I have retired from my appeals advisory service, but offer a Telephone Advisory Service offering advice on Review, Admissions and Appeals as explained here. As in previous years, I will also publish articles on Medway Test results and Review in more detail as I receive them. You will find fuller articles on 2017 Test results here, and Review here.

Holcombe Grammar School: I have no idea what will happen with admissions and appeals at Holcombe following the chaotic decision making by the school  for 2018 admissions. You will find a number of articles by putting the word 'Holcombe' in my website search engine. 

Schools Adjudicator:  I have secured decisions following complaints to the Schools Adjudicator who ruled that proposed changes to the Admission Rules for the following schools were unfair, primarily to local children: Brompton Academy (withdrew proposals before Adjudicator ruled); Fort Pitt Grammar; Holcombe Grammar; Rochester Grammar. Sir Joseph Williamson's withdrew their proposals before they went to the Adjudicator. You will find details of the decisions here. 

A posting from the Medway 11 plus Forum, without comment: 'All, Congrats to your kids and to all parents !My daughter passed with a score of 659, it is a great news, but we leave in Greenwich. Do you think this mark would be enough to be accepted in Rochester grammar ? We know they changed their criteria this year (feeder school first) ....so we are a little confused. Any other Medway grammar accepting students based on score only ? Thank you all for your precious help best for you all.

Dr Jo Saxton remains a very influential person in national education circles as confirmed by the recent biographical outline in the TES. This is part of a massive PR campaign to promote the Trust through local and national media, and extensive social media activity with cross-feed twitter messages giving an unremitting positive picture about the Trust and its schools. As my previous two articles demonstrate, factual accuracy and consistency appear to come way down the list of priorities, although the passion behind the project shines through. Indeed, the Trust website now tells us that Folkestone was recently ranked by The Times newspaper in the top 10 coolest places to live in the UK, quite a turn around from the comparison at the top of this article. 

Turner Schools also suffers from an obsession about ensuring I publish correct factual material on this website, although in spite of my repeated requests for examples or details of errors I have been provided with only one minor mistake about people’s titles which I immediately corrected. Unfortunately, the principle does not appear to be reciprocated.

I have now checked on the following facts with the Trust as requested, but have had no response in more than a fortnight.

‘A number of schools local to the area with similar demographics, have an annual turnover of teaching staff of approximately 13-15%. …The figures we have represented are in line with the national turnover of teaching staff and changes in staffing at the Academy are consistent with this and, in our view, it would be both responsible journalism and in the public interest, for you to inform your readers of this context’.

Presumably a problem with arithmetic, as the Folkestone Academy proportion is over twice the one quoted for local schools! However, this neatly provides the solution to the school decision to reduce teaching staff by 42 named posts without redundancy.

It has been reported that amongst the staff departing were 20 teachers in management roles. Of course it could be argued that, by replacing staff en masse, this is providing a new environment to enable Dr Saxton’s ideas to flourish. Time will tell.

What is clear is that what Dr Saxton rightly described as a very poor outcome and the claim that it is the result of five years of poor teaching, is completely at odds with a recent quote from  her in KentLive: “The Folkestone Academy is absolutely a success story. There has been ten years of success, more than 500 young people have gone to university”, and with the 2017 GCSE performance.

Also ‘according to Turner Schools chief executive Dr Jo Saxton,both schools will outperform all schools in the south of England – excluding grammars - and provide “success without selection”’.  This hardly provides a good start but, as Dr Saxton states, there are no quick fixes. This could indeed  be appropriate if it were not for all the attempts to paper over the cracks as demonstrated over and over again in this series of articles, rather than acknowledge them.   

The article on the school website designed in an attempt to boost the image of academic success this summer is headed ‘Folkestone Academy Celebrates Encouraging Uptick in Students Securing Top Grades’ . Never having heard the term ‘Uptick’  I checked it out and it is defined as ‘A small increase or slight upward trend’ used in financial circles to describe movement in selling prices of shares. Why on earth use such a deviation from normal language? Who is it designed to impress?

The article explains that ‘Students at Folkestone Academy are celebrating an increase of 75% in the number of top grades achieved, with two pupils even receiving the new 9, equivalent of A** a grade awarded only to the country’s very best students. Last year saw the introduction of the new exams in English and Maths, but students this summer sat the new tests across virtually all subjects’. The key to the Folkestone ‘success’ lies in the fact that the expansion by 28 subject areas of the new Grading system allows many more opportunities to achieve the new top grades, so an uptick is hardly ‘reporting accurately’ as I am so often urged to do. I await the public explanation for the considerable fall in performance with interest. None of this detracts form the hard work of those students who have delivered in spite of the turmoil around them.

You will find initial figures released by KCC below, mainly taken from the official press release, together with further information and ways I can support you. I find that the information articles on this website (right hand side of this article and every page of the website), with links below, answer the majority of questions I receive. 

Although KCC cannot guarantee every Kent child who has passed, a place in a Kent grammar school (and not necessarily of their choice), there were no reported cases in recent years of grammar qualified Kent children not getting in who were looking for a place, although some have had to go to appeal. Further thoughts below. 

Some 350 additional children are eligible for a single grammar school through success in the Dover, Shepway, Mayfield (Gravesend Girls) or Highsted (Sittingbourne Girls) Tests.

Notes: (1) I don't yet have data for boys and girls differentiated for this year, but will include this as soon as it is available

        (2)  'Other' includes children who are home educated. 

        (3) Some totals do not add up, as late adjustments were made. 

Please Note that this article has been produced to meet the Thursday 4 p.m. deadline and is likely to be revised at my leisure, if I have any over the next three weeks!

If you wish to contact me please read the information at the foot of the page and use the Contact Me Form together with all the information I request. If it is a simple question I will attempt to respond to it directly. 

For information you will find Oversubscription and vacancies in Kent Grammar schools on allocation for Admission September 2019 provides considerable information on pressure of places, as does the series of pages on Individual Kent Secondary Schools, which also contain additional information on each school, including take up of places. I am afraid I am behind in updating some of these pages (look at update date in top left hand corner), so if you would like more up recent information, please let me know. You will also find additional data on OFSTED Ratings, Examination Performance, and Appeal Statistics together with other important news, comment and information here. Also try entering the name of the school you are interested in in the Website Search engine: this may provide other news, comment and information articles about that school over recent years.

I will shortly publish an article on school appeals statistics for schools for entry in September 2018. You will find last year's article here, with a link to further outcomes. In the meantime you may wish to consult the relevant information pages for Kent Grammar School Appeals or Oversubscription Appeals the latter for both non-selective and grammar schools, or the Individual Schools section.  

For those obsessed with individual Kent Test scores for other children, there is a breakdown of the 2017 figures here. This is unlikely to be repeated for 2018, as KCC have now correctly applied the Freedom of Information Act and such individual scores are no longer available. This information will also rightly be no longer be available for individual FOI requests for detailed information relating to scores, as these can enable individual children’s performances  to be identified.  

I suspect the overwhelming majority of the others will have had other preferences met, including the M25 tourists, whose poor children take grammar school tests all around the ring.

I anticipate as with last year, the proportion of Kent girls being found suitable for grammar school will be slightly higher than that for boys, last year 26.6% girls to 24.3% boys, but in both cases all Kent children should be allocated a grammar school place eventually, not necessarily of their choice.

The main pressure areas are West and North West Kent and Whitstable/Herne Bay. In West Kent all Kent girls should get a grammar school place in the District, not always the one of their choice. The boys’ situation has eased considerably with additional places being put into all three schools and the two super-selectives, Judd and Skinners, now both giving priority for most of their places to local boys. There is always a shakedown in West Kent and some boys may need to go to appeal as in previous years, but in past years, all have been successful at one of the schools, to the best of my knowledge.

North West Kent continues to have the greatest pressure, caused by enormous numbers applying from London Boroughs, Dartford Grammar turning away 313 grammar qualified first choices last year (and rising year on year) and, along with the girls rejecting local applicants whose pass scores were not high enough (disgracefully and contrary to promises made to the Schools Adjudicator when he approved their new arrangements). However, the two Wilmington Grammars now give priority mainly to Kent children and although they have increased greatly in popularity should pick up all local children who have qualified and choose them, as the number of out of county siblings continues to fall. Last year there was a specific problem for boys in the Longfield, New Ash Green area, but in the end all who wished secured places at Gravesend Grammar

Whitstable/Herne Bay remains difficult for boys, with no local grammar school and extensive building development in the area, some having to settle for a grammar school in Thanet. Whilst some boys will find places in Canterbury, there is not a problem in capacity for girls in the city.

 In other areas the situation can be fluid, and the 5215 places will certainly expand further,  with temporary increases as schools measure demand and capacity.

There will always be horror stories about pressure on grammar school places -they make good media copy, especially with proposals to expand grammar school places (but expansion has been happening for years without legislation and will no doubt continue). The reality is that eight of the 32 Kent grammar schools had vacancies last March on allocation for the second year running, spread across the county apart from the West and NW. 

You will find an early history of the issue and my complaint here, written in July 2017 (!).

The decision is published on the ICO website, here, although it does not reference the tortuous path to bring this about, nor the misinformation provided by the school on the way.

The final figure of 225 children leaving schools for EHE in 2015-16, required by the ICO to follow an analysis back from first principles,  is a remarkable reduction from the result of my initial FOI response which recorded 377 children who left schools for EHE. Comparison of the two lists of schools shows absolutely no relationship between the two, so I still have zero confidence in this final figure, and I assume Medway councillors are in the same situation.  I have failed to find any recent Council report on EHE, so am unable to check, but would appreciate any link.

As a side effect of my complaint, I obtained the 2016-17 exclusion data from Medway Council, which showed 63 permanent exclusions for Medway, down from the astonishingly high 81 of 2015-16, and only slightly lower than Kent’s 68 (Kent being six times as large as Medway) but still in the bottom 20% of Authorities in the country.

 My initial request in April 2017 also included a request for the 2016-17 EHE figures to that date, and the request that went through the ICO has produced a figure of 227. This is considerably larger than the original figure of 173 I was provided with in October 2017 for the whole year, so I still have no idea of the real final outcome. Does anyone on Medway Council know this, given the importance currently being placed nationally on EHE issues.

 As so often when reporting on Medway matters, what a shambles and what a disgrace.  

Unfortunately, KCC sent me the 2017 information for the 14 non-selective schools whose appeals they heard, by mistake instead of the 2018 data, and I am still awaiting the replacements. This article will be updated on receipt, but I have used the original temporarily for the tables below. I am still awaiting outcomes from two of the 55 schools which held appeals.

A new phenomenon is the large number of appeals  being submitted this term across a number of schools, perhaps reflecting unhappiness with the school originally allocated. 

Follow the links to find my general appeal information and advice for Kent Grammars, Medway Grammars, and oversubscription for grammars and non-selectives. Other recent articles include Kent and Medway Test outcomes and Kent GCSE results 2018.

Most Kent secondary schools are Academies, Foundation or Voluntary Aided schools, with the right to choose their Appeal Panel provider. For the past few years the secondary school split has been roughly equal between Panels provided by KCC and other providers. 

* Unfortunately, KCC sent me the 2017 data on non-selective appeals organised by KCC appeal panels at 14 schools in error. I have used this data temporarily to compile this chart, but will update it as soon as I receive the correct information.

You will find outcomes of all individual secondary school appeal outcomes for Kent here and Medway here including nearly all for 2018. Several pages are out of date because of pressure on time but I am happy to update appeal data if requested. The second of two articles on appeal outcomes in 2017 is here. I don't collect details of Reception appeals for the small number of individual primary schools, that organise their own appeals, as success rates are likely to be equally low because of Infant Class Legislation.

Whilst many schools will tend to see similar patterns year on year, circumstances for individual schools can change sharply, as can be seen from the Individual Schools tables, with some examples below.

In Thanet, there was controversy as the head of Dane Court attacked Chatham and Clarendon in the media alleging that they (as do some other grammar and non-selective schools) took on a large number of additional pupils through the appeal process to boost finances. This follows a decision by C&C to get rid of the previous Independent Panel after the 2015 appeals because they were not upholding enough appeals. KCC Panels have ever since been more obliging, as can be seen from the data, with 54 out of 82 appeals being upheld. This has also created concern amongst other local schools; primaries, as they see what they regard as clearly non-selective children being assessed grammar, and non-selective schools being raided of their more promising pupils. Dane Court itself saw a fall in its rate of appeals upheld to 11%.

Similar concerns have been expressed in Canterbury about Simon Langton Girls, which has suffered a fall in popularity following recent controversy, although this year the success rate fell to 64% from 2017’s sky high 82%, all initially non-selective. The heavily oversubscribed Simon Langton Boys operates an opposite policy, with the Independent Panel upholding 7 or 8 appeals each year almost always, as in 2018, from boys previously found selective. The mixed Barton Court having previously been generous with its appeals to boost numbers has now reached capacity so just 7 appeals, 6 from pupils already selective were upheld.

Dover Grammar Girls and the two Sittingbourne grammars continue to see a high rate of success, although Harvey Grammar fell sharply to 10%. Other schools were all below the county pass rate of 30%.

High success rates at both of the Ashford grammars.

The Gravesend Boys Panel was faced with both a large number of boys appealing from London Boroughs and also Essex, and a surge in numbers of local boys passing the Kent Test. With 40 appellants already being found selective, 13 had appeals upheld, mainly or wholly from the local area of Longfield and New Ash Green. One other boy was offered a place from the 81 appellants. At Mayfield, just one of the 14 girls originally found selective was offered a place, along with 12 others as the Panel also appears to have favoured local girls.

The other five grammar schools all had similar outcomes to previous years and, apart from Chatham Grammar Girls, all 31 successful appeals came from pupils who had previously been found selective.

 As noted, I am currently hampered by the lack of current information from 14 Kent schools, and will update this section as they arrive, but just 13 other non selective schools organised their own appeals across Kent and Medway, with 29% of appeals being upheld.

Otherwise, there are few common factors in any of these sets of appeals, as they reflect individual school circumstances, so I suggest you consult the data for Individual Schools for details.   

The most pressured districts are Thanet and Maidstone. In Thanet, where four of the six schools are heavily oversubscribed as many families try and avoid the other two, there were 154 appeals (counting some from 2017), with 25 upheld, just 16% successful, although many families will have made multiple appeals. In Maidstone, there is considerable polarisation of popularity amongst the non-selective schools. All four with appeals held these using KCC Panels which last year upheld just 20% of appeals, with St Simon Stock allowing none through.

Dartford, which not so long ago featured Leigh Academy as the most oversubscribed school in the county, had just 5 appeals in one school, the new Inspiration School, part of the Leigh Academy Trust that runs four of the six Dartford schools.

Most difficult school to win an appeal was Bennett Memorial, where just one out of 24 appeals was upheld. I know from past experience that it normally takes a very special set of circumstances to convince the appeal panel.

Next in difficulty comes Brompton Academy, the second most oversubscribed school in Kent and Medway (to St George’s Foundation School in Thanet which had a very similar statistic last year), where just 5 out of 63 appeals was successful. On the other hand, Rainham School for Girls had all 18 appeals upheld.

Please note that, as last year, these Provisional results are issued now to inform parents making secondary school choices. For the 2017 results, a number of schools' results were amended as students in certain categories were removed from the data. Few of these changes made a significant difference, so the current guidance is pretty reliable if it is one of your criteria for choice.  

Both Progress 8 and Attainment 8 are measured by an arcane formula combining results in eight curriculum subjects to produce numbers whose meaning and spread is very difficult to comprehend, but enable schools to be placed in an order. They  are measured across eight subjects, English maths, 3 qualifications from sciences, computer science, history, geography and languages, and 3 other additional approved qualifications.  for Progress 8 there is a target national average score of 0, with the great majority of schools being between +1 and -1. The government Floor Standard, or expectation is to be above -0.5, in which case “the school may come under increased scrutiny and receive additional support”. and eight Kent secondary schools fail to meet this, including Simon Langton Boys. There are further details of the outcomes below.  

At the foot of the table are sixteen non-selectives who are below the government floor standard and must all be concerned at their performance which will itself hinder future recruitment of the quality staff and leaders needed to improve matters. This is a sharp increase on the 2017 figure of six schools and may suggest an increasing polarisation of non-selective schools in the county as those at the top perform better than ever. Four schools have been here for all three years of the new scheme: Astor College; Hartsdown; Royal Harbour; and Holmesdale. the first three of these, along with Oasis Academy, Isle of Sheppey and Folkestone Academy, also occupying places at the foot of the Attainment table. A total of ten out of the 16 schools are situated on the coast. Oasis and Folkestone are powerful examples of how poor leadership can destroy young people's future prospects, both featuring in previous articles in this website, and both having had a rapid turn over of headteachers. I have branded Oasis Academy and Hartsdown, both serving areas of high social deprivation,  as 'Tough Love Academies'  using unreasonably harsh disciplinary methods for minor offences guaranteed to alienate pupils who above all need support. The most recent example of poor leadership has seen Folkestone Academy plunge into this group of struggling schools  as the high profile Turner Schools trust thrashes around trying unproven methods to educate children, hoping to cover up their failures with extravagant PR claims. 

Astor College in Dover has been at the foot of the tables for years, having receiving two  Warnings  about unacceptable standards from the Department for Education, most recently  in 2015. Dover Christ Church Academy is also in both lists, St Edmund's Catholic the third Dover school, being just above the cut off. The Dover Test for for grammar school entrance sees over 150 children annually who have not passed the Kent Test taken out of the system, which will inevitably be a factor in this low performance across the district. 

Leigh UTC also appears in both lists, down on both from 2017. Whilst its position as fourth lowest in the county for Progress 8 is significant, it should be borne in mind that there were only 36 pupils in Year 11. Medway UTC the only other local University Technical College came bottom in Medway by some way in Progress 8. 

Of the other schools at the foot of the table, Malling School is of particular interest. Five years ago, with the recent GCSE cohort it was another school of last resort for admission, but has been turned round by strong leadership, and is now heavily oversubscribed. It also carries the largest and most popular SEN Unit for children with EHCPs (the successors to SEN statements) in the county, whose results are included in the tables. It won't be there next year. Other schools at the bottom of both lists are Marsh Academy and High Weald Academy. 

 Spires Academy which struggled since long before it became an academy, having no strong catchment in the small community of Sturry, near Canterbury, had a disastrous period being run by the previous Headteacher of controversial Simon Langton Girls Grammar, but  is now part of the E21C (Education for the 21st Century) Academy Trust in Bromley. It is one of a number of schools which have been turned round with a strong improvement and is now in the middle of the table.

Grammar School Progress 8

Chatham Grammar School for Girls' excellent Progress grades at last show major improvement under its new sponsor University of Kent Academy Trust and management by Brompton Academy after years of disappointing outcomes by a variety of measures.

Rochester Grammar continues to head both major tables with its intake dominated by the highest performing girls in the Medway Test. The other Thinking Schools Academy Trust school, Holcombe Grammar, has had a torrid year, bogged down by controversy, which may have taken its eye off the ball being well adrift in both the main measures. Government divides progress outcomes into five groups around a median of 'Average', the large majority of grammar schools across the country exceeding this, arguably because bright pupils have the greater potential to work towards.

 Non Selective Attainment

Rainham Girls put Thomas Aveling into second place.

Victory Academy comes bottom, setting up a double with Holcombe Grammar as its Executive Head oversees both schools.

Currently, the Howard Trust runs five Medway primary schools, including the troubled Temple Mill (which has recently lost its headteacher) as well as the Howard School itself and, I understand is looking to expand further. 

Medway UTC website carried a list of local Trustees and Governors which includes senior members of major local businesses and Universities, together with Les Wicks of Medway Council. 'The report warns that despite their wealth of knowledge and experience from business and education, Medway UTC’s governors have “presided over a failing school”.The report warns that despite their wealth of knowledge and experience from business and education, Medway UTC’s governors have “presided over a failing school” (quote). I am afraid they were clearly not fit to be put in charge of a £12 million capital investment, together with all the other investment of resources, skills, young people's ambitions, etc that go with it. 

If one wishes to seek any excuse for this dire performance it comes in looking at the whole misguided UTC sector. Nine of the 49 UTCs opened since 2010 have already closed, several after just a couple of years existence.  Five of the 26 to have been inspected by Ofsted have been placed into Special Measures. Even Michael Gove, the architect of the UTC experiment acknowledged last year that it had failed. 

Medway's young people are fortunate that they are educated in a sector where nearly all schools are thriving as academies independent of the dreadful Medway Council, so there is little incentive to leave to join the UTC in Year 10. Whilst I do wish the Howard Academy Trust all the best in making this work, I fear it may yet be another white elephant doomed to offer students a bad deal. 

This article looks primarily at the most recent very significant Ofsted Report, as I have commented extensively on aspects of the school before, most recently here.

It is frankly  impossible to reconcile the 2018 Report with the previous one in 2014, or indeed the one for 2011 before the school became an academy which was also ‘Good’.

There is no doubt the most recent Ofsted Report appears to set out to damn the previous leadership of the school, although exceptionally it makes no reference at all to the very positive 2014 Inspection. That described a school very different from the one now painted as existing before the current headteacher was appointed just two years later.

“From his first day of term in September 2016 the headteacher did not shy away from describing the school as it was. To pupils, staff and parents he laid bare its major educational weaknesses. These included well-below-average progress in all years, weak teaching, and GCSE results in the bottom 10% of all schools, along with poor attendance and behaviour. The headteacher has taken effective action to turn the school around. However, some parents and staff have found some of the changes he has made unpalatable and unsettling”. Coincidentally, this is an approach also used in the other two ‘Tough Love’ academies, which have seen a parallel sharp fall in parental choices. At Hartsdown, the number of first choices has almost exactly halved from 99 in 2014 to 51 in 2018.

There is little doubt that Hartsdown is the most socially disadvantaged school in Kent, and the Report does not mince its words about the problems.

‘In 2017, only 15% of all pupils attained a pass (grade 4) in English and mathematics. Pupils’ progress was well below the national average. There are many entwined reasons behind these very low GCSE results. The previous poor teaching, an unsuitable curriculum and other factors such as pupils’ low attendance contributed to this. Pupils’ standards on entry to Hartsdown are well below the national average. When the present Year 7 pupils arrived, the great majority of them had reading ages below those typical for their age, and poor skills in mathematics. A very high proportion of pupils are vulnerable and/or disadvantaged. An above-average number of them leave and enter the school after Year 7. All these factors inhibit progress and, in the past, have had a negative impact on the school’s GCSE results. In recent years the proportion of pupils from minority ethnic backgrounds has increased to at least one-third of Year 11 in 2017. Often, these pupils do not speak English on arrival or have not experienced formal education. With very low starting points and poor attendance, these pupils’ progress is well below that of other pupils’. 

Amongst the current strengths relating primarily to academic progress, are that: ‘Pupils’ reading is improving rapidly as they now have regular, intensive practice sessions - Pupils in Years 7 and 8 are making increasingly good progress, having only experienced the school under its new good leadership. Progress overall is improving from a very low base -The headteacher has a demonstrable commitment to ensuring that all pupils, irrespective of their backgrounds, achieve as well as they can. He has the full support of the trust and its executive headteacher - Underpinning the headteacher’s drive to turn around the school is a loyal and hardworking senior leadership team whose members now know exactly what they are responsible for. Some are new to their roles but all enthusiastically promote the school’s values of ‘scholarship, teamwork, resilience, integrity, vision and excellence’; Teaching has improved. The majority of subject leaders and teachers are enthusiastic, and have welcomed training which has developed their teaching skills’. (selection of comments).

Leadership and Management are unsurprisingly found to be good. All the other four main aspects Require Improvement: Quality of Teaching, Learning and Assessment; Personal Development, Behaviour and Welfare; Outcomes for Pupils; and 16-19 Study Programmes.

With regard to the Sixth Form of just 39 pupils, all Year 12 were on a course during the Inspection, and few Year 13 lessons. The Report manages to be very positive, with no criticism at all, but the Sixth Form still Requires Improvement!

The Report reflects the enormous fund of goodwill for the school to improve, especially from the Coastal Academies Trust which sponsors the school. As for Governors: ‘Board members bring considerable wisdom and relevant experience, in finance, education and personnel, to their deliberations. They know very well how much further the school has to go to be valued and appreciated by the entire school community’.

There is still a massive task needed to win back that community with a lukewarm assessment of communications: Senior leaders take some steps to keep in touch with parents. They provide some information in the languages which some families speak at home. Parents are encouraged to attend meetings with the headteacher. Nevertheless, the very small number of responses and comments written by parents are very mixed. While some parents praise the headteacher’s good work, others have less confidence in the leadership of the school. Pupils’ responses were equally mixed.

An academic study from the University of Kent pays tribute to Hartsdown Academy's work with newly-arrived unaccompanied asylum seeking and refugee children at the school, which is to be applauded. Unfortunately, there is a downside to this in that publicly known expertise with children who have been disadvantaged in some way (a more common example is children with SEN)  can and has been accompanied by a fall in popularity amongst mainstream families and the school suffers  a cycle of decline in take up which Hartsdown is already experiencing. 

2018 GCSE results will be an important milestone for the school, especially Progress 8 which shows how far pupils have travelled. These children are amongst the most vulnerable children in the county; and if this approach works as Ofsted clearly thinks it will, then that will be wonderful news. However, sadly good works amongst those who have had the worst experiences imaginable do not work as a marketing tool, however much they impress Ofsted.  

I am clearly not qualified to make my own first hand assessment of the work of the academy, being neither Inspector, current educationalist, nor having any personal experience of such a situation. As such, I rely on the wide variety of data available together with valued opinions offered, to come to my personal conclusions. The people of Margate desperately and rightly need Hartsdown to become a good school by any measure. I sincerely hope this turns out to be the way to do it, even though it appears wrapped up in the personality of Matthew Tate, the Principal, and still sits very uncomfortably with me.

Given the nature of much of the good work now being carried out by Hartsdown is there a case for it receiving some sort of special status to protect this?

Please do not take anything I have written in this article as an endorsement of the academy model. I still believe its greatest weakness is the lack of accountability for those academies that abuse the freedoms they are given. 

Sadly, a major reason the academy programme came into existence, supported by both Conservative and Labour parties was a concern about low standards in Local Authority schools. The competition between the two sectors has certainly improved standards across the board, although the major weakness of the academy sector remains that lack of accountability which affects a minority of schools. In Kent there are still examples of both academies and Local Authority schools that suffer from this, where there is poor leadership.

The seven schools are: Deal Parochial CEP, The Downs CEP, Hornbeam Primary, Sandown School, Kingsdown and Ringwould CEP, Northbourne  CEP, and Sholden CEP. They cannot incorporate the other two local primary schools as these are already academies, committed elsewhere: St Mary’s Catholic Primary (part of the Kent Catholic Schools partnership) and Warden Bay School, lead school of the Veritas Academy Trust.

All these schools currently have a Good Ofsted Report. Five of them are CofE primaries and so will be familiar with the work of the Aquila Academy Trust, run by the Canterbury Anglican Diocese and one of the most successful in the county, with 18 schools to its name. Aquila has recently taken three of its Kent primaries, all failed under KCC, to two Outstanding and one Good Ofsted outcomes.  The five proposed Members of the Trust, who would appoint the Trustees hardly look as if they are out for themselves, headed by the Director of Education for the Diocese of Canterbury who is a a previous primary headteacher, and each bringing valuable skills to the operation.

The failure of Goodwin Academy has been covered extensively in these pages, beginning here under its previous name Castle Community School. The linked article contains two sections on the school, but finished ominously with the sentence: ‘SchoolsCompany already has a strong presence in the county, working with Kent County Council on its Schools Challenge strategy for supporting underperforming schools’.  In a combined operation, the two organisations brought the school down, my final article being here, although subsequently the school has been taken over by the Thinking Schools Academy Trust based in Medway.

Too many local people, including some who are now highly critical of this proposal, bear responsibility for uncritically championing Schools Company and the Goodwin Academy.

Those who follow this website regularly, know that I can be a fierce critic of unaccountable academies. As with media coverage, I do tend to focus on the minority of academies where there are major issues. For a full list of Kent and Medway Multi-Academy Trusts, go to here. This lists 73 Trusts, of which I have criticised 14 in articles. None of these are local community primary school Trusts, of which there are 17.

I can only see good coming from the seven headteachers committed to doing their best for their schools, firmly rooted in the local community, together with the fine team of Members brought together to oversee the work of the proposed Trust.

I am saddened by some of the unjustified rumours circulating about ‘academies’ deployed in an attempt to shoot down this proposal, but whilst certainly true of some do not apply to most academies. The proposed structure of the DEALT is such that these attacks are not realistic or in some case simply untrue. The two other thriving local primary academies are a powerful demonstration of this! Indeed, the freedoms these schools have may well be an additional factor in the decision to emulate them.

Labour Party policy, which up to now has been fully supportive of the expansion of the academy model, saw a slight change of direction at its recent Conference. Quite rightly it wants to rein in the excesses of some academy chains (such as the unlamented SchoolsCompany) which like the Conservative Party  has ,previously ignored for the greater good of the academy image. However, there is no sign of wanting to stop the expansion of the sector, except that Labour has proposed no school should be forced to become an academy (although what should happen to a failing school under Local Authority control?).

Already some 40% of Kent primary schools are academies or are in the process of changing status, with more coming through every month. As this continues, the funding that KCC has available to support its remaining schools decreases, with several schools described here running into difficulties because of inadequate monitoring or action. KCC has introduced a new model of providing services at a cost to meet this challenge, which are also open to academies, so any advantage that Local Authority schools may have in this area is vanishing fast, hastening the drive to change, as academies also have a choice of where to turn to.

We do not want our community schools to become part of a Multi-Academy Trust because:

Average salaries for teachers in academies are lower – there is no evidence at all for this assertion. Many pay their staff higher salaries to recruit and retain them.

Please note: The data quoted in this article comes from my full analysis of permanent and fixed-term exclusions across Kent, which I shall publish soon. 

One of the main problems in dealing with Turner Schools, the new Multi-Academy Trust set up by Dr Saxton to run four schools in Folkestone, is the relentless PR machine, using uncritical national and local media. As disaster follows disaster at Folkestone Academy, the blame is now laid squarely on the staff of the school, who previously achieved good GCSE results and a Good Ofsted.

In 2016-17, with Turner Schools only being involved with Folkestone Academy in the summer term, there was one permanent exclusion across all schools in the District. There were just 682 fixed term exclusions from all the five secondary and ten primary academies, a far cry from the 1,211 in Folkestone Academy alone this year (I don’t have more detailed information available at present).

In 2017-18, there were five permanent exclusions in Shepway, all from Primary Schools. As well as the Folkestone Academy fixed term exclusion figure, which dwarfs that of all other schools in the county, the highest primary school fixed term exclusion figure for Shepway was at Martello Grove. This is another Turner School, second smallest Shepway primary, with 32 exclusions, showing that the platitudes quoted above are not confined to Folkestone Academy alone.

Back in February, Chief executive of Turner Schools Jo Saxton said: “We now want almost every conversation to be about learning, and what we could hear from staff was that too many conversations used to be about punishment. Perhaps there should have been  more conversation about punishment to tackle the dreadful climate creating this appalling exclusion rate, also seen at Turner Schools' Martello Grove.

 Both Kent and Medway show a fall in the number of families ‘choosing’ Elective Home Education in recent years, sometimes seen as a route for schools to avoid Permanent Exclusion; a further article to follow.

The rules applying to the official release of information such as that quoted in this article forbid release of exact numbers less than five in any category. This is to avoid possible identification of individuals. 

The following table of national rates of exclusion shows Kent consistently below, and recently well below National percentages for Permanent Exclusions, with Medway consistently above and recently well above the same (2017-18 data not available yet). It was only in 2016-17 that Kent fell below the national figure for Fixed Term exclusions, with Medway consistently above. 

