Sutton Grammar School - Why all the secrecy if they have nothing to hide?

[incandecent]

I understand that no grammar school can guarantee a place before the official deadline of 1 March 2012. However, does anyone have any idea why Sutton Grammar School are refusing to publish the results of boys who have not passed the exam? I have had a series of most infuriatingly patronizing and evasive replies from their registrar who blankly refuses to honestly answer specific questions. If anyone is in the same position as me, I have been in touch with the School Admissions Adjudicator who says that Sutton Grammar are not only permitted but encouraged to provide parents with information about the results before parents apply to other schools. Does anyone have an explanation for their behaviour? One is tempted to think that their selection process is secretive enough to be unfairly discriminatory.

I agree. It takes more than a large cohort of very able children for a school to get good results. My point is that the children that superselectives are trying to find are those capable of getting 12 - 14 GCSEs at A*/A. A test at 11 isn't always going to get that right. If it were, their average GCSE point scores would be ~750. Someone earlier in this thread made the comment about the teachers who comment on the ones who fail unexpectedly to pass. I feel for coolasacucumber because her son is like one of my children. The SATs results were not representative of her ability, but she is now holding her own in the top sets. I have every confidence that she will do as well as my oldest child, whose GCSEs were fantastic but by no means the best in the school. I don't think children should be written off at such a young age.

I should have said at least as well. She is a girl after all!

Well, in a super selective grammar/independent you are likely to find that the all the children have very good support from home. The number of disruptive pupils will be far less than a state comprehensive which caters for all (and often fails those children at the far ends of the ability range). The ability and attitude of the child sitting at the next desk is likely to be similar.

I went to a state comprehensive. There was a vast difference between working in a top set for those classes which were streamed and in the mixed ability classes.

With education, as with many things, one size does not fit all.

Sorry, I'm with you on this SoupDragon! Totally agree with you. From primary school experience have observed that the very able ones are often not stretched to their full potential and are left to coast. Have no doubt that DS would achieve at a comprehensive but just maybe not as well as at a selective school.

This is based on combined experiences of myself and DW with comprehensive and grammar options!

Perhaps our views were coloured by our experience: 11 O levels from my comprehensive vs 5 o levels from DH's grammar! Things have changed a lot since I was at school. Whereas we were streamed by form and kept together for most lessons, our children's school sets maths and MFL after a term, with more subjects set in the summer and all subjects set by the start of year 8. What's more, the children are well aware that they can and will go up as well as down. Regular reshuffles mean that the children's abilities are always broadly similar, which is as good for the less able groups as the top sets. As for the comments about disruptive pupils and failing to meet the ability range, that's not been our family's experience. Those things are a reflection on the quality of the school leadership, not the type of school.

Thing is though that grammar schools in our day took the top 20% (and we all know that boys officially got in with lower scores than girls!) so there was still lots of scope to vary from the 5 (or fewer) O levels mob to the super-intelligent who got 14 O Levels of which 8/9/10 were at A Grade. And there was a huge difference between comprehensives in areas without selective schools and those in areas with them - as is still the case.

Haven't got a problem at all with the comprehensive system if it delivers but so many of them in London don't do their children justice! One system should suit all but really if one has a relatively bright child is one going to risk it if one has other options in the state sector?

This link www.education.gov.uk/cgi-bin/schools/performance/group.pl?qtype=GR&f=qt2KaPLeZV&superview=sec&view=aat&set=6&sort=ks4_11.ttapsgcphi&ord=desc&tab=94&no=998&pg=1 will (hopefully) take you to the set of secondary schools within 15 miles of Westminster, in descending order of % of top 8 GCSEs for high attainers (from the av point score data set) but viewed by attainment on entry. I say good for comprehensives like Mossbourne, Clapton and Plashet (with 14 - 20% of their intake high achievers) that are holding their own against superselectives (as opposed to 90 - 100% high achievers).

