State selective vs. fully comprehensive

[textingdisaster]

Hi

I am sure this has been done before , but here goes...

Dd1 is in Year 6 so we are applying for her secondary school place. She will be going to one of the three local state comprehensives that she could have got into. We are lucky that they are all "good" and that we had that choice. The one she is going to go to is by far my preferred one of the three and her brother (ds1 now in Year 8) already goes there.

Out of dd1's 5 closest friends, only one is going to another of these 3 schools (also with a sibling already there). The others have all been doing tests to get into various further away selective state schools (and one religious one which is not an option for us). I was talking to the Mum of one of these girls and she told me that as she was her first child she wanted to do what was best for her which made me feel a bit and .

The reason we haven't gone down the test route is partly because it is the last thing dd1 would have wanted and partly because of my non-competitive (unambitious and passive?) nature. I mean who wants to compete with 100s of other children / families to just not get in (is how I justified myself to myself)? Also these selective schools mostly seem to be girls' schools and I think it is nice for dd to go to the same school as ds.

It now turns out that some of dd's friends are getting places (either through things like musical aptitude or passing the test) and I am wondering if I have done the right thing.

I like lots of things about the school dd will go to. Good head, switched on friendly teachers and a good atmosphere to name a few. It is also a 20 / 25 min walk away (though ds says he has walked it in 15 and run it in 7 ). However the selective schools have the edge academically.

I suppose I am wondering if I am afflicting my dc with my own lack of ambition??

[textingdisaster]

disadv and others was meant to top the two scores

[textingdisaster]

Have looked up the value added scores and have found the 2013 results:

Disadv. Others
Best 8 VA measure 983.5 999.8
Best 8 VA lower 95% confidence limit for disadvantaged pupils. 966.5 987.9
Best 8 VA upper 95% confidence limit for disadvantaged pupils 1000.5 1011.6

Have read that 1000 is average?

The things that stand out for me from your post are a good head. Really, thats not to be sniffed at. Yes I agree!

Will also keep this in mind: As for the GCSE grades... Well you lowering your expectations is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If your daughter's capable of good grades in one school, she's capable if the same grades anywhere. Thank you .

[Hakluyt]

OK.

I would be camped on the doorstep if she were mine- but, as Mumsnet would say "we're all different!"

[VivaLeBeaver]

Sorry, meant just last week it was science as well as maths.

[VivaLeBeaver]

Haklyut, dunno never spoken to the HOY about it.

Her teachers are all happy with her and say she's doing well. When I've questioned the progress there's always a reason. Its mainly been maths and just last week at parents evening half term.

I'm not fussed about maths as long as she passes her gcse. She has no intention of carrying it on at a level.

Her science teacher reckoned her current level is a blip but that she's been letting herself down with her homework. So we talked about dividing her homework into sub headings to ensure she covers what needs covering to get Lvl 7 (they get a learning ladder thing with each homework). And I've said she's to show me all her science homework for the next few weeks.

In the subjects she's interested in she's predicted As for her gcses. Even her science teacher said she ought to do triple science for gcse so I don't think she's that worried. Says she's capable of getting level 7. So I do think she's coasting.

[Hakluyt]

"But the teachers don't seem fussed about lack of progress because she's still achieving more than a lot of other kids in her year."

I'm amazed they feel like that- I wonder what happens at the progress tracking meetings? What happens when you talk to the Head of Year about her lack of progress?

[VivaLeBeaver]

Hakulut, because she is coasting. Her progress from year 6 to year 9 hasn't been great. Just had her parents evening and she's got Lvl 5a in science. She was Lvl 6a at the beginning of year 7. So she's gone down a whole grade in two years.

I guess it could have happened in a grammar school but I kind of doubt it.

But the teachers don't seem fussed about lack of progress because she's still achieving more than a lot of other kids in her year.

I'm not saying this is the same for every comp. I'm just talking about the specific school that dd is at. Its not overly academic. Has a 40% gcse pass rate compared to 99% at the grammar.

[Hakluyt]

"Neither are stellar results BTW"

They might be. Depends on the demographic/cohort/catchment.

Straight %ages in this context mean nothing.

[mummytime]

Neither are stellar results BTW. My DCs comp got 81.5% a-C including Maths and English (not at all religious, any selection is by postcode/parents willing to appeal).

[Hakluyt]

And the % of low, middle and high attainers. Dollars to doughnuts the comprehensive has a higher % of low attainers than the faith school.

[Cantbelievethisishappening]

Check the value added... that is often a better indicator than GCSE results alone. Just because a school is selective does not mean it is better academically. IMO a selective school should be achieving 85% + in results. 77% is not particularly high. Any reasonably good non selective school would achieve 70% +. As has been mentioned by another poster these schools can often coast. I know of a selective school which scored a 3 in it's Ofsted inspection for this reason.

