National Grammar Schools Association
  lineline lineline lineline lineline

Extracts from the SUPPORT KENT SCHOOLS Campaign

'Raising standards - offering choice'

8 Faversham Road, Lenham, Maidstone, Kent ME17 2PN. TEL: (01822) 851351

Fact Sheet One

 

Index

1. Cost of re-organisation on comprehensive lines in Kent
2. Government Assistance for cost of Re-organisation - Nil
3. Key Stage Three Examinations (1998)
4. Performance of Kent Students in maintained schools at GCSE (1997)
5. Performance of Kent Schools at A Level in Maintained Schools (1997)
6. Participation in Education Post 16
7. Size of Kent Secondary Schools
8. Other Costs of Re-organisation
9. Cost of Educating Students
10. OFSTED Report

1. Cost of re-organisation on comprehensive lines in Kent

The cost to change present system to all-through 11 -18 comprehensive schools without split sites is estimated to be at least £150 million!

Source: Kent Education and Libraries Committee December 1998

Note: Re-organisation to a Sixth Form College system may cost less, but will result in the major movement of students and staff from school to school, causing heavy disruption in education for an entire generation of children.

2. Government Assistance for cost of Re-organisation - Nil

Source: Many, including letters from Ministers and answer to question in House of Commons on 17th December, 1998

3. Key Stage Three Examinations (1998)

Percentage of pupils reaching expected level of attainments for their age:

 
Age Eleven - Key Stage Two (level 4)
Age Fourteen - Key Stage Three (level 5)
 
Kent
National
Comparison
Kent
National
Comparison
English
65
64
Average
69
64
Above Average
Mathematics
59
58
Average
63
59
Above Average
Science
68
69
Average
61
56
Above Average

Source: Times Education Supplement 22/1/99 based on DfEE figures.

Note: This demonstrates conclusively that Kent students in Grammar and High Schools improve performance when compared to the rest of the country, between the ages of 11 and 14. Selection works for all.

4. Performance of Kent Students in maintained schools at GCSE (1997)

Level achieved
Kent
National
Comparison
1 A* to G
95.3%
94.0%
Above Average
5 A* to G
90.5%
88.5%
Above Average
5 A* to C
47.5%
43.3%
Above Average

Source: DfEE and Kent Ofsted Report January 1999

5. Performance of Kent Schools at A Level in Maintained Schools (1997)

Average Point Score per pupil

Number of A Levels Entered
Kent
National
Comparison
2 or more
17.3
17.1
Above Average
Less than 2
2.8
2.7
Above Average

Source: DfEE and Kent Ofsted Report January 1999

Note: The gap here is less than for GCSE because of the high proportion of Kent students staying on in post 16 full time education (see below)

6. Participation in Education Post 16

Percentage of pupils aged 16 remaining in full time education:

Kent
National
South East of England
Comparison
1996
77%
70%
Well Above Average
1997
77%
68%
74%
Well Above Average

Source: Kent Ofsted Report, January 1998; Kent Careers Service - Destination Survey 1997

7. Size of Kent Secondary Schools

Size
Number
Size
Number
Less than 400
3
801 - 900
19
401 - 500
6
901 - 1000
15
501 - 600
8
1001 - 1100
8
601 - 700
11
1101 - 1200
5
701 - 800
20
Greater than 12000
10

Source: Education Authority's Directory 1998

Note: Several of the larger schools are rural comprehensives, not affected by re-organisation. There is national consensus that six forms of entry are needed for a comprehensive school, i.e. 900 plus sixth form. Current government policy that small sixth forms are not effective may require eight forms of entry.

8 . Other Costs of Re-organisation

Staff redeployment, retraining, early retirement, redundancy. Specialist facilities for Grammar/High schools would need to be redeployed, extended. Loss of quality of education provided for a generation of children.

9 . Cost of Educating Students

Taking all pupil costs into account, in 1997/8 each High School pupil on average cost Kent £2,299. Each Grammar School pupil cost £2,260.

Source: Section 122: Schools Budget Statement, Kent Education and Libraries Committee, 1998/9.

10. OFSTED Report

There is no criticism whatever of the selective system in the Kent OFSTED Report. There are recommendations for improvement to the selective process, mainly to speed up appeals. KCC is already proposing to implement these

Fact Sheet Two | Debate