Grammar GCSE results

[MrPickles73]

DS2 is in yr 8 at grammar school. Overall the teaching seems very good and he's getting on well. There is lots of homework (1.5hrs a night). It's all boys and outside of SE England so perhaps not as competitive to get into as some grammars.

We were late to the grammar school idea so did 5 months tutoring to get in. Some of the kids in his tutoring group had 3 years X twice a week tutoring. It's quite middle class and only 5% FSMs.

DS2 is bright but by no means a genius. He did well enough to get in but by no means aced it as some of his class mates did. I would expect he will get 7-9s for GCSEs.

According to the year WhatsApp group a few of the parents have already bought the GCSE revision guides.. I was amazed.

So given all this what surprises me is the average GCSE results is not that amazing and some kids are getting 5s. How is this? Parents go berserk to get their kid in and then stop pedaling? kids pushed to hard too young and give up? They are all sitting on computer games? Something else?

She said the GS is getting double the local conp so worth going to though.

Because grammar school isn't for everyone but some parents shut their eyes to that. Plus inclusion policies mean they take in students with problems who don't pass 11+, won't get the best grades but still do pretty well

@MrPickles73 wrote:
"Is RE notoriously easy?"

I've heard this said before, so had a little look online. It depends how you define 'easy' (% getting 9, or 7+, or 5+ etc.) but the 'easiest' subjects are unsurprisingly those languages that aren't routinely taught in school and are therefore taken by native speakers.

Looking at some numbers from AQA's 2024 results, sciences also score well.

RS does get a higher percentage of high grades than history and geography.

https://filestore.aqa.org.uk/over/stat_pdf/AQA-GCSE-STATS-JUN-2024.PDF

My dd goes to a comprehensive which has a lot of kids who didn’t make it into the very competitive local super-selective (we are in a non grammar area).

Many kids were tutored at primary and are still tutored at secondary. Many of them are doing exceedingly well. The ones who have STEM tutors did very well in the “kangaroo” style tests because they have already learned so much more of the curriculum.

GCSE revision books in y8 aren’t very useful. Textbooks are more helpful at this stage If a child wants to extend depth but honestly it’s easier to get that material online - a revision guide won’t really help much as it’s literally there to help you swat up on material you’ve covered in depth elsewhere.

My dd in y10 is bright, not a genius, and is comfortably predicted 8s and a smattering of 9s for nine of her eleven GCSEs. She is untutored but listens well and follows the teachers advice regarding revision and study technique. She also relies on BBC Bitesize and various YouTube channels along with online tools like Seneca, and she has dipped in and out of maths and science clubs at school in years 7 to 9.

She has never done exceptionally well at Kangaroo style comps - usually silver or gold - and thinks these are desperately uncool and only for people who are swotty or tutored. I agree.

Many children change to a different provider at sixth form, so no A Levels is not a reason not to choose it.

How far is the school below the national average, and what are the outcomes for bright children? That's your comparison point.

Teacher recruitment is a problem everywhere.

RE is no more easy than any other GCSE.

RS does get a higher percentage of high grades than history and geography.

That's not comparing eggs with eggs though. Latin has a significantly high proportion of top results (something like 75% Grades 9-7). We cannot deduce from this that Latin must be very easy.

She has never done exceptionally well at Kangaroo style comps - usually silver or gold - and thinks these are desperately uncool and only for people who are swotty or tutored. I agree.

This is precisely the attitude people try to avoid at all costs.

When did it become ‘failing’ to get 5s. 4 is the benchmark and if 0.2% achieve 9, there must be plenty between 4 and 8. Anything that enables young people to move to the next phase of education and training, is positive.

Remember only the top percentage of students are awarded a grade 9 and fhe boundaries are decided with this in mind. In MFL (which I teach), the subject is marked harshly and only gifted linguists get 8s and 9s. Grade 5 is a ‘good pass’ if it’s not one of a child’s stronger subjects. He needs 7+ in the subjects he wants to do at A level. Year 8 is rather early for revision guides - maybe Y9 though if he has time on top of homework and other activities.

Lots of reasons.

First of all, if you are looking at 2025 or 2024 results, these were the kids who were transitioning from Primary during Covid and missed a lot of the building blocks.

Secondly SpLd is not linked to IQ. My DD has CATs in the 130s... she would ace any entrance exam that wanted VR and NVR, she's also severely dyslexic and the 4s and 5s she got at GCSE were with a lot of pain. Got top grades in the subjects she excels at.

Many kids at grammar will be ND or have SpLd. Plenty also will have specific areas of interest. Not everyone is an all rounder.

Thirdly GCSEs test specific skills sets that aren't actually all that useful in the modern world. Many children who do really well at GCSE come unstuck at A level, and many who aren't suited to GCSEs find they excel later at A levels or BTECs (which are probably closer to work place requirements).

