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...

Who said we don't?

Lies, damned lies and statistics.

We set the bar high for students moving into Upper Sixth meaning that if students aren't looking at top grades, we don't enter them.

I went to a private girls school in london (vile school - hated it) and anyone who didn't perform at gcse was booted out to make sure they didn't tarnish the A level stats. I'm not sure how they did it and i was "allowed" to stay but some pupils definitely were not. My brother was asked to leave his school for similar reasons - something along the lines of 'not being invited back for your own best interests this is not the school for you' yada yada yada. I know rules are different state / private / comp etc but all the schools are always at that and it's shit and they definitely should be called out on it.

Also i often wonder how exams are approached generally in various schools. For instance, "allowed sparse notes" in english lit texts was interpreted by one school i know of as pupils being allowed reams of pencil filled essay notes in the blank pages at the back of their texts. It's all crap to be honest and exam questions are so often easily predicted - same topics come up in a cycle. Depends on exam board obviously but still.

You're right Sarah. Questions can be predicted and the best teachers can prepare children for likely questions. Our IT dept. actually analyses questions from exam boards to predict likely topics. It produces spreadsheets of recent questions, those which haven't been examined for a while and so on.

Of course you need the best staff (which higher salaries attract) and the best resources which become available when schools have more money at their disposal.

There are actually very strict guidelines with regard to 'sparse notes' and random books with notes in can be (and are) requested by boards. I'd also say that you don't have time use reams of essay notes. That absolutely does point to poor teaching. You need to know the texts, have practiced past papers (and had feedback) and have nothing more than various essay plans with relevant quotes at the ready. Again, this comes down to the quality of teaching.

We used to supply Eng lit students with 2 compendiums of the set text. One filled with these notes throughout the year and one where the notes were edited, improved and made relevant to the exam and not revision / learning. Again, it's something some schools have the teachers and other resources to do.

Most schools "boot out" students who didn't perform at GCSEs. It isn't about tarnishing a reputation, it's about accepting students who are able to take A Levels, IB or whatever. Point / grade requirements are nothing new and simply a taste of reality.

@choosesomeoptions agreed nothing now. In my school I knew a variety of essay questions practically word for word - they had been rewritten and corrected so many times and were 'word perfect' as it were so i knew my texts but i was also able to churn out the answer. I know that's kind of the point obviously but I don't think I would have done as well without that coaching. There were no more than 7 people in each class at my school during A levels. Don't know what point I'm trying to make here except that it's unfair but I guess everyone already knew that! I do secretly (don't admit this irl) have more respect for the state school / comp A grades than the private schools.

From the actual pupils I mean. I suppose I think depending on environment exam results of schools and pupils are often not so much down to intelligence as they seem.

Most schools "boot out" students who didn't perform at GCSEs. It isn't about tarnishing a reputation, it's about accepting students who are able to take A Levels

I do think it's reasonable not to accept pupils onto an A-Level if they didn't do well at GCSE and will struggle with A-Level demands. It also would be surprising if someone struggled at GCSE and then decided to do an A-Level in that course.

But then to kick them out half way because they were not on course to do really well at A-level? A B or a C at A-Level is still pretty good.

It does of course go a long way to explain why many more people are getting As and Bs at A-level compared to before - nothing to do with grade inflation or people 'getting cleverer' - and a lot more to do with only a select few doing the actual exam.

I think there's a balance to be made - and schools should make their entrance requirements into Y12 and then into Y13 a lot more clearer.

"The effect on the pupils is devastating, they've been given their results and immediately told to go home and not come back, no consultation meeting with parents, no discussion, just out! "

I'm struggling to understand that this is a complete surprise to them. At DD's school it is made clear early enough in year 12 that anyone achieving less than 3 Ds will not be able to continue into year 12.

Surely these schools must give some kind of indication before the exams that there is a minimum requirement to carry on into year 13? Don't they?

Surely these schools must give some kind of indication before the exams that there is a minimum requirement to carry on into year 13? Don't they

Seems not. I think that someone on course to get less than 3 D's will know they are struggling and should have that conversation - who wants to remain on a difficult course?

But it seems some schools have very high entrance criteria to y13. I don't think that's right. Schools need to ask themselves why they have such a high entrance criteria. Is it for them - or the pupils?

I think we are talking about apples and oranges on this thread.
Setting a minimum entrance requirement for particular courses = fine in my view.
Identifying children working below D level and helping them transfer to other courses based on it being a waste of time for them to do another year on that course = ok though open to abuse.
Asking those who are on track for a B/C to leave a school halfway through a course = in my view wrong. My MCS friend was asked to leave based on his mock GCSES grades.

