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...

I know my old grammar was stopping pupils from sitting certain gcse papers if they weren't expected to pass.
Obviously they have lovely gcse statistics and are a top performing school. They don't want any pesky average or below average children messing up their lovely record .

Also, the difference in classroom experience for pupils in 6th forms with v high ability intakes as opposed to v low intakes is huge. In subjects such as RE/ethics & philosophy and History for example, the classroom discussion with A*/A at GCSE students will be very different from those with B/C at GCSE. Yes, there are students that blossom at KS5, and really mature (particularly our boys) but many have already found their level academically.

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!
IME universities will do anything they can to hold onto students, even those that are scraping thirds all the way through. They want the fees.
Another thing- this year, many (fairly average ability) Y13s had unconditional university places! So they had no incentive to work in Y13 whatsoever. When I was a student, unconditional offers were for the creme dear la crème, that universities wanted to attract away from Oxbridge, now it seems they want bums on seats only, and are happy to take people with CDE or lower at a level.

lindy
And yet some people will defend it by conflating children who'll pass (but not be top) with children who would fail and get Us and then tell you that the school was right.
They'll also tell you that the reasons those schools do well is because they have academically gifted children.

Haskell
I find the difference in dynamic is how hard people are willing to work.
E.g. I get quite a lot of students who take my subject because they got Cs but it was because of death by intervention and hours redoing coursework etc so students aren't very independnet. It's their attitude that is the problem, not their grade. A couple of my atudents had a bad day on the new 9-1 paper and got 5s instead of 6/7 which they'd got all year. I know they'll be brilliant.

Haskell I do take issue with letting kids with a C (or current equivalent) on to English courses. Our sixth form staff do this every year and it is a disaster.

We have the same issue you do and are surrounded by grammar schools and therefore lose our top students. Our results were good this year- all B and C grades. But the head is annoyed that there were no A grades. Well of course there wasn't. None of the intake were predicated A grades and none got an A at GCSE. We're not miracle workers.

Haskell
Yes on unconditional offers.

We find it's lazy students who could get a mix of As and Bs at A level if they worked gey unconditional offers from former polytechnics and if they like the city then they take the unconditional offer.
(These are often the students who got their GCSEs due to lots of hand holding, spoon feeding and intervention so think the world owes them)

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.

So how come at this time of year they're all loudly announcing that they had 72%A*-As or whatever it might be? They never say "but you have to remember that we kicked out 33% last year who we thought might not make it" so our real percentages are actually way lower".

We find it's lazy students who could get a mix of As and Bs at A level if they worked gey unconditional offers from former polytechnics and if they like the city then they take the unconditional offer.
(These are often the students who got their GCSEs due to lots of hand holding, spoon feeding and intervention so think the world owes them)
Spot on, Maisy! So infuriating this year too see students kick back their heels because they know they're in. What happened to learning for its own sake? They genuinely don't want to broaden their knowledge in some cases, just want to scrape the requirements.

Haskell
And the worse thing is that you hear from people that the demands on these courses that dish out unconditional offers are hardly challenging really. So they get dragged through gcse by teachers, we try to make them more independent in y12 only for them to kick back in y13 because they want the uni experience rather than learning.

I don't think unconditional offers should be a thing unless somebody already has their grades.

Or my local secondary academy who has GCSE results based on 50 pupils. Amazing results, best yet, pass rates in the 90%'s.....but there are over a 100 pupils in that year group....what happened to the rest?????

Oh I know.... Don't enter them if they aren't going to get the grades....so what seems like 48 children out of 50 passed their GCSE's ...so 96% ...but dig deeper, 48 out of 100 (minimum) is actually only 48%. Great massaging of data, pity for the children got given the option to take the exam.

haskell

I know i am going on about him

Ds1 got an unconditional offer this year

He had to retake his AS levels as well as his A levels this year with the exception of history

I did tell him many times that even though he had an unconditional he still had to work so he didnt look a complete tit

I agree though that you would imagine that in some children it would stop them working

In my obviously very limited experience of ds1 and a few of his friends this uni seemed to offer unconditionals to technically bright children who had done dreadfully in their AS levels

I know this anocdata cant be extrapolated out to every offer

struggling to make any sense of that, Whatawaynot every child takes every GCSE, so the number that takes each subject will be different. GCSEs are there for a reason, if every one could pass, then passing would be pointless and irrelevant. There is no point in a child taking an exam they won't pass, waste of time, money and resources for all concerned.

