There's a "culture of low expectation" in secondary schools. Do you agree?

I am a bog standard teacher ( actually am senior management but in terms of teaching ability I am your average teacher ) in your bog standard comprehensive ( probably a secondary modern / comprehensive ) and so much of this does not ring true to me.

I am not judged on my Ato C rate but how many pupils match their target. So I have to make sure the A students meet their targets and the C garde students, so I cannot neglect any students to focus on my C/D borderline.

There is not a pressure to get students through the C grade borderline because there are so many more options for them if they get a C rather than a D. But the greatest pressure is to get individual students to meet their target grade.

I am a state school educated adult who went to Oxbridge and every year students from my secondary modern/comprehensive go to Oxbridge.

I have children in a grammar and in the comp/ secondary modern in which I teach. They get stretched to the same degree, although the secondary modern/ comp gives the more freedom and independence.

Early and middle eighties? I think they're the past too aren't they? The past Gove is trying to bring back.

No, Talking, I know my experience is irrelevant to today: I say so quite a lot in fact! In 1989-96 my comprehensive was dire, it was allowed to do nothing, it let me down, it was frankly rubbish.

It does not get away with that now, and I have been astounded and impressed at how different schools are now. I loathe it when people make points about What Schools Are Like based on their own schools, and that was actually the point I was trying quietly to make!

What about the early and middle 1980"s then, i left a comp without any academic qualifications Steaming Nit, and that is why i am so passionate about Grammar Schools and relived that both my niece and nephew have benefited from Grammar Schools.

baba tosn
you have both fallen cataclysmically into Goves trap.
your recollections of what went on at your secondary are worse than irrelevant to what kids are doing today

I base my evidence on two teenage kids today
and a husband who works in schols day in day out year in year out
and DATA

you and Gove should all read a LOT more before commenting

Yes, comps were pretty dire in the early 90s, in my experience.

And yes, a child who left year 6 with level 5s would be expected to get a or a* at GCSE.

I can only talk from my own personal experience as my children are not of school age. My secondary school was absolutely appalling, although I didnt know it at the time. Years later I realised that there was a fundamental change when I started at the 'big school.' All the local primary schools were pooled together so you instantly made new friends with kids from wider areas. Teachers no longer knew everyone's name, nor cared. And, no longer was it cool to enthusiastically put your hand up in class and say,'Yes, Sir I went to church on Sunday.' Why? because nobody bothered to ask anymore. Even though it was still a catholic school I was attending.

I think what was missing was that sense of care and warmth that primary schools are so good at providing. I also recall being brilliant at spelling and just loving getting good marks etc. The enthusiasm wanes for sure in secondary because one is also blatantly exposed to the 'class idiots.' Which of course at the time are quite funny, but invariably are also the ones who left school with literally no education to speak of.

It was years later that I started thinking about my educational experience because I went to University and felt I was surrounded by people who 'seemed' like they had had such a wide exposure prior to Uni life. I didn't necessarily think they were brighter than me but they just had a certain something that I felt I severely lacked. I guess 'exposure' and 'overall confidence' is probably what I am trying to say but invariably it was much more than this.

There are a number of teachers that I remember well. One guy who was our P.E. teacher. I recall him quite vividly because he would talk to all the girls' chests. Naturally, he was called 'Mr XXX the Perv.' Another, who was a bit of a snob and you just knew he felt he was surrounded by working class brats who would come to nothing. I remember him trying to get a bunch of class clowns to sit and concentrate and I cant recall his exact words but he was basically saying you will end up on the scrap heap if you continue like this. Of course they didnt listen.

Then to top it all I got an E for my Art A'level. No being big headed but my work was impressive and I worked harder than anyone at that subject. The reason? Unbeknown to us we hadn't submitted the correct criteria for the exam board. Enough said.

I think in low income areas and in particular very low performing areas teachers do have low expectations. I simply cannot remember anyone ever talking to me about going to university. And this was early 1990's. I am not surprised at all! Its been going on for years.

curlew
I suspect that a lot of this concentrating on getting Cs stuff is urban myth
not in comps - where 1/3 will not get grade C : but the financial difference to the school between 37% D and below asa against 32 % C and below is SO HUGE that teachers are mega mega pressured into that boundary, rather than the c/b or even B/A
hence my point on my Gove thread about sliding scales not cliffs

Arisbottle
"If a teacher could not get an A* at their subject at A Level never mind GCSE they should not be teaching."

Thats quite funny considering that some posters on here are for putting failed bankers and ex-military in schools.

Also meant to add low expectations and non pushing of able dcs in comps has fuelled the popularity of grammar schools and the accompanying mad tutoring to get dcs into them. In grammars hopefully dcs will be pushed to get A*/A rather than just settle for a C/B. I'm glad Michael Wilshaw has started this discussion its been so obvious for years.

