state comprehensive secondary schools stretching able pupils - opinions?

I really don't think you can put all comprehensive schools in the same box
indeed!!
I am a supply teacher so get to see lots of schools and the different ways they set/stretch/support.
This week I have been in an outstanding comp, inner city London, mixed population, some kids from leafy expensive streets and also high percentage from estates, on FSM/PP.
This school sets in core subjects from Y7, and in addition to top sets, have an 'accelerated' group in Maths - this week they were doing their assessment - it was a GCSE maths paper. It was challenging, but they thrice on challenge.
The DC did not seem stressed by it, they enjoyed it - they are working very hard but get intrinsic satisfaction from the work.

My DC are at a very academic indie, where they were doing also doing this this in Y7, and I am delighted this exists in schools other than indie and grammar.

Here's my attitude: if I have to ask, is the school good enough? Maybe it's not. Therefore, I'll watch what's happening closely, and, if I am not convinced, I will step into the breach. An individual child gets one chance. By the time you are sure the results are sub-optimal, it's too late.

Scottishprof and Word are giving useful advice about securing a place at an academic uni, and the foundation needed to thrive once there. Ideological comments are interesting, and I am fascinated by this thread, but they won't be much practical help to your DD PSBD.

I would be very concerned about a school that didn't set for maths for the entirety of KS3. It is very difficult to teach maths to a mixed ability class without both the top and bottom end losing out. I certainly couldn't do it. It would take a very skilled maths teacher and extensive resources designed for mixed-ability teaching, both of which are in short supply. Or you end up in a situation where kids work through SMP booklets and kids have to teach themselves.

TheWordFactory - that doesn't help the parent wanting to know whether their child's school is "good enough," does it?...

rabbit I think an A* can reflect any number of possibilities.

If DD were to get an A* in maths ( and that's possible based on her mock results) it absolutely will not reflect superior knowledge or ability in the subject, nor interest in it.

That A* will reflect excellent teaching and dogged determination on her part.

But on paper there will be nothing to distinguish her ability in maths from the subjects that I believe she does display a superior amount of knowledge and ability.

I suppose what I'm saying is that GCSEs are only a very crude reflection of child's ability. A starting point.

Which is one of the reasons I'm uncomfortable with the disappearance of AS.

Hakluyt - there are other reasons than feckless parents why teens do not achieve their potential. Sometimes it can even be because of too much parental pressure.

OP you have to be careful with Maths. It is so easy to get carried away and get ahead of yourself. You then have the situation where you are thumb-twiddling because you have run out of curriculum. Or in a Ruth Lawrence situation.
Go wider, not faster.

I have a child who is a bit of an outlier in his school too- although that is because of the nature of the school rather than because he is super bright. As and A*s are pretty few and far between. But I am assuming he will get them- he has reasonable teaching at school and me cracking the whip at home! I have always taken it that the bright children who do not do as well as they should in a comprehensive school-assuming that the school is reasonably up to the job- are those that do not have supportive homes. What happens at home is key- and at selective schools by definition there will be a higher % of supportive aware parents who understand the system.

There are comps and comps.
There are Grammar schools and Grammar schools.
There are private schools and private schools.

TBH what state comprehensive schools really need is to share best practice
and best practice should be based on empirical evidence
not on the personal whim of idiot politicians who come and Gove.

I know Word does not like our local comps because they send kids to other than Oxbridge
BUT
we have a range of 6th form colleges that meet pretty much every academic range for 16-18 year olds
from the one that gets 25% of its cohort into RG Universities
to the one that does not teach a single A level but has exceptionally high employment rates.

Kick the politicians out of the decision making
use evidence based policy
and things will improve across the board.

I'm still confused as to whether you child heading for a bunch of A* grades in academic subjects is deemed to be sufficient evidence of acceptable teaching and ability?... How can a parent tell the difference between a dull-witted perfectionist, a true genius and a clever child who has been turned into an exam-obsessed perfectionist (who will fail at university and in life) by their god-awful school? The last one being especially relevant, as it's supposed to be the one we can do something about.

