Supporting Families
  • banner8
  • banner6
  • banner11
  • banner10
  • banner12
  • banner2
  • banner13
  • banner7
  • banner3
  • banner9
Monday, 06 April 2015 22:36

Talk at National Tutoring Conference: The Kent 11 Plus test was changed to make it less susceptible to coaching. What happened next?

I was invited to speak at the National Tutoring Conference on 1st April 2015, to the title: "The Kent 11 Plus test was changed to make it less susceptible to coaching. What happened next?" The following is the script I planned to follow, but as those who have heard me speaking before will know. Do not assume I kept to it!

Kent is the largest Local Authority in the country, with 20% of the nation’s grammar schools, 32 in number, all admitting students through success in the Kent 11 plus. Around three years ago, the Cabinet Member for Education in Kent uttered those immortal words: “not fit for purpose” about the Kent Test. There were two main issues, firstly that tutoring was introducing an unfair skew into the outcomes, and secondly that the absence of any element of literacy in the assessments was allowing too many children who were unable to write properly through to grammar school.

I hope you will find that many of the conclusions in this talk apply to grammar schools in other parts of the country.......

Let me be clear; if there is to be an ability test for selection to grammar school, aspiring parents will want their children to do as well as possible, and so create a demand for a tutoring industry. I see nothing wrong with that. However, a Local Authority has a responsibility to be fair to all its children, and state primary schools are not permitted to coach for the test, whilst for many private schools it is their bread and butter, parents often topping this up with further coaching.

In order to answer the question of “what happened next”, I am afraid I need to look at some statistics, which is why I am reading this rather than my usual approach of talking without a script! Most of the data is reproduced on my website which explores a variety of 11 plus issues amongst other themes, in an article entitled “The Conundrum of the Kent Test”.

Kent County Council sets a pass mark in the nationally standardised 11 plus that selects 21% of Kent children as suitable for grammar school. Another 5% are chosen by looking at their work and ability profile, with still more added through the appeals, so that in the end nearly 30% of Kent children are admitted to grammar school in the county. The same rules for deciding if a child is selective apply for out of county children. One complication comes because three of the grammar schools are super-selective - primarily a Kent term to distinguish them from the majority of Kent grammars who, if oversubscribed, select from those who have passed by some sort of distance criterion. The super-selectives choose students on high scores, another five choosing a proportion on high scores, with coaching becoming increasingly important for admission to all these in what can become a fiercely competitive situation.

On a national scale, 21% of children found of grammar school ability equates to selecting on scores of 113 or higher on age standardised tests where children have not been prepared in any way, as in the samples used for comparison. For 2014 entry, the last year of the old test, children passed if they scored 118 or higher in each of three tests: verbal reasoning, non-verbal reasoning and maths, with an aggregate score of 360 or more, the discrepancy being largely due to the preparation and tutoring effect.

For 2015 entry, KCC adopted a different pattern of tests responding to the criticisms, but both still multiple choice: the first test was equally divided between English and maths, the second equally divided between verbal and non-verbal reasoning.

There were three scores produced of equal weighting in English, maths and Reasoning. The pass standard was 106 in each of the three assessments, with an aggregate of 320 or more, in order to produce a total of 21%. In order to understand this dramatic fall from the previous year, I have analysed the data that makes up individual scores and found results as follows:

  21%   Boys 21%   Girls 21%   Total
English 114 116 115
Maths 118 116 117
Reasoning 121 121 121

Several conclusions can be drawn.

Firstly, all these scores are above those of the unprepared national sample in which 21% of children achieved 113 or more. Not surprising, as all nearly all children will have been prepared somehow. Never forget the importance of parents and after school booster classes! Kent boys are only just above the national sample for English! Maths marks are higher than English.

Secondly, the reasoning mark is considerably higher than the other two. In my view, this differential is caused by one or more of the following: a focus of coaching on reasoning tests: more effective coaching on reasoning tests; or simply and most probably that reasoning tests are more susceptible to coaching than the other two.

Thirdly, there is an important difference between the performance of girls and boys. Under the old Kent Test, more boys than girls passed the test after achieving better maths results, with more girls being selected in the second tranche, focusing on school work, the two equalising out. In the new test, more girls than boys pass directly thanks to the introduction of English, and more are also selected in tranche two, so in total 25% of Kent boys and 28% of Kent girls are found selective before appeals. Whilst not relevant to this talk, this has the effect of there being increased pressure on girls’ grammar school places in Kent this year.

