Our schools' 11-plus 'shame'

Echo: Robin Bevan, headteacher of Southend High School for Boys Robin Bevan, headteacher of Southend High School for Boys

A GRAMMAR school headteacher has accused Southend primary schools of shocking failures in the way they teach 11-plus pupils.

Robin Bevan, headteacher of Southend High School, said profound mistakes were being made by some primary schools, leading to falling numbers of Southend pupils passing the exam, which enables you to enrol at a grammar school.

Speaking as headteachers explained to Southend councillors on Monday why pupils lag well behind children from outside the borough in the selective school test, Mr Bevan revealed eight primary schools only managed to send five pupils to grammar schools between them this year.

Mr Bevan said: “It’s just shocking. If you take the eight primary schools that had the lowest number passing to grammar schools, they had 353 children in Year 6. Just five of those went to grammar schools. Something is more profoundly wrong than just providing more information to parents.

“Even if a large number are choosing to go somewhere else, where only five young people have managed to secure places something is profoundly not right and they are being let down in the process.”

Out of the 4,200 pupils overall who took the 11-plus last year, 53 per cent of boys and 44 per cent of girls scored higher than 303, taken as the mark necessary to pass.

But out of the 395 boys and 380 girls from Southend postcodes, just 37 per cent of boys and 30 per cent of girls scored higher than 303.

Mr Bevan, who has been carrying out statistical analysis of 11-plus test results for the Consortium of Selective Schools in Essex for a decade, added: “You can infer about the extent to which those who sat the test have encountered sufficiently difficult material sufficiently early in their primary education.”

But Richard Spence, headteacher of Chalkwell Hall Junior School, pointed out that a higher proportion of Southend pupils than pupils from outside the borough took the test, meaning a higher proportion were likely to fail. He said: “The statistics could be skewed.”

Cheryl Woolf, headteacher of West Leigh Junior School and Friars Primary School, in Shoebury, said all schools are under pressure from Ofsted to show that standards are improving all the time.

She added: “There are some schools in Southend that are not performing as we would like, but we are all working really hard. Every single one of them will be working with our children at years 3, 4 and 5.

“We have to be careful we are not looking at the primary schools and saying we are not doing our job, because across the board we are.”

Comments (108)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:47am Thu 5 Dec 13

DogsMessInLeigh says...

" Mr Bevan revealed eight primary schools only managed to send five pupils to grammar schools between them this year. "

no wonder why the trains are full of kids travelling from outside of the area everyday, some may be more privileged that the locals, some even arrive in their own new cars when of age.

local primary schools need to do more..as do parents.
" Mr Bevan revealed eight primary schools only managed to send five pupils to grammar schools between them this year. " no wonder why the trains are full of kids travelling from outside of the area everyday, some may be more privileged that the locals, some even arrive in their own new cars when of age. local primary schools need to do more..as do parents. DogsMessInLeigh

10:23am Thu 5 Dec 13

heartbeat says...

"leading to falling numbers of Southend pupils passing the exam, which enables you to enrol at a grammar school."

Enables "you"?? The grammar in the sentence above would have had red biro all over it at a Grammar school! If the lack of Southend pupils passing is not down to kids being thicker, then how can the quality of teaching not have something to do with it? Or is it down to the plethora of languages/cultural differences being accommodated in several primary schools in this area? Discuss!
"leading to falling numbers of Southend pupils passing the exam, which enables you to enrol at a grammar school." Enables "you"?? The grammar in the sentence above would have had red biro all over it at a Grammar school! If the lack of Southend pupils passing is not down to kids being thicker, then how can the quality of teaching not have something to do with it? Or is it down to the plethora of languages/cultural differences being accommodated in several primary schools in this area? Discuss! heartbeat

10:32am Thu 5 Dec 13

jayman says...

Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools...

http://www.explorele
arning.co.uk/vebo/in
dex.php?idPage=656

Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools.

My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit..

Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already.

If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools'

A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE.

The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.
Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools... http://www.explorele arning.co.uk/vebo/in dex.php?idPage=656 Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools. My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit.. Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already. If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools' A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE. The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence. jayman

10:39am Thu 5 Dec 13

jayman says...

heartbeat wrote:
"leading to falling numbers of Southend pupils passing the exam, which enables you to enrol at a grammar school."

Enables "you"?? The grammar in the sentence above would have had red biro all over it at a Grammar school! If the lack of Southend pupils passing is not down to kids being thicker, then how can the quality of teaching not have something to do with it? Or is it down to the plethora of languages/cultural differences being accommodated in several primary schools in this area? Discuss!
I believe that Grammar school Heads have been given chairmanship of this Investigation. Southend council should have had the Grammar school heads in there rightful place. sat opposite a panel of independent experts whilst being asked a series of 'institutionally' uncomfortable questions.
[quote][p][bold]heartbeat[/bold] wrote: "leading to falling numbers of Southend pupils passing the exam, which enables you to enrol at a grammar school." Enables "you"?? The grammar in the sentence above would have had red biro all over it at a Grammar school! If the lack of Southend pupils passing is not down to kids being thicker, then how can the quality of teaching not have something to do with it? Or is it down to the plethora of languages/cultural differences being accommodated in several primary schools in this area? Discuss![/p][/quote]I believe that Grammar school Heads have been given chairmanship of this Investigation. Southend council should have had the Grammar school heads in there rightful place. sat opposite a panel of independent experts whilst being asked a series of 'institutionally' uncomfortable questions. jayman

10:52am Thu 5 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

jayman wrote:
Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools...

http://www.explorele

arning.co.uk/vebo/in

dex.php?idPage=656

Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools.

My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit..

Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already.

If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools'

A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE.

The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.
and nowhere in your diatripe (sic) do you mentionthe appalling failure of the local primaries. for you it is only about denigration of the success stories.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools... http://www.explorele arning.co.uk/vebo/in dex.php?idPage=656 Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools. My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit.. Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already. If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools' A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE. The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.[/p][/quote]and nowhere in your diatripe (sic) do you mentionthe appalling failure of the local primaries. for you it is only about denigration of the success stories. profondo asbo

10:52am Thu 5 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

jayman wrote:
Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools...

http://www.explorele

arning.co.uk/vebo/in

dex.php?idPage=656

Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools.

My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit..

Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already.

If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools'

A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE.

The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.
and nowhere in your diatripe (sic) do you mention the appalling failure of the local primaries. for you it is only about denigration of the success stories.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools... http://www.explorele arning.co.uk/vebo/in dex.php?idPage=656 Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools. My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit.. Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already. If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools' A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE. The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.[/p][/quote]and nowhere in your diatripe (sic) do you mention the appalling failure of the local primaries. for you it is only about denigration of the success stories. profondo asbo

10:59am Thu 5 Dec 13

sansculotte says...

People would do well to listen to Dr Bevan, one of the UK's most respected Head Teachers.
As he knows grammar schools traditionally provided the best chance of social mobility for ordinary children who were academically gifted.
Lets be absolutely clear. For a bright child at a normal junior school a local grammar school offers them their best chance of fulfilling their potential.
When grammar schools were removed across most of the England the result has not been rising educational standards that Labour predicted. In fact just the opposite has occurred as most parents are well aware so we should be grateful to have four high performing schools in Southend.
The problem in Southend is as Dr Bevan has correctly identified is that a large number of our junior schools continue to fail their more able pupils by setting low standards and expectations.
It is up to parents to demand better from their local junior schools and for Southend Council as employers to ensure these standards are maintained.
People would do well to listen to Dr Bevan, one of the UK's most respected Head Teachers. As he knows grammar schools traditionally provided the best chance of social mobility for ordinary children who were academically gifted. Lets be absolutely clear. For a bright child at a normal junior school a local grammar school offers them their best chance of fulfilling their potential. When grammar schools were removed across most of the England the result has not been rising educational standards that Labour predicted. In fact just the opposite has occurred as most parents are well aware so we should be grateful to have four high performing schools in Southend. The problem in Southend is as Dr Bevan has correctly identified is that a large number of our junior schools continue to fail their more able pupils by setting low standards and expectations. It is up to parents to demand better from their local junior schools and for Southend Council as employers to ensure these standards are maintained. sansculotte

11:21am Thu 5 Dec 13

jayman says...

As a country we are slipping further and further in terms of education and educational outcomes.

we have

. fee paying schools
. non fee paying schools
. preparatory schools
. faith schools
. free schools
. academy schools
. grammar schools
. local authority schools
. special educational schools

Each one has its own ethos, curriculum and standards.

we have built a school system that spends more of its time identifying socio-economic and religious difference then it does in producing good educational outcomes..
As a country we are slipping further and further in terms of education and educational outcomes. we have . fee paying schools . non fee paying schools . preparatory schools . faith schools . free schools . academy schools . grammar schools . local authority schools . special educational schools Each one has its own ethos, curriculum and standards. we have built a school system that spends more of its time identifying socio-economic and religious difference then it does in producing good educational outcomes.. jayman

11:21am Thu 5 Dec 13

jayman says...

As a country we are slipping further and further in terms of education and educational outcomes.

we have

. fee paying schools
. non fee paying schools
. preparatory schools
. faith schools
. free schools
. academy schools
. grammar schools
. local authority schools
. special educational schools

Each one has its own ethos, curriculum and standards.

we have built a school system that spends more of its time identifying socio-economic and religious difference then it does in producing good educational outcomes..
As a country we are slipping further and further in terms of education and educational outcomes. we have . fee paying schools . non fee paying schools . preparatory schools . faith schools . free schools . academy schools . grammar schools . local authority schools . special educational schools Each one has its own ethos, curriculum and standards. we have built a school system that spends more of its time identifying socio-economic and religious difference then it does in producing good educational outcomes.. jayman

11:29am Thu 5 Dec 13

jayman says...

profondo asbo wrote:
jayman wrote:
Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools...

http://www.explorele


arning.co.uk/vebo/in


dex.php?idPage=656

Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools.

My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit..

Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already.

If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools'

A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE.

The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.
and nowhere in your diatripe (sic) do you mention the appalling failure of the local primaries. for you it is only about denigration of the success stories.
excluding learning disability, we should remove all conceptual social barriers from children's education.

I am of the belief that once you exclude leaning and behavioural disability. All children have the same ability to learn to the same standard in various topics.

Some parents demand prestige and fundamental difference. Some parents loath it.
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools... http://www.explorele arning.co.uk/vebo/in dex.php?idPage=656 Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools. My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit.. Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already. If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools' A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE. The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.[/p][/quote]and nowhere in your diatripe (sic) do you mention the appalling failure of the local primaries. for you it is only about denigration of the success stories.[/p][/quote]excluding learning disability, we should remove all conceptual social barriers from children's education. I am of the belief that once you exclude leaning and behavioural disability. All children have the same ability to learn to the same standard in various topics. Some parents demand prestige and fundamental difference. Some parents loath it. jayman

11:36am Thu 5 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

if that is your belief then the local primaries are failing.
if that is your belief then the local primaries are failing. profondo asbo

11:41am Thu 5 Dec 13

jayman says...

profondo asbo wrote:
if that is your belief then the local primaries are failing.
no.. the system is failing.

Its like blaming a component part of an engine that wont start. The problem is that the car in question is over sixty years old, is riddled with rust and has been driven by several careful drivers.

we need a new and different vehicle for our children's education.
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: if that is your belief then the local primaries are failing.[/p][/quote]no.. the system is failing. Its like blaming a component part of an engine that wont start. The problem is that the car in question is over sixty years old, is riddled with rust and has been driven by several careful drivers. we need a new and different vehicle for our children's education. jayman

11:46am Thu 5 Dec 13

jayman says...

jayman wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
if that is your belief then the local primaries are failing.
no.. the system is failing.

Its like blaming a component part of an engine that wont start. The problem is that the car in question is over sixty years old, is riddled with rust and has been driven by several careful drivers.

we need a new and different vehicle for our children's education.
sorry. should have been 'uncareful' drivers
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: if that is your belief then the local primaries are failing.[/p][/quote]no.. the system is failing. Its like blaming a component part of an engine that wont start. The problem is that the car in question is over sixty years old, is riddled with rust and has been driven by several careful drivers. we need a new and different vehicle for our children's education.[/p][/quote]sorry. should have been 'uncareful' drivers jayman

12:04pm Thu 5 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

jayman wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
if that is your belief then the local primaries are failing.
no.. the system is failing.

Its like blaming a component part of an engine that wont start. The problem is that the car in question is over sixty years old, is riddled with rust and has been driven by several careful drivers.

we need a new and different vehicle for our children's education.
in which case how is it that a high percentage of westleigh pupils make the grammars but chalkwell low?
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: if that is your belief then the local primaries are failing.[/p][/quote]no.. the system is failing. Its like blaming a component part of an engine that wont start. The problem is that the car in question is over sixty years old, is riddled with rust and has been driven by several careful drivers. we need a new and different vehicle for our children's education.[/p][/quote]in which case how is it that a high percentage of westleigh pupils make the grammars but chalkwell low? profondo asbo

12:23pm Thu 5 Dec 13

Janefromsouthend says...

Many parents are choosing not to send their children to grammer schools as some of the main stream schools are getting equally good results with these pupils.
Many parents are choosing not to send their children to grammer schools as some of the main stream schools are getting equally good results with these pupils. Janefromsouthend

12:26pm Thu 5 Dec 13

jayman says...

profondo asbo wrote:
jayman wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
if that is your belief then the local primaries are failing.
no.. the system is failing.

Its like blaming a component part of an engine that wont start. The problem is that the car in question is over sixty years old, is riddled with rust and has been driven by several careful drivers.

we need a new and different vehicle for our children's education.
in which case how is it that a high percentage of westleigh pupils make the grammars but chalkwell low?
??? you have highlighted a good fact for me quite well. I am now confused as i think you produced this fact in the belief that it would act to counter my viewpoint, it seems to have reinforced it.
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: if that is your belief then the local primaries are failing.[/p][/quote]no.. the system is failing. Its like blaming a component part of an engine that wont start. The problem is that the car in question is over sixty years old, is riddled with rust and has been driven by several careful drivers. we need a new and different vehicle for our children's education.[/p][/quote]in which case how is it that a high percentage of westleigh pupils make the grammars but chalkwell low?[/p][/quote]??? you have highlighted a good fact for me quite well. I am now confused as i think you produced this fact in the belief that it would act to counter my viewpoint, it seems to have reinforced it. jayman

12:46pm Thu 5 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

chalkwell is failing where westleigh is not. yet for you the whole system broken which it clearly is not.
chalkwell is failing where westleigh is not. yet for you the whole system broken which it clearly is not. profondo asbo

12:58pm Thu 5 Dec 13

jayman says...

profondo asbo wrote:
chalkwell is failing where westleigh is not. yet for you the whole system broken which it clearly is not.
if you can see 'why' then I am at a loss of how to further express this.

i will however cut and paste some extracts of what i have stated in above posts.

"we have built a school system that spends more of its time identifying socio-economic and religious difference then it does in producing good educational outcomes.."

"The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence."

to conclude. we have a system that is more about supporting affluence then it is at producing excellence"
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: chalkwell is failing where westleigh is not. yet for you the whole system broken which it clearly is not.[/p][/quote]if you can see 'why' then I am at a loss of how to further express this. i will however cut and paste some extracts of what i have stated in above posts. "we have built a school system that spends more of its time identifying socio-economic and religious difference then it does in producing good educational outcomes.." "The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence." to conclude. we have a system that is more about supporting affluence then it is at producing excellence" jayman

1:00pm Thu 5 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

how is a maths and verbal reasoning test unscientific? you are hung up on affluence when the word you are struggling to find is aspiration.
how is a maths and verbal reasoning test unscientific? you are hung up on affluence when the word you are struggling to find is aspiration. profondo asbo

1:17pm Thu 5 Dec 13

jayman says...

profondo asbo wrote:
how is a maths and verbal reasoning test unscientific? you are hung up on affluence when the word you are struggling to find is aspiration.
aspiration... Ah, this allusive concept. I take it you are a Tory then. Aspiration is a well intentioned word that has been used to mask something else altogether. A Tory favourite so to speak. To test your social science understanding. try to separate the two things (affluence and aspiration) by right.

The indicators that they (aspiration and affluence) are in any way different would be found in free school meal take-up in both grammar and state schools. This is the governments own measure of poverty amongst school age children. Now do some research and get back to me. I know the free school meal figures and demographics of grammar school vs state school intake.

with the facts your point of view may have to undergo self adjustment.
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: how is a maths and verbal reasoning test unscientific? you are hung up on affluence when the word you are struggling to find is aspiration.[/p][/quote]aspiration... Ah, this allusive concept. I take it you are a Tory then. Aspiration is a well intentioned word that has been used to mask something else altogether. A Tory favourite so to speak. To test your social science understanding. try to separate the two things (affluence and aspiration) by right. The indicators that they (aspiration and affluence) are in any way different would be found in free school meal take-up in both grammar and state schools. This is the governments own measure of poverty amongst school age children. Now do some research and get back to me. I know the free school meal figures and demographics of grammar school vs state school intake. with the facts your point of view may have to undergo self adjustment. jayman

1:30pm Thu 5 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

jayman wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
how is a maths and verbal reasoning test unscientific? you are hung up on affluence when the word you are struggling to find is aspiration.
aspiration... Ah, this allusive concept. I take it you are a Tory then. Aspiration is a well intentioned word that has been used to mask something else altogether. A Tory favourite so to speak. To test your social science understanding. try to separate the two things (affluence and aspiration) by right.

The indicators that they (aspiration and affluence) are in any way different would be found in free school meal take-up in both grammar and state schools. This is the governments own measure of poverty amongst school age children. Now do some research and get back to me. I know the free school meal figures and demographics of grammar school vs state school intake.

with the facts your point of view may have to undergo self adjustment.
a bogus test if ever there was one. affluence comes from aspiration if that is what you aspire to though that may take a generation to follow. not everything in my life boils down to politics though it clearly does in yours.

study what succeeds in life and replicate it. don't tear it down just because it's skewing the average of all the failing establishments.

parents should aspire for their kids to do better academically and the failing primaries need to pull their finger out and replicate the successes
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: how is a maths and verbal reasoning test unscientific? you are hung up on affluence when the word you are struggling to find is aspiration.[/p][/quote]aspiration... Ah, this allusive concept. I take it you are a Tory then. Aspiration is a well intentioned word that has been used to mask something else altogether. A Tory favourite so to speak. To test your social science understanding. try to separate the two things (affluence and aspiration) by right. The indicators that they (aspiration and affluence) are in any way different would be found in free school meal take-up in both grammar and state schools. This is the governments own measure of poverty amongst school age children. Now do some research and get back to me. I know the free school meal figures and demographics of grammar school vs state school intake. with the facts your point of view may have to undergo self adjustment.[/p][/quote]a bogus test if ever there was one. affluence comes from aspiration if that is what you aspire to though that may take a generation to follow. not everything in my life boils down to politics though it clearly does in yours. study what succeeds in life and replicate it. don't tear it down just because it's skewing the average of all the failing establishments. parents should aspire for their kids to do better academically and the failing primaries need to pull their finger out and replicate the successes profondo asbo

3:40pm Thu 5 Dec 13

jayman says...

profondo asbo wrote:
jayman wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
how is a maths and verbal reasoning test unscientific? you are hung up on affluence when the word you are struggling to find is aspiration.
aspiration... Ah, this allusive concept. I take it you are a Tory then. Aspiration is a well intentioned word that has been used to mask something else altogether. A Tory favourite so to speak. To test your social science understanding. try to separate the two things (affluence and aspiration) by right.

