Why are comprehensive schools allowed to have selective Sixth Forms?

[Reincarnatedpig]

This is really bugging me. DD is in year 10 at a comprehensive school with a banded admission procedure (all applicants take a test and places are awarded equally to each of the four ability bands). However the Sixth Form is a different story. They are now asking for all grades at GCSE to be B or above with A's in the proposed A level subjects. DD is dyslexic, she has sat 3 GCSEs so far with B's in all 3. She would like to do English A level but only got a B overall in English Language which she sat in Nov, she cannot resit (she will sit Lit in year 11). She got A/A* in the coursework but only a C in the exam. She is bright and in the top stream.

I just cannot understand why a comp is allowed to do this. They only offer A levels anyway. Surely someone with a B is capable of getting a reasonable grade at English A level. She wants to do fine art at college so grades are not that important overall but she would have liked to have stayed at her current school with her friends and there are no good alternatives.

Sixth Forms are not so much about being in a particular school: it's about whether you can cope with that particular subject.

It's a big step up to A-levels and in some subjects it is probably perfectly reasonable to say that you are unlikely to cope well with the A-level unless you achieved a certain standard at GCSE.

Many colleges won't even take maths students who didn't get an A- the reason being that the work is hard even for straight A students. Dd and her friends who got A/A*s in English literature are finding the AS course very heavy going.

But if your dd does feel confident that she could cope, how about shopping around for different colleges who may have different views? This is a good time for moving on and making new friends.

There are no good alternatives around here, hence the problem.

I have done A level English Lit and my elder DD is doing it now so I am aware of the standard. I think DD2 is very able but due to dyslexia her performance in exams is a bit iffy. She also sat 18 months early.

I agree in respect of maths but I think refusing A level courses to anyone with less than an A is discriminatory in comprehensive schools.

I think on the basis she took it early and is Dyslexic I would be stating all this to the school in writing.

DD also year 10 and Dyslexic wants to take A levels in art based subjects(Photography,Textiles Media Studies and resit English) at local 6th form but needs academic subjects in B'S to get in.
She is qualified and has set up her own business in Photography/Photoshop which is giving her a great portfolio and they have agreed verbally that they will consider that. Which I have emailed in writing to confirm and received no response....which I take as confirmation .
Should this fail I will consult a solicitor on the grounds of discrimination-me stroppy? Oh yes (smile)

The reason they can select is because education is non-statutory by that age (the recent change to require continuation in training isn't a straight raising of the school leaving age, so doesn't affect this).

stayathomegardener, your dd sounds incredibly able and motivated! Yes getting stroppy sounds like a good idea!

I think DD's school want to up their position in the league tables hence the "selective" sixth form. They have also hinted that due to the popularity of the school, they may restrict entry to those with a minimum number of A's overall. I think it is outrageous that they can kick out the majority of their students out post GCSE. It is also the only non religious school in the area, so no chance of getting into another school and there are no good local colleges.

The Head of the local catholic high school boasts that he gets better results at 6th form than Eton and other famous public schools.

Parents all clap and whoop and pat themselves on the back.

Most of them don't realise that he only allows students with A or better at GCSE to do A Levels there and Eton is a little less selective.

I'll be interested to see whether comps where there is no other local provision will be allowed to be generally selective once the leaving age rises to 18 next year

individual colleges will but in an area there has to be provision for everybody surely

Interesting. When the school leaving age was 16 it was a different thing, but now I would like to see how they justify it.

once the leaving age rises to 18 next year

The leaving age is not changing. There is a requirement for young people to receive some form of education or training but the relevant law (the Education and Skills Act 2008) is clear that the school leaving age will remain at 16.

prh
indeed, they will leave school, but they will have to be in accredited training

here in Hampshire the more "vocational" colleges are expanding their courses for those who will work three days and study two
the academic colleges are pretty much unaffected

in school 6th form areas, colleges will have to pick up all of the slack but I wonder whether schools will be forced to loosen criteria for some subjects because of the changing requirements

What are your DD's A-level choices? Apart from English.

My DD is in a similar position being a dyslexic and requiring a B in English for her preferred sixth form.

This seems very harsh she's a scientist, she doesn't want to do English at A'level or any essay based subject.

Her group did the two main CAs very early in Y10 (and DD1 has matured a lot since she was 14) and they spent time on speaking and listening that Gove has thrown in the bin .

While I understand schools/collages being desperate to maintain their places in the league tables, I can't but wish they took individual DCs circumstances into account.

DD1 is lucky, her own school sixth form will take a C for English, so she has a fall back, but it's frustrating that they 'win' back a good scientist (who the head of science has treated appallingly) by not really pushing English CA marks.

Why do schools enter pupils who have learning difficulties early for exams and then restrict their future potential because they perform less well than expected? Children need all the teaching they can get. It disadvantages them if they do not get it. Also English A level is normally literature, not language. Therefor how she performs in English Lit should be the important result.

A 'B' grade at GCSE is sometimes not good enough for the rigors of A level and many pupils these days do get As at GCSE in their A level subjects. I am surprised that a comprehensive does not make alternative courses available for those who are not academic enough for A levels. Not a very comprehensive education in my view.

