To not let DS sit AS Levels?

[bluebellpillow]

Ds has always been a high achiever with little effort, was predicted straight 8/9s at GCSE. He barely did any revision, laughed and joked about not wanting to 'peak too soon' and that he would be fine. Results day he got all 8s bar one 7. In honesty we were disappointed as for him he could have done better, which the school wholeheartedly agreed with. He promised to knuckle down, had learned his lesson...

I will add here that due to where we are (without outing my location) he had to move to a fee paying school in order to pursue science/maths A levels. We did this before GCSE in order to make the transition for A level as smooth as possible. Ds knows that for us this is a sacrifice we are making.

Fast forward to now and his exam results have been terrible. First set he got B,C,D,U and most recently E,C,U,U. I phoned school to discuss this, according to them he is a role pupil who just isn't working up to his full potential . He is polite, does all his homework etc so no concerns.

Ds has lofty ideas about going to top unis which whilst are within his reach are laughable at his current performance. I have told him that if his next set of exams do not significantly improve that I will pull him out of school and he can get a job until he is willing to work harder for his exams.
AIBU? I'm just so annoyed and disappointed that we are paying for him to piss it up a wall.

@LoniceraJaponica your post sparked me to say that. AAA is great, and if she worked for it too I’d be very very proud (funnily, my one who was accepted onto a PhD got lower grades at A-level, excelled a bit later we more independent study...)

Thanks again for the replies. I should have added that he is bright in RL but not even average by MN standards

I can only do my best to facilitate him achieving his potential, but ultimately he is the one that has to put in the hard work. I think school are downplaying his terrible grades due to the sport to a certain degree (they want to keep him on regardless) and combined with his unrealistic sense of ability it hasn't done him any good. In many ways I am loathe to spend even more money on tutors, I will see how he gets on next month in his next set of exams and go from there. It's just really frustrating from my POV because i didn't have these opportunities when I was younger and he clearly doesn't appreciate it.

"I think school are downplaying his terrible grades due to the sport to a certain degree (they want to keep him on regardless) and combined with his unrealistic sense of ability it hasn't done him any good"

They aren't doing him any favours, and I would be challenging the school. It makes it even more frustrating that you are paying for his education.

What is it with these posters who think that anything less than A in every exam is not worth considering?*
It's not that it's not worth considering.
My take on it is a mix of A*-B is a good set of results. It suggests a child is reasonably bright (and probably school have quite an efficient GCSE preparation machine).
What it wouldn't tell me is that a child is very bright. So if/when I see that sort of grade profile along with claims of being very bright etc then part of me thinks 'reasonably able but honestly not that remarkable' and that comes from teaching a range of able students. Some students are very very bright and very able. Some are brighter than average. Some are average and so on. Equally, some can be 'top' in their school or shine in their hobby but when put into a bigger pond it becomes clear that whilst talented, they aren't remarkably talented. Saying something isn't particularly remarkable in a wider context doesn't mean someone believes anything other than an A* is terrible.

The OP seems quite grounded and aware of this.

OP I think you need to have a serious chat with the school about this as they appear to be encouraging his misplaced sense of (over) confidence in his ability. I personally wouldn't be propping up with tutors when he is failing to use the opportunities you've provided for him. A frank chat with school and him would be my recommended starting point

DS1 did a 3rd 6th form year, had to go through clearing, applied himself at uni, came away with a First which was never predicted for him at school. He says that his Erasmus year in Germany showed him what could be achieved with hard work and also that the German students/uni really didn't rate people who didn't work hard.

I think you have to have a serious talk with him and the school and then leave him to do what he's going to do. Don't hold whatever he has done or will do against him. You can't force him to work hard. He has to do it himself. Some people realise this sooner than others.

Context is all. In many contexts the GCSE grades achieved by OP's DS would be amazing. But in his context of school and ability they are not amazing grades.

Perhaps it is better that he fail now. Better this than falling further and further behind his peers. If he scrapes together enough A levels he might, just might find himself on a STEM course somewhere but it is unlikely to be what he wants or where he wants.

When he gets there it won't be an easy ride. DD2 is in her first year of a STEM subject. It is hard work. Already some students are dropping out or changing course. The students who are keeping up are the ones who are used to motivating themselves.

Perhaps this is the advantage of having been to a low achieving school. I don't believe that high achieving schools spoon feed their students but they do explain the menu. Students at low achieving schools often have to find the menus and work them out for themselves.

ultimately he is the one that has to put in the hard work.

Absolutely. And he's the one who needs to figure out what he wants to achieve and then try to make that happen. Does he actually have a goal of some particular uni courses or is he still somewhat vague? It might motivate him if he can get a clearer focus on this. Going to some open days might make it more 'real', perhaps.

Some of DDs classmates, iirc, were getting quite low test scores at this stage and while they may not have pulled things round enough for 'top' unis they still got places on perfectly respectable STEM courses with decent employment statistics. They get 5 ucas choices so they can choose a spread.