The indicators that they (aspiration and affluence) are in any way different would be found in free school meal take-up in both grammar and state schools. This is the governments own measure of poverty amongst school age children. Now do some research and get back to me. I know the free school meal figures and demographics of grammar school vs state school intake.

with the facts your point of view may have to undergo self adjustment.
a bogus test if ever there was one. affluence comes from aspiration if that is what you aspire to though that may take a generation to follow. not everything in my life boils down to politics though it clearly does in yours.

study what succeeds in life and replicate it. don't tear it down just because it's skewing the average of all the failing establishments.

parents should aspire for their kids to do better academically and the failing primaries need to pull their finger out and replicate the successes
give me a single example where this is the case and where the educational system facilitates this in light of the financial constraints of a low income family....

here is a good place to start...

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/special/educat
ion/school_tables/se
condary/12/html/882.
stm
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: how is a maths and verbal reasoning test unscientific? you are hung up on affluence when the word you are struggling to find is aspiration.[/p][/quote]aspiration... Ah, this allusive concept. I take it you are a Tory then. Aspiration is a well intentioned word that has been used to mask something else altogether. A Tory favourite so to speak. To test your social science understanding. try to separate the two things (affluence and aspiration) by right. The indicators that they (aspiration and affluence) are in any way different would be found in free school meal take-up in both grammar and state schools. This is the governments own measure of poverty amongst school age children. Now do some research and get back to me. I know the free school meal figures and demographics of grammar school vs state school intake. with the facts your point of view may have to undergo self adjustment.[/p][/quote]a bogus test if ever there was one. affluence comes from aspiration if that is what you aspire to though that may take a generation to follow. not everything in my life boils down to politics though it clearly does in yours. study what succeeds in life and replicate it. don't tear it down just because it's skewing the average of all the failing establishments. parents should aspire for their kids to do better academically and the failing primaries need to pull their finger out and replicate the successes[/p][/quote]give me a single example where this is the case and where the educational system facilitates this in light of the financial constraints of a low income family.... here is a good place to start... http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/special/educat ion/school_tables/se condary/12/html/882. stm jayman

3:46pm Thu 5 Dec 13

jayman says...

percentage of Southend high school for boys students who are eligible for free school meals 1.6%

percentage of chase high school (only a few hundred meters from SHSFB) children who are eligible for free school meals 31.1%!

keep doing your research. the FACTS get worst with every measure..
percentage of Southend high school for boys students who are eligible for free school meals 1.6% percentage of chase high school (only a few hundred meters from SHSFB) children who are eligible for free school meals 31.1%! keep doing your research. the FACTS get worst with every measure.. jayman

4:22pm Thu 5 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

jayman wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
jayman wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
how is a maths and verbal reasoning test unscientific? you are hung up on affluence when the word you are struggling to find is aspiration.
aspiration... Ah, this allusive concept. I take it you are a Tory then. Aspiration is a well intentioned word that has been used to mask something else altogether. A Tory favourite so to speak. To test your social science understanding. try to separate the two things (affluence and aspiration) by right.

The indicators that they (aspiration and affluence) are in any way different would be found in free school meal take-up in both grammar and state schools. This is the governments own measure of poverty amongst school age children. Now do some research and get back to me. I know the free school meal figures and demographics of grammar school vs state school intake.

with the facts your point of view may have to undergo self adjustment.
a bogus test if ever there was one. affluence comes from aspiration if that is what you aspire to though that may take a generation to follow. not everything in my life boils down to politics though it clearly does in yours.

study what succeeds in life and replicate it. don't tear it down just because it's skewing the average of all the failing establishments.

parents should aspire for their kids to do better academically and the failing primaries need to pull their finger out and replicate the successes
give me a single example where this is the case and where the educational system facilitates this in light of the financial constraints of a low income family....

here is a good place to start...

http://www.bbc.co.uk

/news/special/educat

ion/school_tables/se

condary/12/html/882.

stm
you are completely unqualified to write off a system that works for those who aspire academically. a quick check of the demographics of year 7 at westcliff and southend reveals how many ethnic minorities have access to good quality education. many are second generation not monied but aspirational. it's a simple as that. your school dinner measure is a measure of those who help themselves rather than those who rely on others.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: how is a maths and verbal reasoning test unscientific? you are hung up on affluence when the word you are struggling to find is aspiration.[/p][/quote]aspiration... Ah, this allusive concept. I take it you are a Tory then. Aspiration is a well intentioned word that has been used to mask something else altogether. A Tory favourite so to speak. To test your social science understanding. try to separate the two things (affluence and aspiration) by right. The indicators that they (aspiration and affluence) are in any way different would be found in free school meal take-up in both grammar and state schools. This is the governments own measure of poverty amongst school age children. Now do some research and get back to me. I know the free school meal figures and demographics of grammar school vs state school intake. with the facts your point of view may have to undergo self adjustment.[/p][/quote]a bogus test if ever there was one. affluence comes from aspiration if that is what you aspire to though that may take a generation to follow. not everything in my life boils down to politics though it clearly does in yours. study what succeeds in life and replicate it. don't tear it down just because it's skewing the average of all the failing establishments. parents should aspire for their kids to do better academically and the failing primaries need to pull their finger out and replicate the successes[/p][/quote]give me a single example where this is the case and where the educational system facilitates this in light of the financial constraints of a low income family.... here is a good place to start... http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/special/educat ion/school_tables/se condary/12/html/882. stm[/p][/quote]you are completely unqualified to write off a system that works for those who aspire academically. a quick check of the demographics of year 7 at westcliff and southend reveals how many ethnic minorities have access to good quality education. many are second generation not monied but aspirational. it's a simple as that. your school dinner measure is a measure of those who help themselves rather than those who rely on others. profondo asbo

5:05pm Thu 5 Dec 13

Howard Cháse says...

Der kidz mite bee two fik to lern da fings dey nede four gramma skool innit
Der kidz mite bee two fik to lern da fings dey nede four gramma skool innit Howard Cháse

7:06pm Thu 5 Dec 13

bookbug says...

It's all very well laying the blame at the feet of primary schools,but parents are also expected to play a part in the education of their children. If parents show little or no interest in how their children are progressing at school, the child will treat school as a chore, an interruption to their social life.
Grammar schools are an option for people who cannot afford school fees, it just takes guidance and effort to attain.
It's all very well laying the blame at the feet of primary schools,but parents are also expected to play a part in the education of their children. If parents show little or no interest in how their children are progressing at school, the child will treat school as a chore, an interruption to their social life. Grammar schools are an option for people who cannot afford school fees, it just takes guidance and effort to attain. bookbug

9:57pm Thu 5 Dec 13

jayman says...

"parents are also expected to play a part in the education of their children."

indeed. Some do.

http://www.leightuto
ring.co.uk/Parent-Re
views.html

http://www.explorele
arning.co.uk/vebo/in
dex.php?idPage=656

http://www.rachelstr
ainingacademy.co.uk/
southend-home-tuitio
n-prices.htm
"parents are also expected to play a part in the education of their children." indeed. Some do. http://www.leightuto ring.co.uk/Parent-Re views.html http://www.explorele arning.co.uk/vebo/in dex.php?idPage=656 http://www.rachelstr ainingacademy.co.uk/ southend-home-tuitio n-prices.htm jayman

10:31pm Thu 5 Dec 13

HerculePoirot says...

Mr Bevan said: “It’s just shocking. If you take the eight primary schools that had the lowest number passing to grammar schools, they had 353 children in Year 6. Just five of those went to grammar schools. Something is more profoundly wrong than just providing more information to parents."

Mr Bevan is right - something is profoundly wrong: the 11+ test that his school is using. Grammar schools claim to select on innate ability - by pointing the finger at everyone but himself he is just confirming that the test is hopelessley unfair for children that don't get intensive preparation. This is not the fault of the local primary schools - it is not their job to try to make up for the failings of Mr Bevan's test.
Mr Bevan said: “It’s just shocking. If you take the eight primary schools that had the lowest number passing to grammar schools, they had 353 children in Year 6. Just five of those went to grammar schools. Something is more profoundly wrong than just providing more information to parents." Mr Bevan is right - something is profoundly wrong: the 11+ test that his school is using. Grammar schools claim to select on innate ability - by pointing the finger at everyone but himself he is just confirming that the test is hopelessley unfair for children that don't get intensive preparation. This is not the fault of the local primary schools - it is not their job to try to make up for the failings of Mr Bevan's test. HerculePoirot

11:48pm Thu 5 Dec 13

Keroberus2 says...

HerculePoirot wrote:
Mr Bevan said: “It’s just shocking. If you take the eight primary schools that had the lowest number passing to grammar schools, they had 353 children in Year 6. Just five of those went to grammar schools. Something is more profoundly wrong than just providing more information to parents."

Mr Bevan is right - something is profoundly wrong: the 11+ test that his school is using. Grammar schools claim to select on innate ability - by pointing the finger at everyone but himself he is just confirming that the test is hopelessley unfair for children that don't get intensive preparation. This is not the fault of the local primary schools - it is not their job to try to make up for the failings of Mr Bevan's test.
If the standard of children's prior junior teaching is not good enough to pass the 11+, then yes, there is a problem with teaching. The 11+ is not meant to be a walk in the park for a kid who doesn't exactly want to spend more than 5 minutes a day on homework, and grammar schools aren't meant to cater to those who are not capable of the capacity required to be at such a level, or not willing to put the work into it. Grammar schools do select on ability, whether it be natural or whether it be through lots of hard work. If you don't achieve either one of those categories, then wallah, you have good old comprehensive schools and their supposedly superior methods of teaching.

I went to Southend High with 3 other members in my primary school. We all worked a hell of a lot to get in, but our efforts paid off. Like the real world, nothing is free and easy, and if the local primary schools aren't doing a good enough job, good job primary schools.

To me, this view point sounds like the type of viewpoint that is thrown out when one fails to get into a Grammar school, or has had a relative fail in his/her stead. This also sounds like the type of viewpoint that in around 5-10 years time, if the %age of passes for the 11+ shot up by 10-15%, would then be claiming that our education is now becoming too easy and not rigorous enough, like with the SATs and GCSEs.

Simple point that this response states. Work hard, and you shall be rewarded. Whatever the age.
[quote][p][bold]HerculePoirot[/bold] wrote: Mr Bevan said: “It’s just shocking. If you take the eight primary schools that had the lowest number passing to grammar schools, they had 353 children in Year 6. Just five of those went to grammar schools. Something is more profoundly wrong than just providing more information to parents." Mr Bevan is right - something is profoundly wrong: the 11+ test that his school is using. Grammar schools claim to select on innate ability - by pointing the finger at everyone but himself he is just confirming that the test is hopelessley unfair for children that don't get intensive preparation. This is not the fault of the local primary schools - it is not their job to try to make up for the failings of Mr Bevan's test.[/p][/quote]If the standard of children's prior junior teaching is not good enough to pass the 11+, then yes, there is a problem with teaching. The 11+ is not meant to be a walk in the park for a kid who doesn't exactly want to spend more than 5 minutes a day on homework, and grammar schools aren't meant to cater to those who are not capable of the capacity required to be at such a level, or not willing to put the work into it. Grammar schools do select on ability, whether it be natural or whether it be through lots of hard work. If you don't achieve either one of those categories, then wallah, you have good old comprehensive schools and their supposedly superior methods of teaching. I went to Southend High with 3 other members in my primary school. We all worked a hell of a lot to get in, but our efforts paid off. Like the real world, nothing is free and easy, and if the local primary schools aren't doing a good enough job, good job primary schools. To me, this view point sounds like the type of viewpoint that is thrown out when one fails to get into a Grammar school, or has had a relative fail in his/her stead. This also sounds like the type of viewpoint that in around 5-10 years time, if the %age of passes for the 11+ shot up by 10-15%, would then be claiming that our education is now becoming too easy and not rigorous enough, like with the SATs and GCSEs. Simple point that this response states. Work hard, and you shall be rewarded. Whatever the age. Keroberus2

11:25am Fri 6 Dec 13

Feminism is Dead says...

Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language, therefore bringing down the reputation of the whole school. Mr Spence also treats his staff like Sh!t.
Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language, therefore bringing down the reputation of the whole school. Mr Spence also treats his staff like Sh!t. Feminism is Dead

11:27am Fri 6 Dec 13

jayman says...

Keroberus2 wrote:
HerculePoirot wrote:
Mr Bevan said: “It’s just shocking. If you take the eight primary schools that had the lowest number passing to grammar schools, they had 353 children in Year 6. Just five of those went to grammar schools. Something is more profoundly wrong than just providing more information to parents."

Mr Bevan is right - something is profoundly wrong: the 11+ test that his school is using. Grammar schools claim to select on innate ability - by pointing the finger at everyone but himself he is just confirming that the test is hopelessley unfair for children that don't get intensive preparation. This is not the fault of the local primary schools - it is not their job to try to make up for the failings of Mr Bevan's test.
If the standard of children's prior junior teaching is not good enough to pass the 11+, then yes, there is a problem with teaching. The 11+ is not meant to be a walk in the park for a kid who doesn't exactly want to spend more than 5 minutes a day on homework, and grammar schools aren't meant to cater to those who are not capable of the capacity required to be at such a level, or not willing to put the work into it. Grammar schools do select on ability, whether it be natural or whether it be through lots of hard work. If you don't achieve either one of those categories, then wallah, you have good old comprehensive schools and their supposedly superior methods of teaching.

I went to Southend High with 3 other members in my primary school. We all worked a hell of a lot to get in, but our efforts paid off. Like the real world, nothing is free and easy, and if the local primary schools aren't doing a good enough job, good job primary schools.

To me, this view point sounds like the type of viewpoint that is thrown out when one fails to get into a Grammar school, or has had a relative fail in his/her stead. This also sounds like the type of viewpoint that in around 5-10 years time, if the %age of passes for the 11+ shot up by 10-15%, would then be claiming that our education is now becoming too easy and not rigorous enough, like with the SATs and GCSEs.

Simple point that this response states. Work hard, and you shall be rewarded. Whatever the age.
here is someone who knows what they are talking about...

http://blogs.telegra
ph.co.uk/news/timwig
more/100220161/gramm
ar-schools-and-the-m
yth-of-social-mobili
ty/
[quote][p][bold]Keroberus2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HerculePoirot[/bold] wrote: Mr Bevan said: “It’s just shocking. If you take the eight primary schools that had the lowest number passing to grammar schools, they had 353 children in Year 6. Just five of those went to grammar schools. Something is more profoundly wrong than just providing more information to parents." Mr Bevan is right - something is profoundly wrong: the 11+ test that his school is using. Grammar schools claim to select on innate ability - by pointing the finger at everyone but himself he is just confirming that the test is hopelessley unfair for children that don't get intensive preparation. This is not the fault of the local primary schools - it is not their job to try to make up for the failings of Mr Bevan's test.[/p][/quote]If the standard of children's prior junior teaching is not good enough to pass the 11+, then yes, there is a problem with teaching. The 11+ is not meant to be a walk in the park for a kid who doesn't exactly want to spend more than 5 minutes a day on homework, and grammar schools aren't meant to cater to those who are not capable of the capacity required to be at such a level, or not willing to put the work into it. Grammar schools do select on ability, whether it be natural or whether it be through lots of hard work. If you don't achieve either one of those categories, then wallah, you have good old comprehensive schools and their supposedly superior methods of teaching. I went to Southend High with 3 other members in my primary school. We all worked a hell of a lot to get in, but our efforts paid off. Like the real world, nothing is free and easy, and if the local primary schools aren't doing a good enough job, good job primary schools. To me, this view point sounds like the type of viewpoint that is thrown out when one fails to get into a Grammar school, or has had a relative fail in his/her stead. This also sounds like the type of viewpoint that in around 5-10 years time, if the %age of passes for the 11+ shot up by 10-15%, would then be claiming that our education is now becoming too easy and not rigorous enough, like with the SATs and GCSEs. Simple point that this response states. Work hard, and you shall be rewarded. Whatever the age.[/p][/quote]here is someone who knows what they are talking about... http://blogs.telegra ph.co.uk/news/timwig more/100220161/gramm ar-schools-and-the-m yth-of-social-mobili ty/ jayman

11:34am Fri 6 Dec 13

jayman says...

Feminism is Dead wrote:
Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language, therefore bringing down the reputation of the whole school. Mr Spence also treats his staff like Sh!t.
Southend council's ethos on education.

it is not enough that I should succeed, others must fail.

Hide the secluded footpaths to success. Build vast motorways to mediocrity and failure..
[quote][p][bold]Feminism is Dead[/bold] wrote: Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language, therefore bringing down the reputation of the whole school. Mr Spence also treats his staff like Sh!t.[/p][/quote]Southend council's ethos on education. it is not enough that I should succeed, others must fail. Hide the secluded footpaths to success. Build vast motorways to mediocrity and failure.. jayman

1:12pm Fri 6 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

jayman wrote:
Feminism is Dead wrote:
Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language, therefore bringing down the reputation of the whole school. Mr Spence also treats his staff like Sh!t.
Southend council's ethos on education.

it is not enough that I should succeed, others must fail.

Hide the secluded footpaths to success. Build vast motorways to mediocrity and failure..
what those that drivel have to do with the point raised by the other poster?
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Feminism is Dead[/bold] wrote: Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language, therefore bringing down the reputation of the whole school. Mr Spence also treats his staff like Sh!t.[/p][/quote]Southend council's ethos on education. it is not enough that I should succeed, others must fail. Hide the secluded footpaths to success. Build vast motorways to mediocrity and failure..[/p][/quote]what those that drivel have to do with the point raised by the other poster? profondo asbo

4:22pm Fri 6 Dec 13

jayman says...

profondo asbo wrote:
jayman wrote:
Feminism is Dead wrote:
Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language, therefore bringing down the reputation of the whole school. Mr Spence also treats his staff like Sh!t.
Southend council's ethos on education.

it is not enough that I should succeed, others must fail.

Hide the secluded footpaths to success. Build vast motorways to mediocrity and failure..
what those that drivel have to do with the point raised by the other poster?
oh.... I had a panic then. I thought I would have to teach you the concepts of producing thought provoking statements. This may have taken a considerable amount of my time. I then realised that A) you do not moderate the comments of this forum B) I am not answerable to you.

what a relief...
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Feminism is Dead[/bold] wrote: Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language, therefore bringing down the reputation of the whole school. Mr Spence also treats his staff like Sh!t.[/p][/quote]Southend council's ethos on education. it is not enough that I should succeed, others must fail. Hide the secluded footpaths to success. Build vast motorways to mediocrity and failure..[/p][/quote]what those that drivel have to do with the point raised by the other poster?[/p][/quote]oh.... I had a panic then. I thought I would have to teach you the concepts of producing thought provoking statements. This may have taken a considerable amount of my time. I then realised that A) you do not moderate the comments of this forum B) I am not answerable to you. what a relief... jayman

4:40pm Fri 6 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

jayman wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
jayman wrote:
Feminism is Dead wrote:
Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language, therefore bringing down the reputation of the whole school. Mr Spence also treats his staff like Sh!t.
Southend council's ethos on education.

it is not enough that I should succeed, others must fail.

Hide the secluded footpaths to success. Build vast motorways to mediocrity and failure..
what those that drivel have to do with the point raised by the other poster?
oh.... I had a panic then. I thought I would have to teach you the concepts of producing thought provoking statements. This may have taken a considerable amount of my time. I then realised that A) you do not moderate the comments of this forum B) I am not answerable to you.

what a relief...
yet another classic avoidance tactic
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Feminism is Dead[/bold] wrote: Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language, therefore bringing down the reputation of the whole school. Mr Spence also treats his staff like Sh!t.[/p][/quote]Southend council's ethos on education. it is not enough that I should succeed, others must fail. Hide the secluded footpaths to success. Build vast motorways to mediocrity and failure..[/p][/quote]what those that drivel have to do with the point raised by the other poster?[/p][/quote]oh.... I had a panic then. I thought I would have to teach you the concepts of producing thought provoking statements. This may have taken a considerable amount of my time. I then realised that A) you do not moderate the comments of this forum B) I am not answerable to you. what a relief...[/p][/quote]yet another classic avoidance tactic profondo asbo

4:50pm Fri 6 Dec 13

jayman says...

profondo asbo wrote:
jayman wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
jayman wrote:
Feminism is Dead wrote:
Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language, therefore bringing down the reputation of the whole school. Mr Spence also treats his staff like Sh!t.
Southend council's ethos on education.

it is not enough that I should succeed, others must fail.