[Hakluyt]

Sorry- pressed too soon. A school which some people have to actively make choice to go to, rather than just being the nearest school is going to have a higher % of involved! supportive parents- so the results will b a bit better.

[Hakluyt]

"When I say less academic, last year's a to c result including English and Maths is 64%, 11% up on the previous year (which itself was part of a 2 year dip they were worried about). Compare that to the 77% of the religious school her friend might be going to and it does make you wonder where that difference comes from."

Easy. It comes from the fact that the religious school has an element of selection.

[Sandthorn]

It seems to me you do have ambition: you want your children to go to a school that's a) local, b) good, c) with their siblings, d) with a good head. Those ambitions are fine, just as it's fine for your friends to have other expectations of the schools they and their kids choose. It's not one size fits all. Try not to be offended or judgemental.

As for the GCSE grades... Well you lowering your expectations is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If your daughter's capable of good grades in one school, she's capable if the same grades anywhere. The school can offer her French or geography or whatever, but she'll learn her work ethic and her confidence at home.

[Mascaramascara1]

last year's a to c result including English and Maths is 64%, 11% up on the previous year (which itself was part of a 2 year dip they were worried about). Compare that to the 77% of the religious school her friend might be going to and it does make you wonder where that difference comes from

Maybe it's just me - but 77% a-c in a selective school seems pretty poor. They're taking the highest achievers after all. I would have thought it would be much higher.

[redexpat]

A good school will get the best out of your child.

The things that stand out for me from your post are a good head. Really, thats not to be sniffed at. Also the fact that she can walk there. Just gives them a chance to unwind evetyday, plus will keep them in better physical shape. Also, having 2 at one school makes for easier coordination.

[Hakluyt]

" I'm under no illusion that her gcse grades won't be as good."

Can I ask why you think that?

[Hakluyt]

"However the selective schools have the edge academically."

Of course they do. They select!

[textingdisaster]

I agree with the not coasting thing viva. Thanks for all your thoughts everybody .

[textingdisaster]

high flying mainly religious schools

[textingdisaster]

Thanks for your thoughts. The selective schools in question are not grammar schools but high mainly religious schools with selective elements to them. They have a number of places for out of catchment/religion pupils and the competition for them is fierce (Marylebone, Greycoats etc...). The area I live in (North West London) has no girls' grammar schools and the nearest boys' grammar in Barnet is a really long commute away.

It is true that I didn't ask dd how she felt about all of this early enough (because in some ways it wasn't on my radar, I've always thought local school and that's it ) but did speak to her recently and she was adamant that she is going to the same school as her brother. However if I had presented them as an option a long time ago, they would have been part of our "normal".

When I say less academic, last year's a to c result including English and Maths is 64%, 11% up on the previous year (which itself was part of a 2 year dip they were worried about). Compare that to the 77% of the religious school her friend might be going to and it does make you wonder where that difference comes from.

Educational choices are a very emotional area, and people can feel threatened when others make different choices. I think this is very true!

[VivaLeBeaver]

Dd passed her eleven plus and goes to a comp rather than the grammar.

She enjoys it and is motivated. I think there's a lot to be said for her being in top sets in terms of her confidence. I think being at the bottom of a grammar might have stressed her.

I don't think she's been as stretched as if she'd gone to a grammar. I'm under no illusion that her gcse grades won't be as good. She's predicted b/c in maths which is her weakest subject. But her progress from sats/cats hasn't been great in some subjects. Even though she's in top sets. I think maths she's in set 2 actually out of 8 levels.

But she's happy, she's doing well. She'll pass what she needs to pass with ok grades and the subjects she enjoys more shell get better grades. I think she has more time for general life than if she'd done to the grammar. I went there and the levels of homework and stress and lack of pastoral care are as bad now from seeing friends kids snowed under as they were when I was there.

If dd had been an academic genius than the grammar would have suited her more. But she isn't. She's a bright day dreamer who has other interests out of school and has more time for those interests or just to chill out.

I think if you've seen the school, like the atmosphere and the staff then that's great. Try to make sure yourself that she doesn't coast, etc. dd will do a bit of homework in ten minutes if she can get away with it. Rather than spending the recommended 45 mins doing it at a decent level. Because that's what a lot of the other kids do and get away with.

[QTPie]

What is right for one child is not right for another. It isn't necessary for every child to go to the most academic school (and, in fact, it would hinder them) and it doesn't suit every child to be ambitious (some people lead happier lives not being so).

DS is in Reception at a super selective school (the infant school is not super selective, but the Jnr school is more so and the Snr school intensely - something like 90% of the A-level grades are A* to B). He is there because it is currently the best place for him, but if he doesn't continue to thrive and it is too academic, I will take him elsewhere. It is important that it continues to suit him (rather than him going to a very academic school that doesn't...)

I agree that it MIGHT have been looking at it and thinking if the tests, but only if your DD had shown interest.