Colyton or Torquay Girls?

[Trambuctious]

If all goes very very well on the exam day this will be the choice we need to make. Has anyone had to decide between these 2 schools, and how did you do so? We've been to the 2 open days, and they came across very differently, but were both tempting!

One would assume that candidates are happy to be in the SW or they would not apply and Devon is not as remote as Cornwall. However Heads in the a North of England would be ok on house prices and less well to do places in the SE. Having seen how Heads of failing schools literally work morning, noon and night and all through the holidays to turn schools around, I don't actually think a high performing grammar is more difficult. As I said in an earlier post the GCSEs at this super selective are only marginally better than a grammar near me that takes about 25 - 30% of the school population and they are not in the 4th quintile for progress in maths either. There is work to be done, but different from turning round a failing school.

I totally agree there is a shortage of talent and obviously no-one has come up to standard but when you get to 3 plus attempts to recruit, one wonders who is out there who would be suitable?

How do you know applicants are applying Milly? Just curious.

Broadchurch said so in a post earlier today. I am assuming this is correct.

Well, parents have been updated throughout the process via parentmail - there have been interviews therefore one presumes there were applicants.

As a parent I am a bit concerned because I prefer certainty to uncertainty. But I rember too that my DCs primary school appointed a head in haste and regretted it at leisure some years ago, and went through over a year of interim heads before the next permanent one was appointed (and he didn't stay long either as it turned out - there were 4 different heads at that school during my kids' time there) - so I suppose on balance getting it right is more important than getting it done quickly. But still. I don't like change so it's not really a very comfortable time for me at the moment and I'll be glad when things are finally resolved.

If I was making the application decision for Y7 now I'd be far more worried about the head situation than I was about the number of A levels my child might take once they got to that stage.

It would make me wonder if the "right" person is ever going to apply though. I assume they are using a Headhunter/Agency so it's even more surprising they haven't got the right new Head yet. They must have trawled through every potential applicant by now - 3 attempts along the road.

Broadchurch sorry- I didn't read your post carefully enough earlier and missed what it was about my post that you considered 'disinformation'- got it now.

I have a few more details but can't be too specific for obvious reasons. It was apparently the staff member who stated that extenuating circumstances such as a mental health problem, supported by a doctor's note, would be needed for a student to be able to drop a subject. No other option was given hence my first post.

The adjective used to describe the meeting was 'scary' rather than 'helpful' so clearly a different experience from your DC and their friends. Maybe the student chose the wrong time to approach the member of staff. However, they were not the only one receiving a similar refusal.

But I accept that your DC's experience was quite different. Maybe the 17 year olds you know are somehow 'better' or at least better able to express themselves in the right way for a favourable decision.

I wonder what the criteria are?

That's not the central issue anyway, but I wanted to clear up any confusion.

Molio what a strange question?!

Oh and it's not the number of A levels that bothers me as much as the three year thing.

Though, personally, I think that 4 A levels is an unnecessary pressure for some students.

It was fine when January modules could spread the load, but that's not an option any more.

crusader it was a reference to the crisis re headship nationally. There's a massive problem with quantity. It's just that Milly is making a lot of assumptions. I wonder if she knows how many times other top schools including grammars have gone out for the top job recently and with what result? It's a wider problem - a lot of very talented people don't want headship. It can be a thankless task and all good heads work their socks off, not just those turning failing schools around. I think the jury would be out on which type of school presented the most challenge as well. Milly and I are clearly on opposite sides of that particular fence. I'd say it was easier to change an E grade into a C then to move from an A to A*. I've no idea which schools use headhunters and which don't although I know that as a general rule headhunters cost an enormous amount of money and aren't in any way a guarantee of success in terms of the right person for a particular job. I've seen headhunting in practice again recently (not in this context, true) and was distinctly underwhelmed. So really my question was a comment: two attempts in the same academic round isn't out of the ordinary and doesn't really send any particular message other than a school in that position appears to be taking some care!

