Move to Gloucestershire or Kent - A Dilemma
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
Re: Move to Gloucestershire or Kent - A Dilemma
Oh that's interesting Villagedad. Must get my map out. I never realised that those 6 West Kent grammar schools were so close together as the crow flies. I thought that the furthest apart must be more than 4 miles. This really does mean that if the future trend is to base admissions policies on ever smaller circles Bidborough has to remain the best bet for a grammar school in West Kent whatever happens to the admissions policies at the superselectives.
If the grammar situation gets even worse here in this bit of West Kent ( if there are changes to the superselective policies, and new development here continues apace), I'll have to sit down with the map, a pair of compasses for drawing circles on the map, and all 6 admissions policies to work out where best to live in West Kent in addition to Bidborough.
Bidborough sounds great, but then I may not be very welcome if everyone there firmly believes that the West Kent grammar schools should have circles with diameters of 3 miles drawn around them. Or maybe once there I would just "go native" ........... "forget about the rest, locals are best" !!
If the grammar situation gets even worse here in this bit of West Kent ( if there are changes to the superselective policies, and new development here continues apace), I'll have to sit down with the map, a pair of compasses for drawing circles on the map, and all 6 admissions policies to work out where best to live in West Kent in addition to Bidborough.
Bidborough sounds great, but then I may not be very welcome if everyone there firmly believes that the West Kent grammar schools should have circles with diameters of 3 miles drawn around them. Or maybe once there I would just "go native" ........... "forget about the rest, locals are best" !!
Re: Move to Gloucestershire or Kent - A Dilemma
It is amazing isn't it, where I live there are three grammars and 2 church schools within 1 mile!mystery wrote: I never realised that those 6 West Kent grammar schools were so close together as the crow flies. I thought that the furthest apart must be more than 4 miles. !!
Re: Move to Gloucestershire or Kent - A Dilemma
And what's the commute to London like, door to door?
-
Villagedad
- Posts: 526
- Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 5:22 pm
- Location: Tonbridge & Tunbridge Wells
Re: Move to Gloucestershire or Kent - A Dilemma
I leave at just gone 8am and get to the office near St Paul's at 9.15, that's with a 15min walk from cannon street thrown in.mystery wrote:And what's the commute to London like, door to door?
Actual train journey is 8.20am to 9am (Hildenbrough to London Cannon Street)
You can park in Tonbridge station which is 5 mins down the road or drive to Hildenborough like I do in 8 minutes, which is a lovely drive through Leigh
Re: Move to Gloucestershire or Kent - A Dilemma
a bit of a misleading statement! I am closely involved with this school and it is certainly not low achieving. The problem is people are very ignorant in reading league table results and you cannot compare the results of a superselective with that of TWGSB. The academic ability varies far more widely here than that of a superselective but the value-added is equally good to that of the superselectives and it is an excellent school. In a nutshell, they do very well and the boys in the top sets do just a well as those at the superselectives. TWGGS has an easier ride than TWGSB as it only has TOGS as superselective competition and is the only girls grammar in TW. There is so much to take into account when making judgments!mystery wrote:More facts on West Kent schools:
- Tunbridge Wells Grammar for Boys - not superselective or high achieving
Re: Move to Gloucestershire or Kent - A Dilemma
Yes it all depends on what you compare. And I am by no means a league table ignoramus!
But at GCSE I'm thinking of percentage of A*/A compared with national average (and I personally think that taking into account that it is a selective school, their %age is not as much higher than the national average, but it should be), and at A levels take a look at grade by grade results subject by subject and compare % getting A grades with the national average for that subject and in some subjects (not humanities, but particularly sciences) it was very disappointing in 2009 (results on website). Maybe 2009 was a bad year and they need to put some more results on their website to show us what they're really capable of. Or maybe they are taking boys from elsewhere with low grades into the sixth form, but for example in 2009 there must have been sufficient boys who passed the 11+ staying on doing chemistry and physics in the sixth form to get better results than those declared on the website. They really look bad that year at the high grade end.
You may think I am being unfair just judging them on A/A* type results, but it is a selective school, and theoretically all boys there are somewhere within the top 25% of the population. In many subjects these days the national % of children achieving A/A* is huge, and one might hope that a school taking the top 25% would achieve an extremely high percentage of grades at this level if the teaching was excellent and the boys motivated.
I don't reserve this criticism for TWGSB alone, there are other grammar schools that fall short of my high expectations!! Also this school is on the whole taking the majority of boys from OK income brackets, so one might be hoping from some strong support from home too.
