Are we wasting our money?

[angelnumber9]

It appears that every year the results gap between state and independent schools narrows and this seems even more defined with 2017 figures. Combined with the incentives that top universities give to state school students I am struggling to find good reasons to carry on paying our hard earned dosh for DC's education.
To give this some perspective I have checked out local independent school results and compared them with some of the state school alternatives and it makes interesting reading. I have said before that we are very lucky to have such a good collection of schools in Shropshire. It has to be said that we can only just afford the less expensive ones such as Wrekin or Shrewsbury High School and I appreciate that like all things you get what you pay for but if you care to cost it out purely on a results v price basis there seems very little point in spending your money.....or am I missing something really important?
Having watched selective schools like the gdst's Shrewsbury High school continue to plummet down the A level league tables for the last 5 years (from 63rd with 61% A/A in 2014 to 255th and 26% this year) I know that many parents are again asking what their money is being spent on. Especially when non selective schools such as Moreton Hall and Adcote are roaring ahead (Moreton is an all round school monumentally up 118 places to 91st place with 53%, more that twice that of its High School rival. State grammar schools like Newport Girls High, Adams and Thomas Telford score consistently above 50% A/A and at least four Shrewsbury Sixth form students have achieved Oxbridge places. The Marches sixth form has 22% and William Brooke's 24%. Shrewsbury School and Concord (like the High School selective but far more expensive) have broken their own records. Concord unbelievably managing 84% A/A with 45% at A. Shrewsbury School continue to publish detailed exam results and leavers destinations on their very informative website.
Perhaps I'm too caught up in figures but when Shrewsbury High School recently held an Oxbridge conference in an attempt to win an award (sadly I'm told none of their girls have secured offers there since 2015) I can understand why parents are livid. But they now have a new dance school so perhaps girls will be able to waltz their way into Oxbridge??? (sorry, couldn't resist!).
So I am very frustrated about it all and seriously considering cutting my losses. I hate to see our school fees being spent on ridiculous projects when the focus should be on raising standards. With what I would save in fees I could probably buy a small house which may be a far better investment for my children in the long term.........anyone?

I agree - why all the talk of Shrewsbury High and their dance facilities if it's Wrekin that's been the let down? What are your issues with Wrekin? Why is your daughter unhappy? Surely not because the school's A Level results aren't good enough? It's a big deal to move a child at year 8 so you need to focus on where she'd be happy.

Almost no private schools have taken that step.

you CAN take 4 at our local independent (best indy in the country according to some recent guide) but they recommend 3. I can promise you that is not due to budget constraints!

scab I'm sure that's right.

But the fact remains that the overwhelming majority of private schools have students taking 4 A levels in L6 ( with a proportion dropping one at the end of that year).

And the schools that only allow 3 A levels at the start of L6 ( or very much encourage it to the point that this is the de facto setting) are nearly all state schools.

I'm not blaming the schools BTW. The budget cuts have been awful. And schools are trying different ways to make ends meet. But it is disingenuous of those schools to spin it as a jolly good thing.

What is wrong with only taking 3 A levels? There's no coursework element now, the huge majority are linear. You can really concentrate on 3. Never seen the point of 4 and dropping one, particularly now that you can't get anything for that subject that you've studied for a year?

Just checked dds state school, the guidance at 6th form is:
Most students choose to follow 3 A-level courses
although exceptional students do choose 4.

So it is still an option if bright enough!

Never seen the point of 4 and dropping one

Beneficial for kids who havn't made career choice decisions to leave options open. Beneficial if you don't know whether you can do the workload for 4 subjects, so a "get out" clause. Beneficial if you risk getting a crap teacher, so you can choose to drop rather than carry on wasting time and still end up with a crap result. Narrowing down from 10 to just 3 is very hard, especially for children who may have several possible career choices in mind.

Sorry to go on. But I can think of two teens that I know that got to Cambridge this year - one for ppe, one for history. Both had only three a levels? So not sure where all your info is coming from. One was from indy one from state if that matters. Maybe medicine you need 4? Otherwise I can't see anywhere where 4 a levels are necessary.

I'm old enough to only have done 3 linear A levels first time around so I suppose it doesn't seem an odd choice to me!

I understand that many schools that did 4 A levels are now only offering 3 , and that there must be an element of cost in the decision. But I can't see why anyone is disadvantaged by only taking 3. Frankly I think more time to do other stuff while in 6th form is a good thing.

