why is it so difficult to find a good school

cecily - those stats certainly give the lie to the baloney faith schools were wont to trot out about it all being down to their 'ethos'. (Personally I've never found a combination of religious discrimination and hypocrisy particularly ethical).

As to whether people 'see through' the stats - I think the 'motivated' parents will see them and be extra pleased their child will tend to be with a high achieving cohort. (I'm pleased my DD is a GS with other academically able girls - but she got there largely by her own ability). It won't do anything to help mend the system.

Nope, I think many people read the press, panic, jump to conclusions and don't even really look into the stats, facts or real life schools.

There are undoubtedly terrible issues in some areas of London, with over-subscribed schools, homes in 'black holes' and areas with problem schools. really tough for people who have to navigate all that. However, the shock horror headlines that were in the press over the last few weeks showing how few families got first choice or even one from the top 3 hid some important facts. Such as with 6 choices and a high density of schools, many people know full well that their first 2 or even 3 preferences are wildly hopeful and optimistic - wild cards, even, in terms of out of area, faith, selective. So it's no great surprise to them that they don't get them. Round us I know people who use the first 4 choices for 3 super-selective grammars and a super-selective Foundation school, and then put down our 2 excellent local comps as 5 and 5 - so that even if they get 5th or 6th choice they are very happy. I know someone who was trumpeting loudly about the dreadful 'system' because she had no place allocated - she had not put down one single school whihc was a remotely realistic choice. But the stats as reported by the press include all this as The Dire Schooling Crisis In London. (repeat of disclaimer - whihc is genuinely dire for some, and not to detract from that)

I know what you mean with your second post, Blu. I did once live in a town that was socially very stratified while the Catholic school took a far wider cross section of the community than any of the other schools.

Maybe, Blu. But do people understand the stats? Certainly in the press these schools tend to be lauded as top performing 'comprehensives' while other schools are criticised as not producing such good results.

Mine went to a "faith" primary
it was either that or shite
so the non motivated parents went to shite
the motivated (even openly atheist like us) went "faith"
and then the motivated end up at the secular community comp
and the idle end up at the god bothering academy
tee hee

(for all that I don't agree, in principle, with state funded exclusive faith schools it is undeniable in areas like mine that sometimes faith is a way for a child from an economically disadvantaged non-mortgae-in-an-expensive catchement child to get a place in a good school. So, as a wise friend of mine says, in an unfair system it makes it it is a way for some families to get a fairer deal' - or similiar.)

I am sure faith schools don't do that deliberately. But it happens as a consequence of selecting by faith. For a range of different reasons. And does it really matter? (in terms of deciding a 'good' school or not). All that matters is that people understand the stats and that they are talking about a school which reflects it's intake and how that might not be exactly the same as a 'good school'.

I do love that juggling metaphor seeker (do I mean metaphor?). It's spot on.

CecliyP- a nun of my acquaintance some years ago said "The Holy Spirit chooses the next Pope- but it's amazing how often the Holy Spirit chooses a rich Italian"

anyone can explain the dominance of faith schools in the top comprehensive list above? Assuming these schools take in pupils of all abilities just like a normal non-faith comprehensive, does faith devotion lead to academic performance?

If you check the latest GCSE results tables for 2011, the results are shown against 3 levels of ability at which pupils entered the school at 11. If you check the high achieving faith schools, it's amazing (or perhaps not) how faith has filtered out low ability children.

Child's education, not duration.

Any school that is selective in any way will do better than one that isn't. Doesn't mtt what the selection criteria are- the vey fact that you qhqve to find out hat they a and conform to them means you are a parent who will b interested and involved in your child's duration. Which is one of the main criteria for success.

If you started a school where parents had to learn to juggle to get a place, it would get better results than the non-juggling school next door.

Ah, by the time I actually found the link Blu has already posted the same conclusions -

• faith schools are not the majority AT ALL
• the ones that I personally know are partially selective and not comprehensive in any sense of the word (though of course, at 6th form entry schools select by academic grade anyway)
• the ones that I know are in pretty wealthy areas which skews intake

And finally OP, I presume by schools selecting only 'good pupils' you mean a system of return to grammar system and sod everyone who doesn't make the grade. Lovely

And also, schools may have 6th form entry ... if you're looking for a secondary school, its probably best to look closer at the GCSE results than A level.

Hampshire : Cambridge : Sussex : Norfolk : Leicestershire
all do 11-16 and 6th form

That table will be DEEPLY misleading as it by nature excludes the HUNDREDS of schools that only go to 16
like the fab secular comps we have here in Hampshire that feed into the secular Peter Symonds, Barton Peverill, Brockenhurst College etc etc

1. That link does not demonstrate that the 'vast majority' of top performing comps are faith schools - although they are over-represented.
2. In the top performing faith schools in oversubscribed areas of London, the faith schools do operate a form of selection. You have to not only attend services on a very regular basis to get in, but even gain points for 'extra curricular' support of the church, being an alter boy for e.g. This naturally precludes the very chaotic and dysfunctional families who could never get to church on time!
3. Of all the areas I recognise in that list, they are all in very 'well to do' areas - it's maybe a measure of intake, not of standard of education
4. people do not understand the statistics which show how much progress children make in the school, how well lower-ability and higher ability students respectively perform and how they preform against expectation. people confuse level of ability at intake with the standard of education on offer
5. Some people find it hard to find good schools because to them that also means a school with lots of people 'like them' and avoid schools with what they see as undesiarable factors e.g a high ratio of children on FSM or with ESOL. Even though the education in that school may be top notch.
6. There are areas where it is hard to find a good school - and sometimes this is excacerbated by parents clusteriing to one school and ignoring another thus creating an ever uncreasing polarisation.

I live in a notorious area of S London and have the choice of 2 very good comps that we can definitely get into, an opportunity to have my child try for a nearby selective, or to gain a place by lottery in another nearish popular comp.

There is also a difference between being able to find a good school and being able to get into a good school. In S London patterns of housing for families has changed rapidly, with house prices forcing many into areas where they would not formerly have considered, and creating huge pressure on schools. Many boroughs only just have enough places - some not enough.

Bibbety's and my DDs will be sewing mailbags.

Good grief, I missed the "good pupils" bit. Please do elaborate, OP.

We (entirely accidentally) managed the trick of living in the catchment of a good non-faith comp in an area with no grammar schools, but within the residual places radius of the neighbouring area's GS. If DD hadn't got into the latter, she'd have probably done fine at the former.

serve as many good pupils as possible
um....what would your definition of a 'good pupil' be?

Incidentally, judging comprehensives by their 6th form results is liable to lead to very misleading results. In our area none of the comps could show up, however good, because they are all ks3/ks4 - there are separate 6th form colleges. Slippery things, statistics!

DS will shut in a box, abandoned in a boarded up precinct which is only frequented by gangs and drug users with a 1958 edition of the Ladybird Book of Aeroplanes as his only text book.

I am mildly curious about the results and the faith schools thing, but ... actually ... then again ... not interested enough to read up on it!

Op if you send your child to one of these average comps you do realise that there will be a lot of just average children there? but this does not mean that your precious could not be a high flyer?

Of course grammars (generally) achieve higher grades than non-selective schools. Ditto independents (of which the majority are at least a bit selective). Faith schools are also selective in a way; see ragged's link.

As an aside, the one CofE school in our town is well undersubscribed, whereas the one co-ed, non-denominational comprehensive is full to the gills.

I know.