GCSE pass rate when choosing a school

"There are about 10 schools in my town. None of them get near 75%. I would think it unlikely that any school with a genuinely broad intake would."

Isn't this exactly how averages work? Why would a true comp with a representative all ability intake manage a huge increase on the national average?

I would look at the stats for my child's ability cohort. If there is a tiny cohort of high ability but each of those kids gets good progress 8 and sky high results, then you know your high ability child can flourish there. Even though they may not, have a huge impact on the overall A-C stats.

Why would anyone worry about a school with 70% A-C?

I really wonder how much class and snobbery come in to play.

Sorry-that's rubbish. A school should be judged by the difference it makes to it's pupils.

the measure of a school is the opportunities it offers pupils.

The school has absolutely no control over whether a pupil takes up the opportunity of n education or not.

Nor does it have any control over pupils taking up educational opportunities outside of school, such as private tutors, or even just single bedrooms.

so the way to judge a school is by the exam results of a comprehensive range of pupils, discounting the ones that wasted time and discounting the ones with private tutors and their own bedrooms.

Then, to be statistically valid, you need to look at the long term trend, rather than a one off event,

so

the average of the last 7-8 years results of students that are neither lazy, nor particularly well supported at home,

that is the only measure that has any meaning. Nothing else is valid.

The thing with progress 8 is that the two decimal places give an illusion of accuracy that simply isn't there. Look at the confidence interval, the true progress value for the school will (most likely) lie somewhere in that interval but could be either end. A school with a published negative progress 8 score could still actually be performing as expected, or even better.

I mean not like yoga. Nothing against yoga but I'd much rather have drama instead.

University and degree destinations for me if they have an attached 6th form. I'll be looking for traditional subjects like medicine, law, engineering, the hard sciences etc. Plus entries to the top UK universities like Imperial etc. If not Uni then i wamt to see decent work placements. Also Progress 8 score by each cohorts group and the amount of timetabling for non-core subjects that are mandatory for pupils like yoga but I do value music education and drama (not on term rotation but be integral). For middle cohort progress 8 score at least 0.20+ and positive, not negative values across board.

75% A*-C with English and Maths but negative progress 8 (assuming they have an intake that has a broadly average ability profile) suggests that the school is doing very well for its middling students but probably not so well for the most and least able.

There are about 10 schools in my town. None of them get near 75%. I would think it unlikely that any school with a genuinely broad intake would.

My DS's school didn't (quite) get 75%. It's a great school, with fab results from all sorts of students. Some of them in the (just over) 25% too...

*bit

Yeah I widened my eyes at but at that too Sopassremarkable.

at people having a 75% cut off.

Great if you have that sort of choice but round here only one school has that sort of pass rate, the others range between 32%_65%.

Trampires comments about when she chose 2 years ago is pretty typical.

There will be lots of parents who wouldn't touch a particular school wi a bargepole - often because it's in a less affluent area and maybe has a bad reputation locally. However, sometimes these schools have great Progress 8 and are doing a great job for the kids they teach. Whether they will be great for an individual kid depends on the kid themselves and if they do well for that type of kid. If your kid is an able child and that school caters fantastically for the lower ability it might not be so good for them....but realistically most schools have some of each ability .....the question is whether there are enough like them for them to get what they need. Some schools do a great job with all abilities. However, many parents feel happier if their kid is in a school where the majority are if a similar ability or background ..... It might not always make a difference to outcomes, but it is how parents often think and in many ways is understandable. I would always look to see the % of high/low/middle entrants to the school to get a sense of it and it would be a key factor in my decision making. I would not want my child to be in a significant minority as either a high achiever, nor as a low achiever.

X post with chocolatewombat...

If you want to know how good a school is, you need to look at a lot of data. If you want to know how good that school might be for your child, you look at children like your child and see how they are doing.

And, of course, take the leap of faith that nothing will change in the next 5-7 years...

On a macro level, I agree that schools should be judged on the difference they make to their pupils - this involves looking at hole cohorts an considering their impact on kids starting from low, middle and high bases, as well on the overall year group.

