New Secondary Schools for Richmond 3

[BayJay]

Hello and welcome to the Mumsnet thread about Richmond Borough Secondary Schools. The discussion started in February 2011 in two parallel locations here and here.

In November 2011 the most active of those two threads, in Mumsnet Local, reached 1000 messages (the maximum allowed) so we continued the conversation here.

Now its May 2012 and that thread has also filled up, so the conversation will continue here ......

From today?s Guardian news blog: 1805: Michael Gove has claimed that abolishing GCSEs will end years of "drift, decline and dumbing down" in England's exam system. In a statement on exam reform, he said that GCSEs were "designed for a different age" and that pupils would start studying for the new qualifications in September 2015, taking the exams for the first time in 2017. His plans were published in full in the Mail on Sunday yesterday and the only significant new fact in the announcement was the name of the new exam, the English baccalaureate certificate. Gove said that changing the exam would enable English pupils to compete with the best in the world.

We plan to call these new qualifications - in core academic subjects - English Baccalaureate Certificates - recognising that they are the academic foundation which is the secure base on which further study, vocational learning or a satisfying apprenticeship can be built. Success in English, maths, the sciences, a humanities subject and a language will mean that the student has the full English Baccalaureate.

Now some will argue that more rigorous qualifications in these subjects will inevitably lead to more students failing. But we believe that fatalism is indicative of a dated mind-set; one that believes in a distribution of abilities so fixed that great teaching can do little to change.

And we know that great teaching is changing lives even as we speak. We have the best generation of teachers and headteachers we have ever had. Their excellence combined with reforms and improvements to education that this Government are making through improved teacher training, greater freedoms for head teachers and the growth of academies and free schools will mean more students will be operating at a higher level.

So even as exams become more rigorous, more students will be equipped to clear this higher bar. Indeed, we are explicitly ambitious for all our children ? and we believe that over time we will catch up with the highest performing nations and a higher proportion of children will clear the bar than now.

Gove adopted a belligerent tone in his statement, accusing Labour of devaluing GCSEs by introducing modules and extending the use of coursework. But, if the Daily Mail report from earlier this summer about his plans was accurate (and no one is suggesting that it was not), Gove has retreated in some respects. The introduction of the new exam has been postponed and at this stage he is only proposing that pupils start studying for the English baccalaureate certificate in English, maths and science from September 2015; other subjects will follow at some unspecified point in the future . .

So if the new exams are going to be even harder than GCSEs, how would Orleans Park cater for the two-thirds of pupils who didn't get the Ebacc and quarter who didn't get 5 GCSEs at A-C in any subjects?

We're talking about an outstanding community school with good academic standards. But it isn't selective. So what is the school going to do with those in danger of failing? And how early will they sort them into streams, sealing their fate before they've even taken an exam? What kind of training will it offer them? (In fact, what does it offer to the quarter who didn't get 5 GCSEs this year? I disagree with MrsGuy that the figure without English and Maths is not so relevant - better that children are learning and achieving something.)

The only schools that can cope with a two-tier exam system are double-sized schools.

All the secondary schools should band their intake .This will enable them to get the kind of results like they do at mossborne etc .a grammer stream would really work in this areas can't believe they haven't done it as they are doing it everywhere else

So that would mean Orleans (35% high attainers) would have to take more from Twickenham Academy's intake (17% high attainers) so both are evened up. Unless you mean one becomes a grammar and the other a 'secondary modern'? I think Kunskapsskolan would have something to say about that.

I'm not very sure what "banding" is but I think it's dividing children completely by perceived ability rather than on a subject by subject basis isn't it? Most of the schools round here seem to put the pupils in sets for some subjects eg. maths, fairly quickly in Year 7, although I'm not clear if they ever do it for subjects like history. I'm not sure that a system that decides the same group of children are the best at everything is a good idea. My friend's son is brilliant at maths and music but can barely bring himself to write a couple of sentences - not sure what band he would end up in! However, I agree that there is still plenty of room for improvement in the results obtained by local schools. The low pass rate in the GCSE English Bacc at present seems to be a lot down to the fact that relatively few children study languages to GCSE. My language teacher friend says this is because they are definitely harder to get higher grades in and a percentage of the higher grades always go to children who are native speakers or have a parent who is.

That's what I always called 'streaming' - it's what I remember from my school, but I think it was too rigid and those in the middle 'stream' just stayed there and mostly sat CSEs rather than O-levels. 'Banding' is a term used for dividing up school places so that there is a fair distribution of mixed ability in each school.

This is the definition of banding in Wandsworth's admissions brochure:

'Banding
Some schools also divide children applying for non-selective places into
ability bands. They offer an equal number of places in each band, based on children?s scores in the Wandsworth Year 6 Test, to make sure that children of all abilities are admitted.'

or Merton for example:

'Harris Academy Merton and Harris Academy Morden operate a banding system to ensure a comprehensive intake and all applicants for these Academies will be required to sit a test'.