I agree that the system needs overhauling. These blooming league tables make educational establishments less than forthcoming about how the schools achieve these "amazing" results.

As PPs who work in 6th forms have pointed out we all do it - the difference is though this school set their Yr13 entry a lot higher. We know that the vast majority of students who have U/E grades in year 12 will fail to improve these grades and therefore will have wasted 2 years. If we let them go in year 12 they can enrol on different subjects/courses at a different provider.

Funding is also a major issue - if you stay at one provider for 2 years, you will not get another 2 years of funding at a different provider.

The main difference though between the majority of 6th forms/colleges and this one is the bar they have set in order to continue.

I would like to know if they have ever made exceptions based on the students personal circumstances; for example we had a student who got 3 x U grades the other year including a subject where he was highly talented in, he was allowed to retake year 12 with us, changing 2 off his subjects but we allowed him to re start the subject we knew he was talented in and worked with him to overcome the issues he had with the exams

The main difference though between the majority of 6th forms/colleges and this one is the bar they have set in order to continue

Indeed - I wonder how common this high bar in Y13 is - and if there is any correlation between such a high bar in Y13 and good statistics?

These blooming league tables make educational establishments less than forthcoming about how the schools achieve these "amazing" results

Yes - Queen Ethelburgas is one of the schools which advertise locally and does make a big song and dance about how high achieving their school is.

(Nothing libellous there, is there?)

Nothing libellous there, is there?
I don't think so. They even have a page on their website about which of their 2 secondaries on the same site is the 'best for you' (read best for us)

Most schools "boot out" students who didn't perform at GCSEs. It isn't about tarnishing a reputation, it's about accepting students who are able to take A Levels, IB or whatever.
Thing that are ok:

• having basic entry requirements for post 16 e.g. B at Gcse / 5 A*-C passes
• giving honest guidance at the ens of y11 (eg. I've told some students they'd be able to do my subject at A level but it's a step up and they'd need to work harder than someone with a grade b+)
• not allowing students with Es and Us to continue. It's clear A levels is thr wrong pathway and once they have a level 3 qualification (however poor) means they'd have to pay their own.

What's not ok:

• accepting kids with great gcse results and then deciding that getting a C at AS level might ruin your statistics so showing ZERO consideration to the child, kick them out, make them find another college (which may or may not do thr same spec) and leave them having to take 3 years for college rather than 2 - all because school is more botherer about justifying their fees than educating children

a stellar reputation and incredible A level results - achieved this back in the late 2000s in part by forcing anyone who got less than a C as AS level to drop the course

but this is completely normal, if you could get a "stellar reputation" for that, everyone would have one

Does it? Surely losing that many pupils at the end of Y12 shows that something they are doing is not working.

I think they lose fewer than average

I think to make it transparent schools should show how many started gcse, how many sat rhem,, how many of those went on to as level and how many of those into a level and their grades. That linear visibility will show a lot that is hidden now.

all that information is freely available

Schools need to ask themselves why they have such a high entrance criteria. Is it for them - or the pupils?

Um- it's the fault of parents actually! You know- the ones who only send their precious children to sixth forma that have exceedingly high pass rates!
My 6th form has been struggling with numbers for years, for a variety of reasons.
We're in an area with "league topping" super-selective grammar schools, that always feature in top twenty schools nationally (GCSE and A Level). Our really high flyers leave us after GCSE to go to these 6th forms, so our average ability intake at 6th form is fairly middling. Our performance at a level is also fairly middling. We don't have poor value added, we don't have amazing value added. We allow anyone getting E or above at end of Y12 to continue the subject in Y13, so in things like physics or maths we do have some Es and Us at A level, mainly because those students shouldn't really have been doing those incredibly hard subjects, but they really want to (perhaps for next level of study). We also have students that because of their ability (well, technically because of their prior performance at GCSE) have A level targets of D (and even an E this year). Even if these students get above target, they're still middling results (Cs and Ds) and parents look and the headline pass rates and refuse to consider us for A Level.
What are we supposed to do? Keep taking mediocre students, so the passrates stay mediocre? Our GCSE are truly outstanding! But Y11 pupils know that if they go to one of the grammar schools for 6th form they'll get stellar a level results too (because if they don't, they'll be out after Y12!! We get one or two each year return to do Y12 again, or Y13 with us).
Our students that stay are v happy, because our 6th form is a lovely place to be, where the staff do actually care that the students are happy, and enjoy all the courses they've chosen (even if they weren't necessarily the "correct" choices for those pupils), we do not have many that drop out of 6th form (and certainly only force maybe 1, perhaps 2 students to drop an a level per year, where they really will not get a grade, and could do something else more beneficial to them in their time, e.g. an AS level in Y13, work experience, EPQ to get them more UCAS points etc.). But we cannot stop the spiral that parents see national average a level results from a school way above national at GCSE, and they won't consider us.
Maybe that will change now the dfe performance tables present KS5 performance differently and in terms of progress too? But I doubt it. Parents only look at percentage A-A, A-B. It doesn't matter if your pupils are actually only "capable" of a D and getting C's and Bs!