Finally children have off days, have emotional or social problems, a small percentage were also probably over tutored... I would say the latter is more likely in grammars that aren't super selective or in a very competitive area.

Grade distribution looks normal.

Our local grammar is incredibly hard to get into (1000 kids for a bout 100 places as there aren't really any other grammar choices locally though privates and comprehensive are good tbf). It gets amazing gcse results though, something like 90% at a 7-9, which I'd expect as you really do have to be extremely bright plus determined to get in. However, the 11+ measures v specific areas (iq, maths, English). My son has a very spikey ability profile and I can tell even now he'll get 9 in stem subjects but highly likely to get max 5 or 6s in subjects like art, DT, pe, languages, creative English areas, subjects with a lot of writing. He's actually quite good at the 11+ stuff (although I can't face the ragging to get him in locally), so if we were somewhere less competitive I imagine he'd get a spot, but inevitably get a mix of 9s and 6s (he's either great at something or very average!) So possibly those kids are similar, good at the 11plus activities, ace a specific exam, but potentially average at other subjects! Or they rebel once they hit puberty, get a gf, discover phones, parties etc, or maybe the school doesn't suit them, or maybe the level of tutoring required to get into the school isn't sustainable for 9 gcse subjects over 2 years so things fall through the gaps...I think the new system makes it seem the grade is worse than it is too, I thought a 7 was only "alright" till I realised it's an A in old money, a 5 must still be a high C/low B in old money and if someone said they got a B in their GCSes from our day, you'd think they were reasonably bright/good at it.

"some" kids are getting 5s. That means most children are getting 6-9s. Those are very good GCSE results. Don't worry. Even 1 or 2 5s among the higher grades is a very good set of GCSE results. This new number grading makes 5s seem like a low grade but it really isn't.

I have 2 at a local selective grammar outside of the SE. I have just become aware of how heavily some boys are tutored (eldest DS is in year 11). I was really shocked! Some boys are tutored in over half the subjects.

I am not adverse to tutoring whatsoever and DS is tutored in a subject he was failing (would not have been allowed back into sixth form with that score). But as for the rest of the subjects, he’s doing more than well on his own. I also think he needs to enjoy these years and studying intensely does not lead to this!

I did have them both tutored to get into the school but waited until year 5 to understand their natural abilities better. I don’t think I will go down the grammar route for my youngest, as their abilities don’t appear equal.

What I am trying to say is that I don’t think the top grades the grammar gets are from the teaching or cleverness of the boys - they are all massively hothoused throughout!

Agree - a 5 is a high C/low B in old money. A 4 is a standard pass - low/mid C. A 5 might not be stellar but it is moderately competent.

Who told you RE (it’s actually Religious Studies at GCSE by the way) was easy?
It really isn’t.

What does kangaroo style mean please? Not heard this before.

My DCs’ school. They were going make DC1’s year group sit in y10 to practice doing real GCSEs. Tbey changed their mind - not why.

It doesn’t really matte about RE - I think we can agree that some subjects are generally considered harder than others.

I'm a bit horrified by the 1.5 hours homework a night mentioned... I wonder how that compares to non-selective schools. We've been thinking about grammars for ds currently yr4 but I heard a friend saying how much homework and frequent assessments and tests her ds who is in yr6 at a grammar has. I'd sort of thought similar to what someone said upthread, we'd tutor for a bit to help understand how to do the exam, then if he got in it would be up to the school. Perhaps this is naive! It makes me baulk a bit tbh. I wish we had a better mixed local school but they are impacted by the grammar of course. Horrible system.

He can't be y6 at a grammar.

Sorry yr7, engaging my brain any time now...

My son got a straight run of 8’s and 9’s…. And a 4 for D&T. He didn’t like it, he didn’t put any effort in and the teacher and I were lucky enough to exchange weekly emails about the lack of effort and engagement. He still got A star A star A at A level and a first from a top university. He was not unusual. A lot of them only put half hearted effort into the one or 2 subjects they’d chosen as a least worst option in an option block so there were a good run of boys with all 7-9 in everything except a random 4 or 5 somewhere, usually in something like D&T, PE, Music or a modern language they didnt see the point of

RS is a ‘real GCSE’.
And yes, some subjects are harder than others, but none of them are easy.
And even if they were, that would just raise the grade boundaries so it wouldn’t mean more people would get higher grades.

My school (comprehensive) expects KS3 students to do 1hr each night.

I think 1.5 hours in y8 tor academic kids is nothing out of the ordinary. My kids are academic but went to a comp and probably did that sort of amount.

Also remember that different children will spend very varying amounts of time on the same piece of work. DC1 is a very academic perfectionist (got 4 x Astar at A-Level) and probably spent more time than others on homework.