Fourthly, there is the surprising issue of why the pass mark for each subject is fixed so low, at 106, in order to get 21% of children selected/ This mark actually sees 34% of children reach this standard in each separate subject, whereas the 21% mark in each subject is much higher. The answer to this is highly relevant to tutors and to schoolteachers. Very few children will have failed the whole test by scoring less than 106 in the reasoning test alone; nearly all that have failed have done so through the maths or the English or both. The reason the pass mark is so low is because far too many children performed poorly in either English or maths, and the pass mark is fixed to allow children needing to reach the standard in all three to get through.

I would anticipate that for the 2015 test the pass mark will rise as the tutoring industry adjusts to the increased priority on the curriculum subjects of maths and English, which cannot be bad for children’s education! I have talked to many parents of children appealing for places in grammar schools this year and am frankly appalled to discover how many tutors have neglected English and maths teaching, as they have focused on going through the hoops of reasoning tests, which have no discernible value after the test is taken. For some tutors, this poses a problem, as teaching curriculum English and maths require additional skills, and I would certainly advise parents to ask more questions about such matters when engaging tutors.

Super selective schools choose those students achieving the highest scores: It is here that tutoring mostly comes into its own, as every mark counts, and with three super-selective schools in West Kent, there is a strong culture of coaching, and finding the best coaches. As those of you who work in that area know, many of the best are booked up a year and more ahead, some children are tutored from the age of five and some go to private schools focused on success at the 11 plus and are then tutored outside school as well. The latter examples are no childhood and in my view can almost add up to child abuse.

The most telling statistic is that for 2014 entry, there was a mushrooming of 161 Kent children scoring the maximum of 423, more than three times as many as most other scores down to 400. For the new test, this figure has fallen to just 8 (7 boys and one girl). As a result, these schools have also seen their individual pass mark tumble as the scores have become more spread out. My understanding is that they are pleased with this as there is greater discrimination.

So what is the answer to my question? I believe that for the 2015 Kent Test, the effect of coaching has been reduced, although for many children it will still make the difference between pass and fail, or decide if a child is to gain admission to a super-selective school. It is ridiculous to claim as some do, that a tutor-proof exam exists, and good tutors will always make a difference although for many bright children they are really an irrelevance with regard to the test. Any child who is tutored from now on ought to see an improvement in their maths and English curriculum performance, critical if they attend a poor school, and that is worthwhile in its own right.

Last modified on Monday, 06 April 2015 23:24

Leave a comment

Make sure you enter the (*) required information where indicated.
Basic HTML code is allowed.

Latest News & Comments

Just click on a news item below to read it in full. Feel free to subscribe to the news via the email link to the right or the RSS Feed at the bottom of the page. Please note that the 800 or so regular subscribers who receive each news item directly are not included in the number of readers recorded below the item. If you have a view on any item posted, please leave a comment. Also feel free to suggest items of news, or areas where comment is needed to: \nNews items appear as and when I have time in a very busy schedule supporting clients.

  • Brook Learning Trust Schools in Trouble: Ebbsfleet Academy; Hayesbrook School; High Weald Academy

     The Brook Learning Trust runs three schools, Ebbsfleet Academy, Hayesbrook School in Tonbridge, and High Weald Academy in Cranbrook and appears to be in serious trouble, both financially and in terms of the standing of all of its three schools. 

    Ebbsfleet 1       High Weald 1    Hayesbrook 2
    I monitor a number of factors that indicate how a school supports its students and how it stands in its locality. These include: pupil vacancy rates in year Seven; popularity of schools expressed through first preferences when making applications; percentage drop out rates from the school for all reasons; and proportion of pupils leaving for Elective Home Education; together with academic performance. These three schools are each amongst the worst in the county on four in the case of Hayesbrook or all five of the first five measures for the other two schools. I consider that they can therefore be regarded as generally, if not academically, failing. These common themes across the Trust’s schools suggest the problem starts with the ethos and standards set by the Trust.

    The situation at High Weald Academy is especially dire, as government is proposing a multi-million pound premises investment into this school which appears to have no future under the Trust.

    I look below at the factors affecting each school and the Trust as a whole. I now have data showing a further fall in first choice applications for each school for Year Seven admission in September 2018, which will surely see the Trust heading for insolvency and for each school immense financial difficulty in providing an acceptable level of education. 

    Written on Wednesday, 28 February 2018 06:21 Be the first to comment! Read 522 times
  • Medway Secondary School Allocations for September 2018: Initial Information and Advice

    Table for allocations below has been completed, with more recent information provided.

