Wolverhampton is not a particularly affluent area, but there is demand for boys GS places in Wolverhampton as the only GS for boys is fee- paying. QMGS is our nearest option and that has become increasingly competitive.

For what it’s worth- the advert was really helpful for us, we live between Wolverhampton and Walsall. DS is now at Handsworth Grammar. We would also have been pp eligible until last year when we started to get back on our feet. DH was too proud to “admit” that we were pp eligible when he was made redundant and we were surviving on my part-time salary, We couldn’t afford the long period of tuition. Whether this contributed to DS missing out on a place at QMGS is debatable. But without the access to HGS as an out of catchment student, my son would have lost out. I guess what i’m really saying is that I would like a fairer system for all children, that doesn’t rely on different authorities having different access policies. If QM introduced a catchment area I would be delighted. It would be fairer still if there was non fee-paying access to GS for boys in Wolverhampton.

Apologies, I haven’t read the whole thread here, just giving my opinion! I do believe that the selection process for grammars needs to have the mystery removed as helen has said. I would really like to see year 6 children interviewed by GS and their teachers’ input on their ability and progress also forming part of the process. Knowing a y6 teacher very well, he struggles to hide his disbelief at some of the parents insisting on tuition and a GS place, putting great pressure on their children, whilst it is as clear as day that they are not of GS ability. He wouldn’t need to even say those words to a prospective GS, the numbers speak for themselves across the whole of ks2.

[crazycrofter]

Manon, your point about choice is valid as the schools are different. However, really it’s only the children with scores over 240 who have real choice at the moment. For a girl in Kings Heath scoring 220 she’d have Sutton girls and possibly Handsworth - both a long trek. I think given the choice most people wouldn’t choose a school an hour away even if it seemed to suit their child more. If these parents had Camp Hill as an option I’m sure most would take it even if Handsworth has better sport/languages/whatever.

Some parents do choose Camp Hill though, even if it’s a long trek, in part because they assume it’s better as the results are better. This is then forcing others into accepting long journeys in the other direction.

I don’t know how a priority circle would work as they would overlap. And even with a circle, some would end up just outside it. I think if the category 5 places were offered based on distance not score (subject to a 220 baseline) that would be fairer.

[Manon]

That's a fair point Crazycrofter and one I hadn't thought of. It does seem mad to have children forced into long journeys one way because some parents are happy for their children to travel long distances the other way just to go to Camp Hill. Camp Hill is our nearest so it wasn't something I had thought about. I will do before I respond to the consultation.

The priority area seems to work for Warks but that might be because there's more distance between the schools. The diameter of the circle would need to be a lot less to avoid too much overlap in Birmingham - maybe it would need to be so small that it wouldn't be any better than the current proposal. There's always going to be someone just outside whatever the priority area is. And the Warks priority areas create some anomolies too, including parts of Worcestershire and Solihull etc.

I agree with you that it would be better for category 5 to be on distance rather than score. Maybe they have left it as score to appease Camp Hill and the parents of its pupils?! I can't imagine that there will be many places for category 5 once they've worked through the other categories but I might be wrong.