The Sunday Times Top Schools List 2025

[PushPoshPish]

What are your thoughts? Any surprises? Any experience of the schools that feature? Will it influence any schooling decisions for your DC?

A lot of religious and/or single sex schools in the Yorkshire Post list.

No way to see this without a subscription?

This is interesting. Progress 8 is the best measure I think. However, there are all of things going on to get the progress. Number 1, Michaela the average number of GCSEs is tiny, 7 I think. That seems less than ideal.

Many more children at private schools use tutors, so alongside the other reasons children do better there (small classes etc) it doesn’t seem surprising at all…

It’s laughable that parents still perceive the best schools to be the ones with the best GCSE and A Level results. I can’t bare the naivety of it all !!

This is a free version of the same info, includes state only and based on attainment 8 score:

School League Tables | the Best Primary, Secondary and Independent Schools | Locrating

@Onheretoomuch what do you think is a good school besides grades?
personally I think school experience is important, friendships, a variety of courses, and extra curricular. Decent grades so you have options but overall a mentally healthy environment while a teen matures. I don't believe exposure to antisocial behavior is healthy.

Hard for super selectives to get P8 scores like the top on that list. In fact it's impossible if you have students with target grades of 8/9. You cannot improve by two grades then.
a few (not all) of the top schools on the P8 measure have very narrow curriculums from very early giving more time than other schools to each subject.
I wouldn't like to teach in any of them myself. But different strokes for different folks I suppose.

@GrammarTeacher There is a superseltive on that list. (St Olaves)

Exactly. I don’t think 8-9 is average progress for any child based on KS2 results, which is what this is. It would be 6-7. Selectives are at an advantage because they have a less diverse ability range to support.

Strangely enough, Henrietta, QEB, St Olave's all have top P8. It looks like the score is meaningless then as their intake is definitely not struggling and then amazingly improved by the school.

Big surprise that Henrietta couldn't get all 100% over the grade 5 threshold in Eng and Maths 🤯

Yes. And none have over 2.
The not getting 100% over grade 5 in English and Maths also suggests a different entry profile in terms of SATs than many super selectives. Getting a grade 4 in one of those for any of the grammars in my county would be AT LEAST -3

All forms of league table are limited in the information they actually provide. And there are different advantages that some of the other schools in the list have.
I am more impressed with Totteridge Academy that Michaela for instance. But would teach at neither.

I'm still intrigued to know how we would be expected to get an a P8 of over 2 when there's no student with a target below 7.

I learnt that in terms of comprehensives, my dh's alma mater (Jewish comp) and jcoss (jewish comp) has better results than the st albans schools that people are paying top dollar for catchment and is close to ranking to camden school for girls (called socialist Eton!)

The fact that grammar and indies dominate the rankings isn't surprising.

I agree, stats are just a snapshot of something that is much more nuanced in real life. And not everything is captured by the stats - I have first hand experience of six schools in the league tables and local knowledge of a few more and the numbers wouldn't tell you much about them.

One cannot compare Progress 8 scores like for like between selective and non-selective schools. When the progress on a scale appears comparable, in fact, it is not. A higher academic baseline implies other inherent factors that suggest students have better academic abilities or better family environments or resources to begin with, thus naturally leading to a steeper slope in terms of progress, to the scale much much less to do with the individual school itself.

Agreed. So many other factors involved in all of this that it's not a helpful metric - on its own.
But we are where we are I suppose. League tables have been around in many forms for decades.

I will add that I always feel a bit odd this time of year - we get a congratulatory email and sometimes the governors give us some pastries for the staff room. We didn't sit the exams the students did. With the support of everyone around them (hopefully). Teachers and schools are a small part of the puzzle that makes up achievement.

Progress 8 is based on SATS, not 11+. Taking someone who got 110 (so just greater depth) in SATS and turning that in to a string of 9s would be good progress.

I agree you shouldn't just take one statistic into consideration. And you need to be picky... frankly, ordinary comps aren't competing with super selective (state or private) or vn "normal" grammar schools. So being top is irrelevant there. Being above average is good. Above average progres is good.

I presume if I were looking at super selective again I would want to know that pupils make good progress (above average, not something like 2 grades!) And a good number achieving Ebac, opportunities for interesting subjects like Latin (instead of the Animal Care DD us interested in)... that sort of thing.

My DDs school did come 350th in the Progress 8 list. Its 0.63. Many grammar schools above that.

I very much doubt HBS, QEB and St Olave's applicants have SAT 110.

These schools, even those that are highly selective, still have students who achieve grades 5/6/7 in their GCSEs, year after year. This demonstrates the great variability in predicted Attainment 8 scores based on prior SAT results. Additionally, the estimated prior Attainment 8 is based on the prior KS2 group average, so even if you are in the top group with a SAT scaled score of 119-120, the average estimated Attainment 8 is still average at about 80 (G8)

The variability may be explained by many factors e.g. highly pressurised environment is hell for some children so they can't achieve or some MH conditions may manifest themselves in adolescence irrespective of the school etc.

This only proves that stats per se is not very helpful or even informative.

We moved school recently and even though DC's new school is well known nationally, in reality it's nothing like it looks on paper. Neither better nor worse, just very different to what you'd expect academically looking at its stats. It depends on the class too - there may be more SEND children in one year accidentally etc.

Some schools in the new ranking moved up or down by double digits - it's a huge movement for schools that have been at the top for decades and are well known and predictable re. their selection procedures/ethos/policies/teachers etc. There must be something unusual behind these results but it's impossible to tell what happened exactly just looking at the numbers.

You'd be surprised. There are frequently posters on here saying their kids aced 11+ exams, and had SATS scores of just over 110. The 11+ test papers are very different from SATS, and parents would absolutely prioritise 11+ over SATS revision.

I know quite a few children who passed/didn't pass the first rounds including my DD, and for many of them we know CAT4 scores and at what level they have been working for years. It is certainly higher than 110. But maybe it's just our bubble 🤷‍♀️

SATs are being done now, after the main rounds for grammars so no need to prioritise. And I don't know anyone who revised for SATs, even without the pressure of 11+ 🤔 Why on earth would you do that? You just have your normal homework and extensions.

Yes, SATs and 11+ are different formats but underlying academic ability works in both anyway. You just have to prep for 11+ whilst SATs come as your everyday school work.

The SAT does not test VR or NVR in the same manner as many 11+ exams do. There is much less unnecessary time pressure to complete the test. Additionally, the SAT in Year 6 does not test beyond the curriculum, and all state school teachers prepare students for it because this is how primary schools are measured. In contrast, the 11+ exam, taken right after Year 5, covers material beyond the curriculum at that time, and most state primary schools do not incentivize preparing pupils for it, this distorts the stats a lot.

And your point is?..