Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    e used to have something for the gifted but it kind of fizzled out after a poxy few weeks, so we have nothing. I think talented and gifted people are held back in school because working to GCSE or A level standard doesn't allow you to go further and doesn't allow such students to excel themselves.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I go to a grammar, where about 80% of the student population seems to be gifted and/or talented at something or other. The amount of national competition winners we have is disgusting, and applying to oxbridge just means extra work. I mean, you have to do something *spectacular* to get noticed academically around here.

    As a result, all these extremely intelligent girls sort out a hierarchy through who wears the best clothes. *sigh*
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by soulsussed)
    e used to have something for the gifted but it kind of fizzled out after a poxy few weeks, so we have nothing. I think talented and gifted people are held back in school because working to GCSE or A level standard doesn't allow you to go further and doesn't allow such students to excel themselves.
    I agree that GCSE's and AS/A levels have a 'ceiling' that means that those who are very able are not able to achieve any higher than that ceiling.

    However, that does not prevent extending yourself beyond the limits of the syllabus - indeed, an indication of giftedness and highly talented in a particular area is that the student undertakes independent learning. Don't allow the constraints of the course to prevent you going further yourself, even if it is not recognised by the school. Self fulfillment is more important than any other consideration.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yawn)
    I agree that GCSE's and AS/A levels have a 'ceiling' that means that those who are very able are not able to achieve any higher than that ceiling.

    However, that does not prevent extending yourself beyond the limits of the syllabus - indeed, an indication of giftedness and highly talented in a particular area is that the student undertakes independent learning. Don't allow the constraints of the course to prevent you going further yourself, even if it is not recognised by the school. Self fulfillment is more important than any other consideration.
    Can't say it any better, just try hard at whatever you want to archieve.

    Personally, I hate the strict structures of A-level courses esp. the Chemistry and Biology modules.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    We've gone on some trips, and in year seven the bright kids had to go in early to get random grad students talking at them about stuff nobody had any clue about. Oh, and awards are given out at the end of the year, but that has nothing to do with how bright you are. We just called to meetings every so often and asked if we want to go on this trip, and then we spend the rest of lunchtime moaning for gin and tonics.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by No Future)
    Does your school have a programme/organize membership to societies for gifted students?
    had a "gifted and talented" workshop in year 11 i think...was a waste of money...like 20 or 30 quid i think.... for ones days common sense material...like draw mind maps, and read over your notes and that sort of ****!

    :mad:

    for A-levels, they are really **** though....discouraged students with <=5A*'s and less than AAAB from even applying to oxbridge...wont let you do it through the school! ********s!

    pk
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Phil23)

    for A-levels, they are really **** though....discouraged students with <=5A*'s and less than AAAB from even applying to oxbridge...wont let you do it through the school! ********s!

    pk
    No school can stop you from making applications to whatever unis you desire - that is illegal.

    What they can do is discourage you. You have to show determination and make your own decisions based on your predicted grades.

    If the worst comes to the worst, you can apply to oxbridge once you have your results. That would be 'one in the eye' for your school - and I would think it would be worthwhile to have a word with the Admissions staff at Oxbridge telling them that your school actively discourage applications to their universities. They would not like this as they are keen to be seen to giving opportunities to those that are normally discouraged from applying!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yawn)
    I agree that GCSE's and AS/A levels have a 'ceiling' that means that those who are very able are not able to achieve any higher than that ceiling.
    Ok, in terms of intellectual capacity and maturity, about 65% of the British population would be able to cope with an 'extended' and more 'individualised' study programme. However, half of these students would need immense motivation and pressure (which they wouldn't get) to take full advantage of the programme and achieve highly. That leaves 33% of British students who would realistically take full advantage of the programme. Now you don't have to be an economist to realise that the Government would be wasting masses of money on a more flexable study scheme, do you? The same applies for Advanced study at A-Levels - not enough students have matured intellectually to be able to cope. This is why the flexable study schemes are enforced at University, when students have fully matured.

