School with 70% pass rate "actually" has 0% - have you seen this?

[roisin]

BBC article here

"In one academy, 70% of pupils got five good GCSEs, but this reduced to zero when equivalents were discounted."

So what they are saying is that EVERY child in that Academy is doing one of these inflated "worth 2, 4, 6" courses, eg COPE; presumably purely to try and manipulate the league tables. But actually NONE of the students are leaving with a handful of decent qualifications?!

I wonder where this school is?

Surely the starting point of a search for a suitable school is looking at nearby schools, talking to parents of current and past pupils, and then contacting the school?

Do people really start with league tables?

"And isn't sometimes a Btech better than an F in GCSE."

If a BTEC isn't always better than failing a GCSE, then they must be utterly useless.

I think the idea that vocational qualifications are for kids who aren't bright enough for academic quals is a problem - both for the respect given to the quals and the weaker pupils who are pushed to do them.

A lot of pupils who struggle academically also struggle at practical subjects.

If vocational qualifications are genuinely as challenging as academic ones, then a lot of pupils will struggle with either.

I did have my doubts tbh, but it was only about 5 hours of afterschool club spread over the term for a small group of children who they thought might otherwise not display their potential at SATs (whether that would be level 2 or level 3).
Clearly it was for the school's benefit rather than hers, since there is no concrete advantage to a six year old in getting a certain level in their KS1 Sats (although Lambeth give out medals for SATs acheivement at an award ceremony, which DD enjoyed). But I like the school and was happy to help them, and a bit of practice in basic comprehension tests, which is all they did, is a solidly useful skill that will do no harm - it's not like spending hours staring at NVR patterns, which would be cramming for the sake of cramming.

But Btechs have a lot of coursework attached. At least that's what I've heard. A careful, steady worker who uses teacher support can do okay there. Whereas GCSEs are increasingly controlled assessment and exam. Gove likes the do or die at the end of two years approach. That's an assessement style that doesn't suit everybody.

I would see all those steps as also important in the search for a school, AThingInYourLife. But as the view on this thread seems to be that all schools which offer vocational qualifications are charlatans, then one really is stuffed.

I don't think schools that offer vocational qualifications are charlatans because they suit some children very well. I'm unimpressed by schools that favour vocational qualifications (rather than offering GCSEs as well) for their high achieving cohort, and/or don't provide their low attaining cohort with the option to do vocational qualifications. I spoke to a friend yesterday whose son is bright but enjoys practical subjects. He is thoroughly enjoying doing STEM GCSEs 4 days a week alongside an engineering qualification at a local college. He has secured work experience with one of the performance car manufacturers, which is something that I doubt he would have secured via his school.

roisin, that 23.7% figure is overall England exam entry figure (17.6% achieving passes in Ebacc subjects). Of state schools it's average 21.6% entry and 15.4% achieving passes.

There is also a breakdown for low/middle/high attainers e.g. only 44% 'high' attainers in state schools (who form 33% as an average proportion) entered for 5 Ebacc subjects. If that top figure doubled it might make the 15% state school pass rate go up by 10-15%. But the league tables could still ignore a large majority with too narrow a focus on Ebacc.

I don't really understand how the equivalents were worked in the past and how that can change so suddenly. I'm wary of politicians making these judgements.

The problem is that schools are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

If they go academic they are not being inclusive.
If they allow vocational subjects they are not bringing out the best in pupils.
if they go ebacc they are not inclusive.
If they don't go ebacc they fail in the league tables.

Where can I find the figures for my dc's schools please ?

Shock horror.

Governments want education to behave more as a market.

Schools react and behave more as a market, altering what they do to play the game with data/league tables.

Government unimpressed.

Why is anyone surprised?

It all depends on your viewpoint ASB. You could rephrase it as:
Labour Government want to boost education statistics, so they achieve it by making it possible for schools to massage data. Remember 'spin'?
Conservative Government want to boost education statistics, so they stop schools from giving misleading impressions by massaging data and ask them to actually educate the children instead. Novel idea, eh?

purits

that assumes that the current government has the best interests of children at heart.

Since 1988 when the NC came in. Education has been nothing but a ping pong ball for consecutive governments to fuck about with.

If they really cared they would remove politics from education.

"ask them to actually educate the children instead."

If only that's what Gove was asking.

If they really cared they would remove politics from education.

And leave it to the NUT? Not on your life!

I never said anything about leave it to the NUT, because they are a politcal body.

Education needs to be free from politics and and teachers need to be allowed to teach.

By all means put safe guards in place, put an body in place to control education.

But changing education policies and ofsted criteria every couple of whatevers is not helping.

I hate the assumption that BTECs are only for thick kids.

For some subjects, a BTEC is a more appropriate qualification no matter WHO takes it. Getting a Distinction or Distinction in some BTECs is just as difficult as getting an A or an A. The course is assessed in a different way, that's all, but in the subject I teach (drama/Performing Arts) a student has to be consistently at a high standard in order to get that grade overall. A student cannot start Yr 10 getting passes for assesments, then work their way up to Distinctions towards the end of Yr 11 and end up with a Distinction overall.

The flip side, of course, is that GCSEs are available in some of the subjects which are often taught as BTECs (child development, engineering, performing arts etc) so I think posters need to think about what exactly they're objecting to. Is a GCSE in Health and Social Care a more valid qualification than a BTEC in Health and Social Care? If so, why?
Oh, and please stop putting an "h" on the end - it's not a Btech.

Hmmm. Why didn't the bold work?

If only Gove understood the implications of what he's talking about at least half of the time, things might feel better.

Not that I'm saying that Labour were great! Children's education should not be a political catfight,.

This is where it could lead if vocational subjects get devalued as a result of too narrow a focus on Ebacc -demotivation and behaviour problems.

evil twins - love your question! I would also be interested if it is the subject or the qualification that is the major objection.

Isn't this going to work out rather embarrassing for Michael Gove and his ambitions to turn as many schools as possible into academies. Not so long ago, he was waxing lyrical about how failing schools have become academies and suddenly have amazing pass rates at GCSE because they're being properly run, rather than run down and suppressed by evil LAs. That's all come a bit unglued, has it not?

Banter, Phoenix Academy (Hammersmith & Fulham) has 0% EBacc - I'm guessing there's a few others out there. A big school by the way, not a tiddly private Steiner!

As I've said before, you have to look at the context of a school which, in this case, is only 14% high attainers coupled with SEN=21.8%, English not first language=63.8% FSM=58.5%.In addition, it looks like there's a high proportion of new refuges with all the difficulties those children will have faced. That's a school that has been left with a cohort of high maintenance kids once London's selective schools have had their pick of the easiest wins. I know nothing about how well or otherwise this school does in comparison with its peers, but surely it deserves to be judged against its real peers rather than the ones that have chosen the easiest cohorts?

You surely can't draw any conclusions about EBac percentage, until you get a group coming through who made their GCSE choices after (not before) the announcement that brought it into being and what it would include.

And, unwelcome though many MNetters might find it, what Gove is showing in this is integrity. He is reducing the chances to skew tables because it is the right thing to do, and is not taking an easy option to demonstrate "improvement" by inflated result comparisons as whoever set up those equivalences did.

Extra classes, or one to one tuition that helps kids improve in certain subjects has worked really well locally.
For some an hour a week in a different set up, concentrating on their areas of concern is as much value as a day in school.
Thankfully DS had this, he benefited, the school got him through the correct level for his age and he is now confident. It's not cramming for an exam, it's being child focused