Senatorial ‘Houses Or DifferentDevelopments Yonder’

Report

Compiled by Senator Sam Harrison (12CN) and Senator James Persico (12HD)With thanks to all those mentioned in the acknowledgements,

without whom this report may never have happened

1

Contents

Preliminary Ideas…………………………………………………………..3

Student Opinions…………………………………………………………..4

Staff Opinions……………………………………………………………...6

Analysis of Advantages andDisadvantages………………………………………………………….….7

Student Polls……………………………………………………………….9

Case Studies…………………………………………………………..…17

Recommended Names forHouses…………………………………………………………………....19

Potential Sorting Hats……………………………………………………20

Conclusion…………………………………………………………………22

Acknowledgements………………………………………………………..24

2

Houses: Preliminary Ideas

n as much as the discussion of this proposal has been undertaken by those intendingto undertake the undertaking in question, and the questions of the efficacy and utility of theproposal in question have been opened to discussion, it has been suggested that those matterswhich the report has previously discussed be put to the question in a way which, as seemsperfectly plain, calls into question the whole questionable procedure of putting to the question theproposal at hand, this quite clearly being the fairest method of proceeding.

In that furthermore the questions regarding the proposal have yet to be provided with theevidence to which the report made reference inasmuch as it made reference to the matters putto the question, if questionably, it may be necessary to put to the question the whole procedureby which the report in question has previously reportedly questioned the matters discussedbeforehand.

Whereas the houses to which the report has elsewhere made reference are indeed to beconsidered by those considering them, it has been implied that their establishment is the primaryfunction of any such procedure as that previously discussed by the discussion to which thisreport has made reference in the references previously referred to. This impression is, ofcourse, quite incorrect, insofar as the discussion made reference to was never referenced bythe reference in the discussion itself.

Without a doubt, the primary response to the idea of introducing a House system has been “likeHogwarts?”. This, in the opinion of all involved notwithstanding those involved in an auxiliary rolewithout prior involvement in the non­auxiliary running of those roles considered non­auxiliary bythose involved in the auxiliary runnings of the auxiliary roles, is a particularly impressive feat,seeing as a question is not an answer, any more than a statement is a carrot.

3

Student Opinions

Consultations with a range of students revealed the following opinions:

In favour:

Belief that such a system:

1. would create camaraderie amongst students from all age groups

2. could lead to a greater range of competitions within the school, extending frominter­form to inter­house

3. might enhance the general, preferably friendly, air of competition within the school interms of achievements

4. could extend friendship groups

5. would give actual purpose to things like Sports Day

6. would provide fertile grounds for the cultivation of banter

7. would provide an excuse for the school to buy a sorting hat

8. would be an example of the will of the school, Sixth Form included (see page 13), beingput into practice

4

Against:

Belief that such a system:

1. would be completely and utterly pointless, especially at Sixth Form Level, due topossible lack of interest (see page 9)

2. would be utterly unable to replicate the brilliance of Hogwarts

3. could cause excessive and damaging competition between students (though it was feltthat the majority would not react in this way)

4. would be a waste of time

5. would have no real impact

6. would “barely do anything”

5

Statement: The Senate of the Altrincham Grammar School for Boys Union of Students isconsidering the possibility of a houses system within the school, organising pupils into theselarge groups. Those who argue in favour of the idea point out that such a system would add anelement of competition in many events, such as Sports Day, and some have suggested a housepoints arrangement, with the highest scoring house winning some kind of reward. It has alsobeen noted that houses may create a valuable sense of camaraderie between year groups,something presumably more valuable to the lower years. Opponents point out the difficulty inmanaging such large houses, and tend to be more sceptical about the potential utility of thestructure.

Staff opinions

Staff member Capacity Opinion

Mrs. Clarke Librarian A houses system has a great deal of potential. Using houses asa way of organising those taking part in competitions wasdiscussed.

Miss Coates Teacher Great idea ­ gave examples based off her own experiences.

Mr. Soulsby Head of P.E. Strongly in favour, advocated raising the subject in the winter.Expressed surprise school does not already have such a system.Later meeting ­ 28/11/12 ­ Outlined the P.E. department’s viewson how a houses system could be set up and maintained. Theview was expressed that the system could be introduced with thenext scholastic year). The committee’s representative (Sen.Persico) also heard the suggestion that each house be composedof three forms, and that the PE department had been consideringhouses with years 7, 8 and 9. This would entail the setting up ofjust 2 houses in the school, making use of the red/green invertiblePE tops. Mr Soulsby expressed an interest in learning what theSenate’s eventual findings would be.

