Email today from Kent 11+ team

[Sparklecat]

You live in Kent or Medway, Sparklecat? And what "was just KCC?"

Where I live is irrelevant. Since the Medway unitary authority took responsibility for education from KCC, kids on both sides of the new border still apply to both areas as before. The point being, around here borders are not an admission criteria. What matters is test score and/or distance from school.

[mystery]

Well that's good it is like that round you. I am not familiar with the schools and the admission policies around there but it's not true for all KCC grammar schools. What was "just KCC"?

You know what, if I was one of the Kent schools that does welcome OCC candidates I'd be annoyed that KCC is sending that email out. I presume that the academies each pay a bit towards the 11 plus test. Maybe they should know about this rubbish email.

[Thwaitsey]

I am right on the border of Kent and we have looked at so many options for our son. The email didn’t make me angry, what it did was scare me a little and make me feel very concerned, the way it reads is as if to say” are you sure your child is good enough” I even called my sons tutor to check then recheck again that he would be a suitable candidate for the 11+. I know my son will do ok but I just got thinking because I’m his mum am I thinking he’s better than he is because I’m so proud of him. I don’t want to build his hopes up for them to be smashed to the ground. I’m not worried about him having competition, that is life but it just made me feel like even if he did get amazing results he wouldn’t stand a chance. I’ve lost sleep over that email. I’ve read it over and over. I didn’t need to know half that information on it.

[mystery]

Exactly. That is why it is a horrible email. Of course it is supposed to be a difficult test. You only need around 50% correct to pass so a lot of children will feel like they got loads wrong when in fact they passed.

There's no need to make their parents feel worse than they might already feel at this stage in the game.

If they want to send out a horrible email they should send it to everyone. Kent residents, Kent primary school children, whatever

I do wish people who received it would complain or get it in the papers. It's horrible.

[Sparklecat]

I wonder if school tourism works in reverse. If my daughter failed the 11+ but I still wanted an Ofsted "outstanding" school with higher funding per pupil, would we be welcome to apply for every school within a couple of miles of every south east London railway station? What if we hadn't researched their admission criteria, but joined hundreds of others to clog up Greenwich's education department with speculative applications? I suspect we would be rejected out of hand by every single school, based on their admission criteria. As long as a tiny minority of Kent grammar schools chase higher results at the expense of local kids who passed on a lower mark, this unseemly annual scramble will continue.

[thickasabrick]

I wonder if school tourism works in reverse. If my daughter failed the 11+ but I still wanted an Ofsted "outstanding" school with higher funding per pupil, would we be welcome to apply for every school within a couple of miles of every south east London railway station? What if we hadn't researched their admission criteria, but joined hundreds of others to clog up Greenwich's education department with speculative applications? I suspect we would be rejected out of hand by every single school, based on their admission criteria. As long as a tiny minority of Kent grammar schools chase higher results at the expense of local kids who passed on a lower mark, this unseemly annual scramble will continue.

I don't know why you bring non-selective schools into the debate, kids are not applying to non-selective schools from outside the authority (unless that is their nearest school).

And yes, the school tourism works in reverse - Kent kids take all the other grammar exams too and in my authority's case, Bromley - the boys' grammar has no restriction whatsoever on 'outsiders'. So really, we are the ones getting shafted because we cannot get into any grammar without being in the top cohort.

Sparklecat, every argument you make is against grammar schools in general, why can you not realise that.

[Sparklecat]

Maybe I don't think the grammar system is the be all and end all. This seems to be the mentality of the M25 tourists. Research shows children overall do better in non-grammar areas. I would be perfectly happy with the comprehensive system if they made special and separate provision for the minority of problem children.

Again, don't get hung up over borders. I'm quite happy for kids to cross a border if that's the nearest and most appropriate school for them. I'm less easy with children making two hour journeys when there are good and outstanding schools within walking distance of where they live. Schools should be more integrated into their local areas, not just education factories with parents shopping around for a couple of extra GCSE percentage points.

[Sorrel]

I wonder if school tourism works in reverse. If my daughter failed the 11+ but I still wanted an Ofsted "outstanding" school with higher funding per pupil, would we be welcome to apply for every school within a couple of miles of every south east London railway station? What if we hadn't researched their admission criteria, but joined hundreds of others to clog up Greenwich's education department with speculative applications? I suspect we would be rejected out of hand by every single school, based on their admission criteria. As long as a tiny minority of Kent grammar schools chase higher results at the expense of local kids who passed on a lower mark, this unseemly annual scramble will continue.

Anyone can apply for any school and if they qualify under the admissions criteria can be offered a place. And what thickasabrick says about Bromley boys having only one entirely superselective grammar option which really does take boys from everywhere.

[mystery]

Exactly. But you don't expect to get an email from the local authorities which has schools you might apply to, in July saying, "think again, this is going to be so hard for your child and dah di dah di dah di dah" but they don't send that to the children in their own authority (well possibly Kent does send this email to a small number of "our" children if they're not registered in Kent school which holds the test during the week).

That email is ridiculous. If I was one of the Kent grammar schools paying for the test service - which presumably they do - I would be complaining right now.

Of course Kent imports some children who will get good exam results - but we send out some ones who won't too!

Are you agreeing that this email is a good and fair one Sparklecat? Or are you saying there should not be superselectives in Kent? Or are you saying there should not be grammar schools? Or are you saying children should not go to school in another authority? There are "out of area" children going to Kent superselectives who live closer than some "in area" children. And where we live in West Kent, it's a long time door to door by public transport or by car to any Kent school. That's the reality of Kent unless you live and go to school in your home town and there are several towns with no school.

What is your definition of "the unseemly annual scramble"? And is there any data on it or just these Daily Mail type stories about children turning up for tests in Kent who live in Aberdeen and are seriously intending to commute to Kent by train to school every day?

Yes, there are some children from London at some superselectives in Tonbridge - maybe at other Kent superselectives too, I don't know. But so what. It's a selective school and it's state funded. And they are in a very small minority.

It's that email that's unseemly as it is treating non-Kent primary attenders differently from everyone else. And let's remember there is a higher pass rate at the Saturday test centres - certainly was up until 2014. Have you looked at the more recent data? So if there's anyone should be receiving a stinky email saying are you sure you want to waste one of our precious test papers, it's the large numbers of Kent primary children who fail every year.

[Sally-Anne]

What is your definition of "the unseemly annual scramble"? And is there any data on it or just these Daily Mail type stories about children turning up for tests in Kent who live in Aberdeen and are seriously intending to commute to Kent by train to school every day?

I don't have any statistics for Kent, but I do for Bucks.

This is a list of the home Local Authorities of children, excluding those who live in the 16 LAs that adjoin Bucks, i.e. those who would potentially be legitimate cross-border traffic, who took the Bucks test in 2016 & 2017:

Barking
Barnet
Bexley
Birmingham
Bournemouth
Brent
Brighton and Hove
Briston City
Bromley
Cambridge
Camden
Cardiff
Coventry
Croydon
Dorset
Ealing
East Riding
East Sussex
Enfield
Essex
Gloucester
Greenwich
Gwynedd
Hackney
Hammersmith
Hampshire
Haringey
Havering
Islington
Jersey
Kensington and chelsea
Kent
Kingston on Thames
Kirklees
Lambeth
Leicestershire
Lewisham
Merton
Monmouthshire
Moray
Newham
Norfolk
North Lincolnshire
North Yorkshire
Nottingham
Nottinghamshire
Overseas
Peterborough
Redbridge
Richmond upon Thames
Sandwell
Solihull
South Gloucester
Southampton
Southwark
Stoke on Trent
Suffolk
Surrey
Sutton
Swansea
Swindon
Telford and Wrekin
Thurrock
Tower Hamlets
Vale of Glamorgan
Waltham Forest
Wandsworth
Warwickshire
West Sussex
Westminster
Wiltshire

A total of 506 children last year, and not one of them stood a chance of gaining admission to a Bucks school even if they qualified. (Bucks places are allocated on a flat qualifying mark + distance from school gates.) That number is rising every year.

Sadly I have every reason to believe that the same pattern is being repeated in Kent and other GS areas. Whilst I agree that the email is poorly worded in terms of the comments about the difficulty of the test, 11+ tourism is a real problem and not just Daily Mail hyperbole.