There's no baccalaureat or any other stuff like that complicating their results, so I'm pretty sure that I've got this right. Sorry if you thought I was reaching sweeping conclusions. Maybe they do add much that is missed by the
But at GCSE I'm thinking of percentage of A*/A compared with national average (and I personally think that taking into account that it is a selective school, their %age is not as much higher than the national average, but it should be), and at A levels take a look at grade by grade results subject by subject and compare % getting A grades with the national average for that subject and in some subjects (not humanities, but particularly sciences) it was very disappointing in 2009 (results on website). Maybe 2009 was a bad year and they need to put some more results on their website to show us what they're really capable of. Or maybe they are taking boys from elsewhere with low grades into the sixth form, but for example in 2009 there must have been sufficient boys who passed the 11+ staying on doing chemistry and physics in the sixth form to get better results than those declared on the website. They really look bad that year at the high grade end.
You may think I am being unfair just judging them on A/A* type results, but it is a selective school, and theoretically all boys there are somewhere within the top 25% of the population. In many subjects these days the national % of children achieving A/A* is huge, and one might hope that a school taking the top 25% would achieve an extremely high percentage of grades at this level if the teaching was excellent and the boys motivated.
I don't reserve this criticism for TWGSB alone, there are other grammar schools that fall short of my high expectations!! Also this school is on the whole taking the majority of boys from OK income brackets, so one might be hoping from some strong support from home too.
There's no baccalaureat or any other stuff like that complicating their results, so I'm pretty sure that I've got this right. Sorry if you thought I was reaching sweeping conclusions. Maybe they do add much that is missed by the
Re: Move to Gloucestershire or Kent - A Dilemma
Hi Mystery
Didn't mean too sound harsh - I am sure you can understand how parents want to protect their own schools, particularly if their own children are doing really well there and I know how this school 'inside out' I just thought your comment was a bit too generalised and creates a negative impression of the teaching standards. Although TWGSB is a selective school, it really does suffer by contstantly being compared to the two superselectives neighbouring it as there is a higher percentage of 'basic passes' there from the 11+ of which there are none at the superselectives (apart from appeals). Even with the basic passes, a number of boys may have been tutored to get to even that level and these students are really at the national average standard. You cannot expect these boys to attain the same grades as those who all got 420, so it is not helpful just to focus on A*/A when looking at schools. I know boys who are there by the 'skin of their teeth'! However, all those I know who did arrive with high 11+ scores are doing really well. If the superselectives didn't exist, you can be sure the results would be higher. I have always thought that if every school could publish just its 'top sets' results, then the results would be very similar. You are right about 2009, particularly at sixth form level (2010 much better) and from that steps were taken for this year's entrants to have reached a higher stamdard of GCSE to be allowed to enter, to also make room for high-achieving students from elsewhere. However, achievement and attainment are two very different things and you are talking about attainment and I am looking at achievement - the value-added part and this is where it is no so different, particularly this year.
Didn't mean too sound harsh - I am sure you can understand how parents want to protect their own schools, particularly if their own children are doing really well there and I know how this school 'inside out' I just thought your comment was a bit too generalised and creates a negative impression of the teaching standards. Although TWGSB is a selective school, it really does suffer by contstantly being compared to the two superselectives neighbouring it as there is a higher percentage of 'basic passes' there from the 11+ of which there are none at the superselectives (apart from appeals). Even with the basic passes, a number of boys may have been tutored to get to even that level and these students are really at the national average standard. You cannot expect these boys to attain the same grades as those who all got 420, so it is not helpful just to focus on A*/A when looking at schools. I know boys who are there by the 'skin of their teeth'! However, all those I know who did arrive with high 11+ scores are doing really well. If the superselectives didn't exist, you can be sure the results would be higher. I have always thought that if every school could publish just its 'top sets' results, then the results would be very similar. You are right about 2009, particularly at sixth form level (2010 much better) and from that steps were taken for this year's entrants to have reached a higher stamdard of GCSE to be allowed to enter, to also make room for high-achieving students from elsewhere. However, achievement and attainment are two very different things and you are talking about attainment and I am looking at achievement - the value-added part and this is where it is no so different, particularly this year.
Re: Move to Gloucestershire or Kent - A Dilemma
Relieved to hear that 2010 A level results looking better than last year at TWGSB. Do you have them to hand subject by subject grade by grade?
Re: Move to Gloucestershire or Kent - A Dilemma
No, not yet but should be in the prospectus for the open evening.
Re: Move to Gloucestershire or Kent - A Dilemma
Good point, thanks
