Advice needed - private to state

cinnamon · Post by **cinnamon** » Tue May 05, 2009 3:20 pm

Richmond, you must have considerable powers of persuasion to get the head to offer such a discount! Good for you, as this seems the outcome you wanted and must have removed so much stress.

However, as another Richmond borough resident, I absolutely agree with mumoffour's comments - we're lucky to have the country's best primary schools. A state primary is far from a last resort and I doubt your child would have suffered from a couple of years there despite the class sizes.

Both my daughters went to a state primary and neither was tutored (other than by me in a rather haphazard fashion!).
One is now at LEH, the other, in Year 6, had offers from 4 fantastic schools so I don't feel we settled for second-best with their primary education. Their primary, like mumoffour's, sends a steady stream of pupils to many of the highly sought-after West London independents (in fact, at The St Paul's Girls' open day, we were pleased to learn the head girl had been to 'our' primary).

T.i.p.s.y wrote:I don't think junior schools should make pupils sit an entrance test to the senior school.

I can't agree with Tipsy on this. It seems like a trade-off: in return for x years fees at junior school, we'll give you a place in the senior school. At least if your child has to sit the exam they know they've earned their place. I admit I'd probably feel differently if my children had had this option!

T.i.p.s.y · Post by **T.i.p.s.y** » Tue May 05, 2009 3:43 pm

Cinnamon, I meant that if a child is doing well in the junior school then why should they be made to sit the entrance exam. I wasn't thinking about it from the fee point of view.

cinnamon · Post by **cinnamon** » Tue May 05, 2009 4:56 pm

Yes, Tipsy, I realise that's what you meant. I think you've misunderstood me. Why shouldn't they sit the exam, all other applicants have to. Otherwise it seems the parents have 'bought' the right to a senior school place by paying fees for the junior school.

T.i.p.s.y · Post by **T.i.p.s.y** » Tue May 05, 2009 5:10 pm

I can see your point

but if a junior school cannot tell if their pupils are good enough for the senior school without examining them then thats a poor reflection on the school. For me its not about someone buying a place but I suppose if you have supported the school for X years by sending DC there then unless they will not cope they shouldn't have to sit the test. For me if a school is making the junior pupils sit the senior entry test it proves that they are only interested in getting the most able candidates and are happy to let the current pupils face uncertainty. I was shocked when one of my friends said that they were happy for kids to get kicked out after GCSE if they got B's because she didn't want "riff-raff" bringing the standards down!

This is a well-known school and I wouldn't send DC there out of principle.

cinnamon · Post by **cinnamon** » Tue May 05, 2009 6:18 pm

Well, I'll agree to differ on this!
As for your other point, a school which gets rid of those who 'only' get Bs in some GCSEs would certainly be off my list, too. Of course, their teaching couldn't possibly be to blame...

richmond · Post by **richmond** » Wed May 06, 2009 8:32 am

On state schools in Richmond at primary level I know they have a good reputation. I just have no knowledge of the state system hence my (probably unfounded) worry about DD2.

Cinnamon - no powers of persuasion by me, it was more a case of the Head thanking me as if I was doing her a favour.! No proof of income or anything required - a very informal process.

Tipsey - I think you have hit it on the head here about LEH and the entrance exam. Girls from the Junior school have to sit the exam if it is felt they would flounder in the senior school. If the Head feels they would not, then why put them through an exam. The Head at the Junior school is excellent and knows each girl thoroughly by the time they get to Year 5 (if not before).

Richmond

Post by **mad?** » Wed May 06, 2009 8:52 am

richmond wrote:
Girls from the Junior school have to sit the exam if it is felt they would flounder in the senior school. If the Head feels they would not, then why put them through an exam.

I suspect because it is easier (and economically more viable) to tell a parent their child is not up to it if they have failed the exam than it is to tell them during Y5 or 6. My (one) experience of parents in this situation is that they can be told until they are blue in the face that a school is not right for their DC but it is not until they have the evidence of an exam result that they even begin to accept it. Prior to that the response can tend to be attacking the school for not doing its job properly etc

T.i.p.s.y · Post by **T.i.p.s.y** » Wed May 06, 2009 9:45 am

I agree you cannot dispute the exam but I have a friend with a child in Latymer prep and she has started coaching DC intensively for the senior school entrance. What happens if the school thinks he is not coping well in class but does amazingly well in the exam?

zee · Post by **zee** » Wed May 06, 2009 1:11 pm

T.i.p.s.y wrote:if a junior school cannot tell if their pupils are good enough for the senior school without examining them then thats a poor reflection on the school.

I'm sure they do know. But I think the reason for the exam is that it is a more objective measure should other parents and prospective parents question the fairness of the selection process.

Post by **mad?** » Wed May 06, 2009 1:11 pm

T.i.p.s.y wrote:I agree you cannot dispute the exam but I have a friend with a child in Latymer prep and she has started coaching DC intensively for the senior school entrance. What happens if the school thinks he is not coping well in class but does amazingly well in the exam?

Good point T.i.p.s.y and really reflecting that the schools should have the b...s to face up to the parents earlier and stick to their guns.