Hide the secluded footpaths to success. Build vast motorways to mediocrity and failure..
what those that drivel have to do with the point raised by the other poster?
oh.... I had a panic then. I thought I would have to teach you the concepts of producing thought provoking statements. This may have taken a considerable amount of my time. I then realised that A) you do not moderate the comments of this forum B) I am not answerable to you.

what a relief...
yet another classic avoidance tactic
avoidance of what? you insulted me and asked a silly question...
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Feminism is Dead[/bold] wrote: Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language, therefore bringing down the reputation of the whole school. Mr Spence also treats his staff like Sh!t.[/p][/quote]Southend council's ethos on education. it is not enough that I should succeed, others must fail. Hide the secluded footpaths to success. Build vast motorways to mediocrity and failure..[/p][/quote]what those that drivel have to do with the point raised by the other poster?[/p][/quote]oh.... I had a panic then. I thought I would have to teach you the concepts of producing thought provoking statements. This may have taken a considerable amount of my time. I then realised that A) you do not moderate the comments of this forum B) I am not answerable to you. what a relief...[/p][/quote]yet another classic avoidance tactic[/p][/quote]avoidance of what? you insulted me and asked a silly question... jayman

5:08pm Fri 6 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

you picked a specific comment, replied to it but made no attempt to answer the point raised. it begs the question why?
you picked a specific comment, replied to it but made no attempt to answer the point raised. it begs the question why? profondo asbo

10:09pm Fri 6 Dec 13

jayman says...

profondo asbo wrote:
you picked a specific comment, replied to it but made no attempt to answer the point raised. it begs the question why?
I was writing in response to that person in question, who incidentally, is not you.

If said person (who once again, is not you) has any issues with the 'dare I say' amazingly thought provoking, poignant and conceptual observation that delivered clarity and gravitas with enough power to render our societies most intellectual of thinkers 'speechless' and locked-in-gaze to the middle distance. Then I am sure that person will use there own communication ability to convey a message to me.

who knows.. we might even continue the debate 'on topic'...
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: you picked a specific comment, replied to it but made no attempt to answer the point raised. it begs the question why?[/p][/quote]I was writing in response to that person in question, who incidentally, is not you. If said person (who once again, is not you) has any issues with the 'dare I say' amazingly thought provoking, poignant and conceptual observation that delivered clarity and gravitas with enough power to render our societies most intellectual of thinkers 'speechless' and locked-in-gaze to the middle distance. Then I am sure that person will use there own communication ability to convey a message to me. who knows.. we might even continue the debate 'on topic'... jayman

10:17pm Fri 6 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

yep still ducking it
yep still ducking it profondo asbo

10:42pm Fri 6 Dec 13

jayman says...

okay.

at 11:25am Fri 6 Dec 13

Feminism is Dead wrote

"Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language, therefore bringing down the reputation of the whole school. Mr Spence also treats his staff like Sh!t."

to which I responded.

"Southend council's ethos on education.

it is not enough that I should succeed, others must fail.

Hide the secluded footpaths to success. Build vast motorways to mediocrity and failure.."

allow me to break this down for you in context.

item (1)

"Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language"

I believe there is no provided evidence to back up this claim. in Kantian philosophy this would be referred to as a 'transcendental statement'

presupposed in and necessary to experience but not necessarily factual or true.

To which I produced a conceptual and circumlocutory response to provoke a 'thought' regarding the nature of the initial and aforementioned commentators observation, instead of producing a clunky and simplistic set of grounding statements to which I would have included some evidence to back up. Any claims that I may have made that would have in turn re-enforced the underlying principle that the sum effect of educational disparity in Southend is being driven by the local authority who are actively producing 'said' disparity in educational outcomes for our poorest and most deprived children in terms of council management, attitude and representation..

I think that clears that up. please feel free to comment below if you have any further questions...
okay. at 11:25am Fri 6 Dec 13 Feminism is Dead wrote "Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language, therefore bringing down the reputation of the whole school. Mr Spence also treats his staff like Sh!t." to which I responded. "Southend council's ethos on education. it is not enough that I should succeed, others must fail. Hide the secluded footpaths to success. Build vast motorways to mediocrity and failure.." allow me to break this down for you in context. item (1) "Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language" I believe there is no provided evidence to back up this claim. in Kantian philosophy this would be referred to as a 'transcendental statement' presupposed in and necessary to experience but not necessarily factual or true. To which I produced a conceptual and circumlocutory response to provoke a 'thought' regarding the nature of the initial and aforementioned commentators observation, instead of producing a clunky and simplistic set of grounding statements to which I would have included some evidence to back up. Any claims that I may have made that would have in turn re-enforced the underlying principle that the sum effect of educational disparity in Southend is being driven by the local authority who are actively producing 'said' disparity in educational outcomes for our poorest and most deprived children in terms of council management, attitude and representation.. I think that clears that up. please feel free to comment below if you have any further questions... jayman

11:04pm Fri 6 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

so your assertion is the language thing is irrelevant. anyone with a quarter of a brain then writes off anything of value you might have had to say.

be careful you don't develop rsi from all that hand wringing.
so your assertion is the language thing is irrelevant. anyone with a quarter of a brain then writes off anything of value you might have had to say. be careful you don't develop rsi from all that hand wringing. profondo asbo

11:16pm Fri 6 Dec 13

jayman says...

profondo asbo wrote:
so your assertion is the language thing is irrelevant. anyone with a quarter of a brain then writes off anything of value you might have had to say.

be careful you don't develop rsi from all that hand wringing.
and where did I state that language is irrelevant?

This is a observation that is presented as fact without evidence. Value must have measure. please provided measure of your claim.

alas, here you go...

Chalkwell hall school. percentage of pupils with English not as a first language... 6.7%

source; department for education

http://www.education
.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho
ols/performance/scho
ol.pl?urn=114718
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: so your assertion is the language thing is irrelevant. anyone with a quarter of a brain then writes off anything of value you might have had to say. be careful you don't develop rsi from all that hand wringing.[/p][/quote]and where did I state that language is irrelevant? This is a observation that is presented as fact without evidence. Value must have measure. please provided measure of your claim. alas, here you go... Chalkwell hall school. percentage of pupils with English not as a first language... 6.7% source; department for education http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=114718 jayman

11:48pm Fri 6 Dec 13

jayman says...

I have just read the entire prospectus fro SHSFB.

I found some notable statements within

page 5

"Pupils are visited in their primary school,
and special arrangements are made for those
who live further away"

"pupils themselves confirm the good relationships
between individuals in our diverse community."

not once have I come across anything that would allude to or otherwise a board social acceptance ethos within the school. the word 'diverse' only occurs once and is contextually connected as an observation in pupil relations as a selling point to the prospective pupils parents.
I have just read the entire prospectus fro SHSFB. I found some notable statements within page 5 "Pupils are visited in their primary school, and special arrangements are made for those who live further away" "pupils themselves confirm the good relationships between individuals in our diverse community." not once have I come across anything that would allude to or otherwise a board social acceptance ethos within the school. the word 'diverse' only occurs once and is contextually connected as an observation in pupil relations as a selling point to the prospective pupils parents. jayman

11:53pm Fri 6 Dec 13

jayman says...

here is a link to the prospectus

http://www.shsb.org.
uk/prospective_stude
nts/brochures/shsb_b
rochure.pdf
here is a link to the prospectus http://www.shsb.org. uk/prospective_stude nts/brochures/shsb_b rochure.pdf jayman

1:35pm Sat 7 Dec 13

stopmoaning1 says...

jayman wrote:
Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools...

http://www.explorele

arning.co.uk/vebo/in

dex.php?idPage=656

Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools.

My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit..

Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already.

If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools'

A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE.

The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.
Well it didn't identify any affluence on my part (Unless my husband had secretly won the lottery)
My daughter passed due to her own hard work and determination.
My son, not so driven didn't.
Both of my children went to the schools that best suited their own individual abilities.
Not once was our financial situation relevant to their years at either school.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools... http://www.explorele arning.co.uk/vebo/in dex.php?idPage=656 Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools. My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit.. Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already. If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools' A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE. The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.[/p][/quote]Well it didn't identify any affluence on my part (Unless my husband had secretly won the lottery) My daughter passed due to her own hard work and determination. My son, not so driven didn't. Both of my children went to the schools that best suited their own individual abilities. Not once was our financial situation relevant to their years at either school. stopmoaning1

1:38pm Sat 7 Dec 13

stopmoaning1 says...

Feminism is Dead wrote:
Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language, therefore bringing down the reputation of the whole school. Mr Spence also treats his staff like Sh!t.
I have no idea how the head treats his staff, but logic states the first part must surely have a massive affect on standards in general.
[quote][p][bold]Feminism is Dead[/bold] wrote: Chalkwell is failing because of the disproportionately high number of children who don't have English as their first language, therefore bringing down the reputation of the whole school. Mr Spence also treats his staff like Sh!t.[/p][/quote]I have no idea how the head treats his staff, but logic states the first part must surely have a massive affect on standards in general. stopmoaning1

6:35pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

I can't believe some of the rubbish I have read on this story. Half of my extended family went to Grammar Schools the other half to Secondary Moderns, or whatever they call them these days and there are only two differences between the different types of schools.
.
1) To get into the Grammar you have to pass a test, if you pass you go if you fail you don't. Easy.
.
2) The Grammars EXPECT more from their kids, two almost identical kids, one just passed his 11 plus, the other failed but one has been pushed into doing really well and got a place in London Uni, the one who went to a Secondary School was not pushed at all, and he is doing A level retakes at Southend College. Grammars, three hours homework a night, Secondary schools NO homework ever.
.
As for people commenting on money, that is total tosh, doesn't cost a penny more to go to Grammar and no one there is interested in how much your parents earn, all that matters is whether you could pass the exam to get in there. And as for blaming a 5 per cent minority who don't speak English for a Schools failure, what absolute total rubbish, 5 per cent is just 5 per cent.
I can't believe some of the rubbish I have read on this story. Half of my extended family went to Grammar Schools the other half to Secondary Moderns, or whatever they call them these days and there are only two differences between the different types of schools. . 1) To get into the Grammar you have to pass a test, if you pass you go if you fail you don't. Easy. . 2) The Grammars EXPECT more from their kids, two almost identical kids, one just passed his 11 plus, the other failed but one has been pushed into doing really well and got a place in London Uni, the one who went to a Secondary School was not pushed at all, and he is doing A level retakes at Southend College. Grammars, three hours homework a night, Secondary schools NO homework ever. . As for people commenting on money, that is total tosh, doesn't cost a penny more to go to Grammar and no one there is interested in how much your parents earn, all that matters is whether you could pass the exam to get in there. And as for blaming a 5 per cent minority who don't speak English for a Schools failure, what absolute total rubbish, 5 per cent is just 5 per cent. Fred the Phoenix

6:54pm Sat 7 Dec 13

stopmoaning1 says...

Fred the Phoenix wrote:
I can't believe some of the rubbish I have read on this story. Half of my extended family went to Grammar Schools the other half to Secondary Moderns, or whatever they call them these days and there are only two differences between the different types of schools.
.
1) To get into the Grammar you have to pass a test, if you pass you go if you fail you don't. Easy.
.
2) The Grammars EXPECT more from their kids, two almost identical kids, one just passed his 11 plus, the other failed but one has been pushed into doing really well and got a place in London Uni, the one who went to a Secondary School was not pushed at all, and he is doing A level retakes at Southend College. Grammars, three hours homework a night, Secondary schools NO homework ever.
.
As for people commenting on money, that is total tosh, doesn't cost a penny more to go to Grammar and no one there is interested in how much your parents earn, all that matters is whether you could pass the exam to get in there. And as for blaming a 5 per cent minority who don't speak English for a Schools failure, what absolute total rubbish, 5 per cent is just 5 per cent.
The problem with the last part Fred, is that although there may only be 5% non English speaking pupils at the school, a disproportionate amount of time money and effort is spent on them.
If the schools gave only 5% of other brighter pupils the same amount of extra help and support, perhaps they would pass, thus increasing the overall pass rate for Southend schools
[quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: I can't believe some of the rubbish I have read on this story. Half of my extended family went to Grammar Schools the other half to Secondary Moderns, or whatever they call them these days and there are only two differences between the different types of schools. . 1) To get into the Grammar you have to pass a test, if you pass you go if you fail you don't. Easy. . 2) The Grammars EXPECT more from their kids, two almost identical kids, one just passed his 11 plus, the other failed but one has been pushed into doing really well and got a place in London Uni, the one who went to a Secondary School was not pushed at all, and he is doing A level retakes at Southend College. Grammars, three hours homework a night, Secondary schools NO homework ever. . As for people commenting on money, that is total tosh, doesn't cost a penny more to go to Grammar and no one there is interested in how much your parents earn, all that matters is whether you could pass the exam to get in there. And as for blaming a 5 per cent minority who don't speak English for a Schools failure, what absolute total rubbish, 5 per cent is just 5 per cent.[/p][/quote]The problem with the last part Fred, is that although there may only be 5% non English speaking pupils at the school, a disproportionate amount of time money and effort is spent on them. If the schools gave only 5% of other brighter pupils the same amount of extra help and support, perhaps they would pass, thus increasing the overall pass rate for Southend schools stopmoaning1

8:07pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

Fair enough stopmoaning except for one thing, what is this extra help and support? When I was at Junior school and when my children were at school there was only one teacher per thirty pupils, no extra help and support. The difference is that we were streamed by ability so that the children who were better at any given subject were all together whilst those who were not so good were also together. Ah but they're not supposed to do that now are they, they haveto treat them as if they are all the same, except they're not and as far as I can see all that has achieved is to drag standards down.
Fair enough stopmoaning except for one thing, what is this extra help and support? When I was at Junior school and when my children were at school there was only one teacher per thirty pupils, no extra help and support. The difference is that we were streamed by ability so that the children who were better at any given subject were all together whilst those who were not so good were also together. Ah but they're not supposed to do that now are they, they haveto treat them as if they are all the same, except they're not and as far as I can see all that has achieved is to drag standards down. Fred the Phoenix

8:18pm Sat 7 Dec 13

jayman says...

stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools...

http://www.explorele


arning.co.uk/vebo/in


dex.php?idPage=656

Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools.

My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit..

Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already.

If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools'

A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE.

The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.
Well it didn't identify any affluence on my part (Unless my husband had secretly won the lottery)
My daughter passed due to her own hard work and determination.
My son, not so driven didn't.
Both of my children went to the schools that best suited their own individual abilities.
Not once was our financial situation relevant to their years at either school.
Do you care to provide any evidence whatsoever to support your claims.

uncorroborated life stories are not of use when I have provided a wealth of information to support what I have said.

what you have said may or may not be true. It may be a fair reflection of your circumstances and experiences. It may be nothing more then a transcendental argument (see above) to muddy the waters and distract from the truth.

All evidence suggests that grammar schools impede social mobility, not encourage it. Grammar schools are free to exclusively brand themselves and use conceptual social control measures. They are state funded but set themselves apart and do little if not nothing for the lives and life chances of a vast majority of children in our society.

provide one single shred of evidence to support you claim and i may take you more seriously.
[quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools... http://www.explorele arning.co.uk/vebo/in dex.php?idPage=656 Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools. My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit.. Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already. If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools' A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE. The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.[/p][/quote]Well it didn't identify any affluence on my part (Unless my husband had secretly won the lottery) My daughter passed due to her own hard work and determination. My son, not so driven didn't. Both of my children went to the schools that best suited their own individual abilities. Not once was our financial situation relevant to their years at either school.[/p][/quote]Do you care to provide any evidence whatsoever to support your claims. uncorroborated life stories are not of use when I have provided a wealth of information to support what I have said. what you have said may or may not be true. It may be a fair reflection of your circumstances and experiences. It may be nothing more then a transcendental argument (see above) to muddy the waters and distract from the truth. All evidence suggests that grammar schools impede social mobility, not encourage it. Grammar schools are free to exclusively brand themselves and use conceptual social control measures. They are state funded but set themselves apart and do little if not nothing for the lives and life chances of a vast majority of children in our society. provide one single shred of evidence to support you claim and i may take you more seriously. jayman

9:03pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

Jayman you are slightly crazy. Like the lady said and like i said there are no fiscal or social components to the 11 plus or grammar schools whatsoever. It is you who has a fundamental misunderstanding of the way the world works. A man who is clever enough to become a professional is likely to marry a wife with a similar level of intelligence and produce children equally blessed with brains who will also go to high school and do well in life and raise more children who are going to do well and so on. The words envy and politics spring to mind.
Jayman you are slightly crazy. Like the lady said and like i said there are no fiscal or social components to the 11 plus or grammar schools whatsoever. It is you who has a fundamental misunderstanding of the way the world works. A man who is clever enough to become a professional is likely to marry a wife with a similar level of intelligence and produce children equally blessed with brains who will also go to high school and do well in life and raise more children who are going to do well and so on. The words envy and politics spring to mind. Fred the Phoenix

9:22pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

Jayman, just for your benefit I have copied my previous post below ...
.
I can't believe some of the rubbish I have read on this story. Half of my extended family went to Grammar Schools the other half to Secondary Moderns, or whatever they call them these days and there are only two differences between the different types of schools.
.
1) To get into the Grammar you have to pass a test, if you pass you go if you fail you don't. Easy.
.
2) The Grammars EXPECT more from their kids, two almost identical kids, one just passed his 11 plus, the other failed but one has been pushed into doing really well and got a place in London Uni, the one who went to a Secondary School was not pushed at all, and he is doing A level retakes at Southend College. Grammars, three hours homework a night, Secondary schools NO homework ever.
.
As for people commenting on money, that is total tosh, doesn't cost a penny more to go to Grammar and no one there is interested in how much your parents earn, all that matters is whether you could pass the exam to get in there.
.
When I was at school and when my children were at school we were streamed by ability so that the children who were better at any given subject were all lumped together whilst those who were not so good were also together. Ah but they're not supposed to do that now are they, they have to treat them as if they are all the same, except they're not and as far as I can see all that has achieved is to drag standards down.
.
If we bow to your politics of envy all we will achieve is worse qualified Doctors, Dentists, etc etc. Think on that Jayman.
Jayman, just for your benefit I have copied my previous post below ... . I can't believe some of the rubbish I have read on this story. Half of my extended family went to Grammar Schools the other half to Secondary Moderns, or whatever they call them these days and there are only two differences between the different types of schools. . 1) To get into the Grammar you have to pass a test, if you pass you go if you fail you don't. Easy. . 2) The Grammars EXPECT more from their kids, two almost identical kids, one just passed his 11 plus, the other failed but one has been pushed into doing really well and got a place in London Uni, the one who went to a Secondary School was not pushed at all, and he is doing A level retakes at Southend College. Grammars, three hours homework a night, Secondary schools NO homework ever. . As for people commenting on money, that is total tosh, doesn't cost a penny more to go to Grammar and no one there is interested in how much your parents earn, all that matters is whether you could pass the exam to get in there. . When I was at school and when my children were at school we were streamed by ability so that the children who were better at any given subject were all lumped together whilst those who were not so good were also together. Ah but they're not supposed to do that now are they, they have to treat them as if they are all the same, except they're not and as far as I can see all that has achieved is to drag standards down. . If we bow to your politics of envy all we will achieve is worse qualified Doctors, Dentists, etc etc. Think on that Jayman. Fred the Phoenix

10:47pm Sat 7 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

averages are all that matter in jayman's head. anyone who outperforms must be handicapped because that might be construed as affluence (???) which is clearly a capital offence.

again the key question that needs answering is how is a maths and verbal reasoning test unscientific? expect plenty of silence and or ducking.
averages are all that matter in jayman's head. anyone who outperforms must be handicapped because that might be construed as affluence (???) which is clearly a capital offence. again the key question that needs answering is how is a maths and verbal reasoning test unscientific? expect plenty of silence and or ducking. profondo asbo

11:44pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

The 11 plus has always been essentially an IQ test, not so much a test of specific knowledge, more a test of potential. Twenty or thirty years ago the IQ test was ridiculed by a study which received wide publicity but which was later found to be fraudulent as it was based on fabricated evidence, but that didn't receive so much publicity (you wouldn't have read about that in the Sun Jayman). The reality is that the modern IQ test and the 11 plus are still just about the best way, almost the only way, we can pick the pupils with the potential to do well in a more demanding educational environment. What I think is a shame is that the boys who will be carpenters and plumbers and motor mechanics can'r spend more time doing that rather than trying to teach them algebra which they will never use in their lives.
The 11 plus has always been essentially an IQ test, not so much a test of specific knowledge, more a test of potential. Twenty or thirty years ago the IQ test was ridiculed by a study which received wide publicity but which was later found to be fraudulent as it was based on fabricated evidence, but that didn't receive so much publicity (you wouldn't have read about that in the Sun Jayman). The reality is that the modern IQ test and the 11 plus are still just about the best way, almost the only way, we can pick the pupils with the potential to do well in a more demanding educational environment. What I think is a shame is that the boys who will be carpenters and plumbers and motor mechanics can'r spend more time doing that rather than trying to teach them algebra which they will never use in their lives. Fred the Phoenix

1:52pm Sun 8 Dec 13

stopmoaning1 says...

jayman wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools...

http://www.explorele



arning.co.uk/vebo/in



dex.php?idPage=656

Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools.

