Financial Times Top 1000 Schools

[Xenia]

398 of the top 1000 are independent
Of the top 100 schools 80 are private and 19 grammar. Only one is a comp but it is a partially selective comprehensive.

(England only)
My older children's schools are 5th, 24th and 35th, not too bad.
www.ft.com/schoolmap-2011
The % ho get A or A* is proper subjects is a good measure and the fact they give the position in 2009 and 2008 too so you can see if a school has just had a bizarre year.

To win a place at Eton you sit a test at age 11 (and are interviewed). The test was devised by Durham University and cannot be prepped for. It's how Eton try to identify raw talent. Yes, the boys then take Common Entrance at 13 but, if they passed the first test, they never fail.

Mainly because Xenia has never been to a good comprehensive on a normal working day but she has seen documentaries about bad ones (that is my guess anyway).
My DC2 does have Xenia's success criteria and that is why he isn't going to university- but I could bet on him earning more than DC1 from his top university. Different personalities. I predict DC2 will do very well, he has drive, common sense, business sense and practical talents. They don't all have to jump through the same narrow hoop.

(in reply to ponders)

Equally Mottledcat we all know that the majority can't afford private education so what's your point?

There is a two tier system, it is unfair, inevitably those who pay get better results we know this. Why be cross with those who do pay? I want the best for my dc's and if I could easily pay for their education I'd do it without a second thought. Yes it's a dog eat dog world.

It can never be an equal system and people must be free to spend their money in the way they want. State education isn't fair-I have bought my way into an area with good schools. People will do their best for their own children. Communism didn't work and will never work!

starting a thread on MN in order to swank about the excellence of the school you've paid for is rather bad form, isn't it?

Does anybody do the same about their very expensive car or house? (I think not...)

It would be better if Xenia could continue in her specialism of posting links to league tables (which are of use to some people, if used as an adjunct to other data and school visits) but leave out the somewhat self-congratulatory note on her own DCs schools which is bound to put noses out of joint. Or at least leave it out of the OP?

I do find it quite interesting when parents who pay are then disappointed when the results are not as expected. An example is Gary Lineker whose son did not get into their chosen university because of his grades and he had blaimed the school.

At the end of the day even private schools cannot work miracles. Some of the threads on mumsnet have also revealed disappointed parents whose children did not make the grades despite the years of cost they put in. If you pay your money, you cannot expect a non-motivated child to do well. The difference is that private schools do seem to be better at motivating kids and fewer state schools do this really well but then many kids who are not motivated academically really come into their own in the world of work which is why apprenticeships are so important as opposed to the fear that is put into children that if they do not go to the best school, best university they will have a crap job.

My neighbour has told her DD that unless she keeps on with her kumon she will not get a good job. She is under 7. Maybe hairdressing and technical drawing should have a comeback. One of the most well-off parents at my kids school is not a doctor or lawyer but runs his own hairdressing chain of salons.

it has been less successful in securing a good economic future for the country.

The current situation (in too many schools, not all) seems to be the worst of both worlds. It neither promotes academic excellence (which is essential in a modern economy, we need world class scientists and engineers) nor technical expertise (e.g. we need people who can do engineering and manufacturing jobs well)

The old system of grammars did pretty well with the academic part, but instead of making the other side of the equation better, it was broken.

There's not much wrong with academic selection so long as the other options are valued correctly too and not automatically viewed and funded as second class.

"The old system of grammars did pretty well with the academic part, but instead of making the other side of the equation better, it was broken.
There's not much wrong with academic selection so long as the other options are valued correctly too and not automatically viewed and funded as second class."

Very true, Grimma - sadly that's not likely to happen with the current govt

Grimma I think that you make a very good point

Those Carthusians that worked hard and didnt think falling out of nightclubs and dating(being polite) ex reality tv stars(in the widest possible sense of the word) did rather well with the pre u,perhaps if young Lineker had followed that example...

You were lucky if you got into a grammar but as you say you were deemed a failure at 11 if you did not, not great for motivation. My DF still has a chip on his shoulder about that 60 years later. If you look at areas where there are no grammar schools such as mine, the comps do seem to be very good at both sides and generally the parents choose the school based on their child's interest, whether it is science or performing arts. Some parents choose against the more academic comps if their child is more interested in sports for instance. The difference is that if their child becomes a late developer in a comp, your path is not so predicted. If you are a really good artist, you can do well in a good comp and may not have done quite so well in a GS. For me the system does work in areas that have good LEAs and the buy in from the parents. Our area has a mix of expensive and cheaper homes so realistically anyone could take advantgage of the top academic comp or the better performing arts comp. There are also two private schools in the top 1000 but parents are not that interested in these when the state schools are so good. I believe the Government should look at areas such as ours and find out why they work and then consider these in areas where it does not work.

1234 I am not cross with those who pay!

I am merely pointing out that it's not a fair system, and so the boasting 'advice' by the OP on this thread is meaningless.

As many people have said, but it is worth repeating, of course those schools get top results as they are either highly selective or/and highly expensive. It would be outrageous if they didn't as all these schools have got passing the current A levels at a high grade down to a tee.

What would be worth commenting on would be if they didn't get the top grades.

Whether one agrees or not with the sentiment 'well life isn't fair, get on with it' is another argument altogether.

What would be worth commenting on would be if they didn't get the top grades.

