Tiffins Late Tests

[twelveminus]

My son has a pupil number 4xxx for Tiffin. Presumably not 4000+ applicants!

[Myname]

Number from first stage 27 September...pupil number beginning with year 13 then (I think) actual number

[tiffinboys]

I think it is difficult to make out number of candidates from the candidate number. However, it is correct to assume that first 2 digits denote 2013 entry. The other four digits seems to be a combination of session number and candidate number in that session. Or it could be candidate number but number starting from some number other than 0001. or, cynically, it may be a combination of area code and candidate number in that area (1xxx = Kingston, 4xxx = Guests).
Ah, may be still trying to do VR.

[tabasco]

Lets not worry to much about how many there are candidates for the stage 2 tests. If they are good enough they will get in. For the superselective schools the more applicants the better as they will get the best candidates out of the cohort. Schools that used more tests will also get the best candidates. Hence they will remain one of the best!!!

[tiffinboys]

That should then apply to all the grammars, not just Tiffins and handful of others. Until then.......

[London_Mum]

tabasco - I think there is only so much distinction you can draw between the relative abilities of a group of 11 year old children.
Once you get to a certain point, introducing more and more tests or encouraging more and more applicants won’t raise standards in the school itself.
If a child has passed the first stage, they are of selective ability. If a child then comes in the top 50% of that second stage group, they are exceptionally able. Whether they beat 15 or 50 other candidates by a single percentage point all starts to become irrelevant when you consider that basically each of those children is of exactly the same academic potential and ability as each other.

I think it is highly unlikely that the Tiffins test at this level sorts the wheat from the chaff at all. It merely seeks to separate an awful lot of equally clever children based on speed / luck / preparedness on the day. Rarely do you get a candidate miles and miles ahead of the field – generally all those who pass and all those who narrowly fail are much of a much-ness.

The problem with selective schools like Tiffins is never one of finding enough clever children to keep standards high. It is more one of far too many children being of an equally high standard than can be offered places at the school. This is the argument for introducing some sort of catchment priority. If testing proves that there are 400 exceptional candidates amongst the 2000 tested, why shouldn't the final 150 selected from the group of 400 be children who live closer to the school? It makes no odds to the school in terms of maintaining standards but makes a huge difference to children who have no other grammar school options to try for.

[tabasco]

Yes, I agree with you that the different of ability for the top 400-500 candidates might not be much but there must be a reason for them to be openly selective. It is up to the school to find or design the best tests to select their ideal candidates. This was I meant by using more tests in my previous post. For indies interview is also included in the selection process. Hence only the results of the best state schools are anyway close to the top indies.

I think speed of thinking and response is extremely important that means that particular DC got good cognitive skill and quick analytical power in order to deduce the answer quickly and accurately. As all of the 11+/entrance exams have a time constraint this actually select the most able from the able. Also time is one of the entity that no one can buy (Hence the saying TIME=MONEY). Usain Bolt ran the 100m in 9.58s for me probably 15s or more. Thats why he is an Olympic legend.

Ideally the school should selects the final 150 from children live closer to the school but it is unlikely for them to get their ideal best candidates from a catchment area unless there is something special about the children within that catchment area. Also not all children should go to a selective Grammar School if they do not fullfilled the selective criteria (ie. score of their 11+ tests).

[tiffinboys]

Ideally the school should selects the final 150 from children live closer to the school.

Totally agree with above statement.

The rest are the excuses to be able to apply any school one feel like. I had suggested that 20% places be on open selection (this will take Usain Bolts in) and the rest of 80% place on proximity/catchment for those who passed the test and meet School's minimum requirement for their 'ideal' applicants.

[ClappedOutMum]

Until the government changes the law (I blame Labour for starting it) so that all publicly funded schools are subject to local authority control on admissions, this will never happen. Its a free for all for all Academies, Free schools, Foundation Schools, and so on.

Local schools for local communities requires local control to do proper planning.

As I have said before, locals (I am not one) should if they are concerned about local school places campaign heavily for the removal of selection and just move to distance criteria. You will then get yourselves and excellent local school serving the community.

[tiffinboys]

That's a good argument. I agree that LAs should have overall control of admission policies of schools within that LA. Due to lack of control and coordination, very soon we will end up with chaos. LAs will get blamed, even though they would have no control. Only the children would suffer.

Academiees are not totally free to do whatever they like. Academies Act has put certain requirements with respect to admissions. So far, Academies have floated these rules and these needs to be legally tested. When it suits these academies, they have taken advantage of these same rules (e.g. Chelmsford's grammars).