The students who are keeping up are the ones who are used to motivating themselves...Students at low achieving schools often have to find the menus and work them out for themselves.

My university operates a targeted form of contextual offers, but offers little support once the beneficiaries arrive. The implication is that once they are admitted, our teaching is so wonderful (it often isn't) and our support so all-encompassing (it really isn't) that they will fly given the chance. All we have to do is given them wings.

Courses which ask A*AA might be ABB for someone from a low-achieving school and/or deprived background. It's lip service for access, because these students are disproportionately likely to fail the first year. They have some or all of lower attainment (including often not having studied the full syllabus), less well-developed study skills, less parental support, money problems and social isolation (they are often living at home, as the scheme is locally targeted). The odds are firmly against them.

The "private education = spoon feeding" claim is bollocks. If anything, students from private schools are better prepared for university study. The "but state educated students do better" is pure survivor bias, as they are less likely to be admitted and less likely to graduate, so those that get through to the end and get a degree were way better to start with. It is an unfortunate fact that better qualified students from supportive households who have had an education supported by their parents which targets university as a prime objective are better prepared for university. How we fix that is really hard, and a lot of us want to. Denying it is true is just absurd.

My university operates a targeted form of contextual offers, but offers little support once the beneficiaries arrive. The implication is that once they are admitted, our teaching is so wonderful (it often isn't) and our support so all-encompassing (it really isn't) that they will fly given the chance. All we have to do is given them wings.

This makes for interesting although depressing reading. I would have thought, in these days where league tables largely based on student satisfaction are so significant, that the university would offer more in the way of student support - if only to avoid a high drop-out figure.

It makes depressing reading that the university is more or less expecting those students in receipt of a lower offer to fall by the wayside and not graduate. Is this not of some concern?

It is not that cynical. It is mostly because of a (ill-founded, in my view) nervousness about singling students out for extra support on the basis of contextual offers. But look at the regular MN threads in which parents of children eligible for pupil premium get offended over their children being offered extra support; the fear may not be as ill-founded as I think.

(Completion rates in the sort of universities doing contextual offers are massively higher than average and thug numbers of such offers barely affect them anyway; NSS is only five by final year students).

This stuff is hard to fix and in my view everyone is acting in good faith; low participation is complex, multi-factorial issue and requires work deep back into 11-16 education. Incentivising universities to do it is hard, for s whole set of reasons.

I was in a meeting last week at which a large funder wanted the assembled red bricks and oxbridge departments to do teaching in schools. The reaction surprised them.

Thug->the, five-> done.

ReflectentMonatomism - I don’t believe my daughter received contextual offers, I wish she had we live in a dreadful area she will be the only university student on our street but went to the grammar school so maybe that made a difference

5fivestar contextual offers arent normally flagged up, they are generally just lower offers than the standard for that course/university. At least that is my experience with DD2.

What the criteria are for a contextual offer will depend on the institution. Some have a list of schools, others will take into account postcode. Many will take into account other things such as being looked after, FSM etc.

I agree with Gnome. One problem with contextual offers is that they are sometimes locally based. So a university will list the names of qualifying schools in their locality. So your child might attend a very low acheiving school in another area but not be considered.

This is particularly an issue if the applicant want to study a subject which is only taught in a small number of universities in the country.

It’s always worth contacting the admissions officer directly to see if there is any flexibility. Sometimes they will make such an offer on an individual basis.

But be warned, they will want hard evidence of status , as too many people have abused the system in the past.

Eg moving a child from a grammar to a qualifying school for a few months, moving a child to a relatives house and saying that they are in care or attending another school.

I’m afraid that not having any other students in your street etc won’t qualify. What might be relevant is if you live in a low depcat area AND the university use that criteria AND the school will confirm that the pupil has lived there for the required period ( eg 6 of the last 10 years ).

She’s not lived in the awful area for long tbh. I’m trying to let her run with this herself rather than get involved but I might ask the school quietly if they can assist ... thank you

I would be really concerned about those results. If he’s bright, attending lessons and doing his homework it’s shocking that he got a U. That indicates a total lack of comprehension that does go beyond simply doing his revision. That’s especially true given he is at a private school where small classes are spoon fed.

I would be asking the school to dig deeper. Ask them to review his scripts and identify what exactly is the issue, because a bright kid doing the work in term time should be able to coast C/D grades, even if they aren’t revising.

5five
Having gone to grammar means that your DC isn't educationally disadvantaged.

Schools I used to work in were educationally disadvantaged as in 50% didn't get 5 GCSEs, huge history of social and economic deprivation over 1/3-1/2 of the school qualified for pupil premium that had given us the relevant information with more in similar situations, most students didn't do a levels and university wasn't something even considered.

Going to a grammar school which is prepping for high grades and college and university isn't disadvantaged.

MaisyPops - she’s not been there long though, but I take your point. They’ve actually been the least supportive school she’s ever been to though. I’m in 2 minds whether to even put the youngest DC in for the 11plus