westof

Mrs Danvers you are right about the children with well-educated parents, but I'm thinking more of bright children who DON'T have well-educated parents who(possibly even know how to) support them in the ways you describe - if they are let down by school as well, then they are more likely to end up in the lower sets in Y7. (Which is fine if they are then able to progress upwards, but that doesn't always happen, and with some children it can leave resentment that they were initially in the bottom sets, even if that was (attainment wise) the right place for them at the time). (????s has got there before me)

JessM Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If your kids are at a good primary school, with a > good teacher, they won't have gaps in their > knowledge and will have been challenged to achieve > their potential. > > So the perceived problem is not only one of the > secondary schools being of varying quality, but > also the primaries. When children start secondary school, if they are setted / streamed in a comprehensive school, then their position (which reflects their current level of achievement) is pretty much determined by the quality of primary school education they've had up to that point. A couple of years later in a decent school with good teaching, things have often shaken up quite a bit - some of this may be down to individual children blossoming later, but I think it's mainly due to the gaps being filled in. What really shocked me with some Year 7 streaming, is that because the quality of primary education that a child receives is so linked to the parents' ability to get them into the better schools, and because London has such varied social extremes - that you could have pretty much set the children according to their parents class & race & they would have ended up in the same sets. (Middle class white children dominating the upper sets, in case anyone needs it spelling out). Though as I said in the paragraph above, at least in a good school, children in the lower sets will be able to move up as they benefit from good teaching (or as they move up the school, then sets get re-shuffled with more of them designated as higher ability). With hopefully the setting in the upper years being a more genuine reflection of children's innate ability.

> I think the answer is for schools in challenging > areas to pool their bright pupils with bright > teachers+university academics for a small > proportion of the week. They do this in Bristol. > Not seen any evidence (yet) of such a scheme in > this area. This is a great idea, also good for those of us with middling, average, maybe just non-academic but lovely and hardworking children, who'd like to send them to a school where children of all abilities including the super-brainy are nurtured. Or where maybe if they weren't noticeably academic at age 10, if they shone later they could end up in the top set with the brainy kids. That said, I can understand people sending their children to a grammar if they can, & if it's the right fit for them (e.g. they don't need loads of tutoring to get in) - we all do the best we can by our individual children. But I'd much prefer a situation where Grammars weren't needed (or perceived to be needed). To wonderwoman: Year 5 is not too early at all to start wondering about grammars - I have a feeling some of the grammar exams are taken very early in Year 6? So if you leave it until you start looking round Secondary School Open Days in the autumn of Year 6, you may have missed the boat. And if you are only now thinking about grammar entrance in Y5 then you hardly come under the category of 'parent who's tutored their child since birth' ;-) - you have nothing to lose by giving it a go.

minder Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I've often wondered why Dulwich Hamlet has this > entrance at age 7 while every other state school > in Southwark and surrounding areas have the normal > Reception age entrance. I suppose it makes sense in a traditionally private school area if the local private schools have an age 7 intake. Otherwise you get a 4-11 primary but then loads of children leave at age 7 (& get replaced off the waiting list) which makes for an unstable school population. If you formalise the split at age 7, it's less of an issue. Plus there is some logic to having 4-7 school and a 7-11 one. I grew up in a county where the (state) schooling was split into Infants/Lower School, then Middle School (9-12) then Upper School (13-16/18) and I intially found the prospect of 4-11 primary schools quite alarming when I moved to London. Though I think going through school admissions every 4 years would tip London parents over the edge!

It's fair to point out though, that Ofsted (from reading the report) seemed to be aware of this years pass dip when they judged the school as 'Good' for teaching, which is interesting. The report bears a detailed read, with that in mind. As a parent whose child will be doing GCSE's in a couple of years, I am concerned about what happened this year, but I do have confidence in what they are currently doing with her cohort.

I'm very happy with this report. If anything I have more confidence in it than the previous somewhat gushy full report from a couple of years back. I'm glad they've noted specific things to be improved - always a bit sus if there's nothing to be worked on. Staff & pupils shoud be very proud!

