Choose school on personality or results???

[Nena7]

I am going a bit mad!

Should we choose the school which we think suits DS's personality best, which has average results, high percentage of free school meals and above average persistent absence, but with a great ethos and lovely teachers

or

the grammar school which I am sure my son would conform to however not necessarily be super happy at, with outstanding results???

All thoughts welcome!

Go with the school which suits the personality of your child the best.

My girls are opposite in personality and ability. Eldest rolls out of bed into school to do her A levels. Youngest walks a far old way in the morning and has an earlier start, she has SEN and her school is amazing, so supportive.

Both schools get similar exam results.

Obviously the grammar school gets better results because it is taking the cleverer children. Does the grammar school not have lovely teachers too or are they all at the other school? This seems an odd comment. Often a high absence rate is an indication of poor teaching and a poor school and the children vote with their feet! Are you sure the ethos is great?

I tend to think you should choose the school that offers the package best suited to the educational needs of your child but you seem very anti the grammar school which, presumably, other people are desperate to go to. Do either schools have a strong value added figure and does your favoured school do well by the high ability children because this is where your child's progress should be judged. Results are only part of the picture. Also staff might be lovely but can they teach? Have you looked at the statistics available for each school in detail? If you or your DS will not fit in at the grammar, and your DS will not follow rules or conform, as you appear to be saying, then maybe joining a school with high absence rates is the best plan. He will get more opportunities to be non-conformist with their blessing.

Personality. If a child is in a school that doesn't suit their personality then chances are their interest will nose dive. My DD's school has an ok OFSTED report, below average results and above average free school meals and absence. DD is super happy there, the ethos and teachers are great. This year the results level was 56% 5 A - Cs but they also had some students got amazing results - top one being 8A and 2As. It was good to see that it can be done, even in a 'less impressive' school.

I'm generally inclined to fit the school to the child, but some things would give me pause.

Is he a lazy, easily swayed type who would rather like the idea of being a persistent absentee?

How do you know these results were brilliant, mychildrenarebarmy, if you do not know the starting point of these children or the progress they made in the school? How do you know this cohort of children should not have achieved 70% A to C? 56% is what the secondary modern schools get around here where 30% have gone to grammar schools and no school is comprehensive. Our secondary schools also get pupils with bags of As at GCSE but they are not comparable with the grammar schools in many, many ways. I am not happy about this because facilities, quality of leadership and outstanding teachers should be available to all. Sadly it is only the secondary schools that ever are required to improve. Nearly every grammar school is deservedly outstanding.

I am by no means against the grammar school and I am sure they have great and lovely teachers there too. It's a brilliant school. And what I am saying is that although the other school suits his personality better, I am sure he will fit in and do his best at the grammar school - despite it not being a natural fit.

But at what cost is my question I guess? Better to go to the other school, not necessarily do as well academically (but presumably good enough to get in to university) or go to the grammar school where he MIGHT not thrive personally but academically.

Normally I would say find a school where you think your child will fit best, but "above average persistent absence" would have me running away very fast.
The other point I would make (as I said on a similar thread) think about the options if your initial choice turns out to be wrong. Eg would it be easier to move to school A if the grammar school doesn't work out for him, whereas it may be very hard to get a grammar school place later on if school A doesn't work out. Or do you have a third option?

I would look at value added figures here rather than just a-c this will tell you if the grammar school is getting the best out of the children or whether, in fact, they make more progress at the other school, just start from a lower point in KS2.

I would also point out that due to the meaning of the word 'average' half the schools in the country must have above average persistent absence; in any case, IME this much more usually reflects the social situation of the catchment area rather than being a reflection of poor teaching.

My DD went to a school that went into Special Measures when she was there - she got 12 A's at GCSE. I think happy children achieve best.

Balia, thank you! I don't really understand the "value added figures", what does it stand for, how do I interpret them?

The value added figures represent the "value" or progress the children make from their various starting points. At a grammar school you would expect nearly all the children to start in the higher achieving group but the 56% A* to C school will have far more middle and lower achievers. Each group are tracked and the "value" is the progress they make - usually a figure of 1000 if normal progress is achieved. If the progress is not so good the figure is below 1000. This will impinge on results and children get lower grades if expected progress is not maintained.

I completely disagree about high absence rates. There are very many schools in poor areas which are socially disadvantaged that have very good attendance because the teaching is excellent and the curriculum meets the needs of the pupils. High absence rates are very often the sign of poor teaching and, if Ofsted are chasing this up, believe me, the school will no longer feel so cozily tolerant. You need to look at the governments web site for school achievement and look at the comparison data but I suspect comparing these schools is like comparing apples and pears.

I cannot see why a clever child would not thrive at a grammar school. You are effectively sending him to a secondary modern. My local one actually does better than the school you quote. Why would he thrive in a school where the vast majority of children are less bright than him? Will he really achieve his potential, get the best advice on A levels, University choices and meet like minded pupils at the other school? There are bright children at schools in special measures but balia you will never know if your DD could have got some A*s if the school had been outstanding. If it had been an outstanding grammar school, she might have done.

results. Personality incredibly hard to judge.

DD2 choose the former.

Time will tell if she made the right decision.

Shorter days, less homework, mixed company and being able to be top half of top set for most things suits her personality.

Her peer group are lovely, but they are a bit chatty. Only projected GCSE grades next year will really give a clear indication if she's also doing enough work.