Have a look at these KS1 and KS2 results and tell me what they say about the school please

[bytheMoonlight]

In KS2 significant improvements have been made over
the past three years.

At the end of KS2 (Y6) % of pupils achieving L4 or above.
Reading 2008 63% 2009 75% 2010 79%
Writing 2008 43% 2009 38% 2010 47%
Mathematics 2008 55% 2009 65% 2010 77%

At the end of KS1 (Y2) significant improvements have
been made in the percentage of children achieving 2A which is above national
average expectations

Reading 29% with 20% at level 3
Writing 13%
Mathematics 39%
EYFS Benchmark 2008 33% 2009 43% 2010 40%

What do you think?

you need to look at value added - as results will depend massively on intake - ie where children start

They start below average in this area.

I can't see value added on the ofsted?

Is it a problem that most will start below average but dd1 will one of the ones that isn't below?

Contextual Value Added

KS1-2 CVA Score
100.5
Lower Limit of CVA Confidence interval
99.9
Upper Limit of CVA Confidence interval
101.0
Coverage indicator - % of pupils at the end of KS2 included in CVA calculation
96%

you need to look at the league tables - on line in the newspapers I think

you can have schools which have v good intake but don't do much with them - eg just coasting - but will look like good results
schools with poor intake which do a lot with them - may be very good for the higher level students or not - you would need visit and possible talk to parents at the school to get a feel for that

I have no idea what that means.

As quick background history before I go to work:

This is a school in a very deprived area, it achieved outstanding throughout it's latest ofsted report. Except for one bit where it says:

The standards¹ reached by learners 3

The juniors is very poor however this has now been combined with the infant and nursery to become a primary and has been taken over by the same headteacher that been acheiving great results in the infants.

However, the fact remains it is what some would call a 'rough' school.

Opinions?

I am arranging a visit with them.

Sorry An0therName, I didn't mean I had no idea what you said - I meant I had no idea what the stats re. CVA meant in my previous post.

Rushing now as I will be late for work

One thing I would be asking is what is the size of the cohort? In a small cohort those variations would be accounted for by 1 or 2 children.

100.5 CVA isn't fantastic really... what cameron would term 'a coasting school' this week

How many children are achieving L5?

Yes, I would also find out more about the level 5s. I think it would be unusual for a child from a supportive home and no particular difficulties, not to achieve Level 4s. Would it be possible to visit the school and find out how the more able children are doing?

I am visiting so can ask.

So so so so annoyed with myself right now. We bought this house as a step to getting a house in a better area when we had children. But fell for dd1 before we had even moved in and now we're stuck with the primary schools in this area.

I could cry thinking about our choices.

DD currently attends the local catholic school nursery. But no guarantee she will get in there. And it's not a fantastic school anyway. There are no fantastic schools in our area is the hard truth. We have three to choose from. The rest are way out of catchment -oh to just live one mile away in the right direction.

All three school's are used to dealing with children that go in below average. The teachers do not expect her to go in with much. Even at the nursery she is at now they are full of praise for how polite and how well she listens - but I know, hand on heart, this isn't a reflection of dd, this is a reflection of the children they are used to teaching. In the sort of school I would love dd to attend this things would not even stand out. Does that make sense?

How on earth do I pick? The choices are

Really bad reputation, really rough area school with outstanding ofsted. Major chance for improvement.
Ok reputation, less than impressive ofsted.
Catholic school. Ok ofsted. Ok reputation.

So stressed by it all.

my DDs school used to have a really poor reputation locally

new head came in and ripped it appart and started again (well not literally but you get my drift)

it took a long time for the positive results to hit Y6 but the children who started in reception with this head are doing fantastically and are this year's current year 6

my oldest DD is in year 5 and there are 4 children already achieving NC level 5 in maths, 3 of them in English -this was previously unheard of

there is a massive amount to be said for a progressive head, and if when you have visited you get a good feel for the school then I would go for it

For those with less impressive ofsted you can ask what changes have been made since last ofsted report. Dd1 school had ofsted a few months after new head took over, and have been quite a few positive changes which weren't all in place. Also a two years out of date ofsted might have raised some questions which have been mainly addressed in the intervening time. Also as a previous poster said small intakes play havoc with sats. In a 30 class intake each child accounts for about 3 percent, so 3 children performing beloow expectation at ks2 can be 10 percent. Also even value added has problems. In our school some children's parents choose to move them on to prep schools, the children coming in are oftent those either at lower achieving schools or one was excluded, the chances are that these children are not likely to achieve at ks2 the same as the child they replaced who got scolarship to private school. Value added is based on class average not following individual child. Basically you can't trust the stats in small schools or those with fluctuation populations. Go and visit and think where your child will be happiest, go to christmas fairs too if can.

Do also look at schools further away, there maybe a chance she could get a place, they may introduce a bulge class or just everyone discount it so get lower than expected applications.
Decide out of your local schools which is the least bad (and some schools which mainly deal with deprived children, do amazingly with gifted ones too).

I have four choices. How many of these should I allocate to school further away?

I think it depends how far away you are from the local schools and how popular they are in the area. Even if you don't like a school, lots of others might. We pass people who choose to go to the lower achieving school which they like because of family ties, culture (our school is seen as snobby); etc. I would put at least 2 local schools down. Also look at village schools which might have larger geographical catchment, and some people might not think of going beyond town they live in. Also remember children can and do move schools, I think up to yr 1 they probably don't even remember. You can put her name on a waiting list for a different school and you might get lucky in reception or yr 1.

Have not read the thread, so just in reply to OP:
KS2: Sounds very average but a bit weak on writing.
KS1: improving sharply, so suggests they are trying hard to pull their bootstraps up and improve those KS2 results.
May have just had a particularly weak KS2 cohort one year, for writing. I have seen waves like that go thru local schools.

My kids go to a very average primary, btw; they have excelled there.
Off to see what everybody else though, now, (shudder with trepidation).

Which school feels best when you walk around it?
I am not completely clear why you describe the Outstanding-report school as "rough".

I would say there an error somewhere in the figures you have looked up.

The ACTUAL performance figures are obviously good (except writing!!)

There is no way that a school with a disadvantaged catchment (ie relatively low level entry standards when assessed) will have the performance figures you give in OP whilst having a VALUE ADDED of about 1oo.

Value added 100 means that overall, pupils have increased in ability between entry and Yr 6 sats at the exact expected average rate.

No way I would say are the performance figs you give the average expected rate for disadvantaged catchment.

So either, the value added score or the y6 performance figs are skewed some how, or the so say disadvantaged catchment actually perform well on entry and are therefor enot disadvantaged in academic terms at all.

You do know that it's commonly understood that able children will succeed anywhere, even in a school thats fairly rubbish?

I didnt' think a school could get an Outstanding with KS2 scores that "low" either...? Thought they had to be much higher than that.

The ofsted was done in 2009 and is graded one - so outstanding. There isn't a more recent ofsted. It says next to the report 'closed' as the school is now merging into a primary rather than separate infants and juniors. I think it's applying for academy status.

The headteacher of the infants and nursery has now taken control of the juniors as well.

The stats above I have c&p directly from the school's website so they are the most recent info I have.

It can be an outstanding school, but they can't make purses out of sows ears.
I think the results you have quoted tell you an awful lot about the intake your child i going to be a part of.

My gut feeling would be to tell you to run far and run fast!!

Actually that's what I've wrong - not explained it properly.

KS2 had a different ofsted because it's the juniors. The juniors scored 3. But I'm not too concerned about that as the head has left and the infant head has taken over so should improve things for ks2.