As a country we have a real problem with languages, beginning with the numbers of language teachers since Labour made it optional.

I think Richmond on the whole for MFL. I also think setting is essential because there is nothing more tedious for a pupil with a strength in languages to spend time waiting their turn while others struggle to say something simple, and it's also difficult for teachers to get the children to maintain concentration (I'm fairly sure that's one reason why it was made 'optional' - it can be excruciatingly embarassing for a teenage boy to be made to 'role play' a conversation ...).

But an academic exam is really unfair to those who could actually have quite a flair for chatting in restaurants - a worthwhile skill - but can't master writing and spelling, because that's the academic emphasis. In fact, I remember a bilingual student (e.g. English educated but with French parents) at university studying French, whose spelling in French was atrocious. So while I would be the last person to deny the value of a broad education, I think Gove's rigid academic approach is narrow-minded and counter-productive.

whoops, 'I think Richmond on the whole is not bad for MFL

What is 'MFL'? It hasn't been mentioned hitherto I think so using just the abbreviation leaves some of us scratching our heads.

'FL' = 'Foreign Languages' I guess because I've heard of TFL but what is 'M' in this context? 'Mainstream'?

Modern Foreign Languages (as opposed to the classics and Klingon)

Good comment here: 'The case for a massively expensive exam at 16 ? once the school-leaving certificate ? is no longer proven.' Why take these exams at 16? The two Swedish-style academies might even give children a better chance with their 'stage not age' approach, seeing as there doesn't seem to be any alternative but failure for the majority. Just as well we've got sixth forms coming into Richmond's schools!

Thanks for posting GCSE results stats . When do schools publish details like level of progress made , more details on no of A* and A grades . Does anyone know how our state grades compare with those of the independents in Richmond . Is the long held belief that if your kids are average and you can afford fees, you should go private , still valid ?

Jeev: I know nothing about this borough's private schools but I asked a friend of mine who teaches History and Politics at Greenacres, a non-selective school in Banstead, Sutton, which takes a lot of 11+ failures from Surrey, how they compared with Waldegrave:

5 GCSEs A*-C inc English & Maths% 2012(2011/2010/2009/2008)
Waldegrave 80% ( 87 88 80 76 )

He replied: We got 96% on this criterion: www.greenacre.surrey.sch.uk/news/gcse-results

His complaint is that the pupils don't stay for the 6th form because by then they have good enough GCSEs to get into the grammer schools instead.

He further said when I asked him that they have their share of special needs kids, autistic, profoundly deaf, etc.. It's clear that they have no trouble makers, in fact the pupils are nearly all willing, some are very keen and a few are just lazy spoilt kids who are just coasting along. The school provides much more individual attention via a much lower pupil/staff ratio: that is what you pay for and it works.

Jeev, full details (e.g. including Ebacc and progress/cohort information for state schools) will be published in January 2013 on the www.education.gov.uk/ website. Not A/A* results - it would be meaningless and unfair to compare selective and non-selective schools.

Independent schools (and high achieving state schools, either selective ... or girls and/or middle class catchment areas...) sometimes do publicise A/A* results where it suits them but independent schools do not contribute the full set of cohort data to government statistics.

National stats are a good benchmark (e.g. reported by BBC):

69.4% of all entries earned grades A*-C

18.9% of boys' entries achieved either an A or A* this year, compared to 25.6% of girls' entries. There's also an 8% gap between boys and girls getting at least a C grade.

Nearly 50% of single science subject entries were A/A*, but only 15% of English or Maths.

(subject by subject breakdown here)

Chris, that private school does feature in an independent school league table and got 49.81% A/A* results among its girls. Waldegrave, with its larger class sizes, got 51%.

Thanks. Parents do compare their nearby state and independent schools. Its a big decision. The 15 to 20 k a year question is will that investment give me a 80 percent plus chance to get high grades

Jeev

It would be very hard to find a way to compare the state and private schools like for like. Parents have much greater choice of private schools so they have to evolve a distinctive offering. The schools that can be most selective tend to get the students who are best at passing exams so the schools that don't select on ability may actually have fewer pupils capable of getting high grades than a state school. On the other hand they all select economically, and in terms of drawing the line at some of the pupils who would be most challenging in a state school. In some less popular [private schools class sizes are smaller (but some people do not realise that for the main academic subjects in the more popular schools there is little difference unless there is setting, when lower sets are smaller).

muminlondon and I were discussing some posts back that it would be unfair to compare St Catherines to Waldegrave, because it serves a niche of parents who want a particular environment , nurturing, strict, class sizes of around 17 etc for their daughters, , but that it is less likely to get the very able girls capable of getting into more selective schools. They market themselves on value added, according to the Durham Tests, which a lot of schools do at 11, a girl predicted a B at 11 will get an A* at St Cs.

