Go to navigation
It is currently Tue Oct 16, 2018 5:59 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 11:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2011 4:33 pm
Posts: 1443
Location: Buckinghamshire
BlueBerry wrote:
I tend to agree with you. But some of the house moves may be genuine.

And as for coaching, this may be required for a child who doesn't attend a Bucks school but lives in the catchment area. I've heard that a couple of the primary schools have been using the CGP books & tests in class. For a child like mine who's not in the Bucks school system, surely these children are given an unfair advantage?

I'm sure some house moves are genuine, but many are tactical. No doubt it's the same in comprehensive areas where house prices are influenced by the perceived quality of the local school, but the system in Bucks is such that those with the fiscal means to do so can coach their child and move into an area to improve their chances of obtaining a place if qualification occurs. That sort of expense is simply out of reach of many families.

Coaching shouldn't be required at all, if the playing field were genuinely level. The stated intention of the grammar schools' own selection system was to make the new test more tutor-resistant. As Guest55 has said, state primaries are forbidden from doing any 11+ preparation other than the proper practice test. The reality is that coaching is rife and it would seem that more tutoring is taking place than it was before, although that's impossible to measure. I would think that it would take a fairly exceptional child to qualify with absolutely no coaching, so anyone not being tutored (professionally or at home) is at a distinct disadvantage. Bucks does not have academic selection at 11+. What it has is an arms race where those with the deepest pockets can almost purchase qualification and those that miss out are at the mercy of a mixed bag of upper schools.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 11:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:59 am
Posts: 7823
anotherdad wrote:
Bucks does not have academic selection at 11+. What it has is an arms race where those with the deepest pockets can almost purchase qualification and those that miss out are at the mercy of a mixed bag of upper schools.
The other thing is it isn't even selection at 11+. I have seen with some alarm over the years the advice on the appeals section that appeals panels like to see level 3s in KS1 tests; and a steady progression from then. This is pedagogically unsound as many children are either late developers (if you call 10 'late'), and anyone with any kind of experience of teaching knows that progression is rarely linear, or 'steady', but tends to involve huge leaps followed by plateaus. This guidance also essentially means selection at 6 or 7!

How it is that lay people are supposed to make these kind of judgements is beyond me and the appeals angle of it looks almost worse than the main tests, not only for the reasons I have said but for the ones you have, anotherdad. Those with the most cultural capital are more likely to appeal if their child misses the cutoff to start with.

But then the whole issue of selecting children at 10 is beyond me as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 12:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2011 4:33 pm
Posts: 1443
Location: Buckinghamshire
Maybe a whole lot of effort, administration and anguish could be saved by just assessing parents at the time their child begins full-time schooling. Kick aside all those Utopian notions of social mobility and simply reserve grammar school places for the children of those parents who are evidently suitable. Those who know how to use a fish knife, for example. Those with a TV that is too big for their living room need not apply.

Tell me it's less scientific than the current selection process, I dare you!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 12:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:59 am
Posts: 7823
anotherdad wrote:
Maybe a whole lot of effort, administration and anguish could be saved by just assessing parents at the time their child begins full-time schooling. Kick aside all those Utopian notions of social mobility and simply reserve grammar school places for the children of those parents who are evidently suitable. Those who know how to use a fish knife, for example. Those with a TV that is too big for their living room need not apply.

Tell me it's less scientific than the current selection process, I dare you!
I think you are right. I have said it before in similar terms. Actually it could be done prenatally, and the child issued at birth with not only a birth certificate but school vouchers marked 'accepted' or 'rejected'. Job done.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 12:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:42 pm
Posts: 274
Very interesting anotherdad and Amber

I would be interested to know what other markers there are?

I don't think it's all down to money though-please tell me it's not or otherwise my children are doomed :lol:

I read an article recently about how many books one had in the house was an indicator of "cultural capital" however with many people owning kindles these days I guess it doesn't count as much?

Sorry for going off topic but I do find this subject very interesting.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 12:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2011 4:33 pm
Posts: 1443
Location: Buckinghamshire
2littleboys wrote:
Very interesting anotherdad and Amber

I would be interested to know what other markers there are?

I don't think it's all down to money though-please tell me it's not or otherwise my children are doomed :lol:

I read an article recently about how many books one had in the house was an indicator of "cultural capital" however with many people owning kindles these days I guess it doesn't count as much?