I think I still have an acute overriding sense of responsibility to ensure everyone has a decent education, not some people more than others. I have been far too principled about this and it's got me nowhere.

I agree that the Blair government did a huge amount to bring equaity into education, particularly through the national curriculum which ensures that all children learn the basics, no child leaves primary school without learning about the Romans, the Victorians and the life cycle of plants.

For me, I am blessed (or perhaps cursed) with my own personal set of circumstances

Ain't we all? I think that's one of the hardest things - trying not to bring our own history and baggage into the equation. I was trepidatious at first - epecially after growing up with the contrast between 1970s private v comp - but we were lucky to fall in the age of Tony Education Education Education Blair. Our decisions seem to have panned out OK so far.

senua I think each parent's moral course of action, is variable. Possibly individual.

For me, I am blessed (or perhaps cursed) with my own personal set of circumstances; a lot of experience of schools/education, current knowledge of how tertiary education operates, able children (one particularly so), lots of choice of school available to me, and wealth.

Also, I feel a very acute responsibility to give my DC the most appropriate education (no doubt fuelled by my own experiences in education). Over riding that responsibility for other factors would be immoral for me.

Um. What more expansion do you need?

Pish. Every Child Matters is always interpreted as helping the more needy.

Eh?

(were more rigorously marked...)

The point is that some people make great consultants, and other people make great nurses. Other people are natural artists but struggle with academia (etc etc). People have different skills and abilities, but everyone is put through a system which only recognises academic achievement. So many of them feel like failures by the time they're in secondary school.

I've just remembered somebody posting once about As from state schools not being as good as As from private ones

Vocational qualifications have certainly been massively devalued in the current GCSE shake up- it's pretty disastrous, frankly, for schools like ours. We have a straight choice- do what's best for the kids, or try to play the league tables game. And probably lose out there anyway.

Carriemac - I hope you are not claiming that a nurse after 3 years' training would be fit for absolutely any nursing role?

We all have a duty to help our children 'reach their full potential', it's one of the Every Child Matters aims IIRC.

Pish. Every Child Matters is always interpreted as helping the more needy.

I'm fascinated by word's 'morality'. It's always interesting to see how other people approach a problem. My approach was that DD's school wasn't ideal but no school is, and the private option didn't seem to be £100,000-worth better. I took a much less moral more pragmatic stance.

It wouldn't surprise me if BTECs weren't more rigorously marked, simply because the government doesn't appear to be interested in them, so less need to play about with the marking system.

OK so a consultant has spent a couple of years more than a nurse 'studying'. But while he's been studying, the nurse has been learning a different set of skills
Its 15 years minimum academic and practical training to become a consultant.

3 years to be a nurse
not exactly 'a couple of years'

We all have a duty to help our children 'reach their full potential', it's one of the Every Child Matters aims IIRC. So it's official that yes, if we have the choice we do have to do the best for them and not restrict them by pushing in the wrong direction.

I think if anything has to change it has got to be the status of vocational qualifications. People like Word still seem to think they are an easy option - they really are not. Anyone who has studied for a Diploma or a BTEC will know how hard it is, how thoroughly they are marked and how, if you fall behind, there are no options for retakes or catchups without serious exceptions. People are readily kicked off courses if they get behind.

rabbit I don't have any problem with qualifications in dance or anything really.

I love the ballet. I wish I could dance.

My issue is the advice and encouragement pupils receive about such qualifications. No high ability child who may later wish to attend a highly selective university should be given to understand that all qualifications have equivalence.

I have issues with a lot of other things I see too regularly . My list grows.

As for the A question; if we're talking about GCSE level then, then no, I don't think an A is a marker of a pupil who has great depth of understanding in that subject or great abiity (which is not to say the pupils don't have that understanding or ability).

At A level, I cant speak for all disciplines, but the marking in humanities means that the more conservative answers are more likely to hit the spot. The marking can be flakey and a student who is pushing the boundaries of their undertstanding will be more at risk of that flakey marking if that makes sense.

For this reason, at the more selective of the two universities where I work, we make offers based not only on qualifications, but also based on aptitude tests, interview and other things.