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?

If the ethos and behaviour is good at a non- grammar school in a GS area, I would say that some children will do well by being one of the best in the non- grammar school, rather than the one who struggles in an academic GS.

I wouldn’t be concerned about what other children’s prospects are. So many factors as to why children who were “bright” enough to be accepted into a grammar school won’t or can’t achieve. Some of them simply aren’t that “bright”, some have peaked at 11.
My child was at a comp (and now at the attached sixth form). The comps results include a huge number of children whose best result was to get 2 GCSEs. My child got good but not perfect all 9s at GCSE including the highest mark in our county in a subject she hasn’t chosen for a-level. That’s down to being in top sets and good teaching. So it’s more complex than it first seems.
The most productive thing is to focus on supporting your child and helping them achieve and maintain balance.

Our eldest went to grammar school. Did state rec-2 and then private 3-6 as we couldn't get into the local state. I tutored him a bit for 11+
Teaching was pretty good for the highest and lowest sets and very mediocre for the others and I ended up either getting tutors or teaching him myself for most subjects. They were also not great for his SEN, which was pretty straight forward and he ended up getting extra time in a load of subjects he didn't need extra time in and not in the one he did need extra time in.
He did well for A level, but their grade predictions were completely wrong for two of the subjects - predicted A in CS and got a B and B in history and got a A.

Anyway - both out others went private secondary - DS2 a academic one and DD and less academic one and they are far better

jetlag92 DS1 is at independent school and whilst the teaching is mostly good, management is dire and there have been so many cockups in the 3 years we have been there we couldn't face sending a second child or spending more money there.

Ironically the largely non selective co-ed indie gets similar results to the boys grammar school which also baffles me ...

We are in Yorkshire and I have a daughter at a selective grammar school in Year 9. She's doing really well, excelling at STEM subjects though probably more like top end of average for English, which is probably not really surprising as husband and I both have jobs in STEM fields. She works really hard and we are happy. I think a lot of schools outside of the super selective areas encounter this, she always says there are some very average kids in her class, clearly tutored extensively to pass and then it stops and they don't excel, maybe don't even really keep up as the pace is faster than in a non-selective school and they probably get a bit demotivated. The data shows her school have 90% of kids getting Grade 5 and above in Maths and English at GCSE, but from an outsider perspective you kind of expect that to be 100%.

My son is yr8 at the local comprehensive and GCSEs are not even on the radar yet. Homework is much less too by the sounds of things. Sparks Maths and Reading weekly plus homework once every two weeks for Humanities Languages and Science. Plus bits of revision ahead of any assessments. I have an older son who has now left the same school. His GCSE grades were good enough for a levels at a local sixth form college but realistically I do think they were lower than his potential had he had the opportunity of a private or grammar education. Private not an option financially for us and grammar wasn't an option for us either as the local offerings are single sex and co-ed was important to us.

Both mine attended highly academic grammar schools, they sat exams to get and had interviews. We didn’t tutor either of them before or during. The way I looked at it was if they couldn’t get in on their own then that’s not the school for them. Many of their peers were tutored within an inch of their lives to get in and then once in, the tutoring stopped and they floundered. Many struggled to keep up (grammar schools are notorious for not moving quickly through content as assuming the majority are highly academic!) and quite a few dropped out. I don’t think this was fair on the kids as the parents basically set them up to fail in a highly competitive environment and the effect on their self esteem would have been detrimental and possibly lifelong. A lot of parents simply wanted bragging rights to say oh yes, my child got in to the (highly selective academically) grammar school …but then once in, they didn’t care if their child could keep up and thrive.

Both mine went to highly academic grammar schools and are now at university. Neither were ever tutored as I figured if they couldn’t get through the entrance exams and interviews, it wasn’t the school for them. Just a word of caution, many of their peers were tutored to get in and then left to fend for themselves once accepted….many struggled and dropped out as couldn’t keep up. All grammar schools are different but the ones mine attended were very academic and consistently ranked in the top ten in the country. They did have a couple of hours homework every evening, workload was heavy and assessments/tests were very common. It suits some kids who thrive in these environments but not all. Both mine achieved all 9s in 11 GCSEs and A*s in their A levels (as did most of their peers) and also competed nationally in their chosen sports during this time. It definitely wasn’t for the faint hearted but both mine loved it and are thriving now at university.

Out of interest what marks a grammar as super selective?

Super selectives often have a limited or no catchment so the test is open to all. This can ramp up the competition as children apply from far and wide. The scores can be very high so they take the top 3-5% of scorers irrespective of address. It’s not uncommon in the SS London schools for people to move into the area from other parts of the country once they know their children have secured places.

The super selectives like QE boys, Wilson’s, St Olaves etc are the top performing state schools in the country. Academically, they will out perform or match some of the top independent schools and still have good enough extra curricular, sports, music etc. Outcomes to Oxbridge, Imperial and RG universities are very similar to some of the top independent schools and it’s all totally free. This is why they are so sought after.

Yes I get the impression some are perhaps more average but have been highly tutored and I guess parents take their foot off the pedal once they are in.

It's a top 100 school rather than top 10 so i would expect him to be in top third or so. He's good at stem and mfl but less enthusiastic at English!

For him academically the GS has been really good. He was coasting and bored at his prep school.

A friend of mine has her kids tutored for years to get into their local gs and the girl has really flown but it's been hard work for the boy and she admits in hindsight perhaps he was not really up to it. As ever it's horses for courses.

Well I know a child who will likely fail GCSEs very soon and attends a grammar. it is getting too close to exams to turn around results.