To illustrate the spread

A/A*

LEH 89
HAMPTON 87
KGS 82
Ibstock 63
St Cs 46

Tiffin Girls 90
Tiffin Boys 84 (2011)

Waldegrave 51
Teddington 31

However universities all attempt some sort of leveling, judging results in the context of the school/college, it can be complicated algorithms or gut feel but they do try.

If you compare a selective girls schools, state vs. private, then Tiffin got 90% A/A* results, virtually identical to LEH (89%), and better than Surbiton High School (70%). So if it's purely about exam success, at this level, class size doesn't seem to make any difference.

Putney Park (30% A/A) has an entrance test but does even worse on an A/A measure alone than Gumley House (33% A/A), and of course Waldegrave (51%), with smaller class sizes. But these A/A grades aren't distributed evenly - there are bright children and less bright children in ALL these schools.

Sorry copthall, cross-posted so wasn't disagreeing. It's almost impossible to prove that one's own child would have done better/worse in another school. Unless there's some sort of controlled study of identical twins going to different schools?!

Private schools have distinct advantages in terms of resources - though not necessarily teachers - because they have more money. That's why they appeal. But state schools provide the experience of mixing with others in the community, with all its diversity. Most parents appreciate this at primary level but get scared at secondary level, and there is a concentration of wealthier parents in this borough with lots of private schools around.

muminlondon it was a bad year at LEH, last year was 96% A/A*.

Now I am at the other end of the process, daughter at uni, I feel more strongly than ever that if you are lucky enough to have a choice of school determining where your child will do best is as much a matter of gut feel as comparing league tables and class sizes. It all depends on their personality, the values you have brought them up with, where their particular talents lie, and you and your child will know the best match in terms of the ethos and culture of a school. The problems arise when parents get too caught up in results and league tables. Just because the school does best in the league tables doesn't mean your child will do best at that school.

Agree, some aspects of a school are impossible to describe in statistics and even if you could (drug abuse, anorexia, bullying), (a) private schools have their own weaknesses, (b) it depends on the cohort.

What I would say is that those parents who themselves have gone to a comp are relaxed about comps, and do believe that bright children thrive anywhere, while those with experience only of selective or private schools feel more comfortable with that choice - if they, too, can afford fees. Richmond is a good area for comps compared to others on a lot of measures, but Waldegrave does skew gender balance here and there. RPA and Grey Court have advantages in this respect.

muminlondon It's not exactly the experience of identical twins but I do have friends who have taught in state and private around here, and my daughters know teens who have moved between the two. The biggest difference is that in the state schools, including Waldegrave, teachers tend to face more of a challenge in terms of crowd control. At the private schools most teachers can move much more quickly through the curriculum, and at the more selective ones they can have developed the pupils' skills so that they are already capable of working at A* standard by Year 9. There is more time for consolodation and revision (and in the smaller classes for individual support). The motivated pupils in state schools have to do a lot more of this at home themselves. However as well as the benefits of mixing with a more diverse community there are also benefits in being in a non selective mix of pupils. Sometimes it is better for your child to be above average in a school of average pupils than below average in a school of above average ones. The only other big difference is if you have a child that is very sporty, some of the private schools around here really do have amazing sports facilities and are quazi national training camps.

In other news, woke this morning to the news on the Today programme that "Nick True" (I bet he loved that, and on BBC Radio 4 too) was taking on the government to challenge the relaxation of the planning regulations which he has described as foolish. Then he is reported in the RTT declaring war on another front It all seems a bit macho, perhaps he should read "The Art of War" "There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare"

"What I would say is that those parents who themselves have gone to a comp are relaxed about comps"

I agree with that. I see local friends who have gone to private schools themselves driving themselves into the ground to earn enough to give the same to their own kids. Otherwise they will feel like failures. And of course their own kids may will feel the need to put the same pressure on themselves in the future, continuing the cycle.

I also see that our borough is filling up with smart professional parents who've migrated to London from places where private schooling is much less common (my own home town only had one private school and I didn't know a single person who went there). They've done well at comps themselves and resent the suggestion that they shouldn't expect good comps for their own kids. Logically I'd expect this to be a factor in the increased local demand for state places (along with economy-driven and house-affordability driven demand).

Good point BayJay, and there are also lots of parents from Europe, US, Australia etc. where there is a smaller private sector and/or where private schools are associated with SEN or faith choices where those aren't available in the state sector. So they also have confidence in mixed ability and community schools although can easily get put off by bad hype.

On consolidation, sports, etc., while there is variation in provision and private schools have more money, they don't always have the sports grounds. I am still impressed by things I read about different Richmond schools - fencing club at Grey Court! Latin choir at RPA! And Waldegrave has homework clubs and catch-up maths classes. Schools are improving all the time.