Page 5 of 10

Re: Day Pupils

Posted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 9:47 am
by HowardH
He misheard to the extent that the Head said this was a planned phasing over the next 5 years, not this year.

Re: Day Pupils

Posted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 9:51 am
by Fjgrogan
Then Lippizaner's objection still stands - foreign residents are being actively sought, as long as they have money?!

Re: Day Pupils

Posted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 10:00 am
by HowardH
No, they are not at the expense of, but in addition to our numbers. The policy is to expand our total numbers from last year's low of 780ish.

Re: Day Pupils

Posted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 10:40 am
by sejintenej
HowardH wrote:No, they are not at the expense of, but in addition to our numbers. The policy is to expand our total numbers from last year's low of 780ish.
That, Howard, makes far more sense; I have to assume that the school already has the available accommodation or that it can be added cheaply.
Thanks for the clarification

Re: Day Pupils

Posted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 11:03 am
by NEILL THE NOTORIOUS
It is a fact that this Forum is perused by others, who are in authority.
Information has appeared , on previous occasions, "Out of the Blue" (Sorry for the pun !)

I expect "information" will be divulged as to how many overseas students are at the School --- however I doubt that they will be categorised by National Origen !

Re: Day Pupils

Posted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 12:11 pm
by Mrs C.
sejintenej wrote:
That, Howard, makes far more sense; I have to assume that the school already has the available accommodation or that it can be added cheaply.
Thanks for the clarification

the Grecians houses are certainly not full to capacity... I don`t know about Avenue houses...

Re: Day Pupils

Posted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 4:45 pm
by lippizaner
How did the numbers of pupils at the school get so low then? My friend whose daughter was there about 15 or so years ago told me that then there were about 820 pupils (I think more boys than girls but not sure) when there was no Grecian's House, so presumably less accommodation than there is now, and I think she said the intake was 120 per year. It seems to be lower now. Is this due to finances or what? Or do some children drop out along the way? If there were only 780 last year, that seems a lot down on my friend's time. Forty down by my reckoning which is nearly 7 per year. It would be interesting to hear the reason numbers have dropped so low, especially as applicants seem to have risen from my friend's time.
Out of interest, anyone know how many people applied/and how many places there used to be in their time? Historically interesting to see how it has changed or not changed I should think.

Re: Day Pupils

Posted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 6:39 pm
by CHDad
I had heard from one of the staff that the entrance numbers for 2010-2011 were lower due to the residential assessment being postopned from January to February (at the last minute) due to the heavy snow falls. This affected us although we did still manage to make the new date in Feb.

Re: Day Pupils

Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2012 10:20 am
by icomefromalanddownunder
HowardH wrote:He misheard to the extent that the Head said this was a planned phasing over the next 5 years, not this year.
With respect, if you were aware of this when you first responded, why did you not elaborate at that time?

Re: Day Pupils

Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2012 11:50 am
by YadaYada
They are looking to grow pupil numbers from 790 last year to 870. They admit needing to increase a greater proportion of full fee payers, including 10% from the EU or further afield and up to 70 day pupils. The plan is to phase these changes in over the next 6 years.
I posted this information, quoted from Housey! back on page 2 of this thread.

Re: Day Pupils

Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2012 4:47 pm
by NEILL THE NOTORIOUS
I realise, of course, that House accommodation is rather more luxurious than in previous eras --- on my "Tour" of Ba B I was astounded at the nice little rooms, as opposed to draughty dormitories. but apropos School numbers, there were 50 pupils per House (+ one or two in some Houses ) which did not include the Prep, but did of course include the Grecians, how does that compare with current numbers, allowing for the fact that Grecians (How many ?) are seperate ?

Re: Day Pupils

Posted: Sun Jan 15, 2012 5:11 pm
by YadaYada
I think there are supposed to be 48 in each house - 8 in each year. I know that in my son's house they don't have 8 in every year, presumably because of the lower overall numbers.

Re: Day Pupils

Posted: Mon Jan 16, 2012 1:17 pm
by lippizaner
It would be really interesting to know exactly how many pupils there are currently in each school year, and to see where the shortfall from a past 820 (with no special Grecian's House so LESS accommodation than now) down to 780 is.
It would also be interesting to know exactly how many foreign sourced full fee payers are projected - I see 10% was quoted from Housey by a poster on this page. Not clear what it is 10% of though. Is it 10% of the extra pupils envisaged, or 10% of the whole school population?
It would be really nice if someone in the know who peruses this forum could tell all us little people.
Plus, to go back to CHDad's posting that for 2010 to 2011 there was a smaller intake because the entrance tests were moved from Jan to Feb - were there less applicants than there were places then? That seems a bit hard to imagine.

Re: Day Pupils

Posted: Mon Jan 16, 2012 1:45 pm
by anniexf
Lippizaner, if I may just intrude here for a minute or so, I think the reasoning was :

1)Snow would have prevented many applicants from making it to the Residentials, so they were postponed.
2) Late Residentials meant delayed Results, so late Offers.
3) People who'd applied to other independent schools as well as to CH seemed to have accepted Offers made by those, rather than gambling on waiting for CH.
4) Hence, fewer acceptances, therefore a lower intake last year.

This may not be the whole story, but I believe it's a strong contributory factor.

Re: Day Pupils

Posted: Mon Jan 16, 2012 3:34 pm
by ailurophile
Lippizaner, if I may just intrude here for a minute or so, I think the reasoning was :

1)Snow would have prevented many applicants from making it to the Residentials, so they were postponed.
2) Late Residentials meant delayed Results, so late Offers.
3) People who'd applied to other independent schools as well as to CH seemed to have accepted Offers made by those, rather than gambling on waiting for CH.
4) Hence, fewer acceptances, therefore a lower intake last year.

This may not be the whole story, but I believe it's a strong contributory factor.
Strangely though, it is evident from posts made on the 'parents' area of this Forum that there were families left on the waiting list in 2010, desperate for places which were never offered. Even more curiously, some of those same families were contacted the following year and invited to re-apply for vacancies.