my son is going to the local bog standard comp

I was looking not at the whole year figures but the "highest" achiever figures. 60% is for the whole KS4 year group, whilst 100% are for the "high attainers" sub-section of that. See www.education.gov.uk/cgi-bin/schools/performance/school.pl?urn=100844. (there were a couple of errors in my post above, the haste of quickly checking figures and I may have taken the wrong one here or there as for Kingsdale, but I think the point remains).

Oh, oops sorry, missed that

Thanks Dilys,
but OhDearConfused said "when you look at the 5GCSEs (inc Maths and English) of all the comps in my area (south London), Lambeth Academy, Kingsdale, Dunraven, and the rest, they were all pretty much the same - all above 95%".

95% will be 5 GCSEs - 60% will be 5 including Maths & English which is far more challenging.

Now I'm utterly confused! When I look at the Kingsdale headline it says 60% to me, not 95%. Where does your 95% come from?

ACtually, what I then found were that when you look at the 5GCSEs (inc Maths and English) of all the comps in my area (south London), Lambeth Academy, Kingsdale, Dunraven, and the rest, they were all pretty much the same - all above 95% - and comparable to the partially selective Graveney (96%), so really only a handfull at most fail to get those 5 in each of the higher sets of those schools.

But of course a child getting 5 Cs is in that %age as is a child getting 5A* - and so looking at the percentage is not really enough. You also need to look at the
"average point score" (which seems to take the best 8 GCCEs of the higher set). Then you do get a stark difference: that figure for Graveney is 409, whilst for Lambeth Academy it is 375, for Kingsdale it is 393, and for Dunravern it is 385.

Not sure what this proves though. Except that perhaps only for my area it is not the case that the top set in a BSC get the same results in a selective school (one can assume that the "high" achievers in Graveney were all there through the selective entry route). But is the difference enough to warrant all the stress and hassle and tutoring to get into something like this. (For Tiffin, however, the average point score is a mind-blowing 440!)

Oh don't I know it .

No, I'm only curious because dd has been offered a school I like, to start this year, and I wanted to compare it to the two above it on our list that she didn't get a place at.

The headline 5 GCSEs including maths and English are all similar (60% - 67%) but I don't really understand what the three subgroups mean and, also, how are the stats affected if a school has a higher percentage of children with English not as their first language and on free school meals?

bibbity
its tricky
Because of Bliar's darned "parental choice" - it causes schools to spiral up and down
I guess you have to combine the stats with what they put on their own websites with the 'feel' you get if you sit outside the school gate at kicking out time (definitely DHs acid test!)

OK, found them now thank you Dilys.

So, what do you think are the pertinent stats when comparing school with school? They are all comprehensives around here, but have very different intakes due to catchment/house prices.

How can I compare like with like?

Agree with seeker and talkin that the split by ability group is v enlightening. Also at the bottom of the page is the number of "GCSE equivalents" each group has been entered for and how many of them are actual GSCEs - a local comp was entering their top set for 19 equivalents each, which screamed to me of an attempt to rig the league tables.

If you can't find your school's results then it's probably changed to an academy recently - there should be a link at the top of the page to click through to the results under its old name.

Any thoughts on why a particular school's results would not be on there ... anyone?

That's interesting, DC schools still come out a bit pants in Seeker's links (although not truly horrific, just hitting MN threshold of awful :) ).

Just tried to look up a school my dd is on the waiting list for and there are no results on the tables - why would that be?

I've been reading this thread with interest, with 2 DDs at a 'bog standard' secondary modern (grammar system here). In fact there is nothing bog standard about it all; they are happy and learning something every day and so are their peers. Our school's statistics would not impress some - under 50% 5 GCSE a-c inc english and maths - but our value added score WAY exceeds the local grammars. Plus specialisms in creative arts, a school farm, excellent results from top sets, vocational options for those who choose etc.

What schools achieve per pupil is all about the 'quality' (in academic terms) of their cohort. So clearly if you are a topnotch public school or a super selective grammar it's much less work to get good results. If your cohort consists of those with a much less academic bent then getting them to the magic 5 A-C at GCSE inc english and maths is a much bigger hill to climb. And dont start me on the ebacc....

I dont think either of mine are going to take silk; but I know they will get the results they need to move onto the next stage of whatever they choose. And at the same time they will also meet a huge range of different people from widely differing backgrounds, with widely differing parental expectations, at a formative stage of their lives. This can only be good cant it?

(And I say all that from the background that both DH and I went to private BS at 10 years old; neither of us got great results or went to Uni; both always worked; now both built own businesses).

Ah, I think I found it. If you click on the school from within the table (which only shows the aggregate figures) then you get info on "low", "middle", and "high" attainers. Thanks!
ODC

Look here

If you find your school and scroll down there are stats for low, middle and high attainers

Sorry, seeker, am I being dense? When I look at the BBC site all I see is % getting A-C (or A-C good) of the school. Not the number getting it from the top set!?

Agreed.
It is one of the (few) excellent things Gove has done.
Sorting league tables into expectation groups will allow parents to compare outcomes for THEIR child across a range of types of school.

A very long time ago I wrote to the BBC to ask them to compile a leage table limited to the top 60 in each year group at each school
as I was pretty sure that the Comps would come out pretty darned well against the rather expensive and stressful alternatives.
Funnily enough the comps had the data to hand, the indies were unwilling to share it!

I LOVE the fact that DD can do triple science, double maths etc etc
and have a CHOICE of faff subjects to lighten up her timetable a tad.

Yep. Look at the league table entry for the school concerned. Look at the number of/ progress of/results of the high attainers.

Easy!

seeker (Mon 05-Mar-12 13:59:42)

"If you are going to compare, compare the grammar or private school with the top set of a comprehensive. The listed results show the entire cohort. Compare like with like and you will get a very different picture."

A good point, but does anyone know how you can check the top set of a comp?

I like threads that are positive about comps too. I have a lot of faith in bog standard comps, I went to one and my school friends and I mostly went on to top universities to do well-regarded degrees so I do know that it is perfectly possible to achieve well in a normal comp.

Now my 12yo is at our local bog standard comp (which does not look great in the league tables), yesterday morning I told her it was time to go to school and she let out a little cheer of enthusiasm, which I fonnd quite heartening on a gloomy March Monday morning. She's very happy at the comp, and my 10yo is desperate to go there too.

I guess the timing was because school allocation is on everyone's minds atm.

TBH I am finding this thread really reassuring. MN can make you feel utterly inaqdequate if you aren't busting a gut to pay for private or to tutor your child to a standstill to get them into a grammar (assuming you have such a thing in your area). And then to feel like a failure if they aren't going to Oxbridge and becoming a barrister with aspirations to taking silk within a decade....

"OK maybe I am supersensitive I just do think maybe starting this thread on the same day that many were feeling sad that they didn't get offered a place at their BSC did sound a little like gloating"

Oh I see what you mean. But I am sure it wasn't meant to upset. Sorry if you didn't get the place you wanted mrsw.

People whose children will go to their nearest comprehensive school (for whatever reason, but for the vast majority of people because finances or their child's ability means it's their only option anyway), and who end up having happy children and no problems, don't need threads on here about getting into alternative types of school. So in a forum full of posts about choosing between private schools, and how to get into selective state schools, they appear to be in the minority, while actually being the silent majority.

It's not that you can't ever get more by paying (of course you often can), or that there aren't benefits to selective state schools for bright children - it's that the differences are nothing like as black and white as the number of private/selective school threads on this forum implies. Going to a comprehensive might not match everyone's ideal, but it's not a catastrophe either. This thread is good in redressing the balance a bit.

I think you have completely misunderstood the op's intention in starting this thread Mrs Woodentop.

Mumsnet is full to the brim with threads about independent schools, grammar schools, prep schools.

A lot of us have just received our secondary school offers and a lot of us having children going to either the local bsc or the local secondary modern school. This was meant to be a thread about the "ordinary" or average folk of Mumsnet to all meet up and say, "hey, yes, my child is going to the local bsc, and I am happy enough with that".

Of course we all know that in some boroughs people are "lucky" to be offered a place at any of their preferred schools. That is dreadful for them, the system is deeply flawed and the country as a whole is experiencing a population boom atm.

But, whilst acknowledging how deeply unfair all that is, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever why this thread should not have been started and you are definitely being deeply oversensitive.

In my borough only 55% of children were offered a place at one of their top 3 preferences and that definitely is NOT good enough.