to think this is a great way of getting top A-Level success rates - I can't believe other schools haven't cottoned on

[orlantina]

Simply don't let the pupils in Y12 who aren't going to get As not do year 13.

Then you are looking good for a high success rate and can market yourself as a great school.

www.theguardian.com/education/2017/aug/29/grammar-school-unlawfully-threw-out-students-who-failed-to-get-top-grades

Unbelievable the school did this...

you can often get concerns from parents and other students if there are people in the class who are holding it back.”
Very telling isnt it?
Some snotty parent no wanting their precious darling to even be in the same class as someone a grade lower than them in case they catch stupid.
If a student really can't deal with being in a class with another who isn't quite as bright as them then in my opinion they aren't that smart. Though I'd probably take bets that the students don't complain and it's just snobby parents hear thay 'Tabitha has been struggling with a topic' and they're on the phone wanting to check Felicity's dreams of being a neurosurgeon aren't about to be shattered.

If we misjudge it and they are not quite up to our pace, we live with that and we support them.
What a nice, sensible head teacher who cares about his students.

by 'poor' results I mean those that the school believes precludes the student from year 13.
its invidious to assess someone as fit for a 2 year course in 3-4 subjects then throw them out 3 terms later - the assessment or pastoral care has failed for this to happen.

My local grammar school get amazing A level results...it should do as it's super selective. They also don't let anyone who won't get a high grade to an exam. A friend of mine had to really argue for her daughter to sit her A levels, as the school thought she wouldn't do well.

Personally I think it's sad a school is more bothered about looking good in league tables than giving someone who has been a member of their community for 7 years a chance at sitting the exams.

But it's obviously a thing.

I do wonder how many of these students were prepped and tutored throughout their education and once reliant on their own intelligence slightly suffer. A super selective should be producing straight As or the teaching is below standard or the pupils GCSE were not a true reflection of the child. My niece at grammar just passed 10 GCSE all As and 3 7s but her parents arranged 20 paid tutoring a week plus their own homework schedule for the whole two years including holidays. Niece is bright but at some stage she will need to use her own intelligence, there will be as bright pupils if not more intelligent with a mix of As and Bs. She has not made the grammar sixth form and is devastated but also exhausted.

Boulshired
I think that might be part of it for some students. (I tend to agree, if you can't get too grades with a highly selective cohort and tutored to death kids then there's something wrong, but then I wonder if some of these kids are so used to lots of tutoring, 1-1, 'help' with coursework etc that they feel entitled to a high grade)

Sometimes I look on threads on here seeing parents getting wound up about the right prep school for their 'gifted' chils to feed into the secondary they want and then getting a tutor for entry exams because they want the 11+ exam not entey at 13 etc.

Don't get me wrong the children are clearly smart, but gifted? Or just tutored and assessed within an inch of their life?

Either way, unless a child is getting a whole load of U/E/Ds at Y12, then any school kicking them out for not having Bs and above in everything is only botheres about their results tables.

I just don't think they should be allowed to do it. They are being paid by the government to educate kids.

Plenty of good university courses and qualifications that you can do with less than 3 Bs. I hope the parents succeed in their legal case.

Real damage being done to young people's lives and future prospects.

CharisInAlexandria
I agree. It's one thing if a student really is struggling to manage A levels, quite another for a school to decide half way through the A levels that a child's C grade isn't good enough.

Sadly, I don't think much will change. These places may get rid of their contracts etc but I think they'll 'strongly advise' that parents withdraw their children voluntarily and apply pressure so in the end the child doesn't want to attend. In other words, bullying.
It wouldn't do for people to realise thay these places aren't worlds better than other schools and parents don't want to lose the kudos of having their child at a 'top' school.

I wonder what OFSTED think

www.gov.uk/government/speeches/amanda-spielmans-speech-at-the-festival-of-education

She seemed to value education over league tables....

School in question is also a boys school. No amount of intelligence or teaching will make up for lack of focus / self motivation / immaturity, which as a huge generalisation boys do tend to suffer from more than girls at that age.

The school is in the wrong, but the parents and students will have been very aware of the requirements for many years. I bet the majority of 'poor' grades were down to effort, not ability.

I don't see what's wrong with it. If it were a job and you weren't up to scratch you'd loose the job or get sidelined.
If you want As then go there, if you're happier with lower grades or need more support, go somewhere else that is more suited. It's about allocation of ability. If you were a C grade student you wouldn't fit in to that academic style so if you insisted on getting in by stamping your feet then you're trying to achieve something you're not capable of in the 1st place but are trying to coast in the hope of getting As as that's what other students are getting.
It's simply not the college for your darlings- that's fairer in the long run.

