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.

I think that selective schools are fine, in their place, for the top band in IQ. However people seem not to understand the term average! The majority of DCs are average, even those with money, those with mums on MN and royalty! Selective schools are not intended for the average, the just above average or the moderately above average. Parents don't say 'my DC isn't suited to a highly academic education' they say 'get a tutor'!!! People should find a school suited to their DC, not find a school and think 'I will make my DC fit'!
Not all the above average are suited to that type of education, e.g. perfectionist girls prone to eating disorders.

If most DCs had an IQ of 120, that would be the new average and selective education would go up a notch. Most DCs would still be average.

The selectivity point is worth considering.

The league table is looking at A-levels. Even in state schools A-levels pupils are 'selected' (you have to get enough GCSE's). In fact, by only including the more 'academic' A-levels, the FT table is only looking at the brightest 30 - 40% or so of total state pupils. The private sector has a much lower drop out rate at 16 (I think about 70-80% go on to take A-levels).

I would suggest that the majority of state A-level pupils would have been academically capable of, at least, getting into the less selective private schools.

There are many good reasons for having a state comprehensive system - but perhaps, achieving the academic potential of our very brightest children is not one of them.

I'm not a scientist but presumably even you accept that some people are mentally subnormal, some no matter how much you teach them will remain at an IQ level which means they are unlikely to go to university (unless we dumb it down even more than we have) and some are very bright. I don't think every child is a clean slate at birth and can be made into a potential brain surgeon and everyone would agree with me. That doesn't matter but the issue is whether children who are quite clever do better in state or private selective education or is setting for subjects sufficient in comprehensives. I think being edcuated with children of a similar level in schools where most children can't pass the exams to get in helps the brighter child more than a comprehensive education.

Luckily we live in a society free enough to mean that we can hold different views if we choose.

No, Xenia, you are clearly not a scientist. Yes, you are right though, there are different types of intelligenicies and kids are born with the potential to do well at these differing skills. its a school's job to realise these as fully as possible.

I have met many so called 'sub normals' who have had more common sense than you or I...I know they will have been hugely successful, with or without qualifications.

You don't, though, understand how comphrensives work. I could choose to believe the moon was made of cheese. I'd like to think I might do some research first to establish the facts before coming to a conclusion like this, though.

I am against selection- full stop- as many are late developers.
If schools want to select they have every right but parents ought to accept that it is the best for the very bright DC and those who have to get tutors drill their poor little DCs should accept that the school isn't suited to their DCs needs.
A very bright DC is best suited to an environment where all DCs are very bright-would you want them hed back by the sort of DC who had been drilled for 3 yrs and then wasn't quick enough-I wouldn't.
My DC 1 wasn't suited at 11yrs but he would have been at 12yrs and DC2 would never be suited. This doesn't mean they are in anyway inferior-DC2 has other talents.

They do have setting in the comprehensive school!!! Since DC went to a Russell group univerity and the school regularly sends to Oxbridge they are in classes with high flyers-not with those who can't read!
I appreciate that you work hard to pay for education Xenia but I really think that you have never set foot in a really good comprehensive, seen a lesson, listened to the parents at meetings or seen the pupils (beat the local fee paying selective school in debating!!!)You seem to get your ideas from inner city sink schools where they don't teach-they crowd control!

There's no argument really. We have choices and exercise them as we think best for our children. Plenty of parents don't even believe in schools and educate children at home. I'm very glad we live in a free society like this and I don't take it for granted.

You get an ability range in these schools even number 5 where one of mine went. Some are virtual geniuses and some are the old traditional grammar school and university entrance IQ level of about 120. These very selective schools do set. One of mine was in the 5th of 5 sets for maths and still got an A. People who aren't interseted in which schools are getting the best exam results can ignore the tables or only check the results of the non selective comps to compare those. The main thing is to keep having the informatino available rather than reserving it only for parents in the know.

exotic - If Comprehensive's are so good at meeting the needs of the brightest pupils, how come they don't do better in the FT league tables?

Are you being serious jackstarb?! Of course they can't, they are not just catering for the needs of the way above average (an easy enough task)they are catering for the needs of the average and the way below average. If every DC could get an A in every subject in GCSE they would have to make the exams a lot harder! (Do people really not understand the word average?)

Jackstarb, with the greatest respect, I suggest you read the whole thread, this has been a point of discussion for a while now.

The mind boggles at the fact the comprehensive takes all and is supposed to beat a school that has cherry picked the brightest!!!!! They can do a lot, but not work magic!

The top 5 comprehensive schools on FT list:
Watford Grammar for boys - Selects 25% academic ability, 10% music
Dame Alice Owen - Selects 32% academic ability, 5% music
Cardinal Vaughan - non selective, but need to be v Catholic, baptism by 3 months, parents and children must volunteer for church, children not taught any subjects in mixed ability lessons
Watford Grammar school for Girls - Selects 25% academic ability, 10% music
Camden School for girls - Non selective, but need to live in an expensive part of London, lots of streaming, but does use fair banding. Has 8 music places.