Indeed - which is one of the reasons these tables do have value. For instance, had this data been available when my ILs were choosing a school, they would presumably not have sent DH to a mediocre private school rather than the various good state schools in his area. I think they naively assumed it was good because they were paying and it had lovely old buildings - there were no tables then which clearly showed its deficiencies.

nottird - I went to a Russel Group uni and taught in several. I now dont have anything to do with any Russel Group uni but have a close and intimate knowledge of one of the former 'poly' universities and what is going on in the lecture theatres. It is shocking. It totally debases the whole point of what should be a gold standard for education. Its all about bums on seats regardless of quality.

I've just looked up the GCSE results for Gads Hill School which claims to be the top performing independent school in the country. Their pupils all were awarded A* for something called public service. Is that the independent school way of saying basket weaving?

I find the suggestion that grammar schools or even top performing comprehensives are providing a level playing field really odd.

Sutton Trust data shows that the average rate of free school meals in the top 200 comprehensive schools is 3%, compared to a national average of over 14% in the same period. At our local girls' grammar it's just over 1%.

Many of the people who argue most vociferously against private schools on here are the people who have access to grammar schools.

By the way, I find the existence of private schools deeply iniquitous. But I've hypocritically sent my son to one.

singersgirl - there is nothing hypocritical about recognising that you dislike aspects of the system within which you are constrained to live, and then being a user of those aspects because that is your best available option.

singersgirl

Yes.

There is no fair system without imposing restrictions that most people would find unacceptable. In order to level the playing field we would have to make private schools illegal and scrap the remaining grammar schools which are, as you point out, in most cases bastions of middle class privilege. Then we would have to bring in a fair banding system at every comprehensive which ignored catchment distances to prevent middle-class children colonising schools in leafy suburbs. The next stage would be to make sure that no child had more or less access to books and computers at home than did any other child.

And there is an argument for Universities to make lower offers to children from poor-performing comprehensives, but what if those children have been tutored privately? What if they did their GCSEs at Eton, on a bursary, and swapped to their comp just for A levels? What if their parents are Oxbridge graduates? How far are universities supposed to delve into an applicant's background in order to offer fairness?

ChazsBrilliantAttitude - what you said about diruptive pupils is something that is very important in the apparent outperformance of private schools.

Private schools do expel pupils who breaks the law or disrupt lessons. It is written into the contractual agrement (along with many other binding conditions) at our DSs school.

If all state schools could do that it would immediately raise standards. One disruptive pupil in a class can destroy learning for everyone.

Reading a piece in the Sunday Times this weekend, a teacher asked a group of high achieving pupils from challenging schools what would be the number one thing to improve the education system.
Smaller classes?
Better teachers?
More books?
Unanimously they said to just make their class mates shut up and listen.

The constant disruption was seen as the greatest barrier by these pupils.

Certainly in the primary where I volunteer the classes are so noisy I can see how hard it must be.

I'ce been rather misquoted above.

1. I am concerned that a lot of parents aren't aware that GCSE subjects matter (and some for some careers are better than others) and I wish all state school pupils had access to the same information. You get thread afer thread of mothers saying he might do GCSE X and they have no idea how that one might be inappropriate for the child's career choice. So information is power and I don't want it reserved only for people such as I am.

1. I said children come in various IQ ranges. I don't see why that is so controversial. ,Everyone accepts it.

1. I don't want to say where I or my children went to university or our exam results. Plenty of people know who I am and could look it up but I don't think it's relevant.

1. Life is unfair but at least women in the uK do have choices and reasonable access to education to enable them to decide they want to be able to earn enough to buy a house in an expensive area with posh state schools or not as the case may be. Private schools are no more unfair than the fact one parent is decent to their child and loves it and plenty aren't.

1. 50% of children at good universities went to state schools. Many do very well. I have never said otherwise.

1. I think it's a pity we went agasinst selective education as that change in the state system seems to be the biggest single cause of state school children having fewer opportunities than in the 60s (unless we take the view the bright people have risen to the top and those at the bottom will always remain at the bottom and the fact those at the botto cannot now rise is because we have been so successful in letting the bright poor through but I don't take that view - it's certainly another ecxplanation)

1. The teacher writing in the papers at the wekeend asked bad comp pupils what would most have helped them (the few sixth formers doing well) - they said nmost of all more than oremoney, more than anything woudl have been removal of disruptive classes from class, making all teachers sit, listen and shut up. I am not saying there are never disruptive pupils in private schools of course but if all the parents are paying I think there's mnmore power to get rid of children who are ruining things for everyone else.

Ah wordf said the same as I did.
I think children are not helped to learn to be quiet enough these days. Perhaps they should spend more time sitting in church or at concerts not allowed to make a sound (within reason depending on their age etc)

I think someone said I was showing off that I'd posted the thread. Instead I think parents are very interested in the education of their children. There have been some rather fixed fake league tables in the last few years but I've always like the FT one as it covers proper subjects is A level and gives you positions for earlier years so it's a reasonable one to pick ifyou are at all interested in trying to ge tyour children into a school in the top 100 or 20 ot 10 or whatever might be feasible.

I agree about subject choice and advice Xenia.

I am all for a wide range of subjects being offered.
However, these options must come with proper advice.
Telling pupils that all qualifications are equal is unfair and a downright lie.

And it doesn't matter if it's unfair, or certain subjects ought to be viewed differently. It doesn't matter that teachers want to change the system for all the right reasons.

As the modern saying goes, it is what it is and it is only fair to give pupils this information.

Then they can decide for themselves.