Oh I see, I thought it was a reference to some sort of covert operation!

Mr Evans will be a hard act to follow. The children all seem to like and respect him and he always seems to be at everything, very visible.

He was deputy head to Mr Sindall. Maybe the school should consider permanently appointing an internal candidate this time as well. There must be someone, somewhere keen to do it, surely?

Any mumsnetters fancy a challenge?

You've even underlined the word mental crusader . That really isn't good. No decent senior teacher would use language like that. The implication of what you're posting is that anyone taking only three A levels has a mental health problem - is that really what you intended to say?

No- it's definitely not my implication at all!

But it seems that different students report very different conversations with different outcomes when asking to drop a subject. This was apparently a recent response to a student but as I wasn't at the meeting myself nor do I want to give identifying details I can't comment further.

Perhaps an open door policy on this kind of thing, where students are confident of being listened and responded to in a consistent way would eliminate this kind of variation. Even better, a equitable policy communicated to students and parents.

I underlined the word 'mental' as I mentioned just 'health issue' in my first post but it was apparently a 'mental health issue' which was given as an example of an acceptable extenuating circumstance by a staff member.

I don't think it is appropriate to continue to discuss specifics further. My general point is that the responses by the school seem pretty variable and the proscribed curriculum, as stated by a member of staff, is 4 full A levels.

*prescribed curriculum

I am sure Molio that you do realise that turning schools around is not all about grades! I speak as a former additional governor of a school that had 19% A-C Grades including English and Maths. Yes, it was one of the worst in the country.

The big problem is often the fact that quite a few teachers, and leadership, may well be very poor and will have to be moved on through capability, a difficult and very upsetting process. You tend to have massive problems recruiting good new staff (and never one from a grammar school) and very often the balance between trying to improve poor teaching over a period of time and going with supply staff is difficult to judge and not having enough staff is very common. The morale is usually very, very low in poor schools. The self esteem of the staff and pupils needs a huge amount of input. Frequently teachers are not assessing the pupils sufficiently well to plan their lessons, hence poor progress of many children, (especially of the higher achieving ones). Frequently behaviour and attendance are poor too. Often teachers do not follow the marking policy so feedback to the children is poor. Children are not given the best advice on future education. You often find failing schools do very little in terms of music, drama and competitive sport against other schools (I found that truly shocking) and there is an air of hopelessness. Senior management teams, when they are in place, will be continually monitoring the quality of teaching in the classrooms, going over every shred of evidence when tracking pupil progress, ensuring that the PP children are making as much progress as everyone else, and dealing with far more SEN, behavioural issues, social services cases, exclusions and general disruption, not to mention some vile parents than most MN contributors will ever imagine.

Believe me, you would not find this list at many grammar schools. However I know enough grammar schools to know the job of the Head is not easy in these schools because people have such high expectations and cruising is not good enough. Of course any new head of a high performing school has their work cut out to keep it there, but it is just not the same as turning around a failing school. I live in a selective county where the grammars are nearly all outstanding and the secondary moderns (not that they are now called that) have, over a period of many years, nearly all been in RI or worse, several times! Many of them are now better, but it is the grammars that are continually the best led. Lessons over - sorry if I have preached but it is something I feel very strongly about.

The reference to grades was a metaphor Milly - I wasn't talking about actual grades! In the context it was a very poor choice of metaphor.

I think a lot of those thinking of headship would actually baulk at the idea of taking on a top grammar but be prepared to apply for a job to turn around a failing school. I'm not in any way minimising the difficulty of the latter, I simply think you may not have a good understanding of the former, that's all.

I do. I used to work for an LA and was involved in school HR. I can honestly say we have never had a failing Head at one of our grammar schools. We have had quite a lot at the secondary moderns. We never seem to get a top class Deputy from a grammar applying for the a Headship of a secondary modern. They stay separate.