    You will find a parallel Kent article here

    The Medway Council Press Release for secondary transfer is the thinnest yet I have seen from the Council on this, or any other subject I can recall. It contains just four facts: 3259 Medway children applied for and were offered places in secondary schools; 91% have been offered a first or second preference school; over 95.5%  were offered one of their preferences; there were 630 applications for Medway school places from children outside Medway. That is it! UPDATE: I have now obtained the full data through an FOI request and inserted it below. I can see no reason why the Council has chosen to hide it.  

    However, there is also a bizarre footnote on a completely different matter, considered below. 

    The table below compares my extrapolation of these numbers with outcomes in previous years. There is also initial advice on what to do if you have not received the school of your choice at the foot of the article on what to do if you have not been offered the school of your choice. This begins as always with my Corporal Jones mantra, do NOTHING in panic! You may regret it. There is no quick fix. 

    Both of the quoted percentages in the Press Release were identical to those in 2017, both a significant fall on 2016, at 93.7% and 97.4% respectively.For 2017 offers, first and second preferences allocated were separated, so one can guess the proportion of first preferences has fallen this year as Medway Council typically tries to fudge its figures. No mention of, or regret about, the unfortunate 147 children with no school of their choice. 

    The cohort size has increased by just 85 children, with the 4.5% who have been given no school of their choice, at approximately 147, five up on 2017.

    Why is the Council so afraid of providing information to its residents?

    Written on Friday, 02 March 2018 12:25 1 comment Read 695 times
  • Kent Secondary School Allocations for September 2018: Initial Information and Advice

    You will find a parallel Medway article here.

    Several updates below, including grammar issues for boys in Longfield, Hartley, NAG, etc. Also look at my response to comment, below. Grammar places for boys in Whitstable, Herne Bay also looking an issue. 

    Kent secondary school allocations have been sent out today for those registered to receive by email and should arrive tomorrow by post for all (weather permitting).

    17,442 Kent children applied for places in schools, 745 more than in 2017, with 79.6% of them being offered their first choice. This is the lowest percentage for at least five years, but just 0.8% down on last year. 765 children been given none of their four choices, at 4.4% of the total, again the highest proportion for at least five years, and well up on last year’s 633. I know that a number of additional school places have been created at pinch points across the county, notably Tunbridge Wells, but I am already hearing of some very difficult situations for some of the children with no school of their choice.

    In spite of another large increase in out of county applications to Kent schools, up 545 to 3,289, just 818 were offered places, only eight more than in 2017. This will have been partially balanced by around 500 going to schools outside Kent.

    You will find more information, including a look at some of the pressure points, together with the tables of outcomes below. You will also find required scores for super-selective schools as these are confirmed (all information welcomed), and initial advice at the foot of the article on what to do if you have not been offered the school of your choice. This begins as always with my Corporal Jones mantra, do NOTHING in panic! You may regret it. There is no quick fix. 

    There is also a link to the limited advice service I now offer. 

    Written on Thursday, 01 March 2018 12:03 12 comments Read 2747 times
  • Knole Academy and the Scandal of Exorbitant Headteacher Pay in Kent and Medway

    Update: Shortly after I published this article, the national BBC led with the same issue on its website, although amazingly there has been no local media interest at all. Is it that this is not of interest as it is what people expect? 

    The headteacher of The Knole Academy in Sevenoaks, a moderately performing single school academy, was paid £210,000 in 2016-17 making her the highest paid academy head or Chief Executive in Kent and Medway. This is an increase of 35% over the past three years after what can only be described as an irresponsible series of decisions by Governors, bringing the whole process into disrepute, and undermining the credibility of the very real financial crisis in schools, as explained below. By contrast the Principal of Homewood School, the largest secondary school in the county, had a salary of just £110,000 last year, one of majority of secondary heads around or below £100,000.


    After Knole the next two highest paid heads are the Principals of Leigh Academy and Wilmington Academy, both part of the Leigh Academy Trust, who each received £200,000 in remuneration, including their roles as Directors of the Trust. They were followed by the CEOs of two of Kent’s largest Academy Trusts, both responsible for more than a dozen primary and secondary schools: Swale AT and Leigh AT at £190,000 and £180,000 respectively.