I wonder why I knew who the OP was before I opened it!

Perhaps you would read my previous post (I have read the whole thread - thanks).

it IS a shame Wales isn't covered- I think ours is top fifty, which can hardly be bad! I say ours, the local one, DS2 will attend but ds1 going to a wonderful abse at a less popular school: it's all about the right school for your kids after all.

Actually when we did the school tours this year I was amazed how true that is: there is a home ec lab on the ground floor and the smell of Welsh Cakes would normally be a big plus for me (big beleiver in value of that sort of thing alongside academics) but with ds1 it was a physical block from accessing the building due to sensory issues. Amazingly interesting, this ASD lark.

No one is suggesting a state selective school can fairly be compared with a comprehensive. Thsi is just information and lots of parents want to know what sort of school one is, where do most chidlren go on to and what is it like. The exam results do help you to assess that.

As for the list above the comps which aren't relaly comps i think there is some over the Catholic ones in London. They have interviewed parents, looked at contrbutino to church life and the Catholic authorities are saying bad you, shouldn't do that, just look at if they are baptised. Parents and schools say well we get the best pupils this way or they think that which of course is true.

I didn't start this to compare selective and non selective schools. You'd need an IQ of 100 or less to think a non selective school should have the same A level results as a selective school.

However parents do like information and very few will pick a school where most children do badly in exams if they can help it.

'I am against selection- full stop- as many are late developers.

Absolutely; a wreck at 11 (family issues p;us generally late developer)- doing my MA now.

DS1 seems to be just showing his ability now: like most with an HFA in mainstream school and barely coping for primary, one session a week in a Base (specialist teaching of MS curriculum within MS school) and accelerated to year nine science already; always had a talent at English anyway- writing poetry etc (school's opinion not that of doting mum LOL).

At thirteen I think academically his potential will be vastly different than that seen at ten.

What I do support though is a midway- using the abse as an example, I think it would be great to have a campus system where children throughout the whole range (with the exception of some severely Sn children who would benefit from a quieter setting) with bases for specialised G&T and Sn teaching on that premises and a level of fluid movement throughout (so someone who develops rapidly in an area can move, as can someone with varying abilities). At 10 I had G&T English (for about 3 weeks until the budget ran out!) from Head and SN maths from TA- can't be the only person. And all the benefits of specialised help for all groups, with fluidity for late developers and those with special areas of help or need, and a community that comes together for school events, drama, PE, lunch etc (important in a small town community like mine).

Specialised doesn;t HAVE to mean separate Grammar style.

True Xenia but they would work that out from a visit!

jackstarb - Xenia has pointed out that selectives have already booted out those 'with low IQs' and who are 'mentally subnormal' (her words, I wouldn't choose them) before exams. There will be kids who do better than those from selectives, but most won't (because the selectives would have, eh, de-selected them) so the average will be lower.

Xenia, you say that "Luckily we live in a society free enough to mean that we can hold different views if we choose" just a sentence after you mention that "everyone would agree with me". This made me .

Seriously though, this makes me wonder whether there should be a separate 'Private school' topic in 'Education' so that those who privately educate can congratulate themselves that their dc go to schools that are on a particular list and the rest of us can focus on more interesting things.

If I was paying out for education, at a school that hand picked the pupils, I would be asking tough questions if they weren't on the list! (and wanting a refund!)

You don't need to get DC into one of the top 20 schools for them to get good A level results xenia. I like you have 3 adult DC who had the misfortune to be born north of the Watford gap and go to the local comp. They all did proper subjects and two went on to sdudy at good universities. Again proper subjects. They all have well paid jobs. Two are now on the housing ladder, and the other spends money on holidays/meals out/having a great time....her choice!

Three teenagers are still at the local comprehensive. They are in top sets, do sport, music, etc. Why shouldn't they do as well as someone from a private school?

I know very little about private school. I do know that they don't all have fantastic sports facilities, at least not the one my DS have played against. Have you ever visited a real comprehensive ie no grammars even in neighbouring counties and very few private schools nearby?

Jackstarb, yes I read your post but it didn't really make a lot of sense to me, sorry.

My twopennorth.

I was thrilled to see DCs comp scored exactly the same as a fee paying school I had considered. Not only is the fee paying one selective (I know boys were in tears after the exam). The Comp is comprehensive, and despite a mainly privileged catchment, the catchment does also include a council estate. The fee paying school may not be the hardest school to get into locally, but it is still selective. But the end result is the same (not bad) position in the ranking.

I also have to say my DCs school beat several independent schools in a recent inter-school problem solving challenge. And that isn't unusual around here.

This is an area with a lot of private schools around (also a lot of movement both ways for sixth form).