My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit..

Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already.

If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools'

A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE.

The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.
Well it didn't identify any affluence on my part (Unless my husband had secretly won the lottery)
My daughter passed due to her own hard work and determination.
My son, not so driven didn't.
Both of my children went to the schools that best suited their own individual abilities.
Not once was our financial situation relevant to their years at either school.
Do you care to provide any evidence whatsoever to support your claims.

uncorroborated life stories are not of use when I have provided a wealth of information to support what I have said.

what you have said may or may not be true. It may be a fair reflection of your circumstances and experiences. It may be nothing more then a transcendental argument (see above) to muddy the waters and distract from the truth.

All evidence suggests that grammar schools impede social mobility, not encourage it. Grammar schools are free to exclusively brand themselves and use conceptual social control measures. They are state funded but set themselves apart and do little if not nothing for the lives and life chances of a vast majority of children in our society.

provide one single shred of evidence to support you claim and i may take you more seriously.
Wow Jayman, how do you manage to get around with such a big chip on your shoulder.
You come across as so blinkered in thinking I am lying and insisting I must corroborate my ‘evidence’
Well I’m sorry, but I’m not basing my argument on links to websites showing other people’s views and evidence.
The fact of the matter remains that my children went to different schools because one passed the 11+ and one didn’t.
At each school the children made many friends, some who’s parents had bigger houses and cars than us, and some who had smaller houses than us. As parents we became friends with some of the other parents. Being ‘chip free’ we never felt intimidated or socially inadequate when we were with the ‘rich people’, and I never once caught them looking down their noses at us.
Both kids have now left school with my daughter having graduated from university last year and now working in the city. My son is in his final year with a view to join the Royal Navy as an engineering Officer. Incidentally, my son, the one who didn’t pass the 11+ had to leave our ‘local comprehensive’ to do his A levels because they were not able to offer him the subjects he wanted. Care to guess where he went in order to do Maths, Physics and Chemistry? Don’t worry, I’ll tell you. WHSB, a grammar!
I apologise again for not providing links to my bank statements or to the many good friends of all backgrounds we have made through the children to corroborate my account.

Oh, and don't worry if you still can't take me more seriously. I'll live with it.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools... http://www.explorele arning.co.uk/vebo/in dex.php?idPage=656 Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools. My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit.. Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already. If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools' A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE. The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.[/p][/quote]Well it didn't identify any affluence on my part (Unless my husband had secretly won the lottery) My daughter passed due to her own hard work and determination. My son, not so driven didn't. Both of my children went to the schools that best suited their own individual abilities. Not once was our financial situation relevant to their years at either school.[/p][/quote]Do you care to provide any evidence whatsoever to support your claims. uncorroborated life stories are not of use when I have provided a wealth of information to support what I have said. what you have said may or may not be true. It may be a fair reflection of your circumstances and experiences. It may be nothing more then a transcendental argument (see above) to muddy the waters and distract from the truth. All evidence suggests that grammar schools impede social mobility, not encourage it. Grammar schools are free to exclusively brand themselves and use conceptual social control measures. They are state funded but set themselves apart and do little if not nothing for the lives and life chances of a vast majority of children in our society. provide one single shred of evidence to support you claim and i may take you more seriously.[/p][/quote]Wow Jayman, how do you manage to get around with such a big chip on your shoulder. You come across as so blinkered in thinking I am lying and insisting I must corroborate my ‘evidence’ Well I’m sorry, but I’m not basing my argument on links to websites showing other people’s views and evidence. The fact of the matter remains that my children went to different schools because one passed the 11+ and one didn’t. At each school the children made many friends, some who’s parents had bigger houses and cars than us, and some who had smaller houses than us. As parents we became friends with some of the other parents. Being ‘chip free’ we never felt intimidated or socially inadequate when we were with the ‘rich people’, and I never once caught them looking down their noses at us. Both kids have now left school with my daughter having graduated from university last year and now working in the city. My son is in his final year with a view to join the Royal Navy as an engineering Officer. Incidentally, my son, the one who didn’t pass the 11+ had to leave our ‘local comprehensive’ to do his A levels because they were not able to offer him the subjects he wanted. Care to guess where he went in order to do Maths, Physics and Chemistry? Don’t worry, I’ll tell you. WHSB, a grammar! I apologise again for not providing links to my bank statements or to the many good friends of all backgrounds we have made through the children to corroborate my account. Oh, and don't worry if you still can't take me more seriously. I'll live with it. stopmoaning1

5:17pm Sun 8 Dec 13

jayman says...

stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools...

http://www.explorele




arning.co.uk/vebo/in




dex.php?idPage=656

Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools.

My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit..

Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already.

If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools'

A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE.

The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.
Well it didn't identify any affluence on my part (Unless my husband had secretly won the lottery)
My daughter passed due to her own hard work and determination.
My son, not so driven didn't.
Both of my children went to the schools that best suited their own individual abilities.
Not once was our financial situation relevant to their years at either school.
Do you care to provide any evidence whatsoever to support your claims.

uncorroborated life stories are not of use when I have provided a wealth of information to support what I have said.

what you have said may or may not be true. It may be a fair reflection of your circumstances and experiences. It may be nothing more then a transcendental argument (see above) to muddy the waters and distract from the truth.

All evidence suggests that grammar schools impede social mobility, not encourage it. Grammar schools are free to exclusively brand themselves and use conceptual social control measures. They are state funded but set themselves apart and do little if not nothing for the lives and life chances of a vast majority of children in our society.

provide one single shred of evidence to support you claim and i may take you more seriously.
Wow Jayman, how do you manage to get around with such a big chip on your shoulder.
You come across as so blinkered in thinking I am lying and insisting I must corroborate my ‘evidence’
Well I’m sorry, but I’m not basing my argument on links to websites showing other people’s views and evidence.
The fact of the matter remains that my children went to different schools because one passed the 11+ and one didn’t.
At each school the children made many friends, some who’s parents had bigger houses and cars than us, and some who had smaller houses than us. As parents we became friends with some of the other parents. Being ‘chip free’ we never felt intimidated or socially inadequate when we were with the ‘rich people’, and I never once caught them looking down their noses at us.
Both kids have now left school with my daughter having graduated from university last year and now working in the city. My son is in his final year with a view to join the Royal Navy as an engineering Officer. Incidentally, my son, the one who didn’t pass the 11+ had to leave our ‘local comprehensive’ to do his A levels because they were not able to offer him the subjects he wanted. Care to guess where he went in order to do Maths, Physics and Chemistry? Don’t worry, I’ll tell you. WHSB, a grammar!
I apologise again for not providing links to my bank statements or to the many good friends of all backgrounds we have made through the children to corroborate my account.

Oh, and don't worry if you still can't take me more seriously. I'll live with it.
Thanks for that..

I suppose that pragmatic argument + chip on shoulder, for you..

You possibly tried to find independent research that supported your view that grammar schools where a positive driver in social mobility, perhaps you goggled 'grammar+school"low income"+social mobility'

you have then decided to repeat yourself in the same manner by using your own example of experience.

There is an ex -Bullingdon club boy who believes that a revival of grammar schools would be a good thing. This chap is also famous for not using 'evidence' and being a bit hard to believe. His name is Boris..
[quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools... http://www.explorele arning.co.uk/vebo/in dex.php?idPage=656 Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools. My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit.. Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already. If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools' A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE. The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.[/p][/quote]Well it didn't identify any affluence on my part (Unless my husband had secretly won the lottery) My daughter passed due to her own hard work and determination. My son, not so driven didn't. Both of my children went to the schools that best suited their own individual abilities. Not once was our financial situation relevant to their years at either school.[/p][/quote]Do you care to provide any evidence whatsoever to support your claims. uncorroborated life stories are not of use when I have provided a wealth of information to support what I have said. what you have said may or may not be true. It may be a fair reflection of your circumstances and experiences. It may be nothing more then a transcendental argument (see above) to muddy the waters and distract from the truth. All evidence suggests that grammar schools impede social mobility, not encourage it. Grammar schools are free to exclusively brand themselves and use conceptual social control measures. They are state funded but set themselves apart and do little if not nothing for the lives and life chances of a vast majority of children in our society. provide one single shred of evidence to support you claim and i may take you more seriously.[/p][/quote]Wow Jayman, how do you manage to get around with such a big chip on your shoulder. You come across as so blinkered in thinking I am lying and insisting I must corroborate my ‘evidence’ Well I’m sorry, but I’m not basing my argument on links to websites showing other people’s views and evidence. The fact of the matter remains that my children went to different schools because one passed the 11+ and one didn’t. At each school the children made many friends, some who’s parents had bigger houses and cars than us, and some who had smaller houses than us. As parents we became friends with some of the other parents. Being ‘chip free’ we never felt intimidated or socially inadequate when we were with the ‘rich people’, and I never once caught them looking down their noses at us. Both kids have now left school with my daughter having graduated from university last year and now working in the city. My son is in his final year with a view to join the Royal Navy as an engineering Officer. Incidentally, my son, the one who didn’t pass the 11+ had to leave our ‘local comprehensive’ to do his A levels because they were not able to offer him the subjects he wanted. Care to guess where he went in order to do Maths, Physics and Chemistry? Don’t worry, I’ll tell you. WHSB, a grammar! I apologise again for not providing links to my bank statements or to the many good friends of all backgrounds we have made through the children to corroborate my account. Oh, and don't worry if you still can't take me more seriously. I'll live with it.[/p][/quote]Thanks for that.. I suppose that pragmatic argument + chip on shoulder, for you.. You possibly tried to find independent research that supported your view that grammar schools where a positive driver in social mobility, perhaps you goggled 'grammar+school"low income"+social mobility' you have then decided to repeat yourself in the same manner by using your own example of experience. There is an ex -Bullingdon club boy who believes that a revival of grammar schools would be a good thing. This chap is also famous for not using 'evidence' and being a bit hard to believe. His name is Boris.. jayman

5:42pm Sun 8 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

You are still off with the fairies Jayman, that ex Bullingdon club member is standing up for grammar schools because one of the areas that is suffering dearly from past closures of grammar schools is politics. Twenty years ago we had loads of ex Grammar school boys in Westminster, now they are a dying breed and the majority of MPs are coming from the public school system. That is because Secondary schools are just not good enough at pushing the brightest to do well and one consequence is that the top professions are once again becoming dominated by ex public school pupils, just like they were before the war, before we invented grammar schools. That is your fault, you and your ilk and your politics of envy has already made the country LESS equal that it was, not more equal. You should hang your head in shame.
You are still off with the fairies Jayman, that ex Bullingdon club member is standing up for grammar schools because one of the areas that is suffering dearly from past closures of grammar schools is politics. Twenty years ago we had loads of ex Grammar school boys in Westminster, now they are a dying breed and the majority of MPs are coming from the public school system. That is because Secondary schools are just not good enough at pushing the brightest to do well and one consequence is that the top professions are once again becoming dominated by ex public school pupils, just like they were before the war, before we invented grammar schools. That is your fault, you and your ilk and your politics of envy has already made the country LESS equal that it was, not more equal. You should hang your head in shame. Fred the Phoenix

5:59pm Sun 8 Dec 13

stopmoaning1 says...

jayman wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools...

http://www.explorele





arning.co.uk/vebo/in





dex.php?idPage=656

Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools.

My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit..

Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already.

If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools'

A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE.

The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.
Well it didn't identify any affluence on my part (Unless my husband had secretly won the lottery)
My daughter passed due to her own hard work and determination.
My son, not so driven didn't.
Both of my children went to the schools that best suited their own individual abilities.
Not once was our financial situation relevant to their years at either school.
Do you care to provide any evidence whatsoever to support your claims.

uncorroborated life stories are not of use when I have provided a wealth of information to support what I have said.

what you have said may or may not be true. It may be a fair reflection of your circumstances and experiences. It may be nothing more then a transcendental argument (see above) to muddy the waters and distract from the truth.

All evidence suggests that grammar schools impede social mobility, not encourage it. Grammar schools are free to exclusively brand themselves and use conceptual social control measures. They are state funded but set themselves apart and do little if not nothing for the lives and life chances of a vast majority of children in our society.

provide one single shred of evidence to support you claim and i may take you more seriously.
Wow Jayman, how do you manage to get around with such a big chip on your shoulder.
You come across as so blinkered in thinking I am lying and insisting I must corroborate my ‘evidence’
Well I’m sorry, but I’m not basing my argument on links to websites showing other people’s views and evidence.
The fact of the matter remains that my children went to different schools because one passed the 11+ and one didn’t.
At each school the children made many friends, some who’s parents had bigger houses and cars than us, and some who had smaller houses than us. As parents we became friends with some of the other parents. Being ‘chip free’ we never felt intimidated or socially inadequate when we were with the ‘rich people’, and I never once caught them looking down their noses at us.
Both kids have now left school with my daughter having graduated from university last year and now working in the city. My son is in his final year with a view to join the Royal Navy as an engineering Officer. Incidentally, my son, the one who didn’t pass the 11+ had to leave our ‘local comprehensive’ to do his A levels because they were not able to offer him the subjects he wanted. Care to guess where he went in order to do Maths, Physics and Chemistry? Don’t worry, I’ll tell you. WHSB, a grammar!
I apologise again for not providing links to my bank statements or to the many good friends of all backgrounds we have made through the children to corroborate my account.

Oh, and don't worry if you still can't take me more seriously. I'll live with it.
Thanks for that..

I suppose that pragmatic argument + chip on shoulder, for you..

You possibly tried to find independent research that supported your view that grammar schools where a positive driver in social mobility, perhaps you goggled 'grammar+school&quot
;low income"+social mobility'

you have then decided to repeat yourself in the same manner by using your own example of experience.

There is an ex -Bullingdon club boy who believes that a revival of grammar schools would be a good thing. This chap is also famous for not using 'evidence' and being a bit hard to believe. His name is Boris..
No I haven't Googled anything searching for links to add to my comments. My view is based on my own experience, not some ranting website telling me what to think.
I can't think of any better evidence than personal experience.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: Grammar schools have become the one thing that they where meant to correct. Elite institutions for those who can afford it by way of private tuition and extra fees that are associated with grammar schools... http://www.explorele arning.co.uk/vebo/in dex.php?idPage=656 Grammar schools need to go a long way to prove that they are inclusive to all backgrounds and income brackets. Grammar school institutions are keen to remain silent on issues regarding the link between wealth and accesses to the schools. My guess is that the councils em, 'investigation' will conclude that there is nothing more that the council can do to address this scandalous imbalance. Grammar schools will come out squeaky clean and our hard pressed primary head teachers will take the hit.. Basically 'smoke and mirrors'. Loaded consultations and investigations that produce nothing that we all did not know already. If the council want to know why we have a problem, a good place to start would not be to consider 'why are not enough local children attending grammar school' but 'why do we have grammar schools' A faceless grammar school administrative body can set the criteria for the 11+. This however should be under the direct control of the DfE. The 11+ exam itself has been dismissed as unscientific as a means of identifying excellence, however, It is a excellent measure of identifying affluence.[/p][/quote]Well it didn't identify any affluence on my part (Unless my husband had secretly won the lottery) My daughter passed due to her own hard work and determination. My son, not so driven didn't. Both of my children went to the schools that best suited their own individual abilities. Not once was our financial situation relevant to their years at either school.[/p][/quote]Do you care to provide any evidence whatsoever to support your claims. uncorroborated life stories are not of use when I have provided a wealth of information to support what I have said. what you have said may or may not be true. It may be a fair reflection of your circumstances and experiences. It may be nothing more then a transcendental argument (see above) to muddy the waters and distract from the truth. All evidence suggests that grammar schools impede social mobility, not encourage it. Grammar schools are free to exclusively brand themselves and use conceptual social control measures. They are state funded but set themselves apart and do little if not nothing for the lives and life chances of a vast majority of children in our society. provide one single shred of evidence to support you claim and i may take you more seriously.[/p][/quote]Wow Jayman, how do you manage to get around with such a big chip on your shoulder. You come across as so blinkered in thinking I am lying and insisting I must corroborate my ‘evidence’ Well I’m sorry, but I’m not basing my argument on links to websites showing other people’s views and evidence. The fact of the matter remains that my children went to different schools because one passed the 11+ and one didn’t. At each school the children made many friends, some who’s parents had bigger houses and cars than us, and some who had smaller houses than us. As parents we became friends with some of the other parents. Being ‘chip free’ we never felt intimidated or socially inadequate when we were with the ‘rich people’, and I never once caught them looking down their noses at us. Both kids have now left school with my daughter having graduated from university last year and now working in the city. My son is in his final year with a view to join the Royal Navy as an engineering Officer. Incidentally, my son, the one who didn’t pass the 11+ had to leave our ‘local comprehensive’ to do his A levels because they were not able to offer him the subjects he wanted. Care to guess where he went in order to do Maths, Physics and Chemistry? Don’t worry, I’ll tell you. WHSB, a grammar! I apologise again for not providing links to my bank statements or to the many good friends of all backgrounds we have made through the children to corroborate my account. Oh, and don't worry if you still can't take me more seriously. I'll live with it.[/p][/quote]Thanks for that.. I suppose that pragmatic argument + chip on shoulder, for you.. You possibly tried to find independent research that supported your view that grammar schools where a positive driver in social mobility, perhaps you goggled 'grammar+school" ;low income"+social mobility' you have then decided to repeat yourself in the same manner by using your own example of experience. There is an ex -Bullingdon club boy who believes that a revival of grammar schools would be a good thing. This chap is also famous for not using 'evidence' and being a bit hard to believe. His name is Boris..[/p][/quote]No I haven't Googled anything searching for links to add to my comments. My view is based on my own experience, not some ranting website telling me what to think. I can't think of any better evidence than personal experience. stopmoaning1

7:14pm Sun 8 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

Ditto, take no notice of old Jayman, classic example of the politics of envy!!!
Ditto, take no notice of old Jayman, classic example of the politics of envy!!! Fred the Phoenix

5:22pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Metta says...

Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth' with all your assertions of evidence. You are merely expressing an opinion, just like the other people here. Our opinions are generally formed by our first hand experience of life more than 'official' surveys and research (which can so easily be biased) so it is natural to share our own personal stories. Why be so dismissive of them?
I have a story too. I failed the 11+ and went to a comp. I didn't achieve any great academic success and my parents didn't seem to particularly expect me to. Working class family and no great aspirations to anything else. I wanted better for my daughter so I encouraged her to meet her full potential. She passed her 11+, went to WHSG, went to Uni (the first ever in my family). I'm proud of her and indebted to her teachers who shared my aspirations for my daughter. I don't really give a hoot for social mobility but I care about choice. My daughter now has greater choice. Income simply didn't come into the equation.
Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth' with all your assertions of evidence. You are merely expressing an opinion, just like the other people here. Our opinions are generally formed by our first hand experience of life more than 'official' surveys and research (which can so easily be biased) so it is natural to share our own personal stories. Why be so dismissive of them? I have a story too. I failed the 11+ and went to a comp. I didn't achieve any great academic success and my parents didn't seem to particularly expect me to. Working class family and no great aspirations to anything else. I wanted better for my daughter so I encouraged her to meet her full potential. She passed her 11+, went to WHSG, went to Uni (the first ever in my family). I'm proud of her and indebted to her teachers who shared my aspirations for my daughter. I don't really give a hoot for social mobility but I care about choice. My daughter now has greater choice. Income simply didn't come into the equation. Metta

7:56pm Mon 9 Dec 13

jayman says...

Metta wrote:
Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth' with all your assertions of evidence. You are merely expressing an opinion, just like the other people here. Our opinions are generally formed by our first hand experience of life more than 'official' surveys and research (which can so easily be biased) so it is natural to share our own personal stories. Why be so dismissive of them?
I have a story too. I failed the 11+ and went to a comp. I didn't achieve any great academic success and my parents didn't seem to particularly expect me to. Working class family and no great aspirations to anything else. I wanted better for my daughter so I encouraged her to meet her full potential. She passed her 11+, went to WHSG, went to Uni (the first ever in my family). I'm proud of her and indebted to her teachers who shared my aspirations for my daughter. I don't really give a hoot for social mobility but I care about choice. My daughter now has greater choice. Income simply didn't come into the equation.
"Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth'"

this is a report held by the house of commons library.

http://www.parliamen
t.uk/briefing-papers
/SN01398/grammar-sch
ool-statistics

here is a report by the Sutton trust. The report sets out a series of recommendations for grammar school socio-economic inclusion.

http://www.suttontru
st.com/our-work/rese
arch/item/access-to-
grammar-schools-for-
disadvantaged-pupils
/

alas..

not unsubstantiated personal stories but objective truth...
[quote][p][bold]Metta[/bold] wrote: Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth' with all your assertions of evidence. You are merely expressing an opinion, just like the other people here. Our opinions are generally formed by our first hand experience of life more than 'official' surveys and research (which can so easily be biased) so it is natural to share our own personal stories. Why be so dismissive of them? I have a story too. I failed the 11+ and went to a comp. I didn't achieve any great academic success and my parents didn't seem to particularly expect me to. Working class family and no great aspirations to anything else. I wanted better for my daughter so I encouraged her to meet her full potential. She passed her 11+, went to WHSG, went to Uni (the first ever in my family). I'm proud of her and indebted to her teachers who shared my aspirations for my daughter. I don't really give a hoot for social mobility but I care about choice. My daughter now has greater choice. Income simply didn't come into the equation.[/p][/quote]"Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth'" this is a report held by the house of commons library. http://www.parliamen t.uk/briefing-papers /SN01398/grammar-sch ool-statistics here is a report by the Sutton trust. The report sets out a series of recommendations for grammar school socio-economic inclusion. http://www.suttontru st.com/our-work/rese arch/item/access-to- grammar-schools-for- disadvantaged-pupils / alas.. not unsubstantiated personal stories but objective truth... jayman

9:35pm Mon 9 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

jayman wrote:
Metta wrote:
Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth' with all your assertions of evidence. You are merely expressing an opinion, just like the other people here. Our opinions are generally formed by our first hand experience of life more than 'official' surveys and research (which can so easily be biased) so it is natural to share our own personal stories. Why be so dismissive of them?
I have a story too. I failed the 11+ and went to a comp. I didn't achieve any great academic success and my parents didn't seem to particularly expect me to. Working class family and no great aspirations to anything else. I wanted better for my daughter so I encouraged her to meet her full potential. She passed her 11+, went to WHSG, went to Uni (the first ever in my family). I'm proud of her and indebted to her teachers who shared my aspirations for my daughter. I don't really give a hoot for social mobility but I care about choice. My daughter now has greater choice. Income simply didn't come into the equation.
"Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth'"

this is a report held by the house of commons library.

http://www.parliamen

t.uk/briefing-papers

/SN01398/grammar-sch

ool-statistics

here is a report by the Sutton trust. The report sets out a series of recommendations for grammar school socio-economic inclusion.

http://www.suttontru

st.com/our-work/rese

arch/item/access-to-

grammar-schools-for-

disadvantaged-pupils

/

alas..

not unsubstantiated personal stories but objective truth...
oh dear. are you the only one who doesn't see it?

must....google....cu
t...paste
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Metta[/bold] wrote: Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth' with all your assertions of evidence. You are merely expressing an opinion, just like the other people here. Our opinions are generally formed by our first hand experience of life more than 'official' surveys and research (which can so easily be biased) so it is natural to share our own personal stories. Why be so dismissive of them? I have a story too. I failed the 11+ and went to a comp. I didn't achieve any great academic success and my parents didn't seem to particularly expect me to. Working class family and no great aspirations to anything else. I wanted better for my daughter so I encouraged her to meet her full potential. She passed her 11+, went to WHSG, went to Uni (the first ever in my family). I'm proud of her and indebted to her teachers who shared my aspirations for my daughter. I don't really give a hoot for social mobility but I care about choice. My daughter now has greater choice. Income simply didn't come into the equation.[/p][/quote]"Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth'" this is a report held by the house of commons library. http://www.parliamen t.uk/briefing-papers /SN01398/grammar-sch ool-statistics here is a report by the Sutton trust. The report sets out a series of recommendations for grammar school socio-economic inclusion. http://www.suttontru st.com/our-work/rese arch/item/access-to- grammar-schools-for- disadvantaged-pupils / alas.. not unsubstantiated personal stories but objective truth...[/p][/quote]oh dear. are you the only one who doesn't see it? must....google....cu t...paste profondo asbo

11:06pm Mon 9 Dec 13

jayman says...

profondo asbo wrote:
jayman wrote:
Metta wrote:
Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth' with all your assertions of evidence. You are merely expressing an opinion, just like the other people here. Our opinions are generally formed by our first hand experience of life more than 'official' surveys and research (which can so easily be biased) so it is natural to share our own personal stories. Why be so dismissive of them?
I have a story too. I failed the 11+ and went to a comp. I didn't achieve any great academic success and my parents didn't seem to particularly expect me to. Working class family and no great aspirations to anything else. I wanted better for my daughter so I encouraged her to meet her full potential. She passed her 11+, went to WHSG, went to Uni (the first ever in my family). I'm proud of her and indebted to her teachers who shared my aspirations for my daughter. I don't really give a hoot for social mobility but I care about choice. My daughter now has greater choice. Income simply didn't come into the equation.
"Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth'"

this is a report held by the house of commons library.

http://www.parliamen


t.uk/briefing-papers


/SN01398/grammar-sch


ool-statistics

here is a report by the Sutton trust. The report sets out a series of recommendations for grammar school socio-economic inclusion.

http://www.suttontru


st.com/our-work/rese


arch/item/access-to-


grammar-schools-for-


disadvantaged-pupils


/

alas..

not unsubstantiated personal stories but objective truth...
oh dear. are you the only one who doesn't see it?

must....google....cu

t...paste
fair is fair asbo. I have provided legitimate information. using the internet is not always a threat you know.

Reliable Information is freely available on-line. There is a wealth of free-of-charge knowledge, data, statistics and scholarly notes on the internet. Its available for everyone at any time regardless of social status or cost of the device used to access it. with information, we all become equal.

on second thoughts! I can see why you treat such evidence put before you as a threat.
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Metta[/bold] wrote: Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth' with all your assertions of evidence. You are merely expressing an opinion, just like the other people here. Our opinions are generally formed by our first hand experience of life more than 'official' surveys and research (which can so easily be biased) so it is natural to share our own personal stories. Why be so dismissive of them? I have a story too. I failed the 11+ and went to a comp. I didn't achieve any great academic success and my parents didn't seem to particularly expect me to. Working class family and no great aspirations to anything else. I wanted better for my daughter so I encouraged her to meet her full potential. She passed her 11+, went to WHSG, went to Uni (the first ever in my family). I'm proud of her and indebted to her teachers who shared my aspirations for my daughter. I don't really give a hoot for social mobility but I care about choice. My daughter now has greater choice. Income simply didn't come into the equation.[/p][/quote]"Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth'" this is a report held by the house of commons library. http://www.parliamen t.uk/briefing-papers /SN01398/grammar-sch ool-statistics here is a report by the Sutton trust. The report sets out a series of recommendations for grammar school socio-economic inclusion. http://www.suttontru st.com/our-work/rese arch/item/access-to- grammar-schools-for- disadvantaged-pupils / alas.. not unsubstantiated personal stories but objective truth...[/p][/quote]oh dear. are you the only one who doesn't see it? must....google....cu t...paste[/p][/quote]fair is fair asbo. I have provided legitimate information. using the internet is not always a threat you know. Reliable Information is freely available on-line. There is a wealth of free-of-charge knowledge, data, statistics and scholarly notes on the internet. Its available for everyone at any time regardless of social status or cost of the device used to access it. with information, we all become equal. on second thoughts! I can see why you treat such evidence put before you as a threat. jayman

8:13am Tue 10 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

yes let's write off the personal opinions of everyone you disagree with and fall back on that ivory tower civil servant data.
yes let's write off the personal opinions of everyone you disagree with and fall back on that ivory tower civil servant data. profondo asbo

9:10am Tue 10 Dec 13

stopmoaning1 says...

jayman wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
jayman wrote:
Metta wrote:
Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth' with all your assertions of evidence. You are merely expressing an opinion, just like the other people here. Our opinions are generally formed by our first hand experience of life more than 'official' surveys and research (which can so easily be biased) so it is natural to share our own personal stories. Why be so dismissive of them?
I have a story too. I failed the 11+ and went to a comp. I didn't achieve any great academic success and my parents didn't seem to particularly expect me to. Working class family and no great aspirations to anything else. I wanted better for my daughter so I encouraged her to meet her full potential. She passed her 11+, went to WHSG, went to Uni (the first ever in my family). I'm proud of her and indebted to her teachers who shared my aspirations for my daughter. I don't really give a hoot for social mobility but I care about choice. My daughter now has greater choice. Income simply didn't come into the equation.
"Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth'"

this is a report held by the house of commons library.

http://www.parliamen



t.uk/briefing-papers



/SN01398/grammar-sch



ool-statistics

here is a report by the Sutton trust. The report sets out a series of recommendations for grammar school socio-economic inclusion.

http://www.suttontru



st.com/our-work/rese



arch/item/access-to-



grammar-schools-for-



disadvantaged-pupils



/

alas..

not unsubstantiated personal stories but objective truth...
oh dear. are you the only one who doesn't see it?

must....google....cu


t...paste
fair is fair asbo. I have provided legitimate information. using the internet is not always a threat you know.

Reliable Information is freely available on-line. There is a wealth of free-of-charge knowledge, data, statistics and scholarly notes on the internet. Its available for everyone at any time regardless of social status or cost of the device used to access it. with information, we all become equal.

on second thoughts! I can see why you treat such evidence put before you as a threat.
So you are prepared to blatantly disregard the accounts of people who have actually USED the system.
You have decided that you don't, for what ever reason, like the grammar school system. Now instead of basing you dislike on a personal experience, perhaps you felt intimidated by all the affluent parents and their spoilt little rich kids, you seem to base you entire dislike on 'evidence' you have found on line, that you have now decided is fact, and that anybody who has a good personal experience must be lying.
I must see if I can find that link where I saw that the sky is green!
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Metta[/bold] wrote: Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth' with all your assertions of evidence. You are merely expressing an opinion, just like the other people here. Our opinions are generally formed by our first hand experience of life more than 'official' surveys and research (which can so easily be biased) so it is natural to share our own personal stories. Why be so dismissive of them? I have a story too. I failed the 11+ and went to a comp. I didn't achieve any great academic success and my parents didn't seem to particularly expect me to. Working class family and no great aspirations to anything else. I wanted better for my daughter so I encouraged her to meet her full potential. She passed her 11+, went to WHSG, went to Uni (the first ever in my family). I'm proud of her and indebted to her teachers who shared my aspirations for my daughter. I don't really give a hoot for social mobility but I care about choice. My daughter now has greater choice. Income simply didn't come into the equation.[/p][/quote]"Oh Jayman. You are so convinced you are expressing some kind of objective 'truth'" this is a report held by the house of commons library. http://www.parliamen t.uk/briefing-papers /SN01398/grammar-sch ool-statistics here is a report by the Sutton trust. The report sets out a series of recommendations for grammar school socio-economic inclusion. http://www.suttontru st.com/our-work/rese arch/item/access-to- grammar-schools-for- disadvantaged-pupils / alas.. not unsubstantiated personal stories but objective truth...[/p][/quote]oh dear. are you the only one who doesn't see it? must....google....cu t...paste[/p][/quote]fair is fair asbo. I have provided legitimate information. using the internet is not always a threat you know. Reliable Information is freely available on-line. There is a wealth of free-of-charge knowledge, data, statistics and scholarly notes on the internet. Its available for everyone at any time regardless of social status or cost of the device used to access it. with information, we all become equal. on second thoughts! I can see why you treat such evidence put before you as a threat.[/p][/quote]So you are prepared to blatantly disregard the accounts of people who have actually USED the system. You have decided that you don't, for what ever reason, like the grammar school system. Now instead of basing you dislike on a personal experience, perhaps you felt intimidated by all the affluent parents and their spoilt little rich kids, you seem to base you entire dislike on 'evidence' you have found on line, that you have now decided is fact, and that anybody who has a good personal experience must be lying. I must see if I can find that link where I saw that the sky is green! stopmoaning1

9:29am Tue 10 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

..and they faked the moon landings and the Queen is an alien lizard.
.
Get real Jayman, income has no bearing whatsoever on whether little johnny passes his 11 plus and where he goes to school except in the sense I have already explained to you - that smart successful parents tend to have smart successful children - if you can't or won't understand that I can only assume that you didn't pass your 11 plus and you have had a huge log on your shoulder ever since. Tough, live with it.
..and they faked the moon landings and the Queen is an alien lizard. . Get real Jayman, income has no bearing whatsoever on whether little johnny passes his 11 plus and where he goes to school except in the sense I have already explained to you - that smart successful parents tend to have smart successful children - if you can't or won't understand that I can only assume that you didn't pass your 11 plus and you have had a huge log on your shoulder ever since. Tough, live with it. Fred the Phoenix

9:33am Tue 10 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

jayman wrote:
percentage of Southend high school for boys students who are eligible for free school meals 1.6%

percentage of chase high school (only a few hundred meters from SHSFB) children who are eligible for free school meals 31.1%!

keep doing your research. the FACTS get worst with every measure..
odd that you used chase for this particular statistic. why wouldn't you have used the biggest comprehensive in the area - belfairs for your stats?

let me help you find the link.

http://schoolguide.c
o.uk/schools/belfair
s-academy
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: percentage of Southend high school for boys students who are eligible for free school meals 1.6% percentage of chase high school (only a few hundred meters from SHSFB) children who are eligible for free school meals 31.1%! keep doing your research. the FACTS get worst with every measure..[/p][/quote]odd that you used chase for this particular statistic. why wouldn't you have used the biggest comprehensive in the area - belfairs for your stats? let me help you find the link. http://schoolguide.c o.uk/schools/belfair s-academy profondo asbo

10:04am Tue 10 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

Doh, thick parents have thick kids who tend not to do so well, smart parents have smart kids who do tend to do well, it aint rocket science, unless you are Jayman who obviously wasn't good enough to pass his 11 plus and has had a huge chip on his shoulder about it ever since.
Doh, thick parents have thick kids who tend not to do so well, smart parents have smart kids who do tend to do well, it aint rocket science, unless you are Jayman who obviously wasn't good enough to pass his 11 plus and has had a huge chip on his shoulder about it ever since. Fred the Phoenix

10:22am Tue 10 Dec 13

jayman says...

Fred the Phoenix wrote:
Doh, thick parents have thick kids who tend not to do so well, smart parents have smart kids who do tend to do well, it aint rocket science, unless you are Jayman who obviously wasn't good enough to pass his 11 plus and has had a huge chip on his shoulder about it ever since.
congratulations. with the content of that text you have just destroyed any legitimate argument you may have been making.
[quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: Doh, thick parents have thick kids who tend not to do so well, smart parents have smart kids who do tend to do well, it aint rocket science, unless you are Jayman who obviously wasn't good enough to pass his 11 plus and has had a huge chip on his shoulder about it ever since.[/p][/quote]congratulations. with the content of that text you have just destroyed any legitimate argument you may have been making. jayman

10:41am Tue 10 Dec 13

jayman says...

http://schoolguide.c

o.uk/schools/belfair

s-academy

????

11.5% of the student population are eligable of free school meals
25% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last six years.

total number of pupils on roll 1310

http://www.education
.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho
ols/performance/scho
ol.pl?urn=115350
-------

chase high school

31.1% of the student population eligible for free school meals
49.4% of the student population eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years.

total number of pupils on roll 1121

http://www.education
.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho
ols/performance/scho
ol.pl?urn=131146
-----------------

Southend high school for boys (grammar)

1.6% of the student population are eligible for free school meals.
5.1% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years

total number of pupils on roll 1047

http://www.education
.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho
ols/performance/scho
ol.pl?urn=136443

--------

I await your intelligent response with great Patience...
http://schoolguide.c o.uk/schools/belfair s-academy ???? 11.5% of the student population are eligable of free school meals 25% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last six years. total number of pupils on roll 1310 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=115350 ------- chase high school 31.1% of the student population eligible for free school meals 49.4% of the student population eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years. total number of pupils on roll 1121 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=131146 ----------------- Southend high school for boys (grammar) 1.6% of the student population are eligible for free school meals. 5.1% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years total number of pupils on roll 1047 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=136443 -------- I await your intelligent response with great Patience... jayman

10:54am Tue 10 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

no explanation as to why you went with chase?
no explanation as to why you went with chase? profondo asbo

10:57am Tue 10 Dec 13

jayman says...

profondo asbo wrote:
no explanation as to why you went with chase?
proximity to chase high school. I said that in my initial text..
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: no explanation as to why you went with chase?[/p][/quote]proximity to chase high school. I said that in my initial text.. jayman

11:22am Tue 10 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

jayman wrote:
Fred the Phoenix wrote:
Doh, thick parents have thick kids who tend not to do so well, smart parents have smart kids who do tend to do well, it aint rocket science, unless you are Jayman who obviously wasn't good enough to pass his 11 plus and has had a huge chip on his shoulder about it ever since.
congratulations. with the content of that text you have just destroyed any legitimate argument you may have been making.
Er no I just stated the facts. and the fact is that the number receiving free school meals proves nothing you muppet, except that is what you would expect to see as smart parents have smart kids and they don't tent to claim free school meals. Why don't you understand how the world works?!!!
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: Doh, thick parents have thick kids who tend not to do so well, smart parents have smart kids who do tend to do well, it aint rocket science, unless you are Jayman who obviously wasn't good enough to pass his 11 plus and has had a huge chip on his shoulder about it ever since.[/p][/quote]congratulations. with the content of that text you have just destroyed any legitimate argument you may have been making.[/p][/quote]Er no I just stated the facts. and the fact is that the number receiving free school meals proves nothing you muppet, except that is what you would expect to see as smart parents have smart kids and they don't tent to claim free school meals. Why don't you understand how the world works?!!! Fred the Phoenix

11:29am Tue 10 Dec 13

jayman says...