From an individual parental view though, most people are really only interested in their own child's outcomes. It is possible for a school to gain great progress figures whilst not serving the needs of one particular group, which means a parent might not choose that school. Or it might be that a school has great Progress 8 but parents don't choose it because they know that school doesn't offer the curriculum they want - so perhaps not enough language choices or 3 sciences, or perhaps not the vocational courses their kid would be suited to. They might choose because of the discipline policy or lack of, or because of the settings arrangements or lack of.

I think that Progress 8 is useful, but there is so much it cannot tell you and when you consider your individual child there is often stuff that is more useful.

I'm interested in raw exam results. I like to see how many gained A/A* and how many took each subject - you start to get a sense of a school from that stuff. I'm also interested in destinations after GCSE and A Level. I'm not actually so interested in how many of the kids they shift from a D to a C because my kids are not in that bracket - but of course I can see that will be really important to some people.

When I choose my dd's school nearly 2 years ago, the Progress 8 didn't seem to be a 'thing'. I studied a heap of data but don't remember seeing it (or knowing what it was).

It does worry me at little that it has a negative Progress 8 score, however dd is doing well, I've been impressed so far with the teaching and the overall ethos of the school. I guess you can't beat just experiencing it.

I've just looked at some of our other local schools where I personally know dcs there (and their parents). One has a much better Progress 8 score and I personally wouldn't dream of sending my dd there. The other one is an outstanding school that parents fall over themselves to get their dcs into and the school consistently produces results that compete with some of the best in the area - fantastic destination data. However their Progress 8 is a flatline at 0.

It really is s bit of a minefield isn't it. I'm glad I'm not choosing a school this year. I found it hard enough before!

It is true that the raw data tells you can tell you more about the catchment than quality of teaching...however, knowing something about the catchment is also useful, especially if you are looking at schools in an area unfamiliar to you because you are about to move.

Many people will choose the school with the higher raw exam passes than the one with lower raw passes but better Progress 8 figures - this is because they decide that they want their kids in school with those from a more affluent or high achieving background. Some who analyse the data and consider these things decide they would prefer to be with bright kids who do well, even if they do t make quite the progress they could with better teaching, to being in a school which really pushes the kids to get the best progress from them, but where there are more low achievers to start with.

Making a choice between these 2 options (if you have that choice - and not everyone does - many only have the option of one of these types, or even a low performing school in terms of raw results plus low progress too sadly) is interesting. Parents will value different things. Some want their kids in the more affluent school believing it will result in better behaviour (if often does, but not always) whilst others are more relaxed about a broader range of children - I think this is especially the case if there is lots of setting within the school and it is evident that each ability group is well catered for and does well.

And I guess here, I'm talking about the parents who are interested in education and results and do at least a bit of research before choosing. Of course many parents don't do this and where they have choice, choose based on all kinds of things.

"Schools can only be as good as the pupils attending"

Sorry-that's rubbish. A school should be judged by the difference it makes to it's pupils.

Schools can only be as good as the pupils attending.
Otherwise compare pass rate with intake numbers and social diversity.

Try and get your data directly from the school, rather from published league tables, if possible.

Because personally, I'm rather more interested in the qualifications students actually leave with, than the results of their first attempt at an exam. Especially if they only made that first attempt so they would be allowed to take the exam when it best fitted into their personal learning plan.

I'm also very much not interested in who's managed to pass the ECDL - even if that makes the school's published results look very pretty indeed.

I taught a Polish pupil in V form. She arrived in England not speaking any English at 14. She passed 9 GCSEs A*-C but got a D in English, this (the way things were counted at the time) that she was a failure.

It also brought the school's GCSE results down. Personally I think both the school and the student must have worked hard for her to get those grades.

I think that means based on where they are when they enter the school they do worse at GCSE's than would have been expected based on normal progression rates. A negative progress score would worry me.

Yeah that sounds about right Beyond. Dd is doing well and is happy at the school, but I've always been slightly obsessed by comparing schools!

Trampire - looks like a typical suburban comp in a "good area" - high achievers will do well, middle achievers will be coached to pass.

Sorry Progress 8 of -0.27.