Is it right to give Tiffin score??

[cakemummy]

I also take your point about it not being right to have say 500-700 people passed but that is exactly what Sutton have done this year, they have 500 or so boys sitting a 2nd test after CAF has closed, so a majority of those will be wasted choices, so how is that more informed than before?

We'll last year when we went through it SG was the only one who set the test after the CAF submition date. Roughly 1,700 people boys sat the test and if I remember correctly only 470 boys passed the exam so in effect 1,300 people wasted a place on their CAF. In my opinion score and rank should be given as in our case we were only interested in one school in particular and fortunately my DS was offered a place come March 1st. Had we know from the outset that he was elegible for a place we wouldn't have bothered with the other two grammars and saved my DS the added stress. However I'm guessing the reason they don't do this is because it probably causes too many problems.

Also last year Wilson's did accept late applications too as I remember reading this on their website which I found quite frustrating - what's the point of a deadline! I agree with ASDDAD in that anyone wishing their children to sit entrance exams should really take a bit more notice of key dates.

[tabasco]

In my opinion I think it is helpful for schools to give score and cut of mark to parents in order to make an appropriate preference on their CAF. The main purpose of the new admission code is not to waste a slot on the CAF especially of LEA with only 3 preferences. If a DC has scored highly in an exam this just give the family an early celebration (???early Christmas present ). For DCs on the other end of the score could just move on. The most frustrating are for borderline candidates and their family. But they can still list those school as their first preference since there is still a chance. I wouldn't worry about DCs comparing scores as they still need to work hard to get good results. The school wouldn't rely on 11+ score to stream there form. The main reason why a particular school is doing extremely well is down to the determination, motivation and drive of the DC, their parents and the school. No matter how selective the school is any lack of the points mentioned, their achivement will go down hill.

[tiffinboys]

The main purpose of the new admission code is not to waste a slot on the CAF especially of LEA with only 3 preferences.

Sadly, most schools have ignored the spirit of the Admission Code with respect to the informed choices.

As most LAs allow upto six preferences, in most areas it would be struggle to name 6 preferred schools.

Some may also think that so many preferences are allowed so that LAs can claim that 99% children got one of their preferences.

[London_Mum]

Six choices are only helpful if you have 6 viable options so I think tiffinboys is right in a way.
All of a sudden a much higher % of Surrey parents get one of their choices than was the case 2 years ago when they were only allowed to list 3 schools. This of course does not mean a higher % of Surrey parents are necessarily happier with their allocations. Generally if you don't get one of your top 3 schools, having number 6 instead isn't much of a consolation.
There is a point where "least hated" is certainly not the same as "most wanted".

The exception of course is the few children who do qualify for 6 desirable schools by virtue of passing 4 or more grammar school tests with scores high enough to attract an offer and have good back-up comps due to a sibling, faith or distance link too.
Unfortunately, despite the changes to the Admissions Code, most schools still do not offer parents any real idea whether they might face this dilemma or not so many people will still be wasting options.

[tiffinboys]

Six choices are only helpful if you have 6 viable options..........

This of course does not mean a higher % of Surrey parents are necessarily happier with their allocations. Generally if you don't get one of your top 3 schools, having number 6 instead isn't much of a consolation. .............. There is a point where "least hated" is certainly not the same as "most wanted".

I think, LAs should publish statistics about how many got one of their first or first three preferences. FOI may be?

In Kingston, if you consider your child to be bright, after Tiffin, sadly there is no other viable option for boys or third viable option for girls (considering Coombe Girls as the second best; streaming is benefitting there).

Parents here have to put schools from other boroughs as their other preferences. Until Tiffin is as open selective as it is now and with all the attachments of becoming most wanted top brand, parents of bright children should look at all available options and for us, this included schools in Sutton to Barnet to Slough. If children could come to Kingston from as far away as Slough and other areas, why can't local children attempt to take places in grammars there, difficulty of travelling being the same for both.

Atleast, that will also solve some problems of shortage of secondary school places in Kingston too.

[London_Mum]

They do release the figures by borough each year.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... admissions
Here are some but I'm not sure how recent (Kingston is number 122 on the list)
The figures for Kingston are roughly 64% get their first choice school. This is below the national average. In fact London generally and SW London in particular is one of the worst places to live in terms of getting one of your preferred schools.

Kingston though has one of the lowest figures for children in the borough getting a place offered within their own LA. Other Grammar areas such as Sutton don't have such low percentages.