Mr. Gartside Headmaster Has previously overseen the installation of a houses system atanother school, and therefore has prior experience of how it canbe implemented.A potential houses system has been discussed on a number ofoccasions, but, in the past at least, it tended to be met withdisapproval and/or apathy from the general teaching staff.A houses system, while it could add to inter­year cohesion, is apoor substitute for the shared euphoria when a form wins an event.As such, the system could potentially reduce cohesive forceswithin the form environment, in accordance with the discussedreference of the discussion to which reference was previouslymade.

Mrs.Harvey­Voyce

HoY12 Thinks such a system could increase co­operation betweenyears. Gave examples based off her own experiences.

6

Analysis of the Proposed Advantages and Disadvantages

With reference to student input (page 4):CamaraderieThe thinking behind this is obvious: that a house system would facilitate better relations betweenyears, which currently leave a lot to be desired, due to the sense of common purpose.

There are, however, faults in this thinking. Firstly, it would require that people be able toovercome the barriers which have grown up between years entirely on the basis of a sharedhouse, which is an arbitrary label unlikely, it seems, to be taken all that seriously by many.Furthermore, it is actually more likely that two individuals chosen randomly from different yearswill in fact be divided, rather than united, by house.

However, proponents of houses would point out that the the system would provide far more thanjust ‘arbitrary labels’ ­ for example, participation on sports day would involve students from thesame house working together and socialising as a group. In aiming to collect points fromvarious intra and extra­curricular activities, students might be more encouraged to work hard inlessons and sign up to some of the school’s many clubs and societies, thus enriching theireducation and leisure time.

Even this is, in turn, open to criticism; it would be, after all, in the wrong spirit that people wouldbe encouraged to participate in such activities. If it is believed that there is a deficit in the areas ofhard work and extra­curricular participation, this can be solved in a better way, it is felt, than bypitting students against their fellows.

The evidence suggests that it is easy enough for students from different years to formfriendships in extra­curricular clubs without the requirement of any common identity, such ashouse; using the example of the GCSE Astronomy class, it was observed that it was it was easyfor people in different years to form friendships, largely over the basis of trials and tribulationsshared. This seems to be more powerful than any, entirely random, label could be.

This effect was most marked, however, in those without fellows from their own year. While thiscould be explained by the fact that people are simply more comfortable among friends, andfriends are likely to be both from the same year and to be showing similar interests (such asAstronomy), it could alternatively suggest that there is a barrier between years as it currentlystands.

Houses are not uncommon in schools with long and rich histories, seeking to concentrate notonly on the education of their students but also their character building for their later release intosociety. The ideas of cooperation and teamwork within defined units can be deemed importantfor the various careers that students may end up pursuing.

7

CompetitionsThis is a promising idea. Mr. Soulsby has already backed the concept, and there could be agreat deal of light­hearted fun to be extracted from this plan. For those with no great wish toparticipate in sports, this is less relevant, apart from of course Sports Day. During many schoolevents, arbitrary groups must be constructed specially for organising students, so it makessense to have some already available, not least to save teachers’ time when organising theseevents.

Air of CompetitionThis is a rather more controversial matter. In discussing this, it will be necessary to consider thepotential benefits of such a system, including increased effort levels and productivity. However,intense rivalry could spoil the enjoyment derived from certain competitions, replacing it with abloodthirsty desire for victory at any cost.

On the one hand, competition could encourage people to work harder in order to outdo theirpeers. On the other hand, those who would actually participate in such one­upmanship may notbe considered the best of chaps.

People ought to be encouraged to work well for the enjoyment of the work itself, and for the goodof their fellows; while this is at best difficult and at worse pitifully optimistic, it’s certainly a damnsight better than encouraging people to work for the sole purpose of causing misery to theirfellows. That smacks of capitalism, and should disgust all those who are ardent believers inenslaving man in a system that poisons the tree of liberty.

