Tiffin schools admission arrangements for Sep 2017 intake

[tiffinboys]

It is time for local patents to send their suggestions for draft admission arrangements. I have sent my suggestions and if more local parents get involved, then only some positive change can come.

1. Reduce and streamline admission area.
2. Places for local catchment in line with other grammars like NS, WHSG, SGS.
3. Local catchment places criteria to be placed after open places.
4. Each criteria to be considered against rank score, without restriction.
5. TGS needs to consider capacity issues and reduce PAN.

[hina]

Dear Parents

The Tiffin Girls’ School is now consulting on its admissions arrangements for entry to the School in September 2017 and welcomes your views on these proposals.

If you would like to express a view on the attached proposals, please do so in writing to the Admissions Office by:

email: admissions@tiffingirls.org (with the subject heading Admissions Consultation 2017)

or

post: Admissions Consultation 2017, c/o Admissions Office, The Tiffin Girls’ School, Richmond Road, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT2 5PL.

The closing date for the consultation is 5.00pm on Monday 4 January 2016.

Kind regards



Julie O’Leary
Admissions Manager
The Tiffin Girls’ School

[tiffinboys]

Criteria 5.1.2 is just hogwash. It's useless and ineffective, as the current PAN is 180 (despite serious capacity issues at the school) and the last girl admitted would, in my experience over last 3 years, have a ranked score of much lower than 250 (more likely to be around 300).

Are we to believe that there are less than 70 girls in the first 250, who choose schools other than TGS?

[Stroller]

Plausible. Put another way, your point is that we've no idea how far down the waiting list TGS goes to fill places. Revealing information about that, even roughly, would help families to be realistic about their chances. I remember reading posts here about someone whose rank seemed close (maybe 10th or 15th), yet the girl never got a place.

Publishing the final cut-off score for the last four or five years would help those wishing to apply for vacancies in years 8-11 to assess whether their original score makes them eligible to reapply for an in-year admission, should a place arise. Of course they could just ask the school, but it would be so much more transparent if it were published.

[tiffinboys]

I remember reading posts here about someone whose rank seemed close (maybe 10th or 15th), yet the girl never got a place.

May be you are confusing with waiting list position or the TGS was not her higher preference.

[Stroller]

I remember reading posts here about someone whose rank seemed close (maybe 10th or 15th), yet the girl never got a place.

May be you are confusing with waiting list position or the TGS was not her higher preference.

Yes, the scenario referred to was definitely a ranked waiting list position. A poster's daughter got in, and they were hoping the daughter's friend would make it too, because it seemed very close, but it never happened. It's relevant because the waiting list positions are also governed by the determined arrangements.

I've read here that other schools publish historic information along with each child's results. TGS could easily provide a little table in the results letter or on the website showing, for example, for each of the past 4 or 5 years, (i) the lowest combined score offered a place in the first round, (ii) the final cut-off score by the end of that academic year.

To earn an additional merit sticker, TGS could go further, as some schools do, by publishing waiting list ranks on National Allocation Day, rather than six weeks later.
Or be honest and state in the determined arrangements that there will be no further information for 6 weeks.
Or the school could group waiting list categories into bands instead of individual ranks, saying "very close, may get an offer", "quite close, an offer is a possibility, but less likely", "historically our waiting list hasn't moved this much, so you're unlikely to get a place in year 7."

Lots of angst is caused every year, not by poor results, but by uncertainty. Clarity helps families to manage expectations appropriately. The determined arrangements document is a good place to provide such clarity.

[tiffinboys]

Transparency is always preferable. Both Tiffin Schools could learn something from Nonsuch.

[Snowdaddy]

I remember reading posts here about someone whose rank seemed close (maybe 10th or 15th), yet the girl never got a place.

May be you are confusing with waiting list position or the TGS was not her higher preference.

There are couple of things that some overlook. The offer day list is based on the ranking 1-6 and address on the CAF application.

If someone moves, or decides to reject their offer for a lower preference then that person gets added to the waiting list. But they don't join the end of the list, they are slotted in depending on their test scores and current address.

In theory a person moving to KT2 who passed with a mark higher than the last offer now moves to top of wait list, therefore even if the wait list position was published on March 1st it could be misleading (although is better than no info). I think schools don't like telling someone they are say 10th on 1 March,, then mid March saying you have moved down to 15th, so would rather not tell you for couple of weeks (and as some are slow returning info, this often becomes 4 or 5 weeks).

I personally know a family whose daughter is at TGS, but she only got offered a place in mid July after attending another schools induction day in early July. It happens, but is stressful waiting that long.

[tiffinboys]

The point being made by snow daddy is valid, but just to avoid any confusion, note KT2 has no priority as such. A girl would need to be in admission area (general catchment) and may also be in local catchment area, which is more than just KT1 or KT2.

And also the so called priority for local catchment is meaningless as any one who could get place in that category, would also be able to get place under lower category, in practice. Higher category is just a humbug to keep Some school governors and local politicians happy. Totally useless priority.

Btw, I am told that a girl has just joined TGS, mid year, from abroad, following recent family relocation.

[tiffinboys]

Last day today for response to the consultation.

1. PAN of 180 needs to reconsidered, until sufficient physical facilities are available.
2. All the applicants who pass stage one test should be eligible for admission under criteria for ppc/local children.
3. Better if criteria for ppc/local children is placed after open places criteria.
4. Stage 2 test should be conducted in such time that outcome could be given before deadline for CAF.

(Note: Henrietta Barnett is also changing its stage 2 test dates as already done by Sutton Grammar, leaving TGS and St. Olaves as the only schools taking tests after CAF deadline).


Change will only come if significant number of parents respond to the consultation. Tiffins always claim that only handful of people write; so the rest must be happy with their admission arrangements, which is contrary to the grumble we often hear at school gate.