I so agree with this from Lemon sole

"This stunning observation owes more to the huge weight placed on KS2 Sats, which few teachers regard as a reliable predictor because they are coached for relentlessly by primary schools, and are testing a tiny part of the pupil's overall curriculum.

On another level, when schools' reputations hang on the 5 A*-C measure, it's not rocket science that they channel more of their efforts into converting Ds to Cs than into Bs to As. That doesn't make it right; it's a logical consequence of making league tables a key measure of a school's worth.

It also reflects the reality that primaries find it a lot easier to counter the impact of a difficult home environment than secondaries, when adolescence and peer pressure kick in. Most children in Willshaw's report are described as being those from families more likely to be vulnerable."

Well, obviously if I know the names of the schools I can compare. I don't think HT's actually a "compare" function, but it's not that difficult to do!

And I do question you saying that OFSTED isn't about exam results- isn't one of the criticisms that it's too much about exam results. And thy look very closely at "expected progress" I suspect that a lot of this concentrating on getting Cs stuff is urban myth. A school which was satisfied with getting year 7 level 5s to a C at GCSE would struggle to get "good"

My DCs left Year 6 on KS L5. They are at selectives now. They got a few years to go before GCSEs but their recent end of year exams consisted of GCSE level questions and they each got a 50/50 spread of As and A*s.

Two DCs aren't exactly a scientific sample but IMO if a child is L5 at the start of his secondary school life then if she/he lands in the right school they have the potential to get at As.

curlew
can you compare though - with neighbouring schools, especially where they are within 2 miles of the LEA boundary : or are academies

Ofsted has bugger all to do with exam results by the way : their current criteria are far more esoteric and unattainable and unmeasurable

But if you put DFES league tables 2012 into google, then enter a school name, a page comes up and half way down it says whether low, middle and high attainers made expected progress. That's pretty "easily searchable" in my book. And a school would not get a good OFSTED if each of those groups weren't making at least expected progress.

Granita - If Wayne from Wakefield wanted advice about his Oxbridge application then he can always Google it. You probably find that the collective wisdom of the Internet trumps that phone call to a rowing buddy.

rather than just be unhappy with what there is ...
make suggestions
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/1779587-If-I-could-sack-Gove-and-Wilshaw-I-would
but they have to be nil cost .....

We live in inner city deprived area when I went to visit secondary schools with ds1 every single one of them were very keen to let us know that they had a dedicated teacher for D/C borderline pupils and introduced us to some of them. There was no dedicated teacher for borderline B/A/A* pupils I really felt for the very able dcs who went to those schools as their parents would probably be in the position to help hem achieve their potential and the schools didn't care as long they achieved as least a C so yes we saw low expectations in secondaries in our area.

curlew
the league tables do not : the detailed ofsted pages do but they are not easily searchable

hence my idea on my "sack gove" thread to make league tables be weighted average of top middle and bottom

it'll never happen though as the grammar / private brigade would have kittens rather than realise they might have wasted their time and money.

Really? Even though the league tables specify low, middle and high attainers and whether they make expected progress?

Curlew
its a league table anomaly : see my other "sack Gove thread"
the only thing that counts is A-C : so schools are (financially) pressured to up that ratio
at the expense of good learning for those way below that level
and extended learning for those above

if that "cliff" was removed, teaching would immediately free up and therefore improve (I can go into great detail why, but think business)

but Gove would lose his "stick" that he hits schools with

I asked earlier down the thread, but either it was missed or I missed the answer-surely a C wouldn't be "expected progress" for a child getting 5snin year 6? Surely not...

So all these anecdotal teachers who are focussing all their attention on getting kids to get Cs - they will fail an OFsTED if they don't, get the level 5s higher grades than that. Or am I missing something?

I only have my experience of secondary school to go by (left 10 years ago now) so I don't have a lot to offer the conversation but what I would say is my school certainly didn't celebrate academic achievement.

We got some certificates at our GCSE presentation evening, three months after we'd left school but other than that there was nothing, yet sporting achievements were always noted. I get why sports are encouraged but it left a bitter taste in the mouth!

this is not new it happened to me when I sent to secondary from really good state primary; secondary was also considered good not outstanding but one of the better ones in area

I did absolutely nothing new in maths in first 2 years at secondary despite being in top set, in primary pi had been 3.14 when i got to secondary I found out this was too hard and pi was actually just 3 I got an A at o level but just think i would have been better prepared for a level if I had not spent 2 years relearning maths and science that i could do already

I know a teacher that has been categorically told that getting D grades to C grades is more important than A's some of course will get A's anyway but some could go from c to b or b to a but that is not pushed

Selectives punch above their weight... I wonder whether that could be anything to do with..... The selecting?