Fred the Phoenix wrote:
jayman wrote:
Fred the Phoenix wrote:
Doh, thick parents have thick kids who tend not to do so well, smart parents have smart kids who do tend to do well, it aint rocket science, unless you are Jayman who obviously wasn't good enough to pass his 11 plus and has had a huge chip on his shoulder about it ever since.
congratulations. with the content of that text you have just destroyed any legitimate argument you may have been making.
Er no I just stated the facts. and the fact is that the number receiving free school meals proves nothing you muppet, except that is what you would expect to see as smart parents have smart kids and they don't tent to claim free school meals. Why don't you understand how the world works?!!!
you are making some bold claims. care to support your toxic and divisive opinions with any substantial evidence other then the anecdotal dross that you have just dumped on here..

The discussion should be better then this. especially with the hopes and life chances of children in mind..
[quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: Doh, thick parents have thick kids who tend not to do so well, smart parents have smart kids who do tend to do well, it aint rocket science, unless you are Jayman who obviously wasn't good enough to pass his 11 plus and has had a huge chip on his shoulder about it ever since.[/p][/quote]congratulations. with the content of that text you have just destroyed any legitimate argument you may have been making.[/p][/quote]Er no I just stated the facts. and the fact is that the number receiving free school meals proves nothing you muppet, except that is what you would expect to see as smart parents have smart kids and they don't tent to claim free school meals. Why don't you understand how the world works?!!![/p][/quote]you are making some bold claims. care to support your toxic and divisive opinions with any substantial evidence other then the anecdotal dross that you have just dumped on here.. The discussion should be better then this. especially with the hopes and life chances of children in mind.. jayman

11:39am Tue 10 Dec 13

stopmoaning1 says...

jayman wrote:
http://schoolguide.c


o.uk/schools/belfair


s-academy

????

11.5% of the student population are eligable of free school meals
25% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last six years.

total number of pupils on roll 1310

http://www.education

.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho

ols/performance/scho

ol.pl?urn=115350
-------

chase high school

31.1% of the student population eligible for free school meals
49.4% of the student population eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years.

total number of pupils on roll 1121

http://www.education

.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho

ols/performance/scho

ol.pl?urn=131146
-----------------

Southend high school for boys (grammar)

1.6% of the student population are eligible for free school meals.
5.1% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years

total number of pupils on roll 1047

http://www.education

.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho

ols/performance/scho

ol.pl?urn=136443

--------

I await your intelligent response with great Patience...
So now all is clear. As a parent, I looked to see which school was best for my own children.

Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable.

It seems that all I should have looked at was the stats showing how many children were eligible for school meals and making sure other parents didn't have bigger cars and houses than me that would have surely made me feel inadequate.

Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City.
And as for my son, well he did go the local non grammar secondary. (I am very annoyed though that some of his friends lived in bigger houses than us because I thought we were all the same!) I do so regret though that he had to go to the grammar to do his A levels because the local Secondary could not provide for his choices. But all is not yet lost with him. He's in his final year at university and hoping to join the Royal Navy as an Engineering Officer, so there's still time to knock that ambition out of him and make him realise his mistake in going to that damned grammar to do academic A levels.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: http://schoolguide.c o.uk/schools/belfair s-academy ???? 11.5% of the student population are eligable of free school meals 25% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last six years. total number of pupils on roll 1310 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=115350 ------- chase high school 31.1% of the student population eligible for free school meals 49.4% of the student population eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years. total number of pupils on roll 1121 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=131146 ----------------- Southend high school for boys (grammar) 1.6% of the student population are eligible for free school meals. 5.1% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years total number of pupils on roll 1047 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=136443 -------- I await your intelligent response with great Patience...[/p][/quote]So now all is clear. As a parent, I looked to see which school was best for my own children. Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable. It seems that all I should have looked at was the stats showing how many children were eligible for school meals and making sure other parents didn't have bigger cars and houses than me that would have surely made me feel inadequate. Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City. And as for my son, well he did go the local non grammar secondary. (I am very annoyed though that some of his friends lived in bigger houses than us because I thought we were all the same!) I do so regret though that he had to go to the grammar to do his A levels because the local Secondary could not provide for his choices. But all is not yet lost with him. He's in his final year at university and hoping to join the Royal Navy as an Engineering Officer, so there's still time to knock that ambition out of him and make him realise his mistake in going to that damned grammar to do academic A levels. stopmoaning1

11:50am Tue 10 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

what is proximate? you picked a catchment school and compared it with a selective non-catchment school. it is not an apples to apples comparison.
so ask again why chase?
what is proximate? you picked a catchment school and compared it with a selective non-catchment school. it is not an apples to apples comparison. so ask again why chase? profondo asbo

12:06pm Tue 10 Dec 13

jayman says...

stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
http://schoolguide.c



o.uk/schools/belfair



s-academy

????

11.5% of the student population are eligable of free school meals
25% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last six years.

total number of pupils on roll 1310

http://www.education


.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho


ols/performance/scho


ol.pl?urn=115350
-------

chase high school

31.1% of the student population eligible for free school meals
49.4% of the student population eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years.

total number of pupils on roll 1121

http://www.education


.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho


ols/performance/scho


ol.pl?urn=131146
-----------------

Southend high school for boys (grammar)

1.6% of the student population are eligible for free school meals.
5.1% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years

total number of pupils on roll 1047

http://www.education


.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho


ols/performance/scho


ol.pl?urn=136443

--------

I await your intelligent response with great Patience...
So now all is clear. As a parent, I looked to see which school was best for my own children.

Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable.

It seems that all I should have looked at was the stats showing how many children were eligible for school meals and making sure other parents didn't have bigger cars and houses than me that would have surely made me feel inadequate.

Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City.
And as for my son, well he did go the local non grammar secondary. (I am very annoyed though that some of his friends lived in bigger houses than us because I thought we were all the same!) I do so regret though that he had to go to the grammar to do his A levels because the local Secondary could not provide for his choices. But all is not yet lost with him. He's in his final year at university and hoping to join the Royal Navy as an Engineering Officer, so there's still time to knock that ambition out of him and make him realise his mistake in going to that damned grammar to do academic A levels.
what, em.. where do I begin..

"Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City."

well done. I am pleased your daughter did well. I am sure she is a driven individual who would have done well at any school. I am sure that there are plenty of graduates and post graduates who would strongly disagree with you though in regards to job prospects.

you also said.

"Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable."

No your not stupid. you did the right thing. If I where to suggest a different way of identifying academic excellence. A system to replace the 11+ or a re-branding of grammar schools to make them more recognisable to the wider public as a place of learning that the whole of society can stake a claim to. then guess what? your daughter still gets a place, she still gets an education and she still gets the good job..
[quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: http://schoolguide.c o.uk/schools/belfair s-academy ???? 11.5% of the student population are eligable of free school meals 25% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last six years. total number of pupils on roll 1310 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=115350 ------- chase high school 31.1% of the student population eligible for free school meals 49.4% of the student population eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years. total number of pupils on roll 1121 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=131146 ----------------- Southend high school for boys (grammar) 1.6% of the student population are eligible for free school meals. 5.1% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years total number of pupils on roll 1047 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=136443 -------- I await your intelligent response with great Patience...[/p][/quote]So now all is clear. As a parent, I looked to see which school was best for my own children. Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable. It seems that all I should have looked at was the stats showing how many children were eligible for school meals and making sure other parents didn't have bigger cars and houses than me that would have surely made me feel inadequate. Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City. And as for my son, well he did go the local non grammar secondary. (I am very annoyed though that some of his friends lived in bigger houses than us because I thought we were all the same!) I do so regret though that he had to go to the grammar to do his A levels because the local Secondary could not provide for his choices. But all is not yet lost with him. He's in his final year at university and hoping to join the Royal Navy as an Engineering Officer, so there's still time to knock that ambition out of him and make him realise his mistake in going to that damned grammar to do academic A levels.[/p][/quote]what, em.. where do I begin.. "Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City." well done. I am pleased your daughter did well. I am sure she is a driven individual who would have done well at any school. I am sure that there are plenty of graduates and post graduates who would strongly disagree with you though in regards to job prospects. you also said. "Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable." No your not stupid. you did the right thing. If I where to suggest a different way of identifying academic excellence. A system to replace the 11+ or a re-branding of grammar schools to make them more recognisable to the wider public as a place of learning that the whole of society can stake a claim to. then guess what? your daughter still gets a place, she still gets an education and she still gets the good job.. jayman

12:13pm Tue 10 Dec 13

jayman says...

profondo asbo wrote:
what is proximate? you picked a catchment school and compared it with a selective non-catchment school. it is not an apples to apples comparison.
so ask again why chase?
don't worry. I used it as a proximity example. I could have used westcliff high school for boys. the figures on the DfE website are actually worst compared to SHSFB and it would have supported my argument further. Only 1.3% of the student population are eligible for free school meals at WHSFB.
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: what is proximate? you picked a catchment school and compared it with a selective non-catchment school. it is not an apples to apples comparison. so ask again why chase?[/p][/quote]don't worry. I used it as a proximity example. I could have used westcliff high school for boys. the figures on the DfE website are actually worst compared to SHSFB and it would have supported my argument further. Only 1.3% of the student population are eligible for free school meals at WHSFB. jayman

12:17pm Tue 10 Dec 13

stopmoaning1 says...

jayman wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
http://schoolguide.c




o.uk/schools/belfair




s-academy

????

11.5% of the student population are eligable of free school meals
25% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last six years.

total number of pupils on roll 1310

http://www.education



.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho



ols/performance/scho



ol.pl?urn=115350
-------

chase high school

31.1% of the student population eligible for free school meals
49.4% of the student population eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years.

total number of pupils on roll 1121

http://www.education



.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho



ols/performance/scho



ol.pl?urn=131146
-----------------

Southend high school for boys (grammar)

1.6% of the student population are eligible for free school meals.
5.1% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years

total number of pupils on roll 1047

http://www.education



.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho



ols/performance/scho



ol.pl?urn=136443

--------

I await your intelligent response with great Patience...
So now all is clear. As a parent, I looked to see which school was best for my own children.

Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable.

It seems that all I should have looked at was the stats showing how many children were eligible for school meals and making sure other parents didn't have bigger cars and houses than me that would have surely made me feel inadequate.

Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City.
And as for my son, well he did go the local non grammar secondary. (I am very annoyed though that some of his friends lived in bigger houses than us because I thought we were all the same!) I do so regret though that he had to go to the grammar to do his A levels because the local Secondary could not provide for his choices. But all is not yet lost with him. He's in his final year at university and hoping to join the Royal Navy as an Engineering Officer, so there's still time to knock that ambition out of him and make him realise his mistake in going to that damned grammar to do academic A levels.
what, em.. where do I begin..

"Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City."

well done. I am pleased your daughter did well. I am sure she is a driven individual who would have done well at any school. I am sure that there are plenty of graduates and post graduates who would strongly disagree with you though in regards to job prospects.

you also said.

"Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable."

No your not stupid. you did the right thing. If I where to suggest a different way of identifying academic excellence. A system to replace the 11+ or a re-branding of grammar schools to make them more recognisable to the wider public as a place of learning that the whole of society can stake a claim to. then guess what? your daughter still gets a place, she still gets an education and she still gets the good job..
But the system is open to the wider public, she took the 11+ and passed so she got a place. My son took the 11+ and didn't pass so he didn't get a place.
Anybody can take the 11+
Pass = grammar school place.
Don't pass = local secondary.
How much easier can it be?
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: http://schoolguide.c o.uk/schools/belfair s-academy ???? 11.5% of the student population are eligable of free school meals 25% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last six years. total number of pupils on roll 1310 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=115350 ------- chase high school 31.1% of the student population eligible for free school meals 49.4% of the student population eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years. total number of pupils on roll 1121 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=131146 ----------------- Southend high school for boys (grammar) 1.6% of the student population are eligible for free school meals. 5.1% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years total number of pupils on roll 1047 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=136443 -------- I await your intelligent response with great Patience...[/p][/quote]So now all is clear. As a parent, I looked to see which school was best for my own children. Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable. It seems that all I should have looked at was the stats showing how many children were eligible for school meals and making sure other parents didn't have bigger cars and houses than me that would have surely made me feel inadequate. Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City. And as for my son, well he did go the local non grammar secondary. (I am very annoyed though that some of his friends lived in bigger houses than us because I thought we were all the same!) I do so regret though that he had to go to the grammar to do his A levels because the local Secondary could not provide for his choices. But all is not yet lost with him. He's in his final year at university and hoping to join the Royal Navy as an Engineering Officer, so there's still time to knock that ambition out of him and make him realise his mistake in going to that damned grammar to do academic A levels.[/p][/quote]what, em.. where do I begin.. "Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City." well done. I am pleased your daughter did well. I am sure she is a driven individual who would have done well at any school. I am sure that there are plenty of graduates and post graduates who would strongly disagree with you though in regards to job prospects. you also said. "Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable." No your not stupid. you did the right thing. If I where to suggest a different way of identifying academic excellence. A system to replace the 11+ or a re-branding of grammar schools to make them more recognisable to the wider public as a place of learning that the whole of society can stake a claim to. then guess what? your daughter still gets a place, she still gets an education and she still gets the good job..[/p][/quote]But the system is open to the wider public, she took the 11+ and passed so she got a place. My son took the 11+ and didn't pass so he didn't get a place. Anybody can take the 11+ Pass = grammar school place. Don't pass = local secondary. How much easier can it be? stopmoaning1

12:19pm Tue 10 Dec 13

stopmoaning1 says...

stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
http://schoolguide.c





o.uk/schools/belfair





s-academy

????

11.5% of the student population are eligable of free school meals
25% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last six years.

total number of pupils on roll 1310

http://www.education




.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho




ols/performance/scho




ol.pl?urn=115350
-------

chase high school

31.1% of the student population eligible for free school meals
49.4% of the student population eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years.

total number of pupils on roll 1121

http://www.education




.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho




ols/performance/scho




ol.pl?urn=131146
-----------------

Southend high school for boys (grammar)

1.6% of the student population are eligible for free school meals.
5.1% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years

total number of pupils on roll 1047

http://www.education




.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho




ols/performance/scho




ol.pl?urn=136443

--------

I await your intelligent response with great Patience...
So now all is clear. As a parent, I looked to see which school was best for my own children.

Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable.

It seems that all I should have looked at was the stats showing how many children were eligible for school meals and making sure other parents didn't have bigger cars and houses than me that would have surely made me feel inadequate.

Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City.
And as for my son, well he did go the local non grammar secondary. (I am very annoyed though that some of his friends lived in bigger houses than us because I thought we were all the same!) I do so regret though that he had to go to the grammar to do his A levels because the local Secondary could not provide for his choices. But all is not yet lost with him. He's in his final year at university and hoping to join the Royal Navy as an Engineering Officer, so there's still time to knock that ambition out of him and make him realise his mistake in going to that damned grammar to do academic A levels.
what, em.. where do I begin..

"Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City."

well done. I am pleased your daughter did well. I am sure she is a driven individual who would have done well at any school. I am sure that there are plenty of graduates and post graduates who would strongly disagree with you though in regards to job prospects.

you also said.

"Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable."

No your not stupid. you did the right thing. If I where to suggest a different way of identifying academic excellence. A system to replace the 11+ or a re-branding of grammar schools to make them more recognisable to the wider public as a place of learning that the whole of society can stake a claim to. then guess what? your daughter still gets a place, she still gets an education and she still gets the good job..
But the system is open to the wider public, she took the 11+ and passed so she got a place. My son took the 11+ and didn't pass so he didn't get a place.
Anybody can take the 11+
Pass = grammar school place.
Don't pass = local secondary.
How much easier can it be?
And full circle back to the original item, the local primaries are not doing enough to identify, support and encourage the brighter children who have every chance of passing the 11+ if they took it. (Whatever their parents financial status)
[quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: http://schoolguide.c o.uk/schools/belfair s-academy ???? 11.5% of the student population are eligable of free school meals 25% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last six years. total number of pupils on roll 1310 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=115350 ------- chase high school 31.1% of the student population eligible for free school meals 49.4% of the student population eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years. total number of pupils on roll 1121 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=131146 ----------------- Southend high school for boys (grammar) 1.6% of the student population are eligible for free school meals. 5.1% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years total number of pupils on roll 1047 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=136443 -------- I await your intelligent response with great Patience...[/p][/quote]So now all is clear. As a parent, I looked to see which school was best for my own children. Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable. It seems that all I should have looked at was the stats showing how many children were eligible for school meals and making sure other parents didn't have bigger cars and houses than me that would have surely made me feel inadequate. Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City. And as for my son, well he did go the local non grammar secondary. (I am very annoyed though that some of his friends lived in bigger houses than us because I thought we were all the same!) I do so regret though that he had to go to the grammar to do his A levels because the local Secondary could not provide for his choices. But all is not yet lost with him. He's in his final year at university and hoping to join the Royal Navy as an Engineering Officer, so there's still time to knock that ambition out of him and make him realise his mistake in going to that damned grammar to do academic A levels.[/p][/quote]what, em.. where do I begin.. "Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City." well done. I am pleased your daughter did well. I am sure she is a driven individual who would have done well at any school. I am sure that there are plenty of graduates and post graduates who would strongly disagree with you though in regards to job prospects. you also said. "Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable." No your not stupid. you did the right thing. If I where to suggest a different way of identifying academic excellence. A system to replace the 11+ or a re-branding of grammar schools to make them more recognisable to the wider public as a place of learning that the whole of society can stake a claim to. then guess what? your daughter still gets a place, she still gets an education and she still gets the good job..[/p][/quote]But the system is open to the wider public, she took the 11+ and passed so she got a place. My son took the 11+ and didn't pass so he didn't get a place. Anybody can take the 11+ Pass = grammar school place. Don't pass = local secondary. How much easier can it be?[/p][/quote]And full circle back to the original item, the local primaries are not doing enough to identify, support and encourage the brighter children who have every chance of passing the 11+ if they took it. (Whatever their parents financial status) stopmoaning1

12:23pm Tue 10 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

I give up, Jayman is completely off with the fairies and so stuck to his communist ideals he can't see the wood for the trees. Isn't it time for your medication Jayman?
I give up, Jayman is completely off with the fairies and so stuck to his communist ideals he can't see the wood for the trees. Isn't it time for your medication Jayman? Fred the Phoenix

12:30pm Tue 10 Dec 13

jayman says...

stopmoaning1 wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
http://schoolguide.c






o.uk/schools/belfair






s-academy

????

11.5% of the student population are eligable of free school meals
25% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last six years.

total number of pupils on roll 1310

http://www.education





.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho





ols/performance/scho





ol.pl?urn=115350
-------

chase high school

31.1% of the student population eligible for free school meals
49.4% of the student population eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years.

total number of pupils on roll 1121

http://www.education





.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho





ols/performance/scho





ol.pl?urn=131146
-----------------

Southend high school for boys (grammar)

1.6% of the student population are eligible for free school meals.
5.1% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years

total number of pupils on roll 1047

http://www.education





.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho





ols/performance/scho





ol.pl?urn=136443

--------

I await your intelligent response with great Patience...
So now all is clear. As a parent, I looked to see which school was best for my own children.

Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable.

It seems that all I should have looked at was the stats showing how many children were eligible for school meals and making sure other parents didn't have bigger cars and houses than me that would have surely made me feel inadequate.

Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City.
And as for my son, well he did go the local non grammar secondary. (I am very annoyed though that some of his friends lived in bigger houses than us because I thought we were all the same!) I do so regret though that he had to go to the grammar to do his A levels because the local Secondary could not provide for his choices. But all is not yet lost with him. He's in his final year at university and hoping to join the Royal Navy as an Engineering Officer, so there's still time to knock that ambition out of him and make him realise his mistake in going to that damned grammar to do academic A levels.
what, em.. where do I begin..

"Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City."

well done. I am pleased your daughter did well. I am sure she is a driven individual who would have done well at any school. I am sure that there are plenty of graduates and post graduates who would strongly disagree with you though in regards to job prospects.

you also said.

"Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable."

No your not stupid. you did the right thing. If I where to suggest a different way of identifying academic excellence. A system to replace the 11+ or a re-branding of grammar schools to make them more recognisable to the wider public as a place of learning that the whole of society can stake a claim to. then guess what? your daughter still gets a place, she still gets an education and she still gets the good job..
But the system is open to the wider public, she took the 11+ and passed so she got a place. My son took the 11+ and didn't pass so he didn't get a place.
Anybody can take the 11+
Pass = grammar school place.
Don't pass = local secondary.
How much easier can it be?
And full circle back to the original item, the local primaries are not doing enough to identify, support and encourage the brighter children who have every chance of passing the 11+ if they took it. (Whatever their parents financial status)
I cannot believe I am defending incontrovertible socio-economic exclusion evidence against someone who supports a pro-genetic viewpoint.
[quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: http://schoolguide.c o.uk/schools/belfair s-academy ???? 11.5% of the student population are eligable of free school meals 25% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last six years. total number of pupils on roll 1310 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=115350 ------- chase high school 31.1% of the student population eligible for free school meals 49.4% of the student population eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years. total number of pupils on roll 1121 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=131146 ----------------- Southend high school for boys (grammar) 1.6% of the student population are eligible for free school meals. 5.1% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years total number of pupils on roll 1047 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=136443 -------- I await your intelligent response with great Patience...[/p][/quote]So now all is clear. As a parent, I looked to see which school was best for my own children. Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable. It seems that all I should have looked at was the stats showing how many children were eligible for school meals and making sure other parents didn't have bigger cars and houses than me that would have surely made me feel inadequate. Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City. And as for my son, well he did go the local non grammar secondary. (I am very annoyed though that some of his friends lived in bigger houses than us because I thought we were all the same!) I do so regret though that he had to go to the grammar to do his A levels because the local Secondary could not provide for his choices. But all is not yet lost with him. He's in his final year at university and hoping to join the Royal Navy as an Engineering Officer, so there's still time to knock that ambition out of him and make him realise his mistake in going to that damned grammar to do academic A levels.[/p][/quote]what, em.. where do I begin.. "Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City." well done. I am pleased your daughter did well. I am sure she is a driven individual who would have done well at any school. I am sure that there are plenty of graduates and post graduates who would strongly disagree with you though in regards to job prospects. you also said. "Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable." No your not stupid. you did the right thing. If I where to suggest a different way of identifying academic excellence. A system to replace the 11+ or a re-branding of grammar schools to make them more recognisable to the wider public as a place of learning that the whole of society can stake a claim to. then guess what? your daughter still gets a place, she still gets an education and she still gets the good job..[/p][/quote]But the system is open to the wider public, she took the 11+ and passed so she got a place. My son took the 11+ and didn't pass so he didn't get a place. Anybody can take the 11+ Pass = grammar school place. Don't pass = local secondary. How much easier can it be?[/p][/quote]And full circle back to the original item, the local primaries are not doing enough to identify, support and encourage the brighter children who have every chance of passing the 11+ if they took it. (Whatever their parents financial status)[/p][/quote]I cannot believe I am defending incontrovertible socio-economic exclusion evidence against someone who supports a pro-genetic viewpoint. jayman

12:33pm Tue 10 Dec 13

profondo asbo says...

jayman wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
what is proximate? you picked a catchment school and compared it with a selective non-catchment school. it is not an apples to apples comparison.
so ask again why chase?
don't worry. I used it as a proximity example. I could have used westcliff high school for boys. the figures on the DfE website are actually worst compared to SHSFB and it would have supported my argument further. Only 1.3% of the student population are eligible for free school meals at WHSFB.
ok so you're avoiding answering the question.

is that because you just goal seeked the highest free school meal percentage in the borough?
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: what is proximate? you picked a catchment school and compared it with a selective non-catchment school. it is not an apples to apples comparison. so ask again why chase?[/p][/quote]don't worry. I used it as a proximity example. I could have used westcliff high school for boys. the figures on the DfE website are actually worst compared to SHSFB and it would have supported my argument further. Only 1.3% of the student population are eligible for free school meals at WHSFB.[/p][/quote]ok so you're avoiding answering the question. is that because you just goal seeked the highest free school meal percentage in the borough? profondo asbo

12:34pm Tue 10 Dec 13

jayman says...

Fred the Phoenix wrote:
I give up, Jayman is completely off with the fairies and so stuck to his communist ideals he can't see the wood for the trees. Isn't it time for your medication Jayman?
where the hell did communism come form? oh god. I disparate I really do. The second I call for 100% state ownership of everything and secret police is the time when you can call me a communist.. LoL, bless you :)
[quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: I give up, Jayman is completely off with the fairies and so stuck to his communist ideals he can't see the wood for the trees. Isn't it time for your medication Jayman?[/p][/quote]where the hell did communism come form? oh god. I disparate I really do. The second I call for 100% state ownership of everything and secret police is the time when you can call me a communist.. LoL, bless you :) jayman

12:43pm Tue 10 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

Jayman doesn’t understand the facts of life, that people are not the same, we are not born equal. If your parents both have blonde hair and blue eyes there is a good chance that you will have blonde hair and blue eyes too. Likewise if both your parents have good brains then you will probably have a good brain too. And if your parents are both thick as two short planks then you probably will be too and there is more chance of stupid people claiming free school meals than smart people. Think about it Jayman.
.
Which brings me back to my original point that it is the Secondary schools that often fail the pupils because they do not expect or push for good academic results. I know two kids, both almost equal but one just passed his 11 plus the other just failed. The one who went to High School was expected to do three hours homework every night and he did really well, the one who went to Secondary school hardly ever got any homework and he had to stay on and do exam retakes cos he didn’t quite make the grade, hardly surprising cos he wasn’t taught so well. Got that Jayman?
Jayman doesn’t understand the facts of life, that people are not the same, we are not born equal. If your parents both have blonde hair and blue eyes there is a good chance that you will have blonde hair and blue eyes too. Likewise if both your parents have good brains then you will probably have a good brain too. And if your parents are both thick as two short planks then you probably will be too and there is more chance of stupid people claiming free school meals than smart people. Think about it Jayman. . Which brings me back to my original point that it is the Secondary schools that often fail the pupils because they do not expect or push for good academic results. I know two kids, both almost equal but one just passed his 11 plus the other just failed. The one who went to High School was expected to do three hours homework every night and he did really well, the one who went to Secondary school hardly ever got any homework and he had to stay on and do exam retakes cos he didn’t quite make the grade, hardly surprising cos he wasn’t taught so well. Got that Jayman? Fred the Phoenix

12:55pm Tue 10 Dec 13

stopmoaning1 says...

jayman wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
http://schoolguide.c







o.uk/schools/belfair







s-academy

????

11.5% of the student population are eligable of free school meals
25% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last six years.

total number of pupils on roll 1310

http://www.education






.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho






ols/performance/scho






ol.pl?urn=115350
-------

chase high school

31.1% of the student population eligible for free school meals
49.4% of the student population eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years.

total number of pupils on roll 1121

http://www.education






.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho






ols/performance/scho






ol.pl?urn=131146
-----------------

Southend high school for boys (grammar)

1.6% of the student population are eligible for free school meals.
5.1% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years

total number of pupils on roll 1047

http://www.education






.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho






ols/performance/scho






ol.pl?urn=136443

--------

I await your intelligent response with great Patience...
So now all is clear. As a parent, I looked to see which school was best for my own children.

Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable.

It seems that all I should have looked at was the stats showing how many children were eligible for school meals and making sure other parents didn't have bigger cars and houses than me that would have surely made me feel inadequate.

Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City.
And as for my son, well he did go the local non grammar secondary. (I am very annoyed though that some of his friends lived in bigger houses than us because I thought we were all the same!) I do so regret though that he had to go to the grammar to do his A levels because the local Secondary could not provide for his choices. But all is not yet lost with him. He's in his final year at university and hoping to join the Royal Navy as an Engineering Officer, so there's still time to knock that ambition out of him and make him realise his mistake in going to that damned grammar to do academic A levels.
what, em.. where do I begin..

"Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City."

well done. I am pleased your daughter did well. I am sure she is a driven individual who would have done well at any school. I am sure that there are plenty of graduates and post graduates who would strongly disagree with you though in regards to job prospects.

you also said.

"Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable."

No your not stupid. you did the right thing. If I where to suggest a different way of identifying academic excellence. A system to replace the 11+ or a re-branding of grammar schools to make them more recognisable to the wider public as a place of learning that the whole of society can stake a claim to. then guess what? your daughter still gets a place, she still gets an education and she still gets the good job..
But the system is open to the wider public, she took the 11+ and passed so she got a place. My son took the 11+ and didn't pass so he didn't get a place.
Anybody can take the 11+
Pass = grammar school place.
Don't pass = local secondary.
How much easier can it be?
And full circle back to the original item, the local primaries are not doing enough to identify, support and encourage the brighter children who have every chance of passing the 11+ if they took it. (Whatever their parents financial status)
I cannot believe I am defending incontrovertible socio-economic exclusion evidence against someone who supports a pro-genetic viewpoint.
The only viewpoint I support is that the 11+ is there for all to take regardless of financial status.
No political ideals there.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: http://schoolguide.c o.uk/schools/belfair s-academy ???? 11.5% of the student population are eligable of free school meals 25% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last six years. total number of pupils on roll 1310 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=115350 ------- chase high school 31.1% of the student population eligible for free school meals 49.4% of the student population eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years. total number of pupils on roll 1121 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=131146 ----------------- Southend high school for boys (grammar) 1.6% of the student population are eligible for free school meals. 5.1% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years total number of pupils on roll 1047 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=136443 -------- I await your intelligent response with great Patience...[/p][/quote]So now all is clear. As a parent, I looked to see which school was best for my own children. Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable. It seems that all I should have looked at was the stats showing how many children were eligible for school meals and making sure other parents didn't have bigger cars and houses than me that would have surely made me feel inadequate. Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City. And as for my son, well he did go the local non grammar secondary. (I am very annoyed though that some of his friends lived in bigger houses than us because I thought we were all the same!) I do so regret though that he had to go to the grammar to do his A levels because the local Secondary could not provide for his choices. But all is not yet lost with him. He's in his final year at university and hoping to join the Royal Navy as an Engineering Officer, so there's still time to knock that ambition out of him and make him realise his mistake in going to that damned grammar to do academic A levels.[/p][/quote]what, em.. where do I begin.. "Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City." well done. I am pleased your daughter did well. I am sure she is a driven individual who would have done well at any school. I am sure that there are plenty of graduates and post graduates who would strongly disagree with you though in regards to job prospects. you also said. "Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable." No your not stupid. you did the right thing. If I where to suggest a different way of identifying academic excellence. A system to replace the 11+ or a re-branding of grammar schools to make them more recognisable to the wider public as a place of learning that the whole of society can stake a claim to. then guess what? your daughter still gets a place, she still gets an education and she still gets the good job..[/p][/quote]But the system is open to the wider public, she took the 11+ and passed so she got a place. My son took the 11+ and didn't pass so he didn't get a place. Anybody can take the 11+ Pass = grammar school place. Don't pass = local secondary. How much easier can it be?[/p][/quote]And full circle back to the original item, the local primaries are not doing enough to identify, support and encourage the brighter children who have every chance of passing the 11+ if they took it. (Whatever their parents financial status)[/p][/quote]I cannot believe I am defending incontrovertible socio-economic exclusion evidence against someone who supports a pro-genetic viewpoint.[/p][/quote]The only viewpoint I support is that the 11+ is there for all to take regardless of financial status. No political ideals there. stopmoaning1

1:06pm Tue 10 Dec 13

jayman says...

stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
stopmoaning1 wrote:
jayman wrote:
http://schoolguide.c








o.uk/schools/belfair








s-academy

????

11.5% of the student population are eligable of free school meals
25% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last six years.

total number of pupils on roll 1310

http://www.education







.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho







ols/performance/scho







ol.pl?urn=115350
-------

chase high school

31.1% of the student population eligible for free school meals
49.4% of the student population eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years.

total number of pupils on roll 1121

http://www.education







.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho







ols/performance/scho







ol.pl?urn=131146
-----------------

Southend high school for boys (grammar)

1.6% of the student population are eligible for free school meals.
5.1% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years

total number of pupils on roll 1047

http://www.education







.gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho







ols/performance/scho







ol.pl?urn=136443

--------

I await your intelligent response with great Patience...
So now all is clear. As a parent, I looked to see which school was best for my own children.

Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable.

It seems that all I should have looked at was the stats showing how many children were eligible for school meals and making sure other parents didn't have bigger cars and houses than me that would have surely made me feel inadequate.

Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City.
And as for my son, well he did go the local non grammar secondary. (I am very annoyed though that some of his friends lived in bigger houses than us because I thought we were all the same!) I do so regret though that he had to go to the grammar to do his A levels because the local Secondary could not provide for his choices. But all is not yet lost with him. He's in his final year at university and hoping to join the Royal Navy as an Engineering Officer, so there's still time to knock that ambition out of him and make him realise his mistake in going to that damned grammar to do academic A levels.
what, em.. where do I begin..

"Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City."

well done. I am pleased your daughter did well. I am sure she is a driven individual who would have done well at any school. I am sure that there are plenty of graduates and post graduates who would strongly disagree with you though in regards to job prospects.

you also said.

"Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable."

No your not stupid. you did the right thing. If I where to suggest a different way of identifying academic excellence. A system to replace the 11+ or a re-branding of grammar schools to make them more recognisable to the wider public as a place of learning that the whole of society can stake a claim to. then guess what? your daughter still gets a place, she still gets an education and she still gets the good job..
But the system is open to the wider public, she took the 11+ and passed so she got a place. My son took the 11+ and didn't pass so he didn't get a place.
Anybody can take the 11+
Pass = grammar school place.
Don't pass = local secondary.
How much easier can it be?
And full circle back to the original item, the local primaries are not doing enough to identify, support and encourage the brighter children who have every chance of passing the 11+ if they took it. (Whatever their parents financial status)
I cannot believe I am defending incontrovertible socio-economic exclusion evidence against someone who supports a pro-genetic viewpoint.
The only viewpoint I support is that the 11+ is there for all to take regardless of financial status.
No political ideals there.
sorry. I quoted the wrong person. that was aimed at Fred the Phoenix.

My apologies.
[quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stopmoaning1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: http://schoolguide.c o.uk/schools/belfair s-academy ???? 11.5% of the student population are eligable of free school meals 25% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last six years. total number of pupils on roll 1310 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=115350 ------- chase high school 31.1% of the student population eligible for free school meals 49.4% of the student population eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years. total number of pupils on roll 1121 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=131146 ----------------- Southend high school for boys (grammar) 1.6% of the student population are eligible for free school meals. 5.1% of the student population where eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years total number of pupils on roll 1047 http://www.education .gov.uk/cgi-bin/scho ols/performance/scho ol.pl?urn=136443 -------- I await your intelligent response with great Patience...[/p][/quote]So now all is clear. As a parent, I looked to see which school was best for my own children. Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable. It seems that all I should have looked at was the stats showing how many children were eligible for school meals and making sure other parents didn't have bigger cars and houses than me that would have surely made me feel inadequate. Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City. And as for my son, well he did go the local non grammar secondary. (I am very annoyed though that some of his friends lived in bigger houses than us because I thought we were all the same!) I do so regret though that he had to go to the grammar to do his A levels because the local Secondary could not provide for his choices. But all is not yet lost with him. He's in his final year at university and hoping to join the Royal Navy as an Engineering Officer, so there's still time to knock that ambition out of him and make him realise his mistake in going to that damned grammar to do academic A levels.[/p][/quote]what, em.. where do I begin.. "Oh how I look back now wishing my daughter was unemployed, aspiring at best for a part time job in the Pound Shop instead of being in a good job in the City." well done. I am pleased your daughter did well. I am sure she is a driven individual who would have done well at any school. I am sure that there are plenty of graduates and post graduates who would strongly disagree with you though in regards to job prospects. you also said. "Stupidly, I was completely wrong in looking at results, facilities, and even the atmosphere that made them feel comfortable." No your not stupid. you did the right thing. If I where to suggest a different way of identifying academic excellence. A system to replace the 11+ or a re-branding of grammar schools to make them more recognisable to the wider public as a place of learning that the whole of society can stake a claim to. then guess what? your daughter still gets a place, she still gets an education and she still gets the good job..[/p][/quote]But the system is open to the wider public, she took the 11+ and passed so she got a place. My son took the 11+ and didn't pass so he didn't get a place. Anybody can take the 11+ Pass = grammar school place. Don't pass = local secondary. How much easier can it be?[/p][/quote]And full circle back to the original item, the local primaries are not doing enough to identify, support and encourage the brighter children who have every chance of passing the 11+ if they took it. (Whatever their parents financial status)[/p][/quote]I cannot believe I am defending incontrovertible socio-economic exclusion evidence against someone who supports a pro-genetic viewpoint.[/p][/quote]The only viewpoint I support is that the 11+ is there for all to take regardless of financial status. No political ideals there.[/p][/quote]sorry. I quoted the wrong person. that was aimed at Fred the Phoenix. My apologies. jayman

1:20pm Tue 10 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

Err what do you mean "aimed"? I support that as much as you, there are no socio economic aspects to the 11 plus, it is just about whether you have the brains to pass it or not.
Err what do you mean "aimed"? I support that as much as you, there are no socio economic aspects to the 11 plus, it is just about whether you have the brains to pass it or not. Fred the Phoenix

1:38pm Tue 10 Dec 13

jayman says...

Fred the Phoenix wrote:
Err what do you mean "aimed"? I support that as much as you, there are no socio economic aspects to the 11 plus, it is just about whether you have the brains to pass it or not.
ah! insults. The swan song of your lost argument..
[quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: Err what do you mean "aimed"? I support that as much as you, there are no socio economic aspects to the 11 plus, it is just about whether you have the brains to pass it or not.[/p][/quote]ah! insults. The swan song of your lost argument.. jayman

4:26pm Tue 10 Dec 13

rhowes says...

We do not have any "Grammar Schools" now, they are "Academies"!

Please stop using the term" grammar schools " in Southend.
We do not have any "Grammar Schools" now, they are "Academies"! Please stop using the term" grammar schools " in Southend. rhowes

6:27pm Tue 10 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

jayman wrote:
Fred the Phoenix wrote:
Err what do you mean "aimed"? I support that as much as you, there are no socio economic aspects to the 11 plus, it is just about whether you have the brains to pass it or not.
ah! insults. The swan song of your lost argument..
Only a fool would think he's won an argument when he has clearly lost it by a mile. There are no socio-economic aspects to the eleven plus or to High Schools and that is a fact, whatever they are called now rhowes.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: Err what do you mean "aimed"? I support that as much as you, there are no socio economic aspects to the 11 plus, it is just about whether you have the brains to pass it or not.[/p][/quote]ah! insults. The swan song of your lost argument..[/p][/quote]Only a fool would think he's won an argument when he has clearly lost it by a mile. There are no socio-economic aspects to the eleven plus or to High Schools and that is a fact, whatever they are called now rhowes. Fred the Phoenix

9:20pm Tue 10 Dec 13

stopmoaning1 says...

rhowes wrote:
We do not have any "Grammar Schools" now, they are "Academies"!

Please stop using the term" grammar schools " in Southend.
They are officially academy grammars.

Southend Council call them academies on their website. Perhaps they can't bring themselves to recognise the grammar status which may explain in part their lack of direction towards their primaries and the 11+.
[quote][p][bold]rhowes[/bold] wrote: We do not have any "Grammar Schools" now, they are "Academies"! Please stop using the term" grammar schools " in Southend.[/p][/quote]They are officially academy grammars. Southend Council call them academies on their website. Perhaps they can't bring themselves to recognise the grammar status which may explain in part their lack of direction towards their primaries and the 11+. stopmoaning1

11:44pm Tue 10 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

Possibly so stopmoaning.
.
So you failed your 11 plus Jayman, get over it.
.
Possibly so stopmoaning. . So you failed your 11 plus Jayman, get over it. . Fred the Phoenix

2:31pm Wed 11 Dec 13

jayman says...

Fred the Phoenix wrote:
Possibly so stopmoaning.
.
So you failed your 11 plus Jayman, get over it.
.
What makes you think I did? What makes you think I sat the test at all?
[quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: Possibly so stopmoaning. . So you failed your 11 plus Jayman, get over it. .[/p][/quote]What makes you think I did? What makes you think I sat the test at all? jayman

2:56pm Wed 11 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

jayman wrote:
Fred the Phoenix wrote:
Possibly so stopmoaning.
.
So you failed your 11 plus Jayman, get over it.
.
What makes you think I did? What makes you think I sat the test at all?
So they decided you weren't even smart enough to try and it still hurts does it, poor Jayman. Get over it!
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: Possibly so stopmoaning. . So you failed your 11 plus Jayman, get over it. .[/p][/quote]What makes you think I did? What makes you think I sat the test at all?[/p][/quote]So they decided you weren't even smart enough to try and it still hurts does it, poor Jayman. Get over it! Fred the Phoenix

4:15pm Wed 11 Dec 13

jayman says...

Fred the Phoenix wrote:
jayman wrote:
Fred the Phoenix wrote:
Possibly so stopmoaning.
.
So you failed your 11 plus Jayman, get over it.
.
What makes you think I did? What makes you think I sat the test at all?
So they decided you weren't even smart enough to try and it still hurts does it, poor Jayman. Get over it!
I fail to see your point or what you are basing your conclusions on. I do however see your enhanced ability to display abject social snobbery, your embittered faith is pro-genetics and your inability to use evidence or basic common sense when mounting an argument.
[quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: Possibly so stopmoaning. . So you failed your 11 plus Jayman, get over it. .[/p][/quote]What makes you think I did? What makes you think I sat the test at all?[/p][/quote]So they decided you weren't even smart enough to try and it still hurts does it, poor Jayman. Get over it![/p][/quote]I fail to see your point or what you are basing your conclusions on. I do however see your enhanced ability to display abject social snobbery, your embittered faith is pro-genetics and your inability to use evidence or basic common sense when mounting an argument. jayman

5:35pm Wed 11 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

Ha ha ha!
Ha ha ha! Fred the Phoenix

8:51am Fri 13 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

Academic achievement owes more to your genes than to your environment, nature not nurture, proven ...
.
http://www.scienceda
ily.com/releases/201
3/12/131211185323.ht
m
Academic achievement owes more to your genes than to your environment, nature not nurture, proven ... . http://www.scienceda ily.com/releases/201 3/12/131211185323.ht m Fred the Phoenix

7:49pm Fri 13 Dec 13

jayman says...

Fred the Phoenix wrote:
Academic achievement owes more to your genes than to your environment, nature not nurture, proven ...
.
http://www.scienceda

ily.com/releases/201

3/12/131211185323.ht

m
your link does not seem to be working..

here is a link that does

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/health-2533795
3

some quoted extracts from the article.

"Study leader Nicholas Shakeshaft, from the Institute of Psychiatry at King's, said: "Our research shows that differences in students' educational achievement owe more to nature than nurture."

"Since we are studying whole populations, this does not mean that genetics explains 60% of an individual's performance, but rather that genetics explains 60% of the differences between individuals, in the population as it exists at the moment"

"This means that heritability is not fixed - if environmental influences change, then the influence of genetics on educational achievement may change too."

-----------------

I believe that concludes that argument. if you have any further need to completely misrepresent the basic principles of human science.; Please make full use of the comments box below...
[quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: Academic achievement owes more to your genes than to your environment, nature not nurture, proven ... . http://www.scienceda ily.com/releases/201 3/12/131211185323.ht m[/p][/quote]your link does not seem to be working.. here is a link that does http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/health-2533795 3 some quoted extracts from the article. "Study leader Nicholas Shakeshaft, from the Institute of Psychiatry at King's, said: "Our research shows that differences in students' educational achievement owe more to nature than nurture." "Since we are studying whole populations, this does not mean that genetics explains 60% of an individual's performance, but rather that genetics explains 60% of the differences between individuals, in the population as it exists at the moment" "This means that heritability is not fixed - if environmental influences change, then the influence of genetics on educational achievement may change too." ----------------- I believe that concludes that argument. if you have any further need to completely misrepresent the basic principles of human science.; Please make full use of the comments box below... jayman

10:39pm Fri 13 Dec 13

Dooberrydoo says...

I read this article with interest as it affects me as a parent and as a teacher. I've just a few questions to ask before I go on to make my points.

How many parents, who have commented on this article, had their children tutored pre-exam?
If your child was tutored for how long prior to the 11+ exam were they tutored?
Does anyone know how many privately educated children passed and entered in to the Grammar School system?
What was your child's CAT score upon entry?
I read this article with interest as it affects me as a parent and as a teacher. I've just a few questions to ask before I go on to make my points. How many parents, who have commented on this article, had their children tutored pre-exam? If your child was tutored for how long prior to the 11+ exam were they tutored? Does anyone know how many privately educated children passed and entered in to the Grammar School system? What was your child's CAT score upon entry? Dooberrydoo

3:23pm Sat 14 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

jayman wrote:
Fred the Phoenix wrote:
Academic achievement owes more to your genes than to your environment, nature not nurture, proven ...
.
http://www.scienceda


ily.com/releases/201


3/12/131211185323.ht


m
your link does not seem to be working..

here is a link that does

http://www.bbc.co.uk

/news/health-2533795

3

some quoted extracts from the article.

"Study leader Nicholas Shakeshaft, from the Institute of Psychiatry at King's, said: "Our research shows that differences in students' educational achievement owe more to nature than nurture."

"Since we are studying whole populations, this does not mean that genetics explains 60% of an individual's performance, but rather that genetics explains 60% of the differences between individuals, in the population as it exists at the moment"

"This means that heritability is not fixed - if environmental influences change, then the influence of genetics on educational achievement may change too."

-----------------

I believe that concludes that argument. if you have any further need to completely misrepresent the basic principles of human science.; Please make full use of the comments box below...
Rubbish, read the whole research paper again, not just the BBC precis. Nature dominates nurture where intelligence is concerned, no question, if your genes have given you a lousy brain then no amount of nurturing is going to make you into Einstein, plain common sense.
.
Dooberrydoo, I am now a grandfather but my experience of all sorts of schools over the years has led me to believe that a big part of the problem is expectation, the kids who to grammars and to private schools are EXPECTED to do well, they are pushed harder and they get a LOT more homework than ordinary secondary and primary schools. Even schools in Romania do a LOT better than our schools because they push the kids harder and they have much stricter discipline regimes.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: Academic achievement owes more to your genes than to your environment, nature not nurture, proven ... . http://www.scienceda ily.com/releases/201 3/12/131211185323.ht m[/p][/quote]your link does not seem to be working.. here is a link that does http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/health-2533795 3 some quoted extracts from the article. "Study leader Nicholas Shakeshaft, from the Institute of Psychiatry at King's, said: "Our research shows that differences in students' educational achievement owe more to nature than nurture." "Since we are studying whole populations, this does not mean that genetics explains 60% of an individual's performance, but rather that genetics explains 60% of the differences between individuals, in the population as it exists at the moment" "This means that heritability is not fixed - if environmental influences change, then the influence of genetics on educational achievement may change too." ----------------- I believe that concludes that argument. if you have any further need to completely misrepresent the basic principles of human science.; Please make full use of the comments box below...[/p][/quote]Rubbish, read the whole research paper again, not just the BBC precis. Nature dominates nurture where intelligence is concerned, no question, if your genes have given you a lousy brain then no amount of nurturing is going to make you into Einstein, plain common sense. . Dooberrydoo, I am now a grandfather but my experience of all sorts of schools over the years has led me to believe that a big part of the problem is expectation, the kids who to grammars and to private schools are EXPECTED to do well, they are pushed harder and they get a LOT more homework than ordinary secondary and primary schools. Even schools in Romania do a LOT better than our schools because they push the kids harder and they have much stricter discipline regimes. Fred the Phoenix

5:05pm Sat 14 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

New Scientist
.
http://www.newscient
ist.com/article/dn24
745-nature-more-than
-nurture-determines-
exam-success.html#.U
qyOd_RdVrw
.
"A study on twins claims to provide strong evidence that genetic inheritance has a bigger impact on exam success than schooling and parenting".
.
.
New Scientist . http://www.newscient ist.com/article/dn24 745-nature-more-than -nurture-determines- exam-success.html#.U qyOd_RdVrw . "A study on twins claims to provide strong evidence that genetic inheritance has a bigger impact on exam success than schooling and parenting". . . Fred the Phoenix

7:10pm Sat 14 Dec 13

jayman says...

Fred the Phoenix wrote:
jayman wrote:
Fred the Phoenix wrote:
Academic achievement owes more to your genes than to your environment, nature not nurture, proven ...
.
http://www.scienceda



ily.com/releases/201



3/12/131211185323.ht



m
your link does not seem to be working..

here is a link that does

http://www.bbc.co.uk


/news/health-2533795


3

some quoted extracts from the article.

"Study leader Nicholas Shakeshaft, from the Institute of Psychiatry at King's, said: "Our research shows that differences in students' educational achievement owe more to nature than nurture."

"Since we are studying whole populations, this does not mean that genetics explains 60% of an individual's performance, but rather that genetics explains 60% of the differences between individuals, in the population as it exists at the moment"

"This means that heritability is not fixed - if environmental influences change, then the influence of genetics on educational achievement may change too."

-----------------

I believe that concludes that argument. if you have any further need to completely misrepresent the basic principles of human science.; Please make full use of the comments box below...
Rubbish, read the whole research paper again, not just the BBC precis. Nature dominates nurture where intelligence is concerned, no question, if your genes have given you a lousy brain then no amount of nurturing is going to make you into Einstein, plain common sense.
.
Dooberrydoo, I am now a grandfather but my experience of all sorts of schools over the years has led me to believe that a big part of the problem is expectation, the kids who to grammars and to private schools are EXPECTED to do well, they are pushed harder and they get a LOT more homework than ordinary secondary and primary schools. Even schools in Romania do a LOT better than our schools because they push the kids harder and they have much stricter discipline regimes.
what...

Nicholas Shakeshaft. The man who the BBC interviewed, was the lead researcher.

I think I will leave the summery of the study down to him.

his exact words.

"Study leader Nicholas Shakeshaft, from the Institute of Psychiatry at King's, said: "Our research shows that differences in students' educational achievement owe more to nature than nurture."

----

Basically. just because there are genetic influences that support educational success. it does not mean that they have been inherited or passed down to a younger generation.
[quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: Academic achievement owes more to your genes than to your environment, nature not nurture, proven ... . http://www.scienceda ily.com/releases/201 3/12/131211185323.ht m[/p][/quote]your link does not seem to be working.. here is a link that does http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/health-2533795 3 some quoted extracts from the article. "Study leader Nicholas Shakeshaft, from the Institute of Psychiatry at King's, said: "Our research shows that differences in students' educational achievement owe more to nature than nurture." "Since we are studying whole populations, this does not mean that genetics explains 60% of an individual's performance, but rather that genetics explains 60% of the differences between individuals, in the population as it exists at the moment" "This means that heritability is not fixed - if environmental influences change, then the influence of genetics on educational achievement may change too." ----------------- I believe that concludes that argument. if you have any further need to completely misrepresent the basic principles of human science.; Please make full use of the comments box below...[/p][/quote]Rubbish, read the whole research paper again, not just the BBC precis. Nature dominates nurture where intelligence is concerned, no question, if your genes have given you a lousy brain then no amount of nurturing is going to make you into Einstein, plain common sense. . Dooberrydoo, I am now a grandfather but my experience of all sorts of schools over the years has led me to believe that a big part of the problem is expectation, the kids who to grammars and to private schools are EXPECTED to do well, they are pushed harder and they get a LOT more homework than ordinary secondary and primary schools. Even schools in Romania do a LOT better than our schools because they push the kids harder and they have much stricter discipline regimes.[/p][/quote]what... Nicholas Shakeshaft. The man who the BBC interviewed, was the lead researcher. I think I will leave the summery of the study down to him. his exact words. "Study leader Nicholas Shakeshaft, from the Institute of Psychiatry at King's, said: "Our research shows that differences in students' educational achievement owe more to nature than nurture." ---- Basically. just because there are genetic influences that support educational success. it does not mean that they have been inherited or passed down to a younger generation. jayman

10:56pm Sat 14 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

What? Of course they have been inherited, how else did they get there? Magic? And as the man said, "owe more to nature than to nurture". Plain common sense, the simple fact is that smarter parents tend to have smarter kids. You'd understand more about the world if you got out more Jayman.
What? Of course they have been inherited, how else did they get there? Magic? And as the man said, "owe more to nature than to nurture". Plain common sense, the simple fact is that smarter parents tend to have smarter kids. You'd understand more about the world if you got out more Jayman. Fred the Phoenix

1:19pm Sun 15 Dec 13

jayman says...

Fred the Phoenix wrote:
What? Of course they have been inherited, how else did they get there? Magic? And as the man said, "owe more to nature than to nurture". Plain common sense, the simple fact is that smarter parents tend to have smarter kids. You'd understand more about the world if you got out more Jayman.
by your reckoning. your children must be exact carbon copies of yourself.
[quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: What? Of course they have been inherited, how else did they get there? Magic? And as the man said, "owe more to nature than to nurture". Plain common sense, the simple fact is that smarter parents tend to have smarter kids. You'd understand more about the world if you got out more Jayman.[/p][/quote]by your reckoning. your children must be exact carbon copies of yourself. jayman

1:24pm Sun 15 Dec 13

jayman says...

Fred the Phoenix wrote:
What? Of course they have been inherited, how else did they get there? Magic? And as the man said, "owe more to nature than to nurture". Plain common sense, the simple fact is that smarter parents tend to have smarter kids. You'd understand more about the world if you got out more Jayman.
spend several years studding the science of self replicating DNA. produce a thesis on the subject. Publish a peer reviewed science paper that supports your claims. Then you can justifiably debunk Nicholas Shakeshaft's conclusion..
[quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: What? Of course they have been inherited, how else did they get there? Magic? And as the man said, "owe more to nature than to nurture". Plain common sense, the simple fact is that smarter parents tend to have smarter kids. You'd understand more about the world if you got out more Jayman.[/p][/quote]spend several years studding the science of self replicating DNA. produce a thesis on the subject. Publish a peer reviewed science paper that supports your claims. Then you can justifiably debunk Nicholas Shakeshaft's conclusion.. jayman

4:59pm Sun 15 Dec 13

Fred the Phoenix says...

jayman wrote:
Fred the Phoenix wrote:
What? Of course they have been inherited, how else did they get there? Magic? And as the man said, "owe more to nature than to nurture". Plain common sense, the simple fact is that smarter parents tend to have smarter kids. You'd understand more about the world if you got out more Jayman.
spend several years studding the science of self replicating DNA. produce a thesis on the subject. Publish a peer reviewed science paper that supports your claims. Then you can justifiably debunk Nicholas Shakeshaft's conclusion..
I do understand quite a bit about genetics thank you, more than you obviously, and why debunk, the man says "owe more to nature than nurture", can't get clearer than that but then you are not interested in the reality of the issue are you, you are only interested in pushing your political views which have nothing whatsoever useful to say on the matter.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: What? Of course they have been inherited, how else did they get there? Magic? And as the man said, "owe more to nature than to nurture". Plain common sense, the simple fact is that smarter parents tend to have smarter kids. You'd understand more about the world if you got out more Jayman.[/p][/quote]spend several years studding the science of self replicating DNA. produce a thesis on the subject. Publish a peer reviewed science paper that supports your claims. Then you can justifiably debunk Nicholas Shakeshaft's conclusion..[/p][/quote]I do understand quite a bit about genetics thank you, more than you obviously, and why debunk, the man says "owe more to nature than nurture", can't get clearer than that but then you are not interested in the reality of the issue are you, you are only interested in pushing your political views which have nothing whatsoever useful to say on the matter. Fred the Phoenix

11:49pm Sun 15 Dec 13

jayman says...

Fred the Phoenix wrote:
jayman wrote:
Fred the Phoenix wrote:
What? Of course they have been inherited, how else did they get there? Magic? And as the man said, "owe more to nature than to nurture". Plain common sense, the simple fact is that smarter parents tend to have smarter kids. You'd understand more about the world if you got out more Jayman.
spend several years studding the science of self replicating DNA. produce a thesis on the subject. Publish a peer reviewed science paper that supports your claims. Then you can justifiably debunk Nicholas Shakeshaft's conclusion..
I do understand quite a bit about genetics thank you, more than you obviously, and why debunk, the man says "owe more to nature than nurture", can't get clearer than that but then you are not interested in the reality of the issue are you, you are only interested in pushing your political views which have nothing whatsoever useful to say on the matter.
read what I wrote at 7:49pm Fri 13 Dec 13...

"Since we are studying whole populations, this does not mean that genetics explains 60% of an individual's performance, but rather that genetics explains 60% of the differences between individuals, in the population as it exists at the moment"

----

lol... Its like having an argument with Kate Hopkins, it really is...
[quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fred the Phoenix[/bold] wrote: What? Of course they have been inherited, how else did they get there? Magic? And as the man said, "owe more to nature than to nurture". Plain common sense, the simple fact is that smarter parents tend to have smarter kids. You'd understand more about the world if you got out more Jayman.[/p][/quote]spend several years studding the science of self replicating DNA. produce a thesis on the subject. Publish a peer reviewed science paper that supports your claims. Then you can justifiably debunk Nicholas Shakeshaft's conclusion..[/p][/quote]I do understand quite a bit about genetics thank you, more than you obviously, and why debunk, the man says "owe more to nature than nurture", can't get clearer than that but then you are not interested in the reality of the issue are you, you are only interested in pushing your political views which have nothing whatsoever useful to say on the matter.[/p][/quote]read what I wrote at 7:49pm Fri 13 Dec 13... "Since we are studying whole populations, this does not mean that genetics explains 60% of an individual's performance, but rather that genetics explains 60% of the differences between individuals, in the population as it exists at the moment" ---- lol... Its like having an argument with Kate Hopkins, it really is... jayman

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree