Talk:Colchester Royal Grammar School

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Schools This article is related to WikiProject Schools, an attempt to write quality articles about schools around the world. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-Importance within Schools.
Current Collaborations: Oldest Wooden Schoolhouse - Westville Boys' High School - Guildford Grammar School - Greenwich High School


Contents

[edit] March 2007 V2

Hello all, and thank you for contributing to this school site. I'm part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Schools/Assessment team, and, as it has recently been editted, then I'm reviewing this page. I'm currently giving it a grade of start on the Wikipedia 1.0 Assessment Scale and an importance of Mid on this importance scale.

My reasoning is as follows: This article is about a school from the 13th century. However the article starts well and then tends to weander into less important issues. More refs, history, relevant pictures Victuallers 21:33, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comments on recent performance

"However its position is due partly to its very tough eleven plus entrance exam, which selects only a small percentage of the area's brightest students. The local area utilises the smallest percentage enforced by any eleven plus selection process and in other areas the percentage is much higher, thus making any direct comparison ambiguous.[citation needed] A better comparison may be by taking the 'value added' score into consideration, where CRGS school falls behind the local Colchester County High School at GCSE level, and is marginally behind the comparable King Edward VI Grammar School (Chelmsford)[1]"

To me this is pointless and adds nothing to the article. The phrase "making any direct comparison ambiguous" is opinion promoting.

Point taken, thanks for bringing it to the talk page. What I think is needed here is some form of historical commentary on the performance of the school. Everything is a little current and I have been trying hard to keep this article from reading like a brochure. Sadly with the current ways of judging school performance, every school can find an area that they excel at and to ignore the areas they 'fail' at it POV. To give direct comparisons whilst ignoring the different contexts is also in my opinion POV. The current write up is looking much better. Pluke 19:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Eleven Plus factors

can someone please confirm my figures for eleven plus entrance exam intake. I believe it's 3% for the grammar school and essex in general. Other places like Northern Ireland have a looser ~20%. Thanks --Pluke 23:04, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It varies. As i passed my 11+ i know. In my year there were 4008 people taking it in the country but only 644 got in. That's around a 16% chance.... J.J.Sagnella 08:42, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
You surely mean county. If you are currently at the school could you ask some of the staff if there are documents confirming this as i would love to get a source to check by. Also the number of people taking the exam out of the entire child population is now much reduced, as you have to pay to enter? (making the concept even more ludicrous, but that is most definitely a POV :). And we really need to work out percentage pass with regards to the entire potential population. If you are interested in this please take a look at Eleven_plus, Tripartite_System and Debates_on_the_grammar_school. Pluke 09:51, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Probably it is county. But what i say is all that was on my sheet for passing. And we didn't have to pay any longer but the year before it was £5. J.J.Sagnella 10:23, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

I took the 11+ last year and there were 450 people who took the test to get to CRGS. This means that there was a 21.3333...% chance of getting through, however I suggest this information be taken out. And no, there is no fee. Jake95 23:38, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Since when has it been a 'science school'? Jake95 23:43, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Use of AD CE.

The page has been locked today because of this issue and the failure for Central to engage in discussion. Could I please call everyone's attention to the wikipedia guidelines on the issue at: Wikipedia:Eras#Policy_in_question, Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/BCE-CE_Debate and to the minor discussion at Talk:Common_Era. You've finished? Good. I hope you realise that there is no official wikipedia agreement on the issue and I suggest we seek a consenus amongst the page editors and put forward any arguments for and against below. Then we can vote. Debate will close on the 11th July 19:00 UTC. Pluke 19:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Isn't there that rule on whether something should be American or British Spellings? We should use that rule on ad/ce. If AD appeared first, I say use that. J.J.Sagnella 19:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
There is no rule about AD CE. There are arguments on both sides for the other being POV. I believe it should stay AD due to the fact that it started off as AD and changing serves no purpose, also AD is the more commonly used making the page more accessable.I think we are the two major editors of this page, any one else out there? Pluke 17:49, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
No rule? Weird. I think there should be. J.J.Sagnella 17:58, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

OK we seem to have come to agreement to use AD, will get this page unlocked and finally clean up this nasty situation. Sorry i should have sorted this on the 11th but have been busy. Pluke 19:01, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unprotecting

This dispute seems to have resolved itself. I'm unprotecting. --Tony Sidaway 23:49, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Userbox

If anyone attends CRGS I have made a userbox: {{User crgs}}. However sometimes it doesn't work !? Jake95 23:43, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ofsted Boarding Report

NPOV?. I am not disputing the reliability of the information from the Ofsted inspection but cannot see that the use of the quotation adds anything relevent to the article. Should we remove it? 129.12.200.49 18:49, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Repeated deletion of section on academic achievement

Please stop deleting the section on the page and discuss here why you feel so compelled to do so. Thanks Pluke 16:56, 4 March 2007 (UTC)