I am finding the thread really interesting as i have another two coming through the ranks

I always knew some schools did this , i am plesaed that someone is challenging this

Our local state school puts just about everyone through GCSE. They obviously make a big deal on their A* -C passes which are usually good

So how come at this time of year they're all loudly announcing that they had 72%A-As or whatever it might be?* they often are success rates, you need to look at the statistics being shown. If they are not success rates, then ask for the success rates. it is easy enough.

There's another article on this - www.theguardian.com/education/2017/aug/29/st-olaves-teacher-weak-students-are-treated-as-collateral-damage?CMP=share_btn_fb.

Quote:

John Ward, a retired teacher who worked at St Olave’s for 26 years, said: “It’s a great place. I’ve really enjoyed all aspects of working there. The staff are really great – they’re clever and supportive. The students are challenging because they’re so bright.”

But, he added, there was now far more stress and pressure on both staff and students because senior management were intent on getting to the top of the league table. “When you are focused on your league table position, then you have to be focused on your success in exams.”

The school, which is voluntary-aided, is selective at year 7, and again on entry to sixth form, but Ward disagrees with any policy to remove students at the end of year 12.

“Once you accept these children in year 12, it’s on the understanding that they continue to the end of year 13, that they complete their A-level course so they can prepare for university. That should be our contract with them.”

To eject pupils at the end of year 12 was, he said, “a cruel thing to be doing and to my mind unnecessary. It certainly isn’t in the students’ best interests. It’s probably always gone on, but not to the extent it is now.”

The school did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

The point is, Copperbeech, that parents don't know to ask for success rates - and schools like this know that perfectly well.

What needs to happen as a minimum is what is suggested in today's Guardian article, namely to make it compulsory that retention rates are published alongside exam results. If parents see that there's a substantial danger that their child will be left high and dry half way through A levels, those schools will become considerably less popular. Which might in turn make them realise that they need to educate the entire A level cohort, not just the ones who will get the As and A*s.

My DD is at a sixth form college, we choose it because of its pastoral attitude. What we discovered after she started that a lot of its students come from other schools/sixth form colleges state and private where they didn't achieve the grades in year 12. It actually has a pretty good value added score - and I'd choose it again.
Actually exam grades are not the only criteria parents use.

The point is, Copperbeech, that parents don't know to ask for success rates - and schools like this know that perfectly well.

any parent can ask any school any time how many pupils leave in y12. it would make more sense than coming online to whine about data not being given to them.

There is SOOOOO much data, you don't want it all. Just ask for what you want. easy.

This happened at my private girls school all the time. After GCSE results came out, there would be a large drop in numbers as any poor achievers were filtered out to other schools in the surrounding area.

Absolutely tiggytape. Lots of psoters missing the pint here talking about y11 entry requirements into sixth form. That is not what has happened here, but a brutal ejection half way through a course, when even a B is not all lost, just less likley. Again, i can bet your bottom dollar that St Olaves do not make that explicitly clear to the kids on entering y12.

Point, not pint!

Common in private schools

Aagh, it's not about filtering out poor achievers! It's about putting kids on courses and subjects that will suit them best. Not all institutions offer all courses.
We have been complaining for so long about the lack of choice for students, that one size does not fit all! Students post 16 have a huge range of choices, yet when schools direct them there, we're shot down for "kicking them out". A-levels are not for everyone, they are not the be all and end all of education and qualifications.
We are experienced professionals of our field, we don't hate kids and want to hurt them. We want them to succeed and give them advice and guidance in order to do so. Since when is not getting what you want just because you want it, someone being nasty. A doctor telling you to stop eating salt and fat to lower you blood pressure isn't being a spoilsport, nasty person. They're doing their job, trying to do the best for their patients. We don't kick kids out for shits and giggles, we tell them this isn't the institution/course for them and give them guidance of where to move on to.
A surgeon has the right to refuse to operate on someone if they don't follow instructions, aren't likely to respond, same goes for a doctor giving chemical treatment, lawyers have a right to say, no we're not the best firm to represent you.
Students have a massive range of options post 16, they just need to consider them

I'm not fighting against the op school btw, that's bonkers and wrong. It's the other comments I'm struggling to reason with!