St Olave's excluding pupils

[jeanne16]

For any school to exclude pupils after Year 12 as their exam results are not good enough is absolutely scandalous. I am pleased to see this is now going to court. I believe this is far more prevalent than people realise and does explain some of the fantastic results these schools achieve. The Guardian Article also refers to a pupil forced to sit exams as an external candidate. That is a very devious way to protect their results.

Parents of academically weak teenagers beg schools to allow them to start A level courses. Schools should stick to what they know is right and say no. A levels are almost impossible now for a student who does not gain a B grade minimum at GCSE and in some subjects students will still really struggle with a B (or a 6 in new money). But parents and students beg, plead and promise hard work, extra effort, etc. Schools do give in. Then when it comes to the end of Y12- usually after warnings all year about likely outcomes at the end of Y12- when the shit hits the fan and they are not allowed to continue, parents get stroppy.
Students who are not able to achieve at least D grades at the end of Y12 are wasting their own and teachers' time. DH has two students who should never have started History - they had Cs in English last year an Cs in History. They have struggled all year, not been motivated and all of their and their parents promises of hard work and support have never materialised. They got Us at AS this summer and have been told they can not continue. Parents are up in arms, students sobbing. The school is doing the right thing as the students will just fail again next year. They have been offered the chance to start a BTEC instead but think it is beneath them. Parents have spoken to Head of Sixth Form, DH who is Deputy Head, the Head and now want to speak to the Chair of Govs.

There is a considerable difference between getting a C (as the children at St Olaves did) and a U at AS level though. Especially if the C was only in one subject.

Not permitting students who fail to obtain a grade to carry on with the same course seems reasonable. They should be, as you describe, given access to other courses.

Not permitting a student who got a C grade to continue smacks of manipulating league tables. Also, less than inspiring teaching if, in a school of immense privilege and engaged parents, they can't support a child to up a grade in one subject.

Students who have got into St Olave's for A Level haven't scraped in on C grades. They've gone into their A Levels with mainly A*-A grades.

A grades do not necessarily translate into an A grade at A level. It is not lawful to remove children based on their attainment. There is a loophole where children have been poor attenders and those who have not worked. That is not being asserted in this case. They have nowhere else to go.

St Olave's takes a lot of very good students from other neighbouring schools, kicks out some of theirs at the end of year 11 and then year 12. I think it is wrong morally. I am not so sure if it is wrong legally as a lot of other schools do it. I taught in a few different grammar schools and they all do it to a certain extend.
St Olave's has always strike me as pretentious. From the way they do their advert for teaching staff to how they hold their celebration evening for external students, who have gotten into their sixth form all strike me as a school who tries too hard when they don't have to.

Year 11 is a natural break and clearly other schools can be found for A levels and other courses. If parents agree, the children go but they cannot be kicked out with an exclusion. Nor can the y12 students. It is about time schools were challenged and parents understood their rights.

My ds has a friend who was asked to leave after the first set of exams in year 12 (before Xmas). I think that's particularly disgusting because there's no way he could have got onto another course that academic year. He ended up getting a job. It's a waste as he got a good set of GCSEs.

He could apply elsewhere and start again in a more supportive environment. BTecs? Apprenticeship with study? No need to have a dead end job.

That's ridiculous. I've seen kids who did badly in the first year 12 mocks go on to study the subject at Oxbridge. In fact this year one of my students went to Cambridge to study and failed her mock at the start of year 13. She just completely fluffed it despite having an A at AS. It happens, no harm was done and she was under a lot of pressure with her UCAS application, aptitude test, interview prep etc. It's totally immoral to throw kids out mid year because of a set of internal test results.

Bubbles you can't get into a BTech course more than halfway through the autumn term. You'll have missed way too much coursework. This will be the case for all college