To Think this is a new low in "social Mobility".

[smokepole]

Just browsing the updated DOE performance tables, "Weald of Kent" Grammar in Tonbridge has officially 0.0% FSM in its 1134 pupils. I am not picking on them in particular , because I would not be surprised to see
Borlasse's in Marlow the same or others, but I just think this is "quite a startling statistic"

This is surely a new low in "Social Mobility" I thought grammar schools were typically about 2% FSM but 0.0% sends out a terrible message.

It's not great, however, that's not to say they don't have lots of children from low income families. Not sure about kent, but where I am, the house has to be completely workless in order to be eligible.

Why does it send out a terrible message just because they all pay for school lunches?

Lots of people use those stats from Ofsted reports to get an idea of the type of school, ones with a low FSM rate means that the parents have a good work ethic and that is likely being passed onto the children. In return results will be better. That's good surely. Those on FSM, in the main, are targeted as the results show there is a big gap between those on pupil premium compared to those not.

It is in Tonbridge!

"Ones with a low fsm rate means the parents have a good work ethic"

It's always amusing how people buy into that sort of crap.

I think that statistic is pretty meaningless unless you know what, for instance, the unemployment rate is round there.

What's the FSM rate in the schools in that area that the kids who don't get into the grammar school go to?

There are state primaries round here where the FSM rate will be pretty darn close to zero. That's because they are small, select based on proximity, and are in wealthy areas, not because they won't take kids whose parents are poor.

Its Tonbridge ( not Monaco) !

Seriously though are you telling me that, there are no FSM children who should be there. The other statistic that makes it look like Mobility is going backwards is the fact that over the six years 4% have at one time or another been eligible . This means that previously 4 or 5 girls eligible for FSM joined yet nobody has joined with FSM eligibilty in the last 6 years. Terrible since grammar schools need to be making at least an attempt to get bright disadvantaged pupils in.

It is a shame, but it's hard to know what to do about it.

This means that on average 4-5 pupils eligible for FSM joined each year, but not one girl in the last 6 years !

I just had a quick look at some of the other schools in Tonbridge e.g. the Secondary Moderns and unsurprisingly all of them had more than 0% free school meals.

I think its fair to say that the Grammar doesn't fully reflect the local area

William Borlase - 1.1% in the last 6 years
Great Marlow - 15.8% in the last 6 years

Perhaps this could be looked at from another angle - and maybe the lack of success in bright children from disadvantaged backgrounds in gaining a place should be laid at the door of the local feeder primary schools?

I think that looking at one year cohort in one school, is not statistically significant
Also you need to look at the claims generally in the area for the same time.
A third thing is that people do not always declare their eligibility

FSM for Tonbridge Schools: Hilview 8.8% Tonbridge Grammar 1.2% Judd 0.9% Hugh Christie 17.9% Hayesbrook 12.8%.

You can see that 0.0% is not representative of the area.

Toohasty. I agree some people are reluctant to declare their eligibility . The 0.0% figure is for the whole school so 7 years.. It means the school has not had any FSM eligible pupils join in the last 6 years (whether any of them were eligible but parents declined, we don't know, but it would 1 or 2 pupils at most.)

Livong in the area where weald of kent is a possibility for mine and friends children to go I know that one of the girls who currently attends this school would be eligble for fsm however her mother will not apply feeling it will stigmatise them as a family. I gave had several conversation s with her about this.
2 of thw children who were in my now y8 sons school would also be eligble but they got scholarships to private schools. Another child who will go this sep has already been given a scolaeship.
so whilst you can say this is not goos. There are many other things at play that needs considering. I know some people prefer bennet memorial in tunbridge wells over grammar schools so would be interesting to see what their fsm is.

Bennett Memorial - FSM 7.7% in the last 6 years

This is surely a new low in "Social Mobility" I thought grammar schools were typically about 2% FSM but 0.0% sends out a terrible message

To me it begs the question are the local state primaries doing all they can to help their potential grammar candidates get ready for the exam? Like their counterparts in private primaries?

• tiggytape Fri 30-Jan-15 10:22:55

Well this alone is massively disadvantaging state primary pupils in all sorts of ways. just think of all those pupils who could have a shot at it, whose parents are not interested are not being encouraged by their own school....

even timing help in an exam situation can help massively.

I do not understand why possible candidates are not given a few work shops to help them have a go at the exam!

I have never understood why primary schools in fully selective areas don't help prepare for the 11+. Would love it to be explained.

The grammar school system is not too popular among teachers in regular primary schools, and I suspect this leads to some resistance to the idea of prepping kids. (I don't like the GS either, but if it exists, it seems a shame not to help poor kids who might be able to get in...)

The grammar school system is not too popular among teachers in regular primary schools

Is it down to teachers though and do they have a right to curtail a childs chances that will affect whole life?

Many primary schools do not approve of or encourage the selection at 11

But is it their place to do this - decide this or let this view be known?

Firstly most 11+ exams are VR and NVR which are specifically designed by educational researchers to not need 'teaching'.And they don't.Students do benefit from practice but after doing a few practice papers (about 4 or 5) there is no further improvement.I bought my own kids a pack of each type of paper and tehy worked their way through them in the few weeks before.It doesn't take a tutor.It cost less than £20.that is not outside anyone's reach
I suggest that (1) more academic parents tend to have more academic children because of genetics; and
(2) more academic parents tend to have better jobs and be in higher socio-economic groups.
The combination of (1) and (2) is why the MCs dominate grammar schools.