Parent power 2023

@TawnyPippit FHSS met all ISI compliance in the most recent report (2022). They did not meet guidance on keeping up with statutory safeguarding reporting in 2021, and it was upgraded at the time of the report. In all other aspects they were complaint in 2021.
My daughter is at FHSS Sixth Form. Their outstanding A Level results last year no doubt contribute to their rise in the league tables. And as for your thinking @LondonMum20222, the 600 plus girls that arrived for Y7 entry tours and interviews this past year disproves your idea it's a last ditch option. The fact it is open to a wider academic entry yet still achieves such outstanding results rather proves it's worth? My daughter says it is not a pressured environment, yet the teachers and the girls aim high. OP she would recommend it. My daughter travels in from Zone 3, so not all girls are local.

sorry, i'm confused. which point do you mean? thanx

@futomaki now I know you've missed my point entirely

Correct. Now just look at "A*" grades only.

@futomaki I think you are missing my point.

Between school 15 and 50 on the list looking just at A*/A for GCSEs there is a 5 percentage point difference (95% to 90%). Given the differences between cohorts from a statistical perspective that's not a meaningful basis on which to differentiate schools' academic performance. This is literally the performance of a handful of students which is most likely down to cohort differences.

For A-levels again 20 schools on the list are separated by a 5 percentage point difference in A*/A level ranking among the top 50.

For all of the top 50 schools, the performance differences and rankings don't tell you anything meaningful about how your child will like perform. If your child is academic enough to get into any of these schools, statistically they'll almost certainly get identical academic results at any of them. The main differences in performance is the ability range of each cohort at intake (between schools and between years).

Focusing on such minute differences in performance creates the wrong incentives for educators that are harmful for children. For schools of this calibre, parents should be ranking them based on qualitative criteria that are often unique to their family like:

1. Ethos and culture including that of the parent body
2. Pastoral care / approach to mental health
3. Cocurricular offering matching your child's interest and needs
4. Convenience / commute
5. Careers advice / university coaching programmes
6. Learning support etc

These league tables are very crude. There are better sources of information on the individual value add each school adds relative to the ability of its intake that isn't captured in these rankings.

Rankings are a joke. Look at Columbia University. Cheated on their data disclosure, dropped from 2 to 18.

FHSS failed their ISI compliance inspection this time last year. So to go from that to school of the year is … erm … interesting 🤔

At the very least it suggests ISI and the Times are looking for different things.

A-star to B and A-star is what was intended to be typed. "*"

If instead of looking at A-B grades they just looked at A grades only, then that would create greater difference between schools at different rankings (I looked at this for a dozen schools, the gaps are wider than the Sunday Times rankings).

And averaging three years of data would absolutely dampen the volatility of rankings. Each year just a third of a school's score would change, not 100%.

Doing a 3 year average wouldn't change the fact that schools will move around in the top 50 quite dramatically each year. Honestly, most of the schools in the top 50 (with the exception of only a handful) have virtually no difference between their results (1 percentage point which is the performance of one student). The main difference between performance for most schools on any given year is the cohort and these rankings add very little information worth knowing about a school to make a decision about where to send your child.

League tables end up with educators acting in ways that are not in the best interest of their pupils-- the scandal with St Olave's Grammar school forcing children off roll illegally to try to preserve their ranking makes that clear.

www.theguardian.com/education/2017/sep/04/calls-for-inquiry-into-grammar-school-that-unlawfully-excluded-students

The same culling happens at private schools as a result of league table pressure.

A number of schools do. Typically a sign is when there's a real step-up from GCSE results to A level results. How often do you hear, "that school is not that selective at the 11+ but gets amazing A levels"...well guess what they are doing in sixth form?! This also applies to Oxbridge percentages, when a school loads up on high achieving kids for sixth form. I would suggest looking at GCSE rankings if you are into rankings. Personally, I think there's so much more to these schools than these rankings, but I know they are popular (just like uni rankings).

Exactly- Kings Wimbledon in particular crams their sixth form with bright girls from all the girls schools nearby!

There do seem to be schools I’d expect to see missing.

Yup, exactly right. Lots of change and then double weighted, yet another way these rankings are badly compiled. Some schools see 20% of the class change in sixth form, @PreplexJ great point.

A levels are double-weighted, probably take pinch of salt, a lot of pupils change schools when taking A levels.

The Woodard Group of schools which includes Lancing College rarely feature on any school lists by choice - I think the schools send in the data but I don't know.

They are ranked on A level and GCSE results. A levels are double-weighted.

Thanks Emma!

A share token for you:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/51064dfe-7642-11ed-b756-a5744446c41f?shareToken=f0525d21edd157d7900870ae138710fc

Does anyone know if the sole criteria for if/where a school ranks in the Times league table is their exam results? Somewhere I saw it suggested that a school has to apply to The Times to be considered but I'm not sure that's right.
I also thought I saw a complaint/comment last year that Tonbridge School didn't feature at all despite being excellent, and now it's 9th in the league table which is obviously stellar.

Yes, I agree, I couldn’t figure out why they changed so much but now it makes since. It is sort of nice to see fresh results this year since it has been so long.

Yes, I know. They changed the calculation because of COVID. However, a three-year average is a better metric to use in the rankings. One year results move around too much.

That is as because of covid and the kids not having exams. This is the first year with real exam results since 2019.

Yes, that's right. It's a shame, they should do 3 year rolling averages every year. Using just one year of results has schools jumping up and down the list from year to year, which is quite silly.