I do agree that finding the right Head for a grammar school is very difficult, but there seem to be just enough brilliant people putting themselves forward, but it is a struggle. Some grammar schools have appointed former LA Advisers and Deputy Heads from other grammar schools so fewer people are moving into the area to take the jobs. It is rare to get a decent field now, unlike a few years ago when we would see several outstanding candidates. Sometimes I would say the governors are extra choosy which is perhaps a luxury at the moment.

The landscape changes though Milly.

Oops, I can see you've just said that!

I'd prefer choosy to casual at my kids' school :)

For me, it would depend upon what they're being choosy about.

The school must be due an OFSTED soon. The last one took place under the previous head, Barry Sindall, in 2007. There are no children left at the school from that time and many teachers have moved on.

OFSTED may or may not like the everyone-must-take-early-GCSEs thing nowadays so it could be quite a risky prospect for an external candidate who is new to the school to take on at the moment. Particularly if governors are reluctant to countenance change to the system (no idea if that's the case or not, just musing).

If it is still to be the same group of long-serving governors that appointed Paul Evans doing the choosing (I don't know) they may indeed be looking for something very specific.

I hadn't really considered the Head recruitment issue when the OP asked for advice, but it is a something worth thinking about. The trouble is, as parents, we aren't privy to what is going on so it isn't easy to make informed decisions.

It also occurs to me that IF Colyton is out of step with nearly every other grammar school regarding their GCSE programme and 3 year A levels, but the Governors wish to see this retained, it is likely that prospective candidates will not have come from this system, except those already at the school or those who have spent time at the school. This could narrow the options for the Governors considerably because suitable candidates in all other respects may be put off by this policy. Some Governors can want to have a new Head who is indistinct from an outgoing Head to ensure the ethos of the school is maintained and, in the current climate, this ideal candidate might be beyond them. Just musing too by the way!

Milly you're doing so much so-called musing that you may well be miles wide of the mark, especially since on your own admission you have no knowledge of or connection with the school in question. Over the course of my own school career and the school lives of my DC I've seen a number of heads come and go in different schools. Sometimes the result has been very positive, sometimes disastrous. But the ethos of a school is easily capable of being sustained while fundamental policies are changed. Obviously I've no idea what a new head might or might not favour in terms of GCSEs but since one very distinct feature of the school is its three year sixth form no incoming head worth her or his salt would ignore the importance of justifying it in the context of the changed curriculum. As a parent I wouldn't have much confidence in governors who didn't expect a clear vision from a new head about how to take the school forward in a changing world. I'm actually a bit surprised about all this twenty year governor stuff because a number of new parent and new other governors have been elected or appointed recently as is clear from the list on the website, so the idea that dinosaurs are holding sway is pretty odd. Also, a feature of the school which I've always liked is its forward thinking and its ability to anticipate rather than react to change - that ethos isn't usually associated with dead wood. If crusader has so many gripes with the school, I wonder if he or she has written to the HT or Chair expressing concerns? That might be more appropriate than naming names on a public website, or as good as naming names when it comes to the issue of dropping the fourth A2. Milly I do also wonder if you realise the problems with progress measures when you start from a really pretty high base?

As a parent I'm not familiar with how progress is officially measured, Milly seems much better qualified to comment.

I do find it hard to re-frame these results, which are publicly available on the Colyton website and JCQ website. One of the Colyton's stated aims in creating a three year sixth form was to address the introduction of the A level A* grade with stretch and challenge.

The A* grade was introduced at A level in 2010 and Colyton's share of the top grade has steadily declined ever since, against a pretty stable picture nationally.

               2010.    2011.    2012.     2013.        2014

Colyton 34.6% 33.9% 28.4% 23.6% 19.3%

UK average 8.1% 8.2% 7.9% 7.6% 8.2%

This does not look like great progress to me! In this aim at least the three year Sixth form has not been successful, unless there is another way of looking at these figures.

I meant to say that the Colyton data is from the governor's report on the annual accounts part of the website.