Which is the best Grammar school in the area?

Sherbetlemon · Post by **Sherbetlemon** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:13 pm

No, Mr Benn, it's grammatist.

Alcester Grammar is obviously best because it has my DD1 in it, but a local high school is shortly to be greatly enhanced by the arrival of my DD2, so nobody round here will bother to take the 11+ at all soon.

Best wishes to all.

Preston · Post by **Preston** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 10:17 pm

Average house price of 3+bedroomed property within catchment of school and low insurance premium bandings:

Stratford: £359k
Alcester (and surrounding villages within 7k of school, aka Leamington Spa): 333k
Lawrence Sheriff: 249k
Rugby High: 249k
Ashlawn: 249k

..I can only assume the original poster is having a snobbish pop at us proud citizens of Rugby Town. Sure, it's got no cafe society and the pta meetings are not full of braying city types, but, hey, we soldier on.....

Dadof3 · Post by **Dadof3** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 1:02 pm

Analysis wrote:Looking at the minimum qualifying marks:

Am I correct that for a boy this is:
King Edward > Alcester > Lawrence Sheriff > Ashlawn?

For a girl this is:
Stratford > Alcester > Rugby High > Ashlawn?

Thanks

Quite possibly the most pointless thread on the entire forum. What possible value in ranking Warks Grammar schools (particularly as you live in Herts!) on such a limited and meaningless basis as minimum qualifying 11+ score?

onlooker · Post by **onlooker** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 1:35 pm

Dadof3 wrote: Quite possibly the most pointless thread on the entire forum. What possible value in ranking Warks Grammar schools (particularly as you live in Herts!) on such a limited and meaningless basis as minimum qualifying 11+ score?

Classic! "Pot calling the kettle black."

Do you realise there are areas within Warwickshire that are in the catchment area of all grammar schools?
Common sense would dictate, that a parent may want to select the "best" grammar school. Don't parents choose grammar schools over other state schools because they think they are better? What about people moving in to the area? The word "best" is debatable.

A better question may have been which schools take the most able students at the point the test was taken, i.e. those with the highest scores. People may not like this question, but that does not mean it should not be asked or answered. All those who gained a place in a grammar school should be happy, and some who didn't will be unhappy. But this is life. Life brings hard questions. The question has nothing to do with money or property prices.

What is clear from the results is that the children in the Southern area, who gained places, scored higher marks than those in the Eastern area. If 11+ tests are an indication of a child's ability, then the South wins. The pointers are at the bottom of page 1 of the results if you child was entered for Eastern and Southern regions. It will state something like East... ranked x out out y and South a out of b. Calculate the percentage ranking in each region. If both regions are equal, the percentage ranking would be equal. You find the ranking of the child in the Eastern is much higher than the South ranking, which indicates the quality of children sitting the test in the South is far higher than the Eastern region. Eg: 58 out of 949 (top 6% in Eastern) and 138 out of 1179 (top 12% in South).

Some people may not like the analysis. But one needs to open their eyes. On the basis of intake, the Southern region takes children with better results, and thus the more able children. So, yes KES/SG and Alcester are the best schools on the basis of intake.

This does not mean the schools are better, just the intake is better. Then the question is what happens to the children in the schools. GCSE results tables are poor indicators as they are open to abuse by taking lots of GCSEs and do not mention how many As or A* grades were acheived in core subjects.

"A" level tables are skewed as Lawrence Sheriff becomes non-selective and data splitting original 11+ students to those who also join for "A" levels are not available. Ashlawn also has the issue that the selective stream is not separated in league tables.

On the basis of qualifying marks and intake, the Southern schools take the "cream" of the "cream" and it is much easier to get a place in the Eastern area. Consider the places to applicants and the qualifying score.

In conclusion: one cannot state which is the best school, but one can say with reasonable confidence it is harder to get a place in the Southern area and that the intake of the Southern area comprises of children with higher scores (and according to the 11+ concept, more able at the point of taking the test).

Broadly speaking, then yes, the order is probably correct on the basis of intake as opposed to the best school.

I should add, my child is in an Eastern grammar, so hopefully I am not biased!

I hope this helps.

Cheers

Preston · Post by **Preston** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 8:20 pm

Am I being thick, or has no one else noticed that the more expensive the area, the harder it is to get in to the grammar schools?

BoltBlue · Post by **BoltBlue** » Fri Mar 04, 2011 11:31 pm

Preston wrote:Am I being thick, or has no one else noticed that the more expensive the area, the harder it is to get in to the grammar schools?

In Warks, children have to elect to take the eleven plus.

In some areas, all children take the eleven plus and have to elect not to take it. Such areas have lots of grammar schools. So, in those regions the more expensensive the area, it is not harder to get in to the grammar schools.