A school can do as much as they can but if say another parent is disparaging and the child will not study it is very difficult.

I also have a child is at a grammar and doing really well - but that is in part because he is very motivated and has also seen the failing boy with the shit home life and is therefore very motivated to do well.

But I also think most parents tutor or provide tutors in grammars and private schools. I would not today try get in one without a tutor or someone at home really checking as the number of applications to grammars has gone up so much with private fees. I don't think it correlates that if you are clever you cruise through grammars. My son failed one grammar test and passed another just and he is flying. I stupidly did not tutor! I would not make that mistake as they don't teach the tests and say what you want ofcourse the tests can be tutored for.

Also grammars might not always have good staffing like many state schools so I think the homework is important. It is intense but also if say for GCSE uesrs they have staff shortages and large classes then it really makes it clear it is down to hard work.

Every child and set up is different.

In my opinion grammars can be powerful because of the aspirations they set. They don't put limits on children. Also they are diverse too. Or the one my child goes to is.

Super-selective is where they have 120 places (or whatever) and those places go to the top 120 scores regardless of where the candidate lives.

Selective grammars tend to have a pass mark and then places are allocated based on distance to the 120 kids who passed and who live closest. So you could have 500 who 'pass' but the 120 with the highest scores live further away than the 120 with the lowest scores.

Thanks. Sounds like Gloucestershire grammars are super selective then.

Also for example in London schools anyway there are enough kids who really want to do well. Whatever the school.

Regarding homework there is always homework and for my child to do well must do at least 1.5 hours a night and more at weekends and more I think during when there are tests and he does really fly through it.

The pace of language work is to me very full on but he enjoys it.

Yes super selective are schools like st olaves or Wilson's.

Off topic but I don’t agree at all with the super selective grammars. The one my DC go to (we are local) has boys travelling from very long distances which compounded with the nearby girls grammar, which I believe is the same, means the traffic around the area at pick up is completely bonkers. It also means very tired children and sometimes no local friends.

The local boys grammar I refer to is thankfully consulting on having a (wide) catchment area. As we’re in an urban area, it will still mean there is ample opportunity for many children across the city.

I went to both a comprehensive school (y7) and then to a girls grammar school in y8.

Comprehensive school - streamed in y7 into an ‘advanced English’ and ‘advanced maths’ group. Huge confidence boost. Some really amazing teachers who were so passionate about their jobs. School were mostly on top of behaviour although there were some children skipping lessons, kids smoking behind bike sheds etc. School buses were an eye opener!!! Overall loved my time there and threw myself into all the clubs, drama, talent shows etc.

Grammar school - top set maths but next to bottom set English which made me feel a bit despondent. Because I’d moved from Cheshire, the absolutely looked down on me due to my northern accent when I first got there. There were a couple of amazing teachers (biology, geography really fab) but also a lot of really mediocre ones. Many teachers had been there a long time and very comfortable there - wouldn’t want to move to deal with behaviour elsewhere. Had a couple of really terrible teachers too - still got results because the children were more self motivated. I would have achieved anywhere I went.

My own daughter went to a school that was trickier to get into (some element of selective but not a grammar). She’s now moved to a non selective school in quite a rough area and doing much much better because she’s been given more of a confidence boost and the pastoral care there is so much better. She has some amazing passionate teachers there too.

Grammar school doesn’t mean better quality teaching, it just mean that you’re surrounded by more able children and generally don’t have as much SEND and behaviour issues.

I would disagree.

Super selectives are arguably a better option. They have far less effect on other local schools as they're taking perhaps top 5% kids from a much wider area rather than just creaming off the top 20%.

Far less likely to end up with the over tutored or 'sneaking in by skin of teeth' which probably means fewer unhappy children needed constant help to keep up.

Travel to school is a different issue - where I live, the nearest secondary is almost an hour by public transport.

It’s not as academic as many other subject, which makes it easier to get a higher grade.

It absolutely is academic - just as much so as other subjects.
It involves critical thinking, analysis, evaluation and a huge amount of knowledge of content.
It’s also one of the harder exams from a time management perspective - around 1 minute per mark, which is significantly less time than comparable subjects such as History.

Boys can be taking the 11+ when they are only just 10. Observing my DC’s friends the boys are so immature at that age compared to many girls and I know several boys who were really academically not focussed, not getting it, etc in Yr 5, and up to Yr 8.

Then did REALLY well. Suddenly grew up, blossomed and flourished.

My own, always identified as bright, summer born boy might well have not got into grammar had we tried. He was just too young, his brain had had enough by 3.30 on a school day, no way would he have done the practice books etc.

By end of Yr 7, storming ahead.

Both these boys got top GCSE and A levels and excellent degrees at competitive Unis.

Both at a London comprehensive. Not leafy.

Segregating kids into separate buildings based on a test on one day when they are 10 makes no sense to me , and I have no doubt that as many don’t fulfill the promise shown on test day as fail to get into grammar even though they end up as high achievers.

followspot you are arguing the opposite.. I'm asking why some who do pass the 11+ don't get high GCSEs and your saying some aren't ready for the exam at 20..?

10 sorry!

No, I’m arguing that a test when you are 10 is an unreliable indicator. Whether eventual high fliers are missed or those who do well on the day but who level out towards average as they get older get through.

So there will be average / less impressive GCSE performers at grammar because some who showed promise aged 10 then slowed progress or were overtaken by later developers, or couldn’t keep up to the standard of the hothouse tutoring that got them through, or factors of attitude, laziness, adverse circumstances etc.