Thanks for replying - I'm annoyed that I missed it, but glad that there was one this month.

Anyone know if it was last night or next Friday? I had a reminder in my calendar, then had a stupidly busy day at work & didn't check it till bedtime.

I agree with the last few posts about the correlation between class insecurity & consciousness of accents. All I'd add, is that some people do seem naturally able to flit between accents much easier than others. I'm thinking anecdotally of adult siblings I know who've had the same background (either regional or poshness) where one has been much better at adapting their accent to wherever they end up, while the other seems unable to change their childhood accent. I wonder if it really is an annate ability, or whether exposure at an early age makes you more able to accent flip? I suppose even siblings with a year or so's difference in age might have been exposed to different accents at different ages, or one may have been at nursery early while the other stayed longer within the family - would that kind of thing make enough difference?

I found lists of Governors on Harris Girls (theres a 'Meet our Governors' page under the 'About' tag) & Evelyn Grace - they were the only two I looked for. One's a 'Harris' school, the other an 'Ark' one - which I mention as both Harris & Ark are comparatively big organisations with very up-to-date website services shared by all their schools. Other schools websites are a bit hit & miss in terms of user-friendliness & being kept up to date - I really don't think there's much to read into that. It was always perfectly possible to contact school governors (via the school but confidentially from the school if needed) before school websites were common.

Plenty of secondary schools do have a list of governors on their website - the Ark & Harris schools all seem to for a start. The chair of governors (I assume the current one) is named on the main Ofsted report & on Wikipedia. Schools that do list governors names don't usually publish personal contact details anyway, so I think it would be expected to contact Governors via the school, in any case.

Oggy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I watched > this piece when it went out last night with my son > who is in year 9, doing well academically, happy, > feeling safe, and fiercely proud of his school. > He was in tears by the end and I don't blame him. You could be describing my daughter - I didn't have the heart to watch it with her last night, though I expect I will at some point. Whether or not this years results reflect badly on past practice, I have no doubts that after this investigation, current exam practice is going to be good. And if there's been staff instability, or staff under stress - without implying that management practices are blameless - I'm well aware that much of it may have been down the very public scrutiny that the school has been under. Prickle - (sorry to answer a questin you've asked another person) - there is never nothing to worry about in any school.

Just like to add - I'm aware that threads discussing Kingsdale have a tendency to get hijacked & closed down. I wonder if it would be possible to move the relevant discussion to a separate thread, as this thread on GCSE results is worth saving, including the speculation as to why Kingsdale hasn't released theirs.

> > "I don't see how the school can win - but more > importantly I can only see how local families and > children can lose out" > > I agree with you here - but are you saying that > the school is blameless? I'm in agreement with Curmudgeon's post, particularly the bit you've highlighted here. It's perfectly possible to hold that view without thinking the school is 100% blameless with regard to exam malpractice. What we don't know is whether they were worse than the 100 or so other schools which were investigated quietly & told to clean their act, or guided towards better practice. 15 months after an investigation started, I would hope those schools were either modelling excellent exam practice, or deemed no longer fit to run exams. What we do know is that in the case of Kingsdale, there are parties (whether or not these are the original whistleblowers) who are determined to bring this into public scrutiny again and again. The tone of the Channel 4 report was very much a case of: This school is an academy: therefore unaccountable & this is the major problem. It's worth noting that if there was exam malpractice of any scale (however major or minor, without the full report we cannot tell), it was almost certainly also going on during the time before the school became an academy. If I am correct the school only moved towards becoming an academy in the months shortly before the initial public whistleblowing.

Speaking as a tenant not a landlord, but my rented flat is managed by Burnet Ware, & they are very professional & always prompt with maintenance. They do quarterly inspections which probably helps keep on top of things. As a tenant, I much prefer them to someone like Foxtons or Winkworths - local & more personal & maybe more conscious of local reputation thana big chain would be.