Would you consider a private secondary school with only 30% A*/A grades at GCSE and A Level?

[ftangftangolebiscuitbarrel]

DS is only 8, but I am thinking of Year 7 already and am looking at through schools, so that he can join a prep in Year 5 and go up to the main school.

There are a number of options near us. The nearest school's latest published results are (as in the title) 30% A*/A grades for GCSE and again at A level.

DS is bright but lazy. He can show brilliance at NVR, maths and his reading age is nearly 12. However, his Literacy (writing stories, comprehension etc) is poor (only because he's bone idle, let's be honest) and I suspect he coasts along in Humanities.

I'm worried that a school with a lower quota of top grades will allow him to coast along through his external examinations. I think he might do better at an alternative school where the cohort gets 45-50% top grades.

Do I consider the local school where he will have friends dropping in at home, or do I send him further away so that he can reach his full potential? It's a hard one. His current school is academically excellent, but it's 20 miles away and we're feeling a bit isolated, especially as his classmates talk about what they get up to after school / at weekends, but that's because they only live about 5 miles away from each other.

We relocated - he was very popular at his last school, lots of local friends etc, so his isolation isn't because he's socially inept.

So, friends or A grades?

Do I gamble on the local school?

I've booked to look round and I'm sure they'll give me the spiel about how great they are, but at the end of the day, 7 out of 10 of them get B grades or less.

Has anyone else had to make a similar choice?

whats it a-c stat?

That's not a good stat. Look at this table of selective state schools for comparison www.telegraph.co.uk/education/leaguetables/11816591/GCSE-results-2015-state-school-results.html

It is really not that bad!!! Frankly it shows that most brighter children go elsewhere . You also do not say what the added value is. This is the key statistic if the school does not have a large number of bright children. They may receive brilliant teaching to get the A*/A grades and the children may have done extraordinarily well. You cannot just judge on exam results but if you think this is not good enough for your £, you will have to go further afield. Lots of people I know have chosen less high achieving schools because their children simply could not get into a highly competitive school. It does not make the schools bad. It is horses for courses.

Your prep school should advise on the most appropriate school. What schools do boys usually get to from the prep school? Does it have a track record for getting boys into top selective independent schools? You could move to be nearer a better school. Your DS could board. Look around at a few more schools to get a better idea of what is available.

Firstly, I would never call an 8 year old lazy. We all have strengths and talents we find easier to work at, and this is why we choose the jobs we do as adults.

Having said that, your local school results are not great, but that may reflect the cohort.
What are your state secondary like?

What you really want to know is whether any given school will enable your child to achieve his full potential. Value added is useful because it is a measure of how good the teaching is (i.e. how much better than their base-line ability do the kids do?). I would be asking the schools direct questions about how they would motivate a bright-but-coasting youngster, how they monitor progress, how would they know if he wasn't doing as well as he could etc. The answers could be very illuminating.
FWIW DC2 was always a do-the-minimum-to-get-by kid, but suddenly wised up in Yr9 and has been super-conscientious ever since, so being lazy at 8 doesn't necessarily mean they will be lazy for life. Plenty of time to grow a work ethic yet!

No my DC's state school has over 80% admittedly its in the top 20, but if that's what you can get in a state school why would you pay?

What are the A*-C figures?

Yes, A to C figures would be more helpful

It would depend on the individual child and what they needed from a school, and what the local state options were.

There is more to a school than league tables. I have a DC in a selective school where even the low set get As but he has one hour of commute each way and no local friends, and another one in a local school with results like the one you mention in your OP. They are both independent. She is about to start y 6 and wants to stay there for secondary. It is a lovely school and I am inclined to leave her there. The school has the reputation of being plan B for those who fail entrance exams at more selective schools, so it has a mixed intake. They are ecstatic about their 30% A-A*, and have 99% A-C. Pastoral care, sports, music are excellent.

I think you are overthinking it. Your son is 8! Worry about it later on. It is too early to tell what his overall ability is or what will motivate him a few years down the line. Some people are not capable of A grades.

A school with a lot of A grades does not make someone clever, make them work or guarantee success. I had a child at a super selective, it was a very unhappy experience. Frankly she would have got the grades at the 30 per cent A local comp and probably been happier.

You are commiting at most to 2 terms is the first thing I would say. Children can and do move regularly in years 8 and 9.
As others have said the value added scores are really important as they indicate if the pupils are achieving above, on or below their potential.

OP - whether he will reach his full potential depends on at least three factors: 1 his underlying ability,
2 his motivation AND
3 the school's teaching and ability to motivate.

You said that 2 isn't great. We don't know about 3 - that's the value added factor.
What about 1 - do you have any idea of his underlying ability? have you got results of formal tests? You said he's good at NVR but not at comprehension - any standard scores for these?

It depends entirely on the intake.

The average ability of a non selective private school intake is often lower than the corresponding state school.

"The average ability of a non selective private school intake is often lower than the corresponding state school."

Really? I'd love to see some evidence for this.

OP - whether he will reach his full potential depends on at least three factors: 1 his underlying ability,
2 his motivation AND
3 the school's teaching and ability to motivate.

You are right about number 1 - underlying ability is the single biggest indicator of educational outcomes.

you are wrong about 2 and 3 though. Both have an effect, but there are other indicators that have a far bigger influence.

For example, discipline by parents, involvement in school by parents, home environment, peer group, health.

If the parents work hard to support and motivate their children, then small differences in schools will have little effect.

so I would say... it depends if you think his friends will be a positive or a negative influence.

That would be the decider for me

Really? I'd love to see some evidence for this.

Then visit a few private schools!!!

I'm not a great fan of private education, but I do think the schools sometimes get unfairly treated in the league tables.

A significant number of children go there because they are not coping or performing in state schools, and this cohort may well have less academic ability.

I'm not saying its wrong, or they shouldn't go, or schools shouldn't take them, and of course, there are many other reasons children go to private schools.

However, a clever child doing well in a state school is less likely to be moved to private than a less clever child...

A clever child going to private school is more likely to go to a selective one.

So beware, you may very well not be comparing like with like when you just look at the headline results, especially if it is non selective.

"Really? I'd love to see some evidence for this.

Then visit a few private schools!!!"

Oh, righ. So no evidence at all. Fine.

"What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence"

OP - what you really need to look at are the A*-C figures. Anything less than 100% would have me asking questions.

go and look for your self, BertrandRussel.

As someone who works in the private sector and is expected to read and reply to emails in the evenings, at weekend, and on holiday, not having to do any of these things sounds amazing.

That is utter twaddle, and totally meaningless without knowing something about the intake!

How could it have any meaning what so ever?

sorry, wrong quote - I was responding to Betrand Russels pile of nonsense at 11.35

Agree with Charis1, the mumsnet myth that all children at private schools are bright and motivated is not true.

Lots of children end up at non-selective private schools because they are struggling in the state system, for academic, social or whatever reasons.
Look at Prince Harry, seems perfectly ok, but got a B and a D in the two A levels he actually did!

Lots of private schools also test for entrance, and some scholarships are available, but if parents are willing to pay the full whack then most students are admitted.

OP I'd say you are way overthinking this, your son may not even want to do A levels when the time comes!

My DS was bright but coasting at 8.
Different story at 11, when he'd matured a bit.
Also worth considering that some bright children can do better at slightly less academic schools where they can be "big fish" rather than decidedly average in their cohort.

Results on their own tell you nothing except that the school has children who are capable of achieving A/A*s.

Charisma, I wouldn't pay good money to a school that couldn't get the overwhelming majority of kids to Cs at GCSE- would you?

Sorry- charis, not charisma.