To think schools shouldn’t make a massive difference

[Nexusq]

There are three state secondary comprehensives near me; all within a 10-15 min walk of each other.

The schools are all non selective and select their intake based on proximity to the school. No school is a specialist school in any way but they have a massive difference in outcomes. I don’t understand why. They have a similar cohort, similar demographic of students. School A and C are a 1000m walk.

what causes such different outcomes? There really shouldn’t be because the funding and student body are very similar. The schools have broadly followed this pattern for 20 odd years with A being the best and C being the worst.

GCSE passed for maths and English are
School A: 65%
School B: 50%
School C: 25%

The cohorts must be different surely? Where I teach is 60% pupil premium (which you would never guess if you drove through the town) and a school a mile away is 7% pupil premium. The houses near each school aren't noticeably different.

I bet they don't have similar demographics.

If you go to https://www.compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk/ and look at each school and go down to absence and pupil population you can see what proportion of the kids are on FSM, and have SEN.

A lot can come down to management and the ethos they create within the school.

ds goes to what was known as an awful school locally and was at about 75% capacity (requires improvement ofsted) but 10 years ago a new head came in and turned the school around changed approaches and it is now vastly oversubscribed rated Good by ofsted and well respected locally. They are part of the community and that has been led by the SLT.

there is another school neighbouring it ( parents parking is shared type neighbouring) which has sadly done the opposite and gone from being a thriving school to being about to be forced to academise because of the issues. Speaking to parents many put the change down to the approach of SLT not being right for the area we are in.

the only difference between the two demographics wise is the second school is a Catholic school.

And other than the first school having more FSM pupils (38% and 45%) the two schools are very similar in other areas using the link from above.

My guess would be the one struggling results wise will be on the edge a large housing estate with economy disadvantaged families.

Look them up on the government comparison site to see the true differences. Have you also checked the number of offers vs PAN for each year? I’d bet school A is full with a bigger waiting list than B, which is probably also full whilst C has children allocated to it by the council and is undersubscribed.

The parents invested in their DC education and can afford to do so will live nearest the best performing school, this improves their results and the one with the weakest scores declines further which feeds the results further.

Bet the housing closest to the best performing school will be the most expensive. So it becomes selective by affordability of housing.

Because the involved parents will do all they can to get their child into the better school. How do the house prices compare for example?

The demographic could well be very different. The school I work in has approximately 40% pupil premium and high SEND numbers. Other schools in the area have far fewer of either.

That said, we are very aware of the needs of our cohort and adapt accordingly.

It could be weak leadership too. If the leadership isn't good, it can have a huge impact.

High turnover of staff is another one.

Basically, many things affect school performance.

Parental engagement/aspirations and the money to buy a house closest to School A

Incidentally I wouldn’t view 65% maths + English GCSE pass as good results.

It could be demographics or management. Also once a school gets a reputation as a better school then more engaged parents choose to send their kids there and more teachers want to teach there, which at the moment can be a key factor.

Well for a start, all three won't be exclusively by those living in their own proximity circles. There WILL be students shunning their nearest and travelling a little further to a better school a bit further away. Those living closest to the worst school will probably go to the best school if their parents are engaged and interested enough to do the research. There are also differences with public transport (assuming all three aren't within walking distance to the entire wider catchment area) - one may be preferred because of better public transport links from "better" areas. The OP doesn't specify, but are all three non faith school, or are one or two of them catholic or CofE etc as that will likewise skew the attendances as pupils will travel a little further to attend a school of their faith (especially if, as usual, the faith school is a better one!).

I will bet you a large amount of money they do not have the same demographic.

Also it is quite likely that in the past one was a grammar and at least one other a secondary modern. These effects persist.

And A might be rather fond of 'not being able to meet their needs', managed moves and outright breaching the law when it comes to admissions, exclusions and SEND.

Especially if A is one of the big academy chains.

Oh, and 25% pass rate in maths and English in my county would result in either academisation if the school was under local authority control or changing academy trust as it's appalling.

That's a lot of schools in very close proximity.
How big are they? And is it a city? Or do they straddle a border?

Our school catchment is at least 20min walk in any direction. My old school which was only slightly bigger it would take 45mins-1hr to walk across the catchment.
When you have that many schools that close together. If they only go off proximity and not a defined catchment. Then those in the middle get a choice of 3....those further out get allocated whatever is left.