Please can someone answer this simple question about state selective schools?

Because we are talking about grade differences/comparisons in selective v non-selective areas, aren't we? And I think to start with the 'some a*s are more equal than others' line just makes the whole conversation absurd, because it indicates that no matter what results some schools do or do not achieve, some people will still find ways to try to argue their results are somehow inferior!

Your son's a might have been just the beginning of a longer and more profound engagement with maths than your daughters, but frankly they will both have as!

(I thought you disapproved of gcses being taken early? Or is that only when state schools do it?).

nit I have no idea what your A*s covered.

I am too old for them but can assure that my As covered not one thing outside the syllabus. Challenging us beyond the curriculum would have been considered laughable.

As for my own DCs school, well here's an example.

DD has no aptitude for maths. Her set concentrate on moving slowly but thoroughly through the syllabus.

About half the set will leave with an A* (DD with luck and a fair wind).

The set above are covering a whole load more shizzle that would just go way above DDs head.

They will probably all get an A*.

DS already got an A*. I have no idea what he's been doing since but it will be far beyond what the top set are covering at DDs svhool.

This is all fine. Horses for courses. But it does mean that one student with an A* may have far wider exposure to the subject than another.

Why you find this concept. 'Irksome' is beyond me .

Ok, so your children's a*s are 'most definitely' different from mine. I don't think it's absurdly defensive to find that a bit of an irksome concept. But even if we accept that, to be honest, what does it matter?

We live in a super selective area (no catchment). Ds1 passed the 11+ in top 5% and got into the grammar considered the best.
Ds missed the pass mark for selection, however he was diagnosed dyslexic in the middle of yr7- didnt really stand a chance.
Ds1 would have been bored silly and probably expelled from the comp. There is a much narrower range of subjects at the comp and the grammar explore them more in depth.
Ds1 does latin, this is not on offer for ds2.
Ds1 is expected to be independent, ds2 is given more support.
Ds1 school 100% a-c, ds2 school 52% a-c.
I could go on. For me both ds are happy in their schools and that is important.
Dd sits the 11+ in one year, we will soon be exploring her choices.

I think you would have to be absurdly defensive to find that offensive or controversial,

I didn't say spoon feeding or anything else.

But the truth is there often is a difference!

There is a difference covered at my children's schools. Most definitely.

And there is a difference covered in different sets.

Ha. Well for secondary allocation here we get points for nearest primary and nearest secondary and the most sought after school has nuns and is really harsh. And I won't be sending my child there. And I long for the Kent Test even if it is crap as it seems much more simple. Here it must surely be selection by wealth. Though the premise is simple - you send your child to the nearest local school, something I have long been in agreement with.

Well now we know our children's a*s indicate spoon feeding rather than knowledge breadth if they went to the wrong kind of school, we may as well just give up!

Can I come to the SPAG camp ? .

My grammar and punctuation according to 'many' is appalling .

Some A* students have been taught to the curriculum and the exam.

Some will have been introduced to much greater depth and breadth.

The stats can never reflect this.

A varies, I have taught pupils for whom we have been almost certain that they will get an A and therefore we have taught them far beyond the GCSE criteria. The number of pupils to whom this applies will be fewer in a comp than a grammar school.

Although we have had some students start some A levels early.

How can you do better than A*? My school days are long behind me, but surely that grade is pretty much 100% on a paper? If it isn't, it should be....

Well, I don't think that's true of the local comps in LaQueen's patch of our green and pleasant land.

Marthas. Funnily enough there is a 'Comprehensive' in a 'Rich' bit of East Cheshire that does exactly what you say....

Tanaqui. You will need 'prayer' if your children end up at the 'Castle' or Swan valley..

LaQueen is always saying that she lives in a luffly, affluent area so I'm wondering where all these buttheads who she claims populate her local comp come from? Are they bussed in from far away sink estates to intimidate the clever few who didn't pass the 11plus and get to join her DD at the Brightest and the Bestest Gels' Grammar?

We made comparisons with high achievers in our school and the grammar school. At GCSE level there was no real difference in how they did, although we offered a wider curriculum. At A level we tended to do better with our more able students than the grammars. A small comparison between one comp/secondary modern and a few grammars admittedly.

One problem with comparisons is that they are capped at the a, so any child who could theoretically achieve beyond that doesn't get counted. And numbers wise, a lot get a, and some must be capable of more. Statistically, this is a comparison problem.

I'm in Kent, it's not that bad. Many of the "high" schools are very good, especially if you pray rather than tutor. Easy to teach VR and NVR at home, research shows that after 10 hours of practice that's it, no more improvements.

However I went to a bog standard comp in the 80s and I would pay or pray to avoid that for any academically minded child.

nit yes that's a possibility, though Kent isn't one of the most 'successful' LEAs in this regard .

I can't check the stats at the mo but think the top contender is Sutton or Merton (don't quote me on this).

Perhaps if you are a parent keen for your child to go to v selective university, you are more likely to settle in or move to a selective area? Just thinking Kent, and bits of London, though really. I don't know where all the selective areas even are, come to think of it.

Does anyone know what the comparison between high achievers results are? I understand that across the board there is little difference in grades.

What is interesting though is that the LEAs that send the most students to the most selective universities have selective schools in them .

LaQ, without meaning to sound arsey; you say that you don't want a state education for your DDs because you were privately educated, but, IIRC it hasn't done you many favours career-wise. Why so adamant on that?