Wikipedia:Peer review/List of middle schools in England/archive1

List of middle schools in England

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for April 2009.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for April 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this list article for peer review after a considerable overhaul. I have collated up-to-date information on each school, and am now wondering if it might be suitable for making up to Featured List standard - all a new thing to me! Can anyone suggest improvements that might move it in that direction? Thanks, Tafkam (talk) 02:40, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: This looks an impressive effort. However, there are numerous issues which require attention:- Lead:
 * The lead should start with a clear definition of a middle school, rather than a statement about them being a recent "phenomenon" (phenomenon is not a good choice of word anyway).
 * It should be made clearer that although Edward Boyle's 1964 Education Act opened the pathway to the establishment of middle schools, it did so rather grudgingly; it did not, for example, recognise middle schools as a formal category. As you say in the article, middle schools that were established were for legal purposes "deemed" either primary or secondary, this remaining the position as far as I know to this day. You should say in the article what the determining factor was that led to schools being deemed one or the other.
 * The circular to which you refer should be identified as Circular 10/65, a rather notable British educational document (it even has its own Wikipedia article, to which you can link). This circular, incidentally, was withdrawn in June 1970 by the incoming Conservative government, but as your figures show, most of the growth in middle schools occurred after this withdrawal, which might be a point worth making.
 * The minister had requested a review of the age of transfer to secondary schools as part of the Plowden enquiry - the report came two years later.
 * It would be better to explain what "combined schools" were, rather than relying on a link
 * Numbers can rise "continuously", "regularly" or even "continually", but "repeatedly" is strange.
 * The term "National Curriculum" should be linked. Since the National Curriculum was not introduced until 1989 (and was phased in over several years), is there another explanation as to why the number of middle schools started to fall in 1983? It would be useful to have some indication of the rate at which the number diminished; was the decline gradual until the National Curriculum really kicked in?
 * Since you yourself have listed 265 schools, the number of middle schools in January 2009 should be given precisely as 265, not as "fewer than 300"
 * MOS issues: 1,400 not 1400; five years not 5 years; 900-pupil not 900 pupil

Tables
 * All of the following statements need citations to sources:-
 * Cambridgeshire has only one middle school, which is effectively part of the Bedfordshire three-tier system.
 * All Harrow middle schools will close on 31st August 2010.
 * All Isle of Wight middle schools will close on 31st August 2010.
 * All three Kent middle schools will close on 31st August 2009, to be replaced by a new academy on the Isle of Sheppey.
 * Northumberland County Council has begun a process of closing middle schools across the authority in stages.
 * Poole Borough Council intends to close all of its middle-deemed-primary schools in August 2013.
 * Suffolk County Council intends to close all middle schools in its authority by 2013.
 * What is the purpose of giving individual geographical coordinates for every individual school, especially when, in urban areas such as Harrow, Poole and Windsor, the schools are practically next door to each other? I appreciate that much work has gone into including this information, but I think it clutters your tables with data of only marginal usefulness, and would recommend you take it out.

General point
 * With FL in mind, you have to face the question of an inherent instability in this article. Of 265 schools listed, more than half are scheduled to close by 2013, many on dates set before that (in Harrow, for instance). So what will this article look like in a year's time, or in two years? Do you intend to continually update it? Even so, there may not be much of an article left in a few years. You need to decide how you are gong to answer such questions at FL if you take it there,

Don't hesitate to ping my talkpage if you have queries or problems in dealing with any of the above. Brianboulton (talk) 19:50, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for these constructive thoughts! Plenty to be going on with in the coming days and weeks! Tafkam (talk) 20:31, 22 April 2009 (UTC)