A school is not 'good' on the basis that it's high in the local league tables

[Minifingers]

...if its results are simply a reflection of the fact that the school is full of children who are bright, middle-class, and well supported at home?

Really sick of people locally talking about particular schools, which they haven't visited and don't know anything about, in these terms.

A 'good' school IMO is one where many children make progress above what might be expected when they arrive at the school. Such a school might actually be quite low in the borough league tables because of having a disadvantaged intake.

It's all about what schools do with the children they have.

Sorry I'd like a kind hearted school with good results on top.Weak levels of attainment don't help any child.

My DS school went into special measures in September, now 5 months later it is top of the league tables but,the head resigned in sept and the staff now appear much happier. Go figure!

What do you mean by 'good results'?

Do you mean good results in terms of local or national ranking by numbers getting 5 or more GCSE's inc maths and English, or do you mean that a high proportion of children do better than expected?

Many schools have good GCSE results primarily because they are full of bright m/c kids.

I think league tables CAN be important but for me the approach to teaching the whole child is even more important. As a result if I see that the school do well with the disadvantaged learners then their more advantaged children are also likely to do well because a wide variety of teaching methods have to be used to reach the less motivated or learning disabled children (like my DS).

And children need to be able to cope in life....so I also look at how a school approaches the non-academic child. How do they help that child prepare for the world of work...what skills can they give them.

I also look at how much effort a school makes in engaging with parents...especially the "hard to reach" parents, how do they help them aupport their children. Most parents want the best eduxation possible for their child but some may not have the confidence or communication skills necessary to go into a school and say "actually I am not sure how to best support my child's learning and would like some help". How do schools reach those parents?

YANBU OP.....there is a whole lot of other stuff beyond the league tables,

Your ds secondary school sounds far from bog standard Preciousbane. The school and parents should be proud of what they are achieving for children.
I also agree with Jakebullet about looking at how hard schools try to engage with 'hard to reach' parents/ those who do not feel comfortable with the school system or are not truly engaged for whatever reason.

yanbu.
My pet peeve: It gets on my wick when people describe their problems with a school and throw in the Ofsted rating as part of the school description. Very rare that the Ofsted report seems relevant to their problems. Or if they are choosing a school & throw in the ratings when there's tonnes of other info they have to choose from. The way people seem to rely on the ratings, confuses heck out of me.

The new style Ofsted also tell you very little about what a school offers say with engaging with parents etc.
Shorter than old reports and very bullet pointy and bland.
I find that sad and it does emphasise really why parents should visit schools before making decisions.

We were visited by Ofsted last week. I'm not sure of the results yet but have heard that it has not gone well in our all singing/all dancing primary.

Way too much time spent on fun and no time spent on learning.

I want my DCs to be happy. I don't want them bullied as I was, standing out for having two parents who work or being mocked because they go abroad for holidays.

I also wouldn't send them private for the same reason. We could afford it - just- but the cost would mean we couldn't afford other things and they'd end up the poor relations as a result.

I'll try to get them in schools where they will fit in and be happy and have friends; I don't really care about the academic side of things.

youthecat are you talking as a parent, or as a teacher?
I am curious as to whether you think having fun is a good thing, or learning is a good thing... can't tel which angle you're coming from in your comment, sorry!

So only bright m/c kids get good GCSE results.

You sounds like our school.

When your school scores in the lowest quintile for everything the all singing all dancing qualities start to lose their allure.

All singing and dancing and fun and good learning should be what primary schools are about.
Hope report better than you think YouTheCat. If a governor or SLT you will know unofficial result and may know as a teacher or even as a parent by general mood of everyone...

As I said before careful with Dashboard data; can be deceptive and very blunt instrument.

I wouldn't let it bother you. They are nothing more than an extra tool like Ofsted. Visit on a normal working day and ask the questions you want answered. Ignore league tables if you like what you see.

YANBU

I have experience of satisfactory, good and outstanding schools, The 'worst' was the outstanding, the best was the satisfactory one, which not that long before had been in special measures.

There is much more to a good school that league tables.

With my eldest child, I was taken in by the league table ranking, now that I know better, I can see that there is a lot more to it.

Having a child with SNs has also been an eye opener. The way I have seen some children with SNs and their families treated by so called good schools, was shocking.

I'm a TA. I'm a very pissed off one. Our head has been all about putting on a show for years. 3 or 4 big productions a year and you try to do your job but get thwarted at every turn with 'but it's rehearsals'.

I'm all for making learning fun but behaviour has got to the point where half of our time is spent dealing with that and learning has become secondary to image.

"So only bright m/c kids get good GCSE results"

No.

But they're more likely to.

As of course you know. here

Would add, I appreciate this isn't the full picture. I live in an area of economic deprivation (near mid of bottom third in national deprivation index) but our local primary is highest in the borough for SATS results - children achieving level 4 or above in all three subjects. It's because we have loads of new immigrant families from cultures which hugely value education.

It's like living in 'Glee'.

AH- I see. Well, I am not one for making learning fun (! )

It's supposed to be hard work... so I'm with you on that one!

My children's primary was never at the top of league tables because they had an excellent name for SN. The one constantly at the top actively discouraged SN. My children's school was consistently about middle- much better than the wild fluctuations that some have. They had a large top end too.

having moved my children twice from struggling schools, (requires improvement) I've found that Ofsted reports spookily mirror my own experiences.
I guess its down to what your expectations are re. school. Academic success is my number one priority. My children are content wherever they go, but lost all motivation in schools where academic learning wasn't encouraged. There was a poverty of aspiration in my eldest girls school. Bright kids were left to fend for themselves, no homework, behind on the syllabus, falsely predicted grades, supply staff, eating and texting in lessons. Most kids enjoyed it there though cos it was lawless. She's made more progress in a few months at the new school than a year at the other. Moving her made me realise just how woeful the other school was.
You can have the excellent academic success with the great pastoral care and enrichment. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Totally agree.

I teach in a school that has recently been downgraded to a "3" (like every school in our county in the last 6 months - hmmm, agenda at play here?!) so I take grading lightly. Apparently we achieved "3" as pupils don't make "good" progress, they enter significantly above average and leave significantly above average. The majority of our KS3 pupils are predicted Level 7 and the majority of KS4 pupils, "A" grade. They mainly achieve this but as this is their expected progress we haven't made "good" progress. Unless they achieve Level 8 or A* we never will.

I love my school - all teachers work exceptionally hard, we constantly update teaching and learning and nothing is stagnated. Our pupils are generally happy and well-rounded due to the abundance of extra-curricular activities - that's the measure of a school.