Sorry for going off topic but I do find this subject very interesting.

Fish knives and oversized TVs aside, it's a complex area and probably impossible to classify, but I'm sure there are areas of correlation and causation when it comes to background and qualification rates. I don't think it's all down to money, but as with many things in life, money can provide an advantage. I believe that if family life provides the environment and time for, say, lots of reading - both reading to and listening to - and more generally, interesting discussion and debate, the children in those environments are likely to have a good base of vocabulary among other things. If parents work locally and/or have hours that are sympathetic to family life, there is more time for those things and for home preparation if one chooses to do it. Not everyone is fortunate enough to be in that position and there will be many suitable children disadvantaged as a result. Money can short-cut or enhance some of those things through professional tutoring of course.

More recently, there has been an increase in the number of people from further afield registering for the Bucks test. To secure a place, many of those applicants will need to move closer to their preferred school(s). Selling and buying a house costs at least £20k (stamp duty, agent costs, conveyancing costs, moving costs) before you even consider any potential difference in house price. So you can see that to stand a good chance of qualification and of securing a place for some families will cost a significant amount of money. I can't criticise their ambitions for and investment in their children's education but one cannot deny the impact those behaviours have on the existing catchment cohort. It is the system itself which creates the opportunity for wealth to be a factor.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 1:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 1:21 pm
Posts: 15676
It's amazing how 'attractive' Bucks seems to become when one's eldest child reaches 9 ...

I don't even own fish knives - we like it out of paper with chips! Oh dear, we cheated the system :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 1:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 5:26 pm
Posts: 7779
Amber wrote:
The other thing is it isn't even selection at 11+. I have seen with some alarm over the years the advice on the appeals section that appeals panels like to see level 3s in KS1 tests; and a steady progression from then. This is pedagogically unsound as many children are either late developers (if you call 10 'late'), and anyone with any kind of experience of teaching knows that progression is rarely linear, or 'steady', but tends to involve huge leaps followed by plateaus. This guidance also essentially means selection at 6 or 7!
Ah, that old chestnut! :?

Please stop misrepresenting appeals advice.
Read the Q&As, B11, for what we actually say.
http://www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/appeal ... cation#b11

Reviews might possibly be another matter. We have the impression that review panels might be looking for consistent progress, but it's not an approach we have endorsed. Quite the opposite.
viewtopic.php?f=35&t=39618&p=514664&hilit=amber#p514664
      Amber wrote:
      I wonder who advises these people? Children's learning rarely progresses in a steady curve. :roll:
      Etienne wrote:
      I agree, Amber. Perhaps they're influenced more by Ofsted than common sense?
      Surely what matters is current and predicted achievement (provided these are realistic in the light of recent progress)?

Let's get back to the topic now. Appeals (and reviews) can be discussed elsewhere.

_________________
Etienne


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 2:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:59 am
Posts: 7823
Etienne wrote:
Please stop misrepresenting appeals advice.
My apologies, I had no idea I was misrepresenting it. As recently as October last year an appellant was told:
Quote:
I think it could be a valid point if KS1 results were depressed (ideally one would like to see level 3s) - but hopefully you would be in a position to argue that there has been rapid progress at KS2?
but if I missed the nuance there I apologise.
Etienne wrote:
Let's get back to the topic now
Sure. Sorry.
2littleboys wrote:
I would be interested to know what other markers there are?
If you are interested, try looking up the work of Stephen Ball, who has written a huge amount on education and social class; also Carol Vincent who has done a lot of work on school choice. I was trying to explain to my 15 year-old yesterday what cultural capital is and ended up with saying it means having the 'nous' to access services e.g. good healthcare, education etc. It is hard to put your finger on. Let's just say that being on this forum probably means you have plenty of it, 2LB. :D

Apologies again if I misrepresented anything or took the subject off topic. I will leave you Bucks residents to it. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2017 2:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 4:42 pm
Posts: 274
Thanks for the info anotherdad

I like chips best straight out of the bag too Guest55 naturally with loads of salt and vinegar-yum yum.

Thanks Amber I will look them both up. It's good to know you think I have plenty of "it"-living where I do I always feel that my children are having a "second rate" upbringing compared to most of their peers. I feel very guilty that we don't have the money for foreign holidays, numerous extra-curricular activities etc etc so it's good to know it's not all about the readies :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 9 guests


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 – 2018