Of course you need the best staff (which higher salaries attract) and the best resources which become available when schools have more money at their disposal.

nonsense, this is not what "the best staff" do, predicting questions is impossible, and a complete waste of tie and resources to try. it isn't the best staff that spend their time doing this. All staff discuss what questions are possible, but you would have to be stupid to try and say for sure

Surely these schools must give some kind of indication before the exams that there is a minimum requirement to carry on into year 13? Don't they?

yes of course they do.

I don't know what people think is going to happen to their children at university, where the kick out points are quite often twice a year!

Or at work.

Private schools do this all the time

Indeed - I wonder how common this high bar in Y13 is - and if there is any correlation between such a high bar in Y13 and good statistics?

I keep saying this - the success rate goes down if someone is asked to leave. Departments, schools and staff are judged on success rates, so no, asking someone to leave does NOT improve statistics, it mars them.

but this is completely normal, if you could get a "stellar reputation" for that, everyone would have one
Or there are 6th forms out there who care a little more about educating children than some spread sheet & headlines.

What do these places want, total adoration, respect for getting a tiny handful of carefully chosen children top grades? Not a chance. But they don't care. They advertise a nice headline number having messed up children's post16 eductaion and there's enough parents who think their child will be special to buy the nonsense

Where do think the children who get told to leave these places go? Yes, to genuinely inclusive 6th forms such as mine who still send students to Oxford, Cambridge and Russl Group unis every year (and do this without failing students who 'only' get Cs)

The people who defend this crap are the ones who are banking on their kids being the 'right side' of the cull.

To me there are two points to this - firstly - new A Levels are a 2 year linear course, with all exams taken in yr13. Students can (but don't HAVE) to take AS, indeed many of mine haven't because as soon as they take a-level next summer the AS is redundant. So unless these students took AS they have nothing to show for year of study...and students WILL improve in yr13. Even though course is more difficult their study skills, work ethic etc improve more usually.
However - if they are targeting U grades (or even E) you have to question if they are in the right course, surely a key purpose of ks5 is to give them qualifications to access HE/work. If they aren't maybe they SHOULD cut their losses and do something they CAN achieve.
As for the 'good' pass - schools can be judged on A*-A, or B or C or even E...
Only schools that are VERY secure of their funding and numbers could draw the line at a B grade....!!

And saying "pupils are on the wrong pathway" - Yes! We know!! And we have advised them over and over about things that would be more suitable and better stepping stones to what they want to do, but their parents cannot accept that their child isn't ready for the rigour of A Levels! We had people in tears at enrollment previously because they didn't quite meet the (locally, not at all high) requirements for entry, but couldn't accept that A level study wasn't right for them, and their parents arguing that they should be admitted into courses because they want to do them. With GCSE APS of lowered than 40 (C average) and C in subject they want to study at a level. Ok- for some we do allow, e.g. Media Studies or English Language/lit, mainly because if you've taught Danny since Y7, and know his C at GCSE was a blip he'll be fine, but should we really allow a child with a C at GCSE in physics to do physics a level? The child will not cope with the content and level of understanding required! Yet parents will ring up and berate us, or worse come in person and shout at us, pressurise us to let their child study whatever they want, to meet entry requirements at university (for courses that are also entirely unsuitable too, but parents cannot accept that!)

I don't know what people think is going to happen to their children at university, where the kick out points are quite often twice a year!
Not the same.
What goes on at these placea is the equivalent of someone getting to the end of 2nd year at uni and being told 'sorry you're only on a low 2:1 & we only want high 2:1s and firsts so you have to leave'

Or at work
Because people get the sack for doing their job to a decent standard rather than being exceptional every minute of every day?

Have to say, I'm impressed at how much you're determined to defend kicking kids out of school for doing well, but not well enough