League tables for GCSE & A levels 2011

IGCSEs will count in the league tables from now on.

"I'm pleased that someone has made the point about General Studies etc, because I get fed up with seeing schools "playing" the system to climb the tables."

It's easy to spot. Look at the tables (sorry OP: it's 2010) They show 'average point score per pupil' and 'average point score per exam entry'.
So for England as a whole, the average pupil got 744.9 UCAS points in total and 214.4 per exam. Divide one by t'other and you get 3.5, which is what you would expect (three A2 and an AS). Tiffin Girls has 1306 and 262.8, which gives an average of nearly 5 exams per pupil. You know something is going on.

I wouldn't get too hung up on EBacc percentages... so many private schools don't offer GCSE Maths - they do IGCSE - they all score 0%, but with the children taking a harder exam.....

I'm pleased that someone has made the point about General Studies etc, because I get fed up with seeing schools "playing" the system to climb the tables. I really do think that A levels not accepted by unis should be excluded from league tables. I knew Hampton did this but Tiffin? I despair.
When you see a table which lists Westminster, St Pauls and St Pauls Girls in the top ten then you know its a complete list as these are the schools getting the highest number of Oxbridge offers. The FT usually publish in the new year, anything before then is PR.

I agree with ellisbell.
My Godson has just left Tiffin school where it was compulsory for all students to take AS level General Studies and Critical Thinking, despite them not being recognised by many universities, but goodness me, it does make the school's own stats look good.
Meanwhile my son's school allowed DS to take Geography to AS - a subject that was far more useful and relevant in his UCAS application.

why you finally get hold of these tables do treat them to the generous pinch of salt they need. A level results can easily be manipulated by getting your students to do subjects like General Studies and critical thinking that rack up extra points per student but are of very limited benefit when applying to university. The extended project does that too, but may have greater value. You can also encourage students to take "soft" subjects where they are more likely to get good grades - and that applies at both A level and GSCE. Some of the highest scoring schools make full use of such tricks.

DCs school is a very high achieving one. It offered History and Geography, but it wasn't compulsory for everyone, although RE was. Everyone had to study a language though, but some did a NVQ which now doesn't count. The key thing was that as a specialist school it made everyone study a subject in its specialism, if it had also insisted on History/Geography, pupils would only have had 2 options, which wasn't enough for the Diploma or some college courses. And one of these would have had to be in the specialism.
I believe now the goal posts have moved they have dropped the specialism subject requirement and now may well require everyone to do History/Geography although this does now mean these subjects will have a lot of pupils who are not very interested in them doing it to GCSE.

Thanks Senua

Quite shocked to read there that some schools had NOT been offering History & Geography GCSE options.

DD1's school must be doing something 'right' then with > 20% getting Ebacc, with 5-inc-E&M only just above average. Although MFL still not compulsory, they never relaxed on the teaching of them and have continued to offer 3.

Sorry: poor editing. s/be "current achievement rate in England"

circular The 15% is the current number getting EBacc. I have found a website where the Govt says "Ministers have not set any targets for the number of students who should be achieving the English Baccalaureate."

I don't know how many are suposed to get 5-inc-E&M but the current achievement in England rate is just below 50%.

That's up to the schools. If they are good educators then they will do what is best for the child.

Sometimes children should be persuaded to study subjects that they don't like, for the best long-term benefit. How many would get beyond Primary Maths if they didn't have to!?

Senua - Where does the 15% for the ebacc come from ?

Adnd how many are supposed to get 5 to A* to C's incl. Eng & Maths?

Yes, I can't disagree that all schools should offer languages, but the measure does put schools in the situation of 'persuading' children to take exams for the school's benefit rather than for the child's benefit, doesn't it?

I would rather that the Govt measured how many pupils were getting a language GCSE (current situation) than the Govt dropped it off the curriculum so some schools stopped teaching it altogether in KS4 (previous situation). Surely it's better that the opportunity is there for those that want it, instead of denying it to everyone.

If the government brings in a measure like EBacc, do you really think they didn't expect schools to jump on the bandwagon? That's exactly what they wanted. I'm afraid it's the creation of the measure that will affect my DS, I don't blame the school for wanting to be seen to be doing well.

It's not the Government dictating btw - it will be the school. That was the funny thing about the retrospective introduction of EBacc: it showed that schools were not providing a rounded education for their children, they were doing whatever it took to get themselves up the league tables.
It was the same when they introduced the measure of 5 GCSEs: the schools got 'inventive' so the Govt had to change it to 5-GCSEs-inc-Maths-and-English.

than for his own benefit.

senua, X post. My DS may find that his school insist he does French as he has the potential to score for them on the EBacc, rather that for his own benefit.

Was she sighing at me?

I just don't really want the government dictating to my DS that he must be an all-rounder. He's not. And he may not get into the Russell group universities because of it, which will be their loss.

Sorry but I get fed up repeating it. EBacc is only supposed to be obtainable by 15% of the population.

Just how rude is it to sigh at the start of one's post?

Just be careful - some of the top universities insist on a language at GCSE.

The EBacc is supposed to show that you are an all-rounder at academic subjects. If your DS doesn't get it then it shows that he has a particular maths/sci bent and not a language one. Which you knew already.
The EBacc is not compulsory and is not supposed to be obtainable by everyone.

The idea that, just because someone in Government has designed a yardstick, then everybody feels that their DC should qualify is what has created grade inflation.

My DC have the EBacc but don't have A* in Maths nor Science. So what? It just means that mine have different skills to yours.

I hate the EBacc. My DS1 is a whizz at maths, heading for A, good at science, A/A potential and will do 3 sciences, good enough at English, A/B, will do Geography, RE, ICT, Electronics. But he has no gift for languages. If he does French he may get a C, he may not. It will make his results look like he can't be bothered with a subject he doesn't like. Why waste a GCSE on something he may fail rather than getting a good grade at another academic subject?