After frenzied negotiation, we therefore agreed on the compromise of a publicly­owned,collectivist free market system in which houses are distributed on the basis of 'from eachaccording to his ability, to each according to his ability'. This idea was later disregarded on thebases firstly of impracticality, and secondly of downright stupidity (whatever Tony Blair mightthink).

Methods of Implementation

One problem the committee was made aware of was the mathematical issues relating to thedivision of year groups, due to different population sizes. In order to encourage greater socialmixing, it has been suggested that students be picked randomly and sorted into houses thusly.However, there is an alternate point of view which advocates placing forms as unbroken unitsinto houses, thus not breaking down form cohesion. This would present problems, as somehouses would have more forms from one year group than others. Therefore, this system canNOT be recommended lightly. However, these problems can be mitigated if the plan Mr Soulsbyis currently considering is utilised ­ the setting up of just two houses, for years 7, 8, 9 (andpossibly 10). Using two houses would also provide an auxiliary use for the red and greeninvertible tops required for P.E.

8

Student Polls(In response to claimed advantage of the encouragement of hard work)

The Harrison Poll(Otherwise known as 'The Amateur Poll')

In an attempt to introduce a note of democracy to these proceedings, because it’s absolutelynever gone wrong in the past, several polls have been taken in order to assess the potentialeffects of the argument in favour of houses that people may work harder as a result of thecompetition. Obviously, these account only for practicalities pertaining to the issue, and do notaddress the moral elements, nor indeed the lack­of­morals elements.

Here, therefore, are the results of the polls taken by Messr Harrison:

Question Answer of ‘No’ Answer of ‘Yes’

Would you work harderunder a houses system?

11* 1

If we had a houses systemin which you could winpoints, would you workharder?

7 0

If we had a houses systeminvolving points,competitions, prizes etc.,would you work harder?

11 0

*One respondent, who will go unnamed, claimed that he would actually strive to work less hard if houses werebrought in.One respondent claimed that he would work harder provided the prize was £20. Given the potential difficulties ofhanding out £20 to every member of a 300­strong house, it seemed unwise to commit ourselves to this.

On the basis of these results, it would appear that people would not generally be encouraged towork any harder simply due to the introduction of a houses system. These sample sizes are, ofcourse, very small; there is no reason to assume, however, that they are not representative ofthe opinion of those for whom the Union of Students is a powerless figurehead.

9

The Persico Poll(Otherwise known as 'The Keen Poll')

This poll was carried out with an emphasis on improving the sample selected by the pollster,after it was noticed with dismay by said pollster that the prior poll’s polled were being polled by aprevious pollster who polled only those who would provide the poll with an answer similar to thatof the pollster, as it was alleged by said pollster. Therefore, Senator Persico endeavoured totake it upon himself to conduct a poll using more accurate, if not perfect, techniques.Specifically, the students questioned in the Harrison Poll were mainly from the Sixth Form,associated with the pollster and selected using a process that could not be honestly describedas truly random. The results that ensued could therefore in no way be considered reflective ofthe year as a whole, regrettably leading Senator Persico to advise all readers to discount anyresults collected using this flawed set of techniques.

In the Persico Poll, stratified random cluster sampling was used in order to fairly representstudents according to their year group size. Once the number of students from each yearneeding to be polled (S) had been calculated, a form from each year was selected randomly:

Year 7 Total Proportion Proportion * 30Class CM EW HN NC PS SQNo. students 31 32 31 30 31 31 186 14.52% 4.000Form roomNumber 0 1 2 3 4 5Year 8Class KL EL RF JS SL HINo. students 30 29 30 30 30 29 178 13.90% 4.000Form roomNumber 0 1 2 3 4 5Year 9Class LS NW WK MK GA MANo. students 32 31 32 32 31 31 189 14.52% 5.000Form roomNumber 0 1 2 3 4 5Year 10Class HW LW DR ME SN HCNo. students 31 29 27 29 28 30 174 13.58% 4.000Form roomNumber 0 1 2 3 4 5Year 11Class CC LY PT WY RD MN SY RNNo. students 27 26 26 28 27 26 28 28 216 16.86% 5.000Form roomNumber 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

10

Year 12Class HD ST BK MD WX HE MR CNNo. students 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 168 13.11% 4.000Form roomNumber 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7Year 13Class SM TM AZ BN CT GD PR EYNo. students 20 21 21 21 21 22 22 22 170 13.27% 4.000Form roomNumber 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Total number of students 1281

* Numbers of students in Year 12 forms were unavailable and hence estimated.