There is a private school in Exeter that regularly does this - they are only interested in their results and place in league tables. Hate this mentality

My son was asked to leave an independent school aged 8 because he wasn't up to their standards (then working towards common entrance) he would have brought down the grades and then presumably the school's reputation. Of course they put it in a flowery way. As it so happened we thought when we put him in the school the "small classes and nurturing environment" would suit him as we knew he would never be a high flyer. What a mistake. Think it's pretty normal in the private sector! We save our pennies these days!!

bbcessex - the school in question has a mixed 6th form

NotForSale, it just isn't comparable to losing your job. You have a situation here where parents trust their children to a particular school for some of the most important and formative years of their lives, and they choose that school in the belief that their parents will be able to stay to get the qualifications they need for the next stage in their education. Then, when it comes to the sixth form, parents choose to keep your child at that school to get A levels. At both stages the parents could go with other schools but choose not to because they trust this one. And then because the school chooses to regard anything under a B as not worth having - even though it may be absolutely fine for the child in question - they chuck the child out, removing him from his friends, and putting his education back by at least a year.

None of that is remotely comparable to someone being sacked for non-performance in a job; plus, in a job, if you have been in it as long as these children have been in school, you would be able to challenge the decision legally.

I'm torn on this one. Yes, they are children but they will have been warned and warned and warned. There will have been multiple emails to parents. My husband teaches in similar school- they don't do this but I think he'd love the threat to concentrate their minds....

Simply don't let the pupils in Y12 who aren't going to get As not do year 13. Then you are looking good for a high success rate and can market yourself as a great school
It's a tried and tested method. Dd's independent grammar school turfed out any lower achievers at the end of year 9 - 'there is no longer a place for your daughter in the school'. She stayed until 18 but others didn't have the chance. This was twenty years ago.

The grammar schools local to me do it too. You have to maintain a certain educational standard and pace at a grammar school and those that can't keep up can't stay. Should the rest of the class suffer because they can't keep up?

Over the last few years the whole exam situation has become almost farcical; how can anyone take a pride in their achievements if the marking is declared to be 'easier or 'harder' to suit the current climate, and two children of equal ability could have completely different results if they were sitting exams a few years apart.? The Grammar school here gets a huge spread in the local paper every year because the pupils have done very well. Given that it is over subscribed with at least a hundred pupils applying for every place, and can take the brightest children, it would only be noteworthy if they failed badly; 'Extremely bright children who entered this school aged eleven still doing very well indeed at sixteen' is hardly a surprise. Caitlin Moran wrote a brilliant article in The Times a month or so ago criticising what we are doing to our children; they are becoming automatons forced to work towards satisfying statistics rather than enjoying the process of learning.

Yes, they are children but they will have been warned and warned and warned. There will have been multiple emails to parents.

Warned that they have to get an A? They got kicked out for getting Bs

Should the rest of the class suffer because they can't keep up

Maybe children who don't get A* should be kicked out because they can't keep up with the really really bright children?

Why should the really really really bright children suffer because those who are not going to get an A * are keeping them back?

So, grammar school teachers crap at differentiation?
Oh dear.
Is that what you are saying?
How pathetic.

I am thankful that living in a less affluent part of the UK means that we have only one private school in our LA and no grammar schools.

DD's 6th form are upfront right from the start of year 12 about under performing year 12 students not continuing into year 13. But under performing in this case is anything less than a D at AS level. This is sensible because anyone getting an E or a U might as well not bother continuing to A levels.

this happened over 3 terms - I doubt they would have been warned and warned - and we're talking about students accepted to do 3 or more subjects and being blown away 9 months later because they don't look like getting 3 b's - staff with any respect for their profession should be up in arms - the school behaviour as reported is simply wicked - I trust the judicial review is with prejudice and sets enough of a precedent to stop this practice everywhere.

I am thankful that living in a less affluent part of the UK means that we have only one private school in our LA and no grammar schools

Indeed. We have 1 college for post 16 education plus several high schools. Quite a few private schools - I wonder what they do at post 16? Presumably kick the "under performers" out - maybe they get picked up by local high schools. Then the private schools can boast about how good they are at getting great results

I get the disappointment; DS was managed out of his school by Y10 and his A level results (next year) are not likely to make headlines. But the problem has been that GCSEs have been made so easy over 20 years that it's ridiculous to think students with modest grades are going to cut the mustard at A level and university. We have to ask, at what point must reality bite?