    Grammar School Academy Headteachers are generally paid from around £85,000 to £110,000 annually, with Dartford Grammar School, the largest and most oversubscribed grammar school in the county on the latter sum. Highest paid Grammar School Head is at Rainham Mark Grammar, Medway. with £155,000 (£90,000 for HT salary, £65,000 for Academy Trust CEO), followed by Barton Court, Canterbury, at £125,000 (also a Trust CEO).

    At primary level the previous highest earner, the Head of Meopham Community Academy, has now retired from his £150,000 salary post, his replacement being employed at less than half of that rate. The highest paid heads of schools or multi academy trusts I have found this time round are the same two single standing academies as previously: The Academy of Woodlands in Gillingham, £105,000 in 2015-16, and St Stephen’s Academy, a Junior school in Canterbury on, the same figure for 2016-17.

    I look more closely at the Knole situation, and that of other high paying academies below. 

    Written on Wednesday, 21 February 2018 20:29 5 comments Read 1502 times
  • Medway Council fails its most vulnerable children

    Medway Council has once again failed its children, this time the most vulnerable, as confirmed by a scathing Ofsted Report on its ‘services’ to children with Special Education Needs and Disabilities, published this week. The report concludes ‘Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector (HMCI) has determined that a Written Statement of Action is required because of significant areas of weakness in the local area’s practice’. I think that is putting it politely. There are strengths identified; it just happens that all these appear to be down to the health service and not education.

    Concerns centre about chaotic management of the ‘Service’, resulting in failure to take necessary action. This can be seen from the following quotes: ’Medway’s education and service leaders do not share one vision and strategy for SEN and/or disabilitiesNo arrangements are in place to ensure effective joint oversight and clear lines of accountabilityLittle progress has been made in addressing several of the pressing priorities for improvement identified as far back as 2012Leaders’ understanding of what has and has not improved in the meantime is limited. I could have chosen many others.


    'The collaborative work between professionals and children and their families to plan services and meet individual needs, known as co-production, is weak at both a strategic and individual level' This criticism is underpinned by the heavy criticism of the implementation of Education and Health Care Plans for children with the greatest needs, which are at the heart of Departmental work, and ‘A considerable number of parents shared concerns with inspectors that the needs of their children are not being identified and met sufficiently well’.

    There is of course reference to Medway's record exclusion rates: ‘Although improving, rates of permanent and fixed-term exclusion are still notably higher for pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities in Medway than for similar pupils nationally, as it is for all pupils. Lack of specialist provision has brought serious consequences for pupils with severe SEN or disabilities travelling out of Medway daily on long and very expensive journeys.  

    Written on Saturday, 10 February 2018 22:33 4 comments Read 446 times
  • Goodwin Academy – SchoolsCompany Trust on the way out?

    Updated 15th February: see also comment below.

    KM Online 16th February shows details of the job losses at this previously recovering school, expected because of the failures of SchoolsCompany. 

    The new Interim Chief Executive of SchoolsCompany Trust has apologised in a letter to parents of pupils at the Goodwin Academy for ‘previous financial failings, which are unacceptable’.

    Sadly, this has come as little surprise to me, as I foresaw issues as early as 2014, when I noted in an article that SchoolsCompany had contributed to the startling decline of the predecessor school Castle Community College (CCC), in Deal from Ofsted Outstanding to Special Measures in three short years. As a reward SchoolsCompany took over as sponsor of the school as recently as July 2016. The school was awkwardly renamed SchoolsCompany Goodwin Academy, presumably to advertise the name of the Sponsors as a priority, above creating a new school image.     

    The Academy limped on for a period, after 2014, with the 'support' of SchoolsCompany,  unpopular with a third of its places unfilled, and underperforming, although there have recent strong signs of improvement under new school leadership. Unusually, eight of the eleven Company Trustees were paid a salary by the Trust, hardly an inducement for encouraging scrutiny. After the school received a Financial Notice to Improvefrom the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) in October, seven of the Trustees resigned including the Executive Principal of the Company This left the school with just four Trustees including the CEO and founder of the company, Elias Achilleos, although he now appears to have been replaced by the new Interim Chief Executive.  The Trust has demonstrably failed some of the Financial Notice's requirements for improvement. 

    Goodwin Academy

    The school will clearly have a future in its new £25 million premises opened four months ago on October 6th, just three weeks before Trustees resigned en masse, but it looks increasingly likely it will not be with Schools Company. Indeed a more than doubling of first preferences to 173 for 2018 admission, shows confidence in the school and its leadership, achieved without obvious input from the few remaining Trust members. 

    Written on Thursday, 08 February 2018 10:43 4 comments Read 1041 times