Would you be prepared to pay more tax to get better state education for all?

[happygardening]

Any other suggestions welcome to ensure that all where ever they live and whatever their background have access to education of the highest quality.

The discussion, BS, in case you hadn't noticed, was about selective education.

"One good thing about SATs levels is that you actually have something concrete to point to in terms of progress." SATs results are far from immune to the quality of teaching. If you think your DC are truly being failed by the education system they are in, a WISC-V will be a lot more valuable.

Would it? Surely it's measures of progress you need if you are going to put a school on the spot, rather than intelligence tests.

Not if the original baselines are unabitious seeker!

Going from rubbish to a bit better, is progress. But it's not right if the student is actually very intelligent.

Progress is dependent on teaching quality. If teaching has been consistently under par, a child may be on a learning curve that looks fine according to SATs - however, WISC-IV may reveal significant underachievement.

"Not if the original baselines are unabitious seeker!

Going from rubbish to a bit better, is progress. But it's not right if the student is actually very intelligent."

SATs are moderated, so the baseline should be pretty accurate. Or don't you agree?

only if all schools were secular

Tasmania - that's an interesting analysis of the benefits to science of a colossally expensive education. However, if as a society we think it worthwhile encouraging continued development of the sciences (trying to avoid my luddite tendencies, here, which find the pace of technological development quite tiresome and not hugely beneficial and the lack of a focus on less profitable science quite irksome...), the current system of a hugely expensive, all-round education to a tiny minority is still a hugely wasteful, selfish way of achieving this benefit. It still doesn't need to cost that much to develop great scientists, surely?... unless the only great scientists now come from a tiny minority of top boarding schools?

WorriedTeenMum which school is this? You say your school is poorly managed, but it sounds like it's getting in poor raw materials at 11 to me, hence the choice of 'easy' GCSEs.

If they were getting in high achieving children at 11, they wouldn't be doing this.

It's true that some schools do better than others with similar intakes, but that's not to say that your school has got a good intake - I bet anything it hasn't.

On this:
"And school league tables are like lining pupils up in order of height and pointing out that those with the greatest number of centimetres are the tallest, while 50% of pupils are below the mean average height in the class. "

Yes but the tables are useful. If you want your children surrounded by children at a top 10 or 20 school educated with the brightest in a very selective environment it really helps to know which are the best schools in those terms and which are not.

They could perhaps be useful if they showed that, but they don't. They generally just show which schools are in the most comfortable areas socio-economically. If we're talking raw front-line data, "results", they are a very blunt instrument indeed and only the roughest of indicators as to what is a "good school" and what is not.

Well quite. My son is very able at maths. We visited one private school (not regarded as highly selective) and asked about this, and they said that they had one boy a couple of years ago who had done A Level maths early, on his own, during the spaces in class.

Meanwhile at the highly selective school we actually applied for, they regularly win maths competitions, they have an extension group for the most able maths students, and so on.

Obviously the second approach was more appealing, that he would have a peer group of boys with a similar or higher ability, rather than going somewhere where he was easily the best - not exactly inspiring to achieve more.

that was to Xenia's point btw

"SATs are moderated, so the baseline should be pretty accurate. Or don't you agree?"

How do you moderate for eg 3 years or 7 years of sub-standard teaching?

Seeker- SATs are a reflection of attainment not abiliy. They tell you what a pupil knows at a given point in their life, not what their potential is.

A child I know well recently did a WISC-IV, on the advice of his teacher, six years into (the same) school. This child was achieving well below his peers on all the standard indicators but was doing extraordinarily well on some extra-curricular areas.

His IQ was measured at over 150...

Sorry, I'm a bit confused. If we're talking about holding teachers and schools to account, then surely SATs are a good first step because they show actual, measurable progress. Or lack thereof. Knowing what a child's IQ won't really help with this- and anywaym IQ doesn't always correlate with academic ability, does it?

No it doesn't.

SATs are a good way of measuring progress for secondary schools.

I'm not sure about junior schools.

FillyPutty - only school in a town, no GS, no major independent to suck out the brightest with big bursaries. An average town of average intelligence.

No matter how poor this school is, how many OFSTED reports it fails, it cant be closed because there is nowhere for the students to go unless they get shipped to neighbouring towns. After the latest monumental cock-up the current head should be losing his job but in reality root and branch changes are needed.

Face it, some schools are crap and it isnt the fault of the parents.

What are the governors like? Any good?

Seeker, given the numpties they keep recruiting I have my doubts. We are now an academy so goodness only knows where we will go next.

One of the worst-performing schools (St Aldhelm's) in the country gets 50% low attainers, and the best so-called comprehensives get less than 5%.

This head should probably have been sacked for his incompetence in not entering the right exams: www.northantstelegraph.co.uk/news/local/concern-over-standards-as-gcse-results-are-announced-1-4714085

FillyPutty - so do you accept that it is possible for a school to achieve crapness through no fault of the parents?