Following this, S random numbers between 1 and the number of students in the respective formwere generated. Duplicate numbers were discounted. The numbers were then matched up tocertain students according to their place in the form register.

Random numbers

Year 7 (0­5) 0 CMStudents 21 7 17 19 x

Year 8 (0­5) 1 EL15 25 20 22 x

Year 9 (0­5) 5 MA21 10 25 13 12

Year 10 (0­5) 5 HC17 15 26 11 x

Year 11 (0­7) 1 LY24 6 8 15 18

Year 12 (0­7) 1 ST2 13 3 20 x

Year 13 (0­7) 6 PR6 12 7 14 x

11

Survey FormThe questions posed were as follows:

HousesSurvey

AGSB SIXTH FORM SENATE OF THEUNION

Strongly Agree Agree Unsure DisagreeStronglyDisagree

Would a houses system foster better relationsbetween members of different year groups inthe same house?

Would a competitive houses system (underwhich points could be won for houses for aneventual prize) provide you with incentive toimprove the quality of your work and/orcontribution to school life?

Overall, do you believe a houses system ofsome sort should be introduced in the school?

The questionnaire featured closed response sections in order to streamline the process ofcompiling and collating the data and remove elements of subjectivity from the results. Amazinglyhowever, one student (who, for reasons relating to the principles of democracy, shall remainnameless) did manage to tick the line dividing ‘Agree’ and ‘Unsure’. The committee agreed thatthe fairest thing to do in this situation would be to ignore this answer and mark it out on theresults.

12

Results

Year QuestionStronglyagree Agree Unsure Disagree

Stronglydisagree

7Betterrelations? 0 1 3 0 0Work harder? 0 2 2 0 0Houses? 1 0 1 1 1

8Betterrelations? 1 2 0 1 0

Work harder? 1 1 1 0 0* unclear response notrecorded; see 'Survey Form'

Houses? 1 1 1 0 0 * non response x1

9Betterrelations? 0 5 0 0 0Work harder? 1 1 2 1 0Houses? 0 1 4 0 0

10Betterrelations? 0 0 1 1 2Work harder? 0 2 0 1 1Houses? 0 1 0 1 2

11Betterrelations? 1 2 1 0 0 * non response x1Work harder? 1 2 1 0 0 * non response x1Houses? 2 2 0 0 0 * non response x1

12Betterrelations? 0 2 2 0 0Work harder? 2 2 0 0 0Houses? 0 4 0 0 0

13Betterrelations? 0 1 1 1 1Work harder? 0 1 1 1 1Houses? 0 0 2 1 1

TotalBetterrelations? 2 13 8 3 3Work harder? 5 11 7 3 2Houses? 4 9 8 3 4

13

This survey represents, as far as anyone in this year is aware, the first student organised surveyof the entire school in recent history, and thus is invaluable in demonstrating to the electorate theSenate’s commitment to democracy and the principles of open government.

At first glance, the immediate disparities between the results of the Harrison Poll and the resultsof this poll are clearly apparent. While the Harrison poll showed that almost 0% of sixth formersagreed with the suggestion that they would work harder, the Persico Poll found that 62.5% ofsixth formers, a full majority, believed that a competitive houses system (including points) wouldprovide them with the incentive to improve the quality of their work and contribution to school life,with 37.5% ‘agreeing’ and 25% ‘strongly agreeing’.

Chart 1 ­ This shows the responses given by the sample covering all year groupsOne of the largest areas of consensus regards the effect houses would have on inter­yearrelations. 51.7% of respondents agreed that inter­year relations between individuals in the samehouse would improve, with only 20.6% disagreeing, and the remainder saying they were unsure.This therefore could be an intelligent solution to any friction that exists between years.

Chart 2 ­ Again showing responses given by the sample covering all year groupsWhat may be the most important result is the strong support for houses across the school as a

14

whole. When the introduction of houses was suggested, only 25% of those sampled expressedsome form of disagreement. This suggests that houses, in the event of their introduction, wouldbe welcomed and treated with an open mind by an overwhelming majority of students.

