How closely do university admissions analyse a school's GCSE record?

[madmummad]

i keep reading that universities will put an applicant's GCSE score in the context of how well the school does generally but does anyone out there know how closely they look? My DC is at a selective school but it isn't super selective. The school does perfectly well at grade A but really struggles in the A category compared to other grammars. I can't see DC getting any more then a couple of A when I look at the results historically - she'd have to be in the top 1 or 2 % of her year group to get them in most subjects which she isn't. Id put her in the top 25% and when i look at the results of other grammars and even bog standard private schools, I see she would probably pick up a string of As with hard work because those schools clearly have the knack of delivering them for half the year group. Would a uni admission tutor look that closely or would they just say "Grammar school should equal a string of A. ". We chose the school cos we love it for its ethos and atmosphere but I'm now panicking that in the current climate I may have done her a disservice!!!

Too true, Gramercy.
I think I'm the only MNer willing to admit I'll be quite happy if DC get 8-9 GCSE passes, never mind A*s.

Just revisited this as I'm pondering whether we should be looking to move DD.
I realise I'm nit-picking to some extent fretting over A's as compared to A's and many MNetters will be rolling their eyes but I've looked at again at the school's historical performance and she would have her work cut out to get A's in many subjects - no way is she going to come in the top 5-10 of 200 kids at her school.

So, from what Penthesileia had to say, am I correct in understanding that with future use of UCAS contextual data she will be compared to other DC's in her school? ie if only 5% are getting A's and 25% get A's and she gets A's she is better off than if we move her to a {gulps} private school where the top 45% of the year group all get A and she gets A*??? Or in any event it will make no difference?

Anyone have any thoughts? Or even understand what I mean??

I understand completely what you mean. For my DC, I would never contemplate moving them for any reason like this if they were happy at the school. Trying to play politics with university requirements is a minefield and probably of very marginal difference at the edges.

My own reading of the introduction of the new data is that it could disadvantage students who are average or below at the highest achieving schools (even if objectively they are higher achievers than the top achievers at a less good school down the road).

Won't it actually help a student such as your DD at a school such as hers?

Anyhow, if she's happy, nothing surely warrants a move?

Thanks Yellowstone. That's what i was trying to work out and I agree it's marginal and I would much rather not move her.

TBH she's reasonably happy where she is but she wanted to go to the private school originally cos lots of her friends were going and it was an option but I wanted to keep the faith with the state system as i thought it would do her good to be in a wider social mix so there's a very large dollop of mum guilt at play. I didn't even think about uni entrance at that stage so didn't look too closely at the GS's A* results so it's only now that I'm becoming slightly neurotic.

You know what it's like, you go along quite happily for 6 months then you suddenly realise that Dc can't speak a word of French or has no notes in their history exercise book and you panic. Plus DD is pathologically lazy so she settles in the middle of whatever environment she is in. I wouldn't fret but she got a top score in 11plus so i know she's bright but she's the kind of DC who will only work as hard as is absolutely demanded of her by the ethos of the place she's in.

She's not the 'super-bright but lazy child genius type' who one knows will be just fine, she's the 'how much can I do without getting in trouble' type, not realising that she's slowly falling behind her true ability! if she was a non-academic grafter or a 'so bright it really doesn't matter' OR at a school that hoiked the majority up by their bootstraps I really wouldn't care. Or if it was like in my day when I got into a top uni with o'level grades that would be decidedly average by today's standards. It's the combination of grade inflation, lazy DC and unambitious school results that's worrying me. And then again, she may just pull her finger out and surprise me at GCSe....or may not!!! Or it may not matter by then because everything will have changed anyway! Who knows.

Okay, I'm boring myself now.

If she sets herself in the middle, then being in a school where 45% get A*s may not help.

If a school sees her working in the middle level and are convinced she could do better, they may try to push to stretch her to her ability. But it does not always work. Will she let herself be pushed?

Does she know what she wants to do when she leaves school - or even what she would like to study at Uni?
It may help to show her what she needs to acheive at GCSE / A'level to get onto her desired course.

She definitely will let herself be pushed but I think it's dawned on me that the school's ambition is to make sure as many DC's as possible get over the C/B threshold at the expense of pushing the A's up to A which in a big state school is fair enough - and indeed this 'failure' to get the ablest up to A was picked up on OFSTED - the school say they are addressing it but it hasn't had much impact over the last few years' sets of results. It's just when you compare the results with 'like' schools ie the other grammars and selective indies DD's school is clearly not succeeding at A* in anything like the numbers as the others and yet its cohort would be very similar i would guess.

I have tried to discuss with her where she wants to go and do after school and she's not sure - fair enough at 13. Don't get me wrong - she's not 'failing' she's doing perfectly well enough to end up at a good uni doing a good course, but if she turned round in year 10 and decided she wanted to do medicine for example, I'd be worried that she wouldn't have a chance to get the GCSE grades.

I know it's down to her to work hard and I'm very prepared to help her all i can - it's just when you look at her selective school's results and see that only 4% scored A at biology GCSE, or only 8% get A at french etc etc when working with a creamed off cohort and the schools down the road are getting 30-40% A*'s with the same kind of kid , then I'm not sure even I can help her get those very top grades with the best will in the world otherwise others DC's with 'pushy parents' would be achieving them already.

Does that make sense? There seems to be a disconnect between the ability of the intake and the acquiring of the very top results which even OFSTED picked up on - but I suppose this only matters if you need a run of A*'s - I'm sure she'll get A's and B's it just seems a shame to be settling for that regardless of what she and we do about it. I know there are bigger things to worry about - I just feel a bit cross with the school for not being able to achieve the same results as the other GS with the same group of kids! And cross with myself for not looking at the minutae before sending her there. And cross with a stupid system where it matters so much!! And cross with myself again for letting it pee me off quite so much - it's not like she's playing truant and going to finish school with no options. I just can't bear complacency and I think the school is maybe being a bit unambitious for the top end of Year 11.