To be upset by this? (Or just really naive?)

[mollysmum82]

I attended a teacher training inset at my new school the other day. It was all about 'gcse results development' - basically how they could optimise their 5 a-c results at gcse for the league tables. The head teacher put a list of year 11 children's names on the projector, alongside the grades they were predicted for summer. He told us to 'ignore the e,f,g grade pupils' as they were a lost cause anyway, in terms of achieving the precious grade c for the league tables. He also said to ignore the a, a* and b grade candidates as it was unlikely they would slip under a c. Instead we were told to focus all out attentions on the c/d grade pupils to ensure they got their c (and thus the high place in the league tables for the school).

This attitude really shocked and upset me. It goes against every value I have for individual children mattering and helping everyone achieve their highest potential.

Am i naive? Does every school do this??

Don't worry OP!
OFSTED will eat him alive if he's still doing this. When league tables came out I suspect many schools only focussed on the C/D borderline students.
PROGRESS for all is what's going on nowadays.
OFSTED look closely at data and schools and students are expected to make progress from where they were at the end of KS2. Schools are only reported as being good if all students make progress whatever their ability. That includes low and high ability students not just 'C' graders!

I would like to think that good schools wouldn't do it, but league tables drive it and we would be much better off without them.
Since I have been employed specifically to boost the weak ones who could get a level 4 in year 6 SATs I have no doubt it happens.
It is all teaching to the test.

I agree with Kitty-OFSTED will be looking beyond the number of A-C grades.

About to say something really controversial so am prepared for a flaming.

If schools are judged on C/D and above and if some dc have reading ages of 7 or 8 - and if we have to have a comprehensive system that I don't believe works (certainly not in SW London) and from which I removed a child, then why on earth don't school's run regular intelligence/reasoning tests and take those children who simply are incapable of getting higher than a D out of the equation altogether so that schools' performance can be judged on the intake.

One size does not fit all and in a society as diverse as the UKs that is something that needs to be robustly challenged. The system we have now is ideal for nobody and supports under achievement rather than over achievement as far as I can see. All children should be taught to potential NOT grade boundaries.

I would be very happy to pay more tax to fund a better education system but not an education system organised as it is organised today.

Not at all at my current school.

A grades matter- A*s matter, we spend an inordinate amount of time on them too.

E grades get converted into Cs- sometimes it just takes extra attention to convert. We might fail, but we try.

And the c grade borderline matter- lots of initiatives for them too.

In fact, you could say, every child matters?

Call us old fashioned.

I find this very sad, albeit not surprising. At my secondary, all the major subjects were streamed heavily - Maths or French could have 6 sets. The top set would have probably 20 people in it. The bottom set could have as few as 6 and would often have the best teacher. The outcome was that even the bottom set got Bs and a few Cs. The top 3 sets would usually get As.

The impact on a child's employment options if they don't get the magic 5 is enormous. IMO it's immoral of the schools to just write off entire swathes of children. Yes, they won't all succeed but we should at least try.

Apart from any other considerations, under the new Ofsted evaluation framework that is a dangerous strategy to adopt. Ofsted will look for evidence that all pupils are being challenged and supported to work to the best of their ability and make progress. Progress, not final results.
All those talking about their experience at school, you do realise things have changed now don't you?

The Ofsted framework is easily available to read on-line and schools that don't look to support all of their pupils are already failing. I hope your school has a strong governing body who are asking the right questions Op, but it sounds as if maybe they don't.

If you are shocked by this I'm guessing you have some more shocks to come. As other posts have pointed out there are still schools that want all children to succeed but the majority I have worked for are the same as yours. With the worst Head of Ofsted (if your staff are demoralised you are doing something right) and Minister for Education (declaring war on teachers - forget the union bit) in many years don't expect things to get better. I can't think of a worse time to join the profession.

Sorry Pop but as a parent I think we have the best Minister for Education and Head of Ofsted in Years. Both people who are putting the children first and insisting for once that standards for the children have to improve. Thank God for both of them I say.

This happens in any industry - once professionals are assessed on only one criteria (in secondary schools, the only one that really, really matters in many cases is the place in the league table which is based on the % getting above a grade C, regardless of how high above), then they will focus their efforts on that.

It's the same argument that a lot of the high risks that where taken by bankers pre-2008 crash, they one criteria to meet, making a high profit, it didn't matter too much what they did if they achieved that and the difference was manytimes 5X there base salaries. Look at hospitals who in the early 00s were told to get down waiting lists overall, not for particular ops, so some focussed on less important but quicker and cheaper operations they could do more of in a day, thereby cutting overall waiting times.

Change the league tables to reflect "improvement from SATS" and suddenly DCs who are predicted Fs but might get a D at a stretch are worth putting hte effort in compared to an A grade student who with a bit of effort might get an A.... or like private schools, look at what % get 8 or more As (which is what most of them have to be able to advertise so it matters to the heads there), and suddenly getting C won't be good enough.

Once you chose to publish one factor of a job/focus on one factor, that's all that matters, that's there the management will put resources and focus. It doesn't really matter if you are doing a good job overall, if actually, all that you will be rewarded for is meeting one criteria, why bother with the rest if you only have limited resources?

Yep happened in mine in the late 90's and its happening now to my friends daughter. She could pull it up to a c now she's more focused but they don't want to know

The impact on a child's employment options if they don't get the magic 5 is enormous. IMO it's immoral of the schools to just write off entire swathes of children. Yes, they won't all succeed but we should at least try.