Chart 3 ­ Demonstrating wide support for a houses system across the schoolThe committee found, somewhat unexpectedly, that much of the support given to theintroduction of houses came from Years 11, 12 and 13. It had been expected that the lowerschool would be more enthusiastic, but this was the reverse of what was observed. It couldpossibly be that this is due to the lower years putting down ‘unsure’ as they have a lack ofexperience of school life compared to the upper years and thus feel ill­placed to voice a clearopinion. When only Sixth Form votes are counted, 50% are in favour of the introduction of ahouses system, with 25% disagreeing and another 25% responding ‘unsure’.

15

Chart 4 ­ Showing support for a houses system from across the sixth formThis poll therefore concludes that students are in favour of the introduction of a houses system,preferably competitive, for reasons that include better relations between year groups.

An Impartial, Anonymous Critique of the Persico Poll

This author is more than happy to accept that the sampling technique of the Persico Poll was farsuperior to that of the Harrison Poll, and commends Senator Persico for such an impressivesurvey of the school.

He is less convinced by the questions asked. The only valid question, in his opinion, is thatregarding how people would react in terms of work, and this is made difficult to answer by itsdouble­tiered and vague nature. The one regarding the popularity of the proposals is at bestpointless and at worst damaging; it is the opinion of this author that the purpose of this surveyshould not have been to determine how much people want the houses, since that is a matter forsenators to determine for themselves. Furthermore, it is felt that forcing consideration ofpersonal support for houses could colour people's answers to represent this preference,causing said answers not to be so much representative of actual opinions as of whether or notthey want houses overall. The other question, querying whether or not better relations would befostered between members of houses in different years, seems to this author to be phrased inthe wrong way; the question should regard the way in which the individual answering thequestionnaire would react, not how they think others would; after all, there is no way they couldpossibly be able to make a judgement on how others would act.

This is not to detract, of course, from the achievement of Senator Persico in putting togethersuch a survey, which required great perseverance and statistical ability. It is simply believed thatthese suggestions as to its faults should be considered when senators are deciding how to voteon this issue.

16

Case Studies

Case Study 1: the Bollin Primary School

This school is an example of an institution with a houses system. The observed effects of thisare as follows:

Positives Negatives

It provided a sense of competition with otherchildren, potentially contributing to greatereffort put into work.

Friction was sometimes created betweenfriends due to this competition. Such anapproach could be damaging to students’enjoyment of school.

Multiple children were rewarded for work theyall did together, encouraging them to worktowards the inevitable socialist utopia.

N/A

It encouraged a degree of team spirit duringwhole­school sporting activities.

People were very rarely aware of the otherindividuals in their house, making this teamspirit short­lived.

There was no evidence of greater cohesion between years as a result of the house system, andit has been suggested that it actually decreased cohesion within classes.

This school is, however, a primary school, and a fairly bad one at that. As such, it may not beentirely representative. It is certainly hoped not.

17

Case Study 2: Bowdon Church SchoolBowdon Church of England Primary School also features houses, using them to provide acompetitive edge to educational and extra­curricular activities. Throughout the week, points areawarded to particular houses for the achievements of its members, mostly on an individualbasis. At the end of each term, the total house points are calculated and the highest scoringhouse commended, and the house with the highest score by the end of the year wins a cup.Sports day uses these houses to get the entire school to compete, without leaving any yeargroup feeling inadequate.Since the houses are only used for the purposes described above, they tend not to break downany intra­form bonds or friendships. Indeed, it could be said that friends participating in acompetitive event together could risk damaging their relationship if one was perceived to havefailed the other, whereas houses that divide friends lessen the chance of this happening, as twoindividuals are unlikely to be placed in the same house.The house names are the following

Stamford Dunham Tatton Arley

These were, incidentally, the names of AGSB’s previous houses, with the exception of Arley,which was instead ‘Bradbury’.

Positives Negatives

Sports day teams involved a mixture of yeargroups and classes, increasing cohesiontime among different peers.

Rivalry occasionally got a little fierce on theday, but only by primary school standards.

Students were motivated to work hard inorder to win their house points and gainrespect from their house.

Competition makes us all die earlier. Besides,the sort of people who work hard with the soleintention of getting house points generally failto earn any respect from anyone.