The school traditionally entered all pupils for English and maths in November of year 10 so they could have several goes. They abruptly pulled maths altogether and let only DD's class take English due to only the first attempt counting in league tables. This also meant the speaking and listening components the other kids had done went to waste.

DD was predicted an A as she had A/A* for the coursework. She tends to get very muddled and nervous in exams despite extra time. She missed the A by one mark. The paper has gone back for remarking. There is no guarantee she will get A in English Lit either.

She is also interested in psychology and wanted to do that but the school want the English A for that as well. She will definitely do Art and possibly drama - they have to take 4A2s. Thinking about it perhaps the school is not the best choice but other local schools not available to us and the local colleges seem to be full of people who don't really want to be there.

My DC's school has a fully comprehensive sixth form (although it does have a behavioral requirement).

But it restricts A levels to A/B GCSE candidates, those not getting them either to BTECs or GCSE resits.

When I went to Sixth Form in 1986 (gulp!) I had to have at least 6 "O" levels, grade C or above to get in. It's about being able to cope - I don't think league tables existed then.

If a sixth form only offers A levels, it needs to be selective. A levels are not suitable for all students and never have been. The school or college would not be doing kids a favour to let them start A levels when they don't have a chance of success.
Uni courses are increasingly competitive. Good grades at A level are needed to get onto the best courses at the best places. With the high level of debt incurred and high graduate unemployment, more people are thinking carefully about if Uni is the best option for them. Spending 2 years to achieve very low grades or fail is really not a good use of time and schools know that.
Schools which offer a range of vocational or other courses may be more open access, but there are often some requirements for these courses too.
It is not unusual these days to require an A at GCSE in the subject you want to do at A level. People with Bs may be let onto some courses, but statistically their chances are not good. With a C at GCSE in that subject, you really have no real chance of a good grade.
It seems harsh, but people need to think really carefully about if A levels are the right choice for their child and certainly about their subject choice. Schools are interested in league tables, but also the interests of their kids and pushing to start with grades below the requirement isn't usually doing kids a favour.

Should have added that those with recognised SEN get extra time in exams etc and may have some allowances made for them in termsnof entry requirements. However they to ably had extra time at GCSE too, so in that sense their GCSEs have been boosted up to create a level playing field.
A levels are becoming more exam focused and less coursework focused. This doesn't suit everyone and people who panic in GCSEs may do it in A levels too. It's just the academic nature of A levels that means an academic approach, which doesn't suit everyone.

Good luck Op in finding the right place and course for your daughter.

I do not agree that extra time levels the playing field, it makes no difference to DD quite frankly. Perhaps more practice in exam technique might.

If she had got one mark more she would be eligible to do her A level at school. If she gets A/A* in coursework she is capable of doing A level. She wants to do it, she loves English. I know she would make a good contribution to her class and add value in that respect.

She intends to apply for fine art in HE so her A level grades won't make a great deal of difference.

I have an elder child with all A/A at GCSE and predicted all A at A2. IMO the children are equally bright - DD2 perhaps more so.

No extra time does not level the playing field, it's a small and for my DD1 useful apology for the 'unfairness' she has suffered since reception.

If DD1 lived in a world where exams were aural she'd get A* across the board.

If she lived in a country with a more phonetic language or if her schools had decent dyslexia support she'd way better.

Extra time is a feeble apology for the shocking amount of effort it takes to get dyslexia recognised and appalling lack of help available.

It's a tiny recognition of the huge waste of talent that results from one size fits all written exams being the only way to measure a persons intelligence and employability.

DD wants to be a research scientist to work in a field where any written piece of work she does will be carefully crafted on a computer, the technical terms looked up if she's forgotten how to spell them.

No one will care about her B/C in English they will care that she has a quick interested brain, a hardworking nature and a deep love of working out how the world works.

How about re entering your dd for the exam as a private candidate in the summer? Her CA would still count towards the final grade (though not sp and li). If she improved her result to an A, would school accept that? If it's the school I think it is, the recentlyish opened church/LA academy down the road has a good 6th form from what I hear and doesn't require church attendance.

I'm sure you are right that the extra time doesn't totally level the playing field. It is an attempt to go in that direction.

The sad reality is that we live in a country where exams are the key way of assessing people. Those who struggle in an exam environment don't perform so well. GCSE exams are a good predictor of A level success which is why schools use the, as entry requirements. The system might be wrong, but universities and employers use those exam based grades as a basis for judgement, so we do have to work within the system. More children are probably suited to undertake the study required and understand the material than are able to perform in the exam....but that is the system, and we are moving closer to it, with the reduction in coursework.
If you are sure A level English right for your daughter and the exam wouldn't be a big issue for her, then the idea up thread of re sitting privatelty the GCSE is a good one. If she was so close last time, then she has a good chance of getting the grade. Good luck.
There will always be borderline cases, but schools need entry requirements in place so that broadly the right people do the right courses. There are always grey areas and it sounds like your daughter might me one. Best of luck.

Blame the League Tables. All the reasons you might have picked that school are now being used to exclude some children.

That is the reality of a results driven culture.

Agrees with everything Chocolate Wombat has said. Unfortunately getting extra time at school does help the person with dyslexia to pass but if they end up in an admin job or even in teaching they will struggle with paperwork and whilst adjustments will be made to support them they will still be expected to get the same amount of work done as their colleagues. It's a tricky one all round.