Do you really want me to answer your on my first post? I think you know the answer!

Concerned · Post by **Concerned** » Sat Mar 05, 2011 9:37 am

The automatic qualifying scores are just an indication of supply and demand - surely? The East Warks automatic scores are lower purely because there is a levelling factor which controls the 'demand' for the last 50% of places.
The scores are only indicative of how a thousand or so children performed on one day in October and not the overall 'intelligence' of a bunch of year 7s on 1st September 2011 as they walk through the gates of their new grammar schools.
Lawrence Sheriff (from memory) seem to consistently appear at the top of the Telegraph's 'Best Schools' table.

I shouldn't worry what appears best on paper. My advice is to visit the schools and go with your heart. My daughter has grown up insisting she wanted to go to RHS (because I went there - oh to be a role model!), but as we left the open evening last June she'd decided it wasn't for her. In fact she chose a comprehensive school in Northants.

We've had a difficult week. With family and work in Rugby you are confronted with faces of pity when you report not being offered a place at RHS or LSS (even if they weren't on the list). My daughter has been offered her 3rd choice, because there's no selection other than where you live for her first. Her second choice would always be difficult as she needed to score nearly 30 higher than the automatic qualifying score because of recent boundary changes.

Be grateful you have a choice of wonderful/popular schools. Don't get caught up in the stress of one school being the be all and end all. It's horrible watching your daughter cry because she thinks she's let everyone down, when the reality is we have the wrong postcode!

magwich2 · Post by **magwich2** » Sat Mar 05, 2011 12:26 pm

Going back to what another poster mentioned about LSS not being selective in the sixth form I would add that neither is SGSG - the sixth form has become far too large both for the school premises itself (with nowhere for girls to study properly and even the library shut for many periods each week) and also allowing in a number of girls who really are just not up to it, thereby impacting on the learning of girls who are more able. There is a reasonably clear distinction (necessarily in general terms) between those who originally passed the 11+ and those who have joined in the sixth form

BoltBlue · Post by **BoltBlue** » Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:18 am

Spot on.

Parents will do what they can for their children. This means self-tuition or private tutition (which I think is a must, for all but the brightest, to ensure a place). CEM exams are NOT tutorproof, even though they like to think they are.

Parents will move in to an area. It is obvious is is easier to get in to LSS than KES and the competition is lower. It is obvious LS requires the lower marks and if in the inner area, the chances of admission are greatest. It is obvious that at intake the average KES child scores higher, so by the flawed 11+ principle, more "intelliegent". It is obvious (dare I say) KES children are from a higher socio-economic group. It is nothing to do with being snobbish, but fair consideration and simply research.

Any parent that has done their homework will know this. They have to decide which path to take, especially if they have more than one child and want them all to go to the same school. One "clever" child and one slightly less, better pick LSS than KES as the chances of both getting in to LSS are greater. These are considerations many parents make. Travel is also an issue.

People do not only go to grammar or private schools for the education, they go for the life contacts. Perhaps KES has better contacts. I think so. On reflection I think KES is the better school.

The 11+ is unfair. Why ask year 6 work at the begining of year 6? This implies tuition is required. The suggestion of a year 5 or early year 6 SATS test covering English, Maths, Science, all based on curriculum seems fairer, to me, as a basis of selection. Life is about selection. It is about competition. Non-grammar schools stream in to the "top" class. Primary schools have groups based upon ability. Grammar school tests are no different. I am sure grammar schools also stream. This is another consideration. Go to LSS a child may be in the top 50%. Go to KES, he may be in the bottom 25% of the intake.

My child scored high enough for KES an could have got a place, but we chose LSS, knowing that KES, in my opinion, had the brigher intake and better potential contacts.

Controversial? Yes. But that is my opinion. One has to be honest and admit which is the best. It does not detract from the achievement of those who won places at schools with lower qualifying marks. 11+ is just one hurdle. The next is University.

DarkEnergy · Post by **DarkEnergy** » Mon Mar 07, 2011 11:19 am

You may find that the "best" school changes over the next few years, with the budget cuts and introduction of the EBac. I have heard many rumors of changing timetables to fit the new EBac and staffing issues, so many changes may happen soon. The latest one I heard was that RHS may drop music.... Aaaaaargh! (Not confirmed but extraordinarily frightening).

Here's a question... With the new Ebac being introduced, how many options does your DC actually have for GCSE's. In some cases, your options are literally down to choosing ONE GCSE as all other slots are already taken.

I am really frightened that some subjects in most schools will be under threat - music, drama, art, ICT, some technologies, and some humanities (including RE for those that may want it separate from humanities).

DarkEnergy