    The figures I gave above are in no way accurate, if anything, they are slightly too high. I mean just thinking about many people in my GCSE classes, it makes me shudder to think what would happen if you left certain students to their own devices in terms of study... You've also got to take into account that students do have to have social lives and a more academically intense, yet flexable course wouldn't be to everyones' tastes... Rant over, debate started?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Whizz Kid)
    Ok, in terms of intellectual capacity and maturity, about 65% of the British population would be able to cope with an 'extended' and more 'individualised' study programme. However, half of these students would need immense motivation and pressure (which they wouldn't get) to take full advantage of the programme and achieve highly. That leaves 33% of British students who would realistically take full advantage of the programme. Now you don't have to be an economist to realise that the Government would be wasting masses of money on a more flexable study scheme, do you? The same applies for Advanced study at A-Levels - not enough students have matured intellectually to be able to cope. This is why the flexable study schemes are enforced at University, when students have fully matured.

    The figures I gave above are in no way accurate, if anything, they are slightly too high. I mean just thinking about many people in my GCSE classes, it makes me shudder to think what would happen if you left certain students to their own devices in terms of study... You've also got to take into account that students do have to have social lives and a more academically intense, yet flexable course wouldn't be to everyones' tastes... Rant over, debate started?
    Yes but it's about picking out the individuals that would cope with it. Thats why you called them gifted. An individual learning scheme would aim to meet individuals needs anyway whether they're really bright or not. Also you tend to find that if you have a gifted person that they excel in one area, not all!! I think its more about schools allowing a student with ability in a certain subject to express it. I heard some private schools allow their students to do an A level, I don't know how that works, butit's about challenging student so that they find their education forfilling and they get the most aout of it.

    It's not really about what you put into a student its what you can draw out, because kids are talented and creative, but most loose it becasue they're so conditioned, 'you must be this good, but not quite that good' 'you must do it this way and not that'. It's stops people from being and becoming brilliant, but as it appears, there's no way (yet) round it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yawn)
    I agree that GCSE's and AS/A levels have a 'ceiling' that means that those who are very able are not able to achieve any higher than that ceiling.

    However, that does not prevent extending yourself beyond the limits of the syllabus - indeed, an indication of giftedness and highly talented in a particular area is that the student undertakes independent learning. Don't allow the constraints of the course to prevent you going further yourself, even if it is not recognised by the school. Self fulfillment is more important than any other consideration.
    I totally agree, it's like being put into a room where the ceiling too low and you have to have your head bent, except its for two years or so!

    People have to express themselves in whatever subject so they do. They tend to find their own forfillment but school can be discouraging, and not all gifted students are that motivated.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mata)
    I go to a grammar, where about 80% of the student population seems to be gifted and/or talented at something or other. The amount of national competition winners we have is disgusting, and applying to oxbridge just means extra work. I mean, you have to do something *spectacular* to get noticed academically around here.

    As a result, all these extremely intelligent girls sort out a hierarchy through who wears the best clothes. *sigh*
    That sounds like my school! Although I did struggle a bit with chemistry, the most difficult part of my two years in sixth form was trying to find something amazing to wear every day :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by soulsussed)
    Yes but it's about picking out the individuals that would cope with it. Thats why you called them gifted. An individual learning scheme would aim to meet individuals needs anyway whether they're really bright or not. Also you tend to find that if you have a gifted person that they excel in one area, not all!! I think its more about schools allowing a student with ability in a certain subject to express it. I heard some private schools allow their students to do an A level, I don't know how that works, butit's about challenging student so that they find their education forfilling and they get the most aout of it.
    I understand where you are coming from; although I don't quite see the practicalities of your ideas. The following is based upon the notion that your ideas are implemented into mainstream education.
    (Original post by soulsussed)
    Yes but it's about picking out the individuals that would cope with it
    This is the most obvious flaw, in my eyes. There are so many problems with this. Primarily, how do you define a "gifted" student? Are you perhaps suggesting that students are welcomed into a more intense learning scheme, based upon the grades that they achieve? That's also riddled with flaws - just because a student achieves A*s at GCSE does not mean they will be so forthcoming and exceptional in a more intense programme. And if that's not the best method of "picking out the individuals that would cope", what do you suggest? Teachers' reference? Teachers making educated and professional assumptions on who would be best? That would work. But, think about all the uproar that would cause - what about students who feel they are better than other students who have been picked? What about parents who want their child to experience what another child is experiencing? What about jealousy? What about feeling left out? What about wanting to be given a fair chance? This will cause great controversy and the school will be in an on-going battle with students and parents... Some of this interrelates with my next point; isolation, or, more accurately, "singling out". How would you feel if you were a student who worked their ass off, and achieved straight B's, yet wasn't picked to study via a more vigorous learning scheme? You'd be thinking, "all this work, and I'm stuck here with the dumb people - oh wait, I must be dumb, because I wasn't picked as one of the 'clever people' ". It's true - your morale would be rock bottom...

