primary school league tables

[ADDICTEDtosayingHAAAAAAAPYxmas]

what's the best thing to look at? value added, aggregate score, average points per pupil? it's a minefield out there!

[msappropriate]

go and visit the actual school

[ADDICTEDtosayingHAAAAAAAPYxmas]

oh i will go and visit the actual school aswell - but i am hoping to move to want to pick an area where there are some okish schools and have no idea hows these bloody tables work. i know they don't mean much but they are a starting point for the moment.

[Niecie]

Visit the school but for me value added as an indicator is most important. Tells you if the teaching is effective. A poor school won't add much value, a good one will.

Consider 2 schools with an average mark in their SATs but one is in a deprived area and the children started off at a very low level and were below average at the beginning of Yr R. The school is excellent and has a high value added score and the children are all rated as average in their SATS. On the other hand you have a school in an affluent area and the children start off as average but the school is not great and they are still average by the time they get to their SATs. Which school would you prefer your child to go to - the one that adds so much value that the children are achieving more than expected or the one where they have achieved less or the same as expected?

Goodness, that was long winded and didn't make much sense - much like the essay I am supposed to be writing.

I hope I got my point across a little bit though.

Doesn't matter about the stats though if you don't like how the school feels when you visit it. The head be inspiring confidence and making you feel like you are making a good choice by choosing their school. If the head inspires parents then hopefully they are inspiring the teachers to do well for your DC too.

[Niecie]

The head should be inspiring.

I really should be asleep!

[ADDICTEDtosayingHAAAAAAAPYxmas]

i think i get what you mean. its just it seems in my area the schools with the best CVA score aren't known as good schools which is a bit odd .

[roisin]

It certainly is a minefield. I agree completely with earlier posters about the importance of visiting a school. IMO the three most important things about a primary school are:

1. The Head (personality and drive)
   
2. The Head (vision and commitment to the school)
   
3. The Head (relationship with staff and students)
   But that aside and looking at results:
   
   I would look first at CVA (Contextual Value Added) then at the scores (starting with total points then looking at indiv subjects). And don't forget to look at the pattern of results over the past 3 years, not just a blip.
   
   We have schools in the town with very high KS2 SATs (98-100%), but I have been delighted with my boys' primary which has OK SATs results (88-93% this year).
   
   The BBC site is pretty good. It has the national and LEA averages for the past few years as well, which is a useful comparison.
   
   National Averages (Aggregate scores) over the past few years have been 237-245. Personally I wouldn't be happy with a school that was consistently below this, particularly if there was a marked weakness in one subject.
   
   Our town has areas of considerable poverty and scores highly on all deprivation indicators. But there are still plenty of primaries scoring well above the national average, and many more around the national average.

[roisin]

Another thing to be wary of as well is if you're looking at KS1-KS2 CVA it's not a level playing field for primary schools and junior schools. So beware if you are comparing the two.

The aim of an infant school is to get as high results as they possibly can for KS1 SATs. This is then the starting point for the junior schools they feed into.

However, for a primary school they are aware that really pushing and getting every last ounce of potential out of their KS1 students will damage their KS1-KS2 CVA. So they can, if they choose, put their resources and intervention in to KS2 SATs (which are reported) rather than KS1 (which are not), and make their statistics look better.

Cynical? Me?

[ADDICTEDtosayingHAAAAAAAPYxmas]

see that's what i've always though roisin which is why i prefer to look at aggragate score or average points per pupil. i don't agree with people who say schools in a middle class area who probably have pupils of high ability anyway don't push them to their full potential, because surely all schools would like a high percentage of level 5s so all schools will try to get the child to achieve their full potential.

[ADDICTEDtosayingHAAAAAAAPYxmas]

i think value added is more significant in areas where the results aren't that good than areas where the results are already good. it is much harder to add value if the children are doing really well already and doesn't necessarily mean they aren't a good a school.

[Hallgerda]

Addicted, there is the added complication that schools in more middle class areas may have a large proportion of tutored pupils, so their results may not entirely be down to the school's efforts.

The local gossip network may be based on snobbery rather than hard evidence. (Well, if they say a particular school is a bit rough, or that the children who go there aren't nice, I'd keep an open mind. If they know lots of children have left because of endemic bullying and can actually name names, avoid that school like the plague).

I agree with those who say you have to go and look.

[ADDICTEDtosayingHAAAAAAAPYxmas]

there aren't any grammar schools in the area so probably not many being tutored cos there's no reason for it if they are just going to the local secondary school is there?

[Lucycat]

It should really be the value added - but don't look at my dd's school, they were waaay down from last year.

but that's a whole other story

[ADDICTEDtosayingHAAAAAAAPYxmas]

value added works by comparing those pupils ks2 results with what they got in ks1 doesn't it? so it doesn't matter if this years kids are not as clever as last years cos it is from their own results iyswim?

[frankie3]

Roisin, I agree with you about the Head. I send my DS to a state primary which has had, up to now, a very good reputation and had good results in Sats. However, a new Head had started and she is awful, lots of parents have complained about her, she does not seem to really care about the school, the deputy head and lots of teachers have left. Parents have written to the governers, but it looks like she is here to stay. Does anyone else have any experience of this, and is it possible for a school to stay "good" with a weak Head?