Houses provide predetermined groups foractivities that require the division of yeargroups

Some might enjoy being in different groups fordifferent activities

18

Recommendations for House Names

Red Altrincham Milhouse Europe Coleman Aristotle

Green Hale Savile­Laver Americas Peel Newton

[Blue] Bowdon Hamblin Asia Stamford Shakespeare

Somethingequally dull

Timperley Crowther Africa Hughes Mozart

Ahenobarbi Guevara Cicero Descartes Marx Paul

Metelli Castro Caesar Hume Engels Rothbard

Fabii Lenin Pompey Sartres FriedmanSatan

von Mises

Gracchi Anotherbloodthirstyenemy of the freeworld

Crassus Kant Keynes Various otheroppressors of theproletariat

Franklin Marlborough Talavera Stamford Earth Persico

Washington Heath Salamanca Bradbury Water Harrison

QuinceyAdams

Blenheim Vitoria Tatton Wind Morgan

Madison Ashley Toulouse Dunham Fire Garrido

19

Sorting Hats

a.) b.)

c.) e.)

f.) g.)

20

h.)

i.)

j.)

None of these could be recommended by the committee, leading to all of the above beingrejected out of both principle and hand.

21

ConclusionIn no particular order, here are the options this report places before the senate:

Option A):1. Houses to be formed for a selection of the below:

a. Years 7, 8, 9b. Years 10, 11c. Sixth Form

2. Houses can be formed in EITHER of the following waysa. Each form is to have an equal number of students in each house, to be chosen

eitheri. randomly

1. if done from the oldest year downwards, students in lower yearsare automatically sorted into the house of their eldest brother

ii. by allowing students in each form to sort themselves into four equalgroups

Assuming there are x houses, this would result in1/x * 184 Year 7s1/x * 178 Year 8s1/x* 189 Year 9s1/x * 173 Year 10s1/x * 216 Year 11s1/x * ~ 175 Year 12s1/x * 173 Year 13sEXAMPLE ­ If the school were to have 4 houses, each would contain in theregion of 320 students, or 173 if only Years 7,8, and 9 were assigned houses.

b. Entire forms belong to houses3. Each house is assigned the following by the Headmaster

a. two teachers as Heads of Houseb. four Sixth Formers as House Prefects

and all of these are considered a source of pastoral care.4. Each house is assigned a name (report’s suggestions to be taken into account)5. Points systems to be adopted by the houses, and figures for the points to be collected at

the end of the year by integrating the current system for commendations.a. Commendations for students to contribute towards their respective housesb. Victory in events (e.g. Sports Day) to contribute towards house points in a way to

be decided by the Headmaster.6. Older members of each house to be encouraged to give help wherever they can to

younger members of their house in need of said help.

22

Option B):

Do not implement a houses system. Instead, a series of measures, outlined below, should beintroduced instead of such a system, with the purpose of providing the same benefits as weresuggested for the houses themselves.

The proposed measures are the following:1. Greater participation by older students (i.e. Year 10 and above) in the running of

extra­curricular activities to be encouraged, in the hope that this will encourage discourseand/or intercourse between years.

2. The peer mentoring system to be reintroduced, but made more expansive than before.Peer mentors would aim to help any students experiencing difficulties in their personal orfamily lives, in the work they do, or in their organisation. Students could sign up for anolder peer mentor, or could be assigned one if a teacher felt this to be appropriate; for thesystem to work best, however, it is advised that students be assigned peer mentorsprincipally when they are willing to have this done.

3. Children to be encouraged to work hard for the common good (using unspecifiedmethods)

4. Older children to be encouraged to engage with the needs of younger students to agreater extent, with the intent of providing real and meaningful help.

Option C):Do nothing as regards houses.

So concludes the Senatorial 'Houses Or Different Developments Yonder' report.

23

AcknowledgementsThe authors are indebted to the services of

Dhee Gheetala, for bringing this issue to the Senate’s attention All teachers interviewed as part of the Staff Opinions section All those surveyed for their co­operation All form tutors responsible for distributing and re­collecting the surveys Mr. Ahmadzadeh for advice on the methods of statistical investigation Sen. Charlie Berthou (12ST) and Sen. Anush Shashidhara (12BK) for assisting in survey

distribution Ian Messiter, who created this amazing game Our lovely audience here at Altrincham Grammar School for Boys

24

Notes

25