    My third and final point on this is; why? Yes, "why?" Why do this? Why pressure a student and encourage them to study and learn more than is required of them? Why would someone want to make their path to University harder? Why? Satisfaction? - Maybe, but unlikely... Very, very few people would say, "I'll make my education harder than it really needs to be". Some, however, would say "Yeah, I'll like the challange, it'll be great!". But, there are very few of those people - and I reiterate, it's not cost efficient for the Government to enforce such a scheme, without a wider audience to be concerned.

    You also said that perhaps GCSE students who wanted to, could take A-Levels whilst studying GCSEs. That's fine; many schools already do this. It's a practical solution, in many schools' eyes - if the student is abled, get their A-Levels out of the way sooner, if it'll motivate them.

    Another guy said that A-Levels have a ceiling whereby you cannot progress any further... Very, very few students even notice the ceiling. A-Levels are much more advanced (hence the name). They are for students who want to go further in education, and for students who are passionate about certain subjects... They are not easy and they actually challange 90% of the population. The other 10% are encouraged to sit AEAs where they can show their academic superiority... However, there is a 50% pass rate in AEAs - so that therefore tells us that A-Levels fully challange 95%, and only 5% could go onto study more advanced work at that specific age... So the question still stands, why make such a fuss when only a small proportion are involved? There is a 5/100 chance that you will find A-Levels too easy. Not a big chance is it? :rolleyes:

    I just want to say that I am not frowning upon students who want to undergo more 'thorough' study. But, I am saying that it must be private. You said that the GCSEs should be more flexable - they shouldn't, put simply. There is not enough students who would take advantage of this. Therefore, it should be left to the student to undergo privately, more intense study. This should of course be "for fun" because there is not a need to have more knowledge. There just isn't - therefore it should be in the student's own time, that they widen their knowledge.

    And sorry to be pedantic, but it really irritates me when people spell fulfill incorrectly; so, fulfillment.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by soulsussed)
    'you must be this good, but not quite that good' 'you must do it this way and not that'. It's stops people from being and becoming brilliant, but as it appears, there's no way (yet) round it.
    To add - that's boll*x... Why on Earth would teachers and learning co-ordinators encourage us to not reach our potential? :rolleyes: I don't know what goes on at your school, but, at my school we are encouraged to undergo as much private study as is needed. Contrary to what you might or might not be suggesting, very few find GCSEs too easy - teachers realise this and act upon it, thus, motivating and exerting pressure on students.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    No but my college does (6 or more As at GCSE)
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by yawn)

    However, that does not prevent extending yourself beyond the limits of the syllabus - indeed, an indication of giftedness and highly talented in a particular area is that the student undertakes independent learning. Don't allow the constraints of the course to prevent you going further yourself, even if it is not recognised by the school. Self fulfillment is more important than any other consideration.
    So why the rant, whizz kid? :confused:
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Whizz Kid)
    I understand where you are coming from; although I don't quite see the practicalities of your ideas. The following is based upon the notion that your ideas are implemented into mainstream education. This is the most obvious flaw, in my eyes. There are so many problems with this. Primarily, how do you define a "gifted" student? Are you perhaps suggesting that students are welcomed into a more intense learning scheme, based upon the grades that they achieve? That's also riddled with flaws - just because a student achieves A*s at GCSE does not mean they will be so forthcoming and exceptional in a more intense programme. And if that's not the best method of "picking out the individuals that would cope", what do you suggest? Teachers' reference? Teachers making educated and professional assumptions on who would be best? That would work. But, think about all the uproar that would cause - what about students who feel they are better than other students who have been picked? What about parents who want their child to experience what another child is experiencing? What about jealousy? What about feeling left out? What about wanting to be given a fair chance? This will cause great controversy and the school will be in an on-going battle with students and parents... Some of this interrelates with my next point; isolation, or, more accurately, "singling out". How would you feel if you were a student who worked their ass off, and achieved straight B's, yet wasn't picked to study via a more vigorous learning scheme? You'd be thinking, "all this work, and I'm stuck here with the dumb people - oh wait, I must be dumb, because I wasn't picked as one of the 'clever people' ". It's true - your morale would be rock bottom...