And even worse to take vocational qualifications out of the tables.

Some people are just better at practical subjects. I think one problem is that MPs have generally been quite academic and there is a certain snobbery about GCSEs vs vocational.

Look at someone like Jamie Oliver - crap at school subjects but by no means thick. Capable of practical things like cooking and running a business.

All those talking about their experience at school, you do realise things have changed now don't you?

Some things have, some things have not. All this 'top set', 'bottom set'.

In my day (pre GCSE) there would be 5 or 6 sets for maths and English but for the options there would be two classes, one for O Level and one for CSE. Pupils deemed not capable of a CSE in a subject did not get the option to do that subject.

The CSE groups wuld, I supose, be equivelant to the C/D pupils now, there was a possibility they could get a grade 1 = O Level but would need to be pushed.

Actually people who were boarderline would often sit both CSE and O level, so they would end up with a qualification. This was most common in maths and English.

You try hardest to achieve the things you get judged by. - Tiggy. - (Future famous quote.)

Do people actually understand that Ofsted evaluation isn't led by league tables and final exam results?

I know from own dd shes middle primary seems bottom and top get all the help.

I was a 90s child and did very badly at gcses.

It wasent that I wasent capable.

i as in bottom sets for most things other than english where i was top

the bottom sets had worst teachers and were so disruptive.

No one in my geography gcse group must been 15-20 in class got a c I got a d.

my french teacher told me to my face after 5th form mocks as it was called then that she predicted me an e. I got french tutor my cousins wife she was french teacher and got a c I just needed that bot extra work.

got c business studies and english.

resat english lit, history and maths in lower 6th.
all by myself still failed maths but got b history, c english lit so finally had my magic science but my e in maths and d in science limited opportunities for me.

Head 6th wouldent let me onto a levels so started gnvq advanced which was only thing was allowed to do suppost to be equivilant to 2alevels hated it so much courseork, hated the course hen came to applying for uni had to get distinction just to get onto a hnc.

decided to go fe college and did 2alevels law and soicialogy in 1year and got a dd and offers to do bsc at uni which i went and did and passed.

I do regret not passing maths and science.
however i can run a cash office, do bookkeeping and accounts so im not hopeless now i actually think my maths quite good.

my steps sons one of the ef kids his year 10options are

gcse pe-our school never did that0they did childcare
gcse welsh-compulsary
btec in hospitality- he does not want to work in that area
gcse art.

plus foundation english, maths and single award scinence so highest grade he could get in that I think is a c.

I be shocked if he choses to apply himself hes spent a year in pru unit as got expelled from 1st secondry.

I still remember how crap I felt gcse results day.

At the school I went to, two people got below C. In one subject each. In the whole year. Selective, private education rocks. Most of those schools manage to do even better now. And that's in traditional subjects - they don't teach the other ones.

Whilst schools and colleges are judged on results and the higher results seen as successful, any child not reaching these grades and levels will feel inadequate and that is wrong. Whilst schools and colleges are able to determine what subjects and level of papers an individual chooses, this will not be in the interest of the child. I am so glad that my dd will take whatever subjects she wants and at what level and the choice will be completely her own. Downside I will have to pay

Yes points mean prices for schools, this is the result of simple target measuring.

prizes not prices.

HollyBerryBush, you said:

"A Level results can be 'faked' - they aren't calculated on cohort like GCSEs, but on number of entriesw, Eg 20 candidates, 1 gets ungraded, reducing results to 90%, there is a 2 week window to withdraw the entry = - voila, back upto 100% pass rate."

What do you mean by the two week window? Is that after the results have come out? It sounds like it from what you say there. How can you withdraw a student after they've had their grade?

This is the same old bollocks that has gone on in certain schools for 20+ years.

Back when I was taking my GCSEs, and in the 'top' group for every subject, no real attempt was made to push us to achieve results (other than in Maths - our teacher in that subject was coming up to retirement and one of very few teachers in the school who wanted his entire class to get As and Bs). The experience was exactly the same for my friend who was in one of the lowest sets. There were less than 10 children in a year of 180 who got an A in ANY subject.

I have been overwhelmingly disappointed to find that now, some 20 or so years on, my DS is now in exactly the same position - the teachers in his school could not give a shit what grades his class get. He is top group for everything, will get a C, job done. The only focus is on the C/D borderlines. No attempt has been made to push him - he should achieve A/A* in every subject, and if he'd made it to the selective schools in our area he would be assured of getting that - sadly having been condemned to the local crappy comp, he'll probably only get a C, like the rest of his class, because there is fuck all interest in teaching him and his peers beyond that standard.

Velvet.

I am suggesting you should do this nor that you should have to. However, if your ds is really motivated and can see the benefit of a higher grade, and it is that important to him, then I would buy or borrow extra resources or even a tutor for a while. It is such a pity that the system doesn't cater for all levels. Your ds has as much right to reach his full potential as any other. and

The system does cater for all levels. Value Added is a league table measure specifically to check that all students are being pushed to reach their potential. That a particular school isn't doing this isn't a failure of the system and it is certainly something that would be picked up on by Ofsted.

Noblegiraffe

With due respect, this is not my and many others experience. It doesn't matter to parents what the reason is or why, just that the system is failing their dc, or at best not supporting them to reach their individual potential.
I see it being a problem of individual versus majority.

So these schools which are failing the brightest are all rated outstanding by Ofsted? If they are, then perhaps you could say that the system is failing. Otherwise you just have to be content with saying that that particular school is failing.