The exclusion rate amongst children in Special Schools or with a Statement of SEN or now the Education Health Care Plan has also fallen from the early unacceptable high levels, although I have not requested SEN figures for some years.

 The n/a entries are where I have not requested the specific data at the time.  

 2016-17 is the first time in the past ten years that Kent’s fixed term exclusion rate has fallen below the Nation Average, although it is difficult to find any particular driver for this. The most striking statistic is the Turner Schools outcome with Folkestone Academy and Martello Primary both at the top of their respective tables, in spite of the claim that 'Teacher capacity and skill is the best antidote there is to exclusion of students', hardly an endorsement of the teacher quality and management of the two schools.

The percentage figures do not give the full picture behind the data as they are derived by simply comparing the total number of exclusions with number of pupils in the relevant age group according to the January 2018 school census. It does not for instance take into account either the number of times a pupil has been excluded, nor the length of exclusions, both of which are provided on a county wide basis in government statistics.

There are various reasons for a school using a high number of fixed term exclusions, so this may not necessarily indicate poor management. However, several of the schools below have featured before in these pages, the context suggesting the cause.

Oasis Academy Isle of Sheppey has featured regularly in this website because of its appalling treatment of pupils, most recently here, which will have contributed to its dreadful GCSE performance. Surprisingly, a recent Ofsted Monitoring Inspection did not notice the very high rate of exclusion or other issues regularly reported by parents. It may be that the HMI should have spent more than one day looking at the school. I would certainly like to know his view on the practice of placing some pupils who have been excluded for a period into the abusive Reflection system as a punishment for being excluded! For details of how Reflection works, please consult the articles I have written. By depriving pupils of any education whilst they are required to reflect on their 'sins' in effective isolation for a day amounts to unlawful exclusion. Surely the HMI should have noticed this. 

Of the other schools, both New Line Learning and Cornwallis Academies have been struggling badly and as a result have recently been re-brokered to another academy chain, as explained here. Astor College has limped along for years, having been warned two years ago for poor performance, but has hardly improved its standards since. Charles Dickens has been in Special Measures for some years but has recently been taken on as a sponsored academy by Barton Court Grammar.

Edenbridge Primary crashed into Special Measures last year, following appalling management, described by me as being out of control in a previous article. It has now been taken over as a Sponsored Academy by a Bromley Trust.Temple Grove has limped along for years, being the least popular and worst performing school in Tunbridge Wells.  

 My previous article explores this takeover that appears to be for the benefit of all schools concerned except Sir Joseph Williamson's Mathematical School (known locally as The Math), founded in 1701 following a bequest by its founder 'towards the building and carrying on and perpetual maintaining of a free school at Rochester'. After a series of strong headteachers, culminating in the leadership of Keith Williams, one of the great grammar school heads, it then embarked on an ill judged expansion through The Williamson Trust taking on a number of local schools, several of which were soon in trouble. The Trust was part of the ill-fated Inspire Special School scheme and it has had the Elaine Primary School taken away from it after a government Pre-Termination Warning was issued. This was after a government Letter of Concern about Standards was issued to Elaine, All Hallows and Hundred of Hoo Academies. 

The Sir Joseph Williamson's Mathematical School Trust  is a charity independent of the school, whose main aim is to provide financial assistance and other support for the school. It is a wealthy charity and in 2017 donated £244,677 to The Math (and £200 to Rochester Grammar School), such donations surely making it the richest state school in Kent and Medway. Unusually for an Academy, the freehold for its buildings and land are still owned by the Math School Trust, and leased to the school for a peppercorn rent.  

 The Trust's most recent published accounts for 2016-17 show that it had one of the highest Local Authority Pension Scheme deficits in the county, with two of the three primary schools in deficit. It considered that one of the ways to improve finances is to take the historical reserves from some schools and re-allocate them centrally. I think we can assume this means spreading out the funding accruing to The Math. 

The accounts also describe the Trust's aspirations,  which look very empty in the current context. So: ''Our strategic action plan is ambitious and exciting and reflects our locality and the needs of our young people. The country's education system is in a state of fundamental change as we move to a self-improving system that reduces central government control in favour of an academy-led system. This provides a great opportunity for all of our Academies to take the lead and create a system that our young people deserve'.

In summary, the parents of children at most of the Williamson Trust's schools, can now consider themselves well out of it. It remains to be seen what the Leigh Academy Trust plans for The Math. 

The sharp drop of over a quarter in the Sixth Form intake in September 2017 will be partially down to the removal of practical vocational courses including the thriving Hair and Beauty Department whose successes can be tracked by Internet searches or from the school website the year before it was closed down. Or the Catering Department, just a year after the grand opening of its Training Kitchen. In both areas, students learned to  provide for the public in a very practical way, surely the mark of a truly vocational course, but sadly not fitting Turner Schools’ model  of academic excellence for all. 

Sentence two tells us that not only are there 200 places available for external students, immediately contradicted by sentence three. There is NO general requirement for performance laid down, although deep in the Sixth Form Prospectus there is a requirement for Level 4 in English and maths. This is immediately contradicted by a proviso that students who do not achieve these grades can be considered after an interview with the Sixth Form Team although it is unlawful according to the Admissions Code of Practice cannot form part of a process on whthere to offer a place.

Just two flaws in this financial analysis. The falling numbers in Post 16 are a direct result of the school cutting out various practical vocational options in its drive to secure more Russell Group University places – although I am not sure how this helps or what is wrong with many other universities, and will be exacerbated by the poor GCSE results.  The ‘return to normal numbers’ in Year 7 is mainly due to the entirely predictable opening of the Turner Free School in September 2018, which the Trust must have known about when it took over the school and so can’t blame it on problems with the calculation, or some vague 'inheritance' with its inference of blame on the previous administration.    

The facts of the matter could of course have been clarified if Turner Schools had not refused my FOI request for the current figures in each year group of each of its four schools, on the presumably spurious grounds that it was planning to publish all this information some time. The fact that I am not aware of any other school in the country which does this voluntarily does rather cast doubt on the Trust's claimed intention and the matter is now in the hands of the Information Commissioner's Office. 

 SchoolsWeek records that the trust is in discussion with the DfE because it believes the correct clawback figure is “significantly less than the figure cited”. However, the academy’s own staff consultation confirms a funding deficit of £770,000, considerably more than the SchoolsWeek figure.  

The good news for Turner Schools is that it has excellent links with government and so may benefit from the SchoolsWeek  revelation that some ‘schools owing clawback have had the debt written off. The highest write-off was £1 million owed by the Greenwich UTC’. 

As noted, the quotation above ignores the major flaw of current all-through schools locally (there will be four in Kent next September) that this continuous provision would only apply to a small proportion of the secondary intake. In the case of Rainham some 40 girls (having lost a quarter to grammar school amongst others who don’t take up the offer) would join more than 200 others from different backgrounds in Year 7.  Will the school then differentiate between the two groups? Surely not as this would create first and second class citizens. But if not, the ‘advantages’ of the home grown pupils will surely dissipate, except that they are likely to self-identify as a group which knows the ways of the school which may be difficult to handle. 

Rainham School for Girls complements The Howard School, the nearby boys’ non-selective school, so logically if a new primary section was to be formed, it should feed into both schools. This won’t happen as the two are academies from different Trusts, and there is no indication anyhow that Howard has any interest in such a project.

The Consultation does not refer to orconsider the overall Medway Place Planning Strategy, whose 2018 Review concluded that for Gillingham and Rainham: ‘the spare capacity in 2019 is 4.3% and 4.9% in 2022. The surplus capacity is forecasted to grow over time, and so should ensure that sufficient places are available during this time to meet demand from inward migration. It is therefore suggested that the actions taken in recent years, and those currently underway will provide the appropriate number of additional places to meet demand and no further expansion is recommended in the short term’. In other words, the proposal for an extra 60 primary places will simply add to the vacancies in other local schools.

However, gender issues are making waves in this country at present, and it could be that the proposal will catch the mood of the moment. Certainly, it would be popular amongst some cultural and religious groups. I don’t consider myself competent to comment on such issues, but I would have thought that such a proposal ought to do so.

There is of course a solution to the gender imbalance and that is for TKAT to propose that Napier Community Primary Academy be changed into a boys’ school. Imagine the outcry to see what is wrong with the proposal.

As a footnote, it is surely an anomaly that it is possible to successfully challenge a school's Admission criteria through the Schools Adjudicator as I have demonstrated recently by forcing a clutch of Medway secondary schools to retract their proposals for change, whilst it does not appear legally possible to challenge proposals for a new academy. This proposal appears simply to be a change in admission arrangements of an existing school. Presumably therefore, if the proposed new criteria were adopted by the school these would also be open to challenge for the Adjudicator to rule on.

We don’t yet know the details of the plans for the successful schools, although you will find a list of their names here, along with some examples of the incentives offered. Targets will be set, although it is difficult to see what sanctions can be applied if schools fail to meet these as the new buildings will then be in place. I have not looked across the country to see if there are any patterns in the successful schools, but the contrasts between Kent and Medway are quite stark.

We do not yet have a list of all the applicants, but there were certainly some from Kent, and I have looked at possibilities and rationale in several previous articles, most recently here.

The 24 grammar schools offering some form of social mobility encouragement encompass a variety of plans. These include 12 who offer a blanket PP priority such as Dartford Girls’, together with Borden  and Queen Elizabeth’s both offering FSM priority, but in slightly different ways, and Weald of Kent that offers a maximum of 18 PP places. A further six offer priority to PP or FSM children living in a priority area defined by the school for its general admissions, such as Maidstone Grammar which sub-divides its priority area into two, one for high scorers (when all would get in) and one for other boys (who should also all get in).

The other three are super-selective schools, all offering a set number of places to the highest achieving pupils on PP or FSM, such as Judd School with 5 places on offer to the five highest scoring FSM boys.

Just eight grammar schools offer no priorities: Dane Court; Dartford; Folkestone School for Girls; Harvey (these last two Folkestone schools, however each offer a large number of places to passing through the alternative Shepway Test with both having amongst the highest proportion of Ever 6 FSM pupils in the grammar school sector in Kent); Mayfield (also admitting extra pupils through the Mayfield Test); Norton Knatchbull; Simon Langton Boys; and Tunbridge Wells Boys (surprisingly).

 The six schools with the highest  percentage of Ever 6 FSM comprise all the East Kent grammars apart from Sir Roger Manwoods. The four Folkestone & Dover Schools all operate alternative local tests which should explain the high figures. All serve areas of high social deprivation, especially the two Thanet schools. The six schools with the lowest percentage are all in West Kent. Three are super-selective. Five of the West Kent grammars have recently changed their oversubscription criteria to give some priority to Pupil Premium children, so one would expect to see these percentages increase over the next few years. 

The national percentage is 29.1%. It is totally unsurprising that the grammar school average of approximately 10%  is much lower, as the average proportion of Ever 6 FSM in these schools is inevitably lower than for all schools, and so the two are not comparable. Please note that this does not discount the demonstrable fact that too many able PP children do not achieve their full potential, and so are not selected for grammar school. This is what the KCC policy and the actions of many grammar schools are about. What is needed is an incentive, or a pressure to get the remainder to follow suit, rather than this bribe which will do nothing for the majority of grammars not  

So where do these decisions leave Kent, with increases in its population creating serious pressure points, as it tries to provide 25% coverage of grammar school places across the county. It also has to manage the additional pressure of out of county children seeking Kent grammar places with no control of academy provision.  I have written about these issues several times before, with regard to grammar school expansion here, and looking at pressure on places here. Yes the number of grammar school places has increased with self-funding, money for KCC (often in return for PP policies) or from government under different financial headings. However, current schools cannot expand indefinitely, some with restricted space cannot expand at all (for example the two Wilmingtons'). Unless government policy changes, KCC will be unable to offer places to all Kent children found suitable for grammar school. This scheme does not address this serious issue. 

The only Medway grammar school offering relevant admission priority is Rainham Mark Grammar School, which offers places to grammar qualified children on FSM, irrespective of place of residence, although most other places at this oversubscribed school  will go to boys and girls living nearest, following a recent complete change from high scorers irrespective of residence. 

It is no surprise that of the two TSAT schools, Holcombe is trying to lose its basis for prioritising local boys, by restricting numbers, falsely claiming at appeals that the pass standard is much higher, and twice failing in its attempts to turn the school co-educational, the issues at RGS being explored below. 

We don’t yet know the terms of the funding, which would proportionally be some £3 million to expand further, but I do have concerns that the school’s ethos, built around its priority for high scoring girls in the Medway Test, has appeared more focused on the ablest children with some of those unable to conform contacting me about their unhappiness with the school.

Given the school’s popularity with high scoring girls from outside the county, including an apparently insatiable demand from London children, it is likely that many of the extra places created will be taken up from this area, surely not the intention of the scheme. Others will be drawn from within Medway, which will inevitably hit Chatham Grammar School for Girls (see below) with possible dire consequences.

Is this really what the scheme is about?

The school has considerable potential under its new management to rebuild its reputation as a good school serving its local community. Now it appears that government wants to undermine that future and close the school. Surely that is quite the opposite of what this scheme is about. However, Chatham Girls does have a 'Get out of Jail Free' card, in that it also can look to out of Medway girls to make up its numbers, the whole making Brexit look quite simple!"

ŹC 

I have retired from my appeals advisory service, but offer a Telephone Advisory Service offering advice on Review, Admissions and Appeals as explained here. As in previous years, I will also publish articles on Medway Test results and Review in more detail as I receive them. You will find fuller articles on 2017 Test results here, and Review here.

Note: OOA stands for Out of Area, i.e. living outside Medway

You will find the source of much of this data here. 

Out of Area Applicants:It is difficult to be precise about the consequences of the massive increase in Out of Medway children passing the Medway Test, although last year's problems will give an indication. We don't yet know the gender breakdown, but the table below shows the 2018 allocation breakdown by school.  

Note: PAN stands for Planned Intake Number. Most grammar schools increased their PAN to respond to high demand. Details here, 

One of the consequences of pressure on places is that appeals from children initially found non-selective are more difficult to win. You will find some details in the Individual Schools section. 

Around half of the OOAs are from Kent children in most cases. In previous years, a large number of London children apply late for some Medway grammars having failed to gain places at closer schools in Dartford and Gravesend, or else sit the Medway Test late for the same reasons, then apply. 

Chatham Grammar Girls: In most years the only undersubscribed Medway Grammar. However, for 2017 entry, 143 places were offered with 36 OOAs. It looks as if numbers will be up again for 2019.

 Fort Pitt: Heavily oversubscribed with strong priority for local children. 

Holcombe Grammar School: I have no idea what will happen with admissions and appeals at Holcombe following the chaotic decision making by the school  for 2018 admissions, as the school made up policy on the hoof. You will find a number of relevant articles by putting the word 'Holcombe' in my website search engine. Historically took boys from across Medway a large number getting in on appeal. If 2018 admissions repeats, I am afraid it could be very difficult for appeal boys to secure a place anywhere, unless they have a strong case for the Math. 

Rainham Mark: Changed last year to give main priority for local children. Some OOA will have gained places through the sibling rule. This figure will continue to fall. 

The Rochester Grammar School: Most places awarded for high scorers irrespective of residence. With the inevitable increased pressure on places from OOA girls the cut off score is likely to rise from last year's 25 points above the pass mark, so higher than 517. 

Sir Joseph Williamson's Mathematical School: Heavily oversubscribed but giving priority to boys living geographically nearer. So all OOA boys come from Kent, close to the West and South of Medway. 

Schools Adjudicator:  I have secured decisions following complaints to the Schools Adjudicator who ruled that proposed changes to the Admission Rules for the following schools were unfair, primarily to local children: Brompton Academy (withdrew proposals before Adjudicator ruled); Fort Pitt Grammar; Holcombe Grammar; Rochester Grammar. Sir Joseph Williamson's withdrew their proposals before they went to the Adjudicator. You will find details of the decisions here. 

A posting from the Medway11 plus Forum, without comment: 'All, Congrats to your kids and to all parents !My daughter passed with a score of 659, it is a great news, but we leave in Greenwich. Do you think this mark would be enough to be accepted in Rochester grammar ? We know they changed their criteria this year (feeder school first) ....so we are a little confused. Any other Medway grammar accepting students based on score only ? Thank you all for your precious help best for you all.

The proposal is very similar to the new rules already adopted by Rainham Mark Grammar last year, who may therefore have ruled themselves out of the new scheme, being unsuccessful bidders on this occasion. As a result, there will be no element of super-selection anywhere in Medway grammar schools, with local children having priority for the greater proportion of places.  

I am delighted to learn of this proposal, having frequently criticised RGS for its elitist image in the past and successfully challenged the 2019 proposals which headed off in a completely different direction. They gave no indication of this sudden turnabout less than a year later, suggesting it has been led by the financial rewards more than a complete change of heart. This government approach by carrot rather than stick may of course have been the intention.

I remain puzzled by the funding to ‘expand the school’  for the intake of 205 will have been the same as in the past two years. Presumably government has accepted that because the formal Published Admission Number has remained at 175 it is indeed a technical expansion. 

For 2018 entry, 81 of the 205 places offered went to girls from outside Medway, 47 of them from Kent. For several years to come, siblings of these girls will have priority, but this number will diminish annually.

There has been a surplus of grammar school places for girls in Medway for some years, so there is no need for expansion. Two of the schools, Fort Pitt and RGS are both considerably oversubscribed, as is the mixed grammar Rainham Mark. The gap is at Chatham Grammar for Girls (CGSG) where there were 60 vacancies for its 142 places on allocation last March. However, by the October census this had shrunk to 27 vacancies due to successful appeals and late applications including some from out of county.  

The new RGS criteria are going to see the out of county numbers fall sharply, except for girls living nearby in Kent, to the west and south of Medway possibly expanding to villages such as Higham, Shorne and Wouldham. This would be in parallel with the also heavily oversubscribed neighbouring boys school, Sir Joseph Williamson’s Mathematical School. It would, however, hit CGSG badly except that the school is likely to be compensated by some of the displaced RGS pupils from Kent and London and one can see the school’s admission strategy adjusting to tackle this.

However, the biggest challenge may be the current ethos and reputation of RGS. The most recent criteria for 2019 make no mention whatever of disadvantage, and there will be much to do to change from chasing high performance from the ablest pupils with those unable to meet the school’s high standards too often casualties of the school. It is indicative that 24 girls left the school at the end of Year 11 this summer, although the eight that left at the end of Year 12 is a much lower number than before I exposed the scandal of illegal academic expulsion in 2016, when 24 left half way through the Rochester Grammar A Level course*.  The school is now committed to supporting all girls who have passed the Medway Test or qualified through the Medway Review, including those with social disadvantage and I hope it will be ready for this. For some years to come, there will be two very different cohorts working through and the school ethos will come under considerable stress. This is no criticism of the proposal as such, merely pointing out the stresses that will need to be managed. 

Holcombe Grammar has now published its own consultation on oversubscription criteria for 2021. After the multiple blunders for 2019 entry, which I exposed in a series of articles earlier this year, the Thinking Schools Academy Trust has decided to play safe and has simply copied the RGS criteria over for Holcombe, but with one exception.  If TSAT was serious about supporting disadvantaged children, surely they would want the same rules in both their grammar schools, but the proposed criteria for Holcombe contain no mention whatever of priority for children with Pupil Premium!