    My third and final point on this is; why? Yes, "why?" Why do this? Why pressure a student and encourage them to study and learn more than is required of them? Why would someone want to make their path to University harder? Why? Satisfaction? - Maybe, but unlikely... Very, very few people would say, "I'll make my education harder than it really needs to be". Some, however, would say "Yeah, I'll like the challange, it'll be great!". But, there are very few of those people - and I reiterate, it's not cost efficient for the Government to enforce such a scheme, without a wider audience to be concerned.

    You also said that perhaps GCSE students who wanted to, could take A-Levels whilst studying GCSEs. That's fine; many schools already do this. It's a practical solution, in many schools' eyes - if the student is abled, get their A-Levels out of the way sooner, if it'll motivate them.

    Another guy said that A-Levels have a ceiling whereby you cannot progress any further... Very, very few students even notice the ceiling. A-Levels are much more advanced (hence the name). They are for students who want to go further in education, and for students who are passionate about certain subjects... They are not easy and they actually challange 90% of the population. The other 10% are encouraged to sit AEAs where they can show their academic superiority... However, there is a 50% pass rate in AEAs - so that therefore tells us that A-Levels fully challange 95%, and only 5% could go onto study more advanced work at that specific age... So the question still stands, why make such a fuss when only a small proportion are involved? There is a 5/100 chance that you will find A-Levels too easy. Not a big chance is it? :rolleyes:

    I just want to say that I am not frowning upon students who want to undergo more 'thorough' study. But, I am saying that it must be private. You said that the GCSEs should be more flexable - they shouldn't, put simply. There is not enough students who would take advantage of this. Therefore, it should be left to the student to undergo privately, more intense study. This should of course be "for fun" because there is not a need to have more knowledge. There just isn't - therefore it should be in the student's own time, that they widen their knowledge.

    And sorry to be pedantic, but it really irritates me when people spell fulfill incorrectly; so, fulfillment.
    If you are interested enough in the teaching of highly able children, I can recommend some fascinating reading material - you should be able to get them from your local library, with the exception, possibly, of the Ofsted one.

    'Able Children in Ordinary Schools' - Deborah Eyre ISBN 1-85346-441-4

    'Educating the Very Able - current international research' - Ofsted reviews of research ISBN 0-11-350100-5

    'Highly Able Children' - Education and Employment Committee (3rd Report) ISBN 0-10-226099-0
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Whizz Kid)
    I understand where you are coming from; although I don't quite see the practicalities of your ideas. The following is based upon the notion that your ideas are implemented into mainstream education. This is the most obvious flaw, in my eyes. There are so many problems with this. Primarily, how do you define a "gifted" student? Are you perhaps suggesting that students are welcomed into a more intense learning scheme, based upon the grades that they achieve? That's also riddled with flaws - just because a student achieves A*s at GCSE does not mean they will be so forthcoming and exceptional in a more intense programme. And if that's not the best method of "picking out the individuals that would cope", what do you suggest? Teachers' reference? Teachers making educated and professional assumptions on who would be best? That would work. But, think about all the uproar that would cause - what about students who feel they are better than other students who have been picked? What about parents who want their child to experience what another child is experiencing? What about jealousy? What about feeling left out? What about wanting to be given a fair chance? This will cause great controversy and the school will be in an on-going battle with students and parents... Some of this interrelates with my next point; isolation, or, more accurately, "singling out". How would you feel if you were a student who worked their ass off, and achieved straight B's, yet wasn't picked to study via a more vigorous learning scheme? You'd be thinking, "all this work, and I'm stuck here with the dumb people - oh wait, I must be dumb, because I wasn't picked as one of the 'clever people' ". It's true - your morale would be rock bottom...

