Go to navigation
It is currently Mon Dec 10, 2018 6:06 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 4:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2018 6:43 pm
Posts: 10
Dear all,

I saw the consultation for a proposal of reducing the entrance requirements for students by reducing the score to 324.

The section on the website states

"Altrincham Grammar School for Girls’ current oversubscription criteria already places Pupil Premium students as second and we continue to attract a number of students meeting this criteria, reflecting the positive access arrangements that already exist. However, Governors have resolved to keep admissions under review and are resolute in their ambition to ensure that the demographic and socio-economic makeup of the school that makes AGGS such a unique place to study and learn does not change. We are therefore proposing to change the qualifying score for applicants who are in receipt of Pupil Premium to 324"

If the school is already attracting a number of students who meet this criteria, doesn't reducing the entry requirement make it unfair for students not on pupil premium?

Any thoughts forumites?

http://www.aggs.trafford.sch.uk/consult ... y-in-2020/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 10:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2018 1:33 am
Posts: 23
I think this boils down to parents who are in receipt of Pupil Premium are not able to afford excessive private tutors versus other parents who are in a more fortunate position to pay more easily for extra tutoring as required. Probably AGGS are trying to bridge the gap between these 2 scenarios.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2018 12:12 am 
Online

Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 8309
Location: Essex
If you feel that that particular change is unnecessary, you should respond to the consultation and make your opinion known to the school.

_________________
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.Groucho Marx


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2018 9:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2018 6:43 pm
Posts: 10
ToadMum wrote:
If you feel that that particular change is unnecessary, you should respond to the consultation and make your opinion known to the school.


I don't feel that this change is necessary as I don't agree with this. I do intend to respond to this consultation. I am not against making concessions for disadvantaged children - children on pupil premium are already second on the oversubscription criteria after looked after children,but reducing the marks for entry appears to be unfair for children not on pupil premium.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 11:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2018 9:32 am
Posts: 9
Yes, I agree this would be very unfair. My DD got a good pass mark, she did not have a tutor, just us, but she was very determined and constantly worked extra at home all her primary years. She may not get a place as we live further to the school, but overall this rule would be very,very unfair to her and all the children that work for their achievement, with or without tutor. A tutor is not a fairy, only children's work and determination count in the end.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2013 7:59 pm
Posts: 5222
Yes, but your DD had you...and assumably you put your time, effort and possiby paid for resources to help her? And you are smart enough to sign up to a forum like this to gain extra support?

Many pp children don't even have that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2018 9:32 am
Posts: 9
You may be right in some of the aspects, but in our days only if you are ignorant you don't have access to the resources you mentioned. Yes, I spent all my spare time with her, at the same time with a full time job and 3 more smaller kids and she was diligent and constant. The money spent on resources were minimal, the bonds books for 11+, sometimes on offer, 2 for 3, and many reading books from library, anybody can afford them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 1:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2013 7:59 pm
Posts: 5222
Actually not true.... Some of the families I work with have very well meaning but genuinely educationally challenged parents - some families the parents really don't give a monkey's about their kids education - some families really do not know where the next meal is coming from - the parents are used to going without to make sure the kids eat. They have no books in the house, they can't afford to trek across to the library, they certainly can't afford to buy 11+ books on offer or not!!

It is very easy to assume everyone else is like you - and it's just a case of "tightening your belts" - it isn't. It's great that you were able to spend spare time with your DD - and with younger children - some don't have any spare time or the ability to teach their own child - I'm not saying what you did is wrong - but, frankly, if a child was coming from the background I have described and gets within touching distance of the recognised pass mark (or an accepted lower score) then they ABSOLUTELY deserve the place over someone who has had all the advantages in my book.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 5:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2018 1:33 am
Posts: 23
AGGS currently have 22 Pupil Premium students representing 1.6% (taken from school website). National average stands at circa 12% for secondary schools. Could explain reason behind this proposal. Furthermore, this is restricted to catchment area so numbers would not jump greatly from current levels.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 01, 2018 8:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2018 6:43 pm
Posts: 10
walidal wrote:
AGGS currently have 22 Pupil Premium students representing 1.6% (taken from school website). National average stands at circa 12% for secondary schools. Could explain reason behind this proposal. Furthermore, this is restricted to catchment area so numbers would not jump greatly from current levels.


Walidal, the catchment area is 8 miles, so it'a large area.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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