There are very few educational systems around the world that reduce their post 16 curriculum to three subjects.

The whole point of sixth form is to stretch the academically able. To offer another layer of education. Not to reduce it to the absolute minimum necessary to attain a place at university.

Doing a fourth subject at L6 means many students trysomething new. Or keep something on that is a bit of an outlier in their portfolio.

The extra contact hours means there is additional opportunities to learn new skills as well as subject material.

The extra feedback that comes with a further A level is helpful not only in that subject but often cross pollinates.

There is also no evidence that the schools offering only 3A levels co incidentally offer a rich array of enriching activities. Quite the opposite. The net result is 16/17 year olds with endless free periods.

I don't know anyone in academia who champions the reduction to 3. Just SLTs who spin it. And parents who seem to swallow any old shite and/or consider anything not strictly necessary as worth a swerve.

"There is also no evidence that the schools offering only 3A levels co incidentally offer a rich array of enriching activities. Quite the opposite. The net result is 16/17 year olds with endless free periods.

I don't know anyone in academia who champions the reduction to 3. Just SLTs who spin it. And parents who seem to swallow any old shite and/or consider anything not strictly necessary as worth a swerve."

The mumsnet theory of education strikes again.

Another post about education that bears no resemblance to my life.

Which academics do you know then who have champion the reduction to 3A levels?

I have a genuine question: is it possible for a student to take an extra A-level privately, i.e. outside the school?

So, study for the A-level privately (tutoring plus self-study, most likely) and then register to take the exam independently rather than through the school?

Genuine question as I am not in the UK and there are some aspects of the UK system that I am not familiar with.

Yes it is possible.
But the student has to take the exams in an examination centre. Independent schools will sometimes ones facilitate this ( for a fee).

Our local (state selective, not a grammar) 6th form has students do 3 A levels unless they want to do maths at university in which case they also do further maths. If they want to then they can do the EPQ as a 4th option. The reason cited for this decision is that universities including Cambridge, Manchester and Durham have all stated that there is no advantage to students in having 4 A levels and they would rather see 3 with an A than 4 without an A.

fairy that is a very disingenuous spin on what those universities said.

Actually you should name and shame them.
Because if that's what's in their web site, then they should be taken to task for it!

So let me get this straight. Schools that say you only need 3 a levels to get into top universities are lying? When Cambridge and Oxford ask for AAA for history (on their websites) they REALLY mean that they want 4* a levels but deliberately aren't telling schools that?

The 3 6th forms I am currently involved with all do 3 as standard. One has very few high attainers, so concentrates on a lot of contact hours to get its kids to 2 or 3 reasonable A levels. One does 4 if you're not sure til Christmas, then drop one. But also a compulsory EPQ, a sport , a volunteering thing of some sort and an "enrichment" activity. The 3rd offers 4 to the very able, and 3 to everyone else with loads of free periods. So there can be good reasons for offering just 3. I think only the last schoolnfom my anecdata is driven by funding alone.

Offers for students studying A-levels will range between AAA and AAA depending on the course. If a practical component forms part of any of the A-levels taken, we expect candidates to have taken it and passed.

That's from Oxford uni. Is this bollocks then?

Been reading this thread.

I'm a bit confused. I'm 45. I gave a first class degree. All my peers and I only ever took 3 A-levels. When was it changed to expect 4? Was it ever? I had friends who got into Oxford and Cambridge back in the day.

Both my dneices are recent graduates from Russel Group Unis. One doing Engineering. Both of them were only ever expected to get 3 A-levels. I think AAB was the highest offer.

Confused by all this 4 A-level talk.

*have a first class degree.

scabs your mixing up the grades required at the end of upper sixth with what academics would rather see happen in lower sixth.

So academics would rather kids study 4 and then drop one? Why? What's the point? Unless you really want to do it? Why do you think parents are disengenous for believing spin from the schools when clearly unis DO NOT EXPECT 4 a levels!

Basically, until very recently it was considered best for able students to start 4 A levels ( or more) in lower sixth.

Then some students would drop one after the AS exams.

This was a practice seen in virtually all schools.

Then the budget cuts started to bite and schools could see a good way to save costs; offer students only 3 A levels from the get go. But spin it as A Good Thing. Point out that 4 are just unnecessary. That better grades come from doing 3 from the start.

Well the proof of that particular pudding is in the eating.