Conversely, what on earth is going on at Chislehurst & Sidcup, Bexley and Beths Grammar Schools?!!! With around 90% of their intake high achievers, how can they be delivering such poor results? For me, the sadest cases are the schools at the bottom with less than 10 children who started with them as high achievers. That's hardly a level playing field, is it?

that is very interesting (but also disheartening in a way) viewing Banter - thanks! My view is that if all grammar schools had a marketed selective intake (to grammar school standard) then most parents, except for those who don't even seem to consider any state secondaries as viable options, would find the local comprehensives more appealing options.

The problem is that it's not entirely about the academic standards though is it? It's also about the intake and the underlying ethos of the schools themselves. I really want a school (primary and secondary level) that is multi-cultural and cuts across the socio-economic categories so that our children grow up with an understanding of how all people live. The primary school they attend unusually does both in buckets. But in London those schools are harder to find than in small towns where one school fits all! And at secondary level such schools are not that easy to find in some Boroughs....

Dunraven seems to do it (visited that one) and Graveney to some extent although most of the parents at the Open Days seemed very m-c/um-c in my opinion. But unless one is willing to use one's children as pawns in some ideological experiment there are schools around that one would not rest easy about sending one's children to....

Hello all, new to this thread but have been keeping myself sane by reading various school threads and realising that I'm not the only one worrying!

@Incandescent, understand your concerns, I have also been through the grammar system and DS has passed 1 out of 3, the 1 not being Sutton but one of the others, we also do not know his mark. My take on this is that at this stage there is nothing that either I or my son could have done any differently and the scores are in! Even knowing his mark would not tell us if he had a place against the 600/700 others that may have passed. DS has sat for the Indie sector and on the back of that we/he interviewd at 3 schools, we have fallen in love with one in particular and if he is accepted we will move heaven and earth to get him there even if he gets an offer at a grammar school as we really believe it to be the right place for him. I can't believe that I'm even saying that I would turn down a grammar school place!! We will be eating beans on toast and I'll have to take on some more work but.....
I have concerns about the grammar school system, I'm aware that a particular child who has passed all 3 has been heavily tutored and in every single assessment/test at school has been topped by more than 1 child, my DS included and I'm sure that will out at some stage, it's not sour grapes I truly believe in doing what you feel to be right for your child. We have 3, DS1 in a not particulary academic Independent but thriving, small classes no pressure and great pastoral care. DD in a selective all girls, catchment area included and DS2 needs to be challenged and stretched academically, seems very bright and LOVED the 1 particular school that we want for him too.

Anyway, I digress, sorry :) I would love to see the system changed, perhaps Junior schools asked to select their top 25%/by results not just because they like them!!! Who have year on year been strong throughout their school life and they are put forward, this would probably be deemed to be unfair but maybe a better representation? What I do know is that at the end of the day it does come down to an ability to pass exams and deal with the pressure of it all, your DS is probably just as able and will be fine because you are bothered about what happens to him. As my DH keeps saying to me "It's a numbers game" Lots of competition, more applicants than places... says it all really. I wish you all the very best and hope that your DS is succesful at Sutton.

Does anyone know how many applications per place there are at Sutton Grammar?

Can give you the information that Admissions Lady gave me when I asked about numbers last week:

Applicants for 2009E 1381
Applicants for 2010E 1486
Applicants for 2011E 1458
Applicants for 2012E 1498

For 120 places....

Wow that is a lot. I wonder how many are duplicates, i.e. have applied to all the south London grammars?

I would imagine that most applicants apply to all the grammars, and depending on where they live to one or more of the the other nearby selectives too.

Certainly the case here .

You could try asking Sutton for the 'overlap' numbers (boys sitting all three of the Sutton LEA grammar exams). But on experience of DS's classmates, only two sat all of them of about eight who did at least one....

I personally expected numbers to be higher but think they will rise as the babyboomers start to hit Year 6.....