    My third and final point on this is; why? Yes, "why?" Why do this? Why pressure a student and encourage them to study and learn more than is required of them? Why would someone want to make their path to University harder? Why? Satisfaction? - Maybe, but unlikely... Very, very few people would say, "I'll make my education harder than it really needs to be". Some, however, would say "Yeah, I'll like the challange, it'll be great!". But, there are very few of those people - and I reiterate, it's not cost efficient for the Government to enforce such a scheme, without a wider audience to be concerned.

    You also said that perhaps GCSE students who wanted to, could take A-Levels whilst studying GCSEs. That's fine; many schools already do this. It's a practical solution, in many schools' eyes - if the student is abled, get their A-Levels out of the way sooner, if it'll motivate them.

    Another guy said that A-Levels have a ceiling whereby you cannot progress any further... Very, very few students even notice the ceiling. A-Levels are much more advanced (hence the name). They are for students who want to go further in education, and for students who are passionate about certain subjects... They are not easy and they actually challange 90% of the population. The other 10% are encouraged to sit AEAs where they can show their academic superiority... However, there is a 50% pass rate in AEAs - so that therefore tells us that A-Levels fully challange 95%, and only 5% could go onto study more advanced work at that specific age... So the question still stands, why make such a fuss when only a small proportion are involved? There is a 5/100 chance that you will find A-Levels too easy. Not a big chance is it? :rolleyes:

    I just want to say that I am not frowning upon students who want to undergo more 'thorough' study. But, I am saying that it must be private. You said that the GCSEs should be more flexable - they shouldn't, put simply. There is not enough students who would take advantage of this. Therefore, it should be left to the student to undergo privately, more intense study. This should of course be "for fun" because there is not a need to have more knowledge. There just isn't - therefore it should be in the student's own time, that they widen their knowledge.

    And sorry to be pedantic, but it really irritates me when people spell fulfill incorrectly; so, fulfillment.
    When a student begins to push the boundaries of the highest level at their age then they should be given credit for it. Like, at GCSE, if you do something expected at Alevel you get no credit for it. Student should be allowed to push this boundary if they already begin doing so.

    The point of being a gifted student is that there really aren't many of them, 3 or 4 in a year group at the most who are extremly able. In reality the enitire education system needs looking at so that it fits the needs of every child. At the moment so many who we consider 'not able' are let down by their schooling. The truth is that everyones able, and if we changed the system to suit everyone then we'd probably discover more gifted people. You talk about jealousy, well what about streaming? It's a similar thing. The problem is that we need an education system that tells employers what the person is capable of ect and it envolves conditioning, and as such yet no one has any better ideas. Vocational would suit some. There should be a range of different qualifications available, not just GCSE. I go to state school, doing an A level this year wasn't even suggested or thought of for anyone.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Whizz Kid)
    To add - that's boll*x... Why on Earth would teachers and learning co-ordinators encourage us to not reach our potential? :rolleyes: I don't know what goes on at your school, but, at my school we are encouraged to undergo as much private study as is needed. Contrary to what you might or might not be suggesting, very few find GCSEs too easy - teachers realise this and act upon it, thus, motivating and exerting pressure on students.
    Teachers do want us to reach our potential, but in the realms of what the exam board has set. When I was doing my mock exam in year 10, I didn't have enough oil paints and it was done on paper!! I was the only person in my class working on that scale and using oil paints, I'd asked for the paint out of my own initiative and said I wanted to work that size. My teacher complained because I wuoldn't do a proper mock up; whether or not it was beneficially to the way I worked or the work I was doing I had to have one. I should have had a board suggested to me, probably not canvas at that stage, and enough oil paints to finish, you can see where I started running out (the painting is on deviant art, I was 15 see sig - the face)

    My yr 11 mock exam I asked my teacher several times for advise becasue I didn't think the painting I was doing looked right, and he told me it was fine because it was enough for what was expected for an A at GCSE. He didn't seem to understand at that stage that I didn't care about what was expected at GCSE and that I'd chosen my own standard to work at - what was expected of ME, so I was disappointed with the painting and was extremly frustrated and even low in moral. I could really really feel the ceiling of GCSE level.

    I am now moving on to AS, it looks an abosolute drag, I'd have loved it a year ago. A2 looks fun from where I'm stood now, but I know it'll rubbish by the time I get to it. So there, thats my personal frustrations. I don't believe I was allowed to forfill my potential in art, getting myself a large enough cavas, using oil paint and the hours I put into my work was done out of my own initiative for myself, and even though some of my work is above what is expected at GCSE level I will gain no credit. I don't mind saying its above because I also spent alot more time than what I was expected to. What about everyone else?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, there's a ceiling, at both GCSE and A level. I've dropped several grades in one A level because of it. The A level reform a few years ago made A levels 'better' (better suited, more challenging in appropriate ways) for the vast majority of those studying them, but had the unfortunate side effect of inadvertently making them more difficult for the most able students, because of this new-found need to restrain themselves in order to stay within the limits and limitations of the new syllabus, the new mark scheme.
    Any good teacher will do his (I say "his" because it is better, respectively grammatically and stylistically, than "their" or "his/her", and because I dislike the token gender equality of "her". For the record, most of my truly inspirational teachers have been female.) best to encourage students to achieve their full potentials, but at the same time he not only has to teach the rest of the class, but also help even the most able students to pass examinations with the marks they deserve, so opportunities for extending study beyond the syllabus are understandably limited. You just have to put up with it in school and read around the subject outside, and then eventually become Minister for Education.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by soulsussed)
    Teachers do want us to reach our potential, but in the realms of what the exam board has set. When I was doing my mock exam in year 10, I didn't have enough oil paints and it was done on paper!! I was the only person in my class working on that scale and using oil paints, I'd asked for the paint out of my own initiative and said I wanted to work that size. My teacher complained because I wuoldn't do a proper mock up; whether or not it was beneficially to the way I worked or the work I was doing I had to have one. I should have had a board suggested to me, probably not canvas at that stage, and enough oil paints to finish, you can see where I started running out (the painting is on deviant art, I was 15 see sig - the face)

    My yr 11 mock exam I asked my teacher several times for advise becasue I didn't think the painting I was doing looked right, and he told me it was fine because it was enough for what was expected for an A at GCSE. He didn't seem to understand at that stage that I didn't care about what was expected at GCSE and that I'd chosen my own standard to work at - what was expected of ME, so I was disappointed with the painting and was extremly frustrated and even low in moral. I could really really feel the ceiling of GCSE level.

    I am now moving on to AS, it looks an abosolute drag, I'd have loved it a year ago. A2 looks fun from where I'm stood now, but I know it'll rubbish by the time I get to it. So there, thats my personal frustrations. I don't believe I was allowed to forfill my potential in art, getting myself a large enough cavas, using oil paint and the hours I put into my work was done out of my own initiative for myself, and even though some of my work is above what is expected at GCSE level I will gain no credit. I don't mind saying its above because I also spent alot more time than what I was expected to. What about everyone else?
    Firstly, I have to say that your teachers are bang out of order; what was said to you should never have been said. I don't do art - but alot of my friends do and I often went with them at Lunch, to talk with them whilst they worked on their art peices... There were teachers there and they were always pressuring people to go further, regardless of whether they were doing 'sufficient' or not. So, I can't agree with your statement that teachers say
    (Original post by soulsussed)
    you must be this good, but not quite that good
    - this seems to be based on what is exercised at your school alone - which I must say is outrageous.

    I myself am moving on to AS-Levels next year, and agree with you; I will find most of the modules at AS rather tedious and boring. I've been doing preperation work for Chemistry and Biology already and the work seems fairly simple, to speak the truth. But like I've said before, the majority of the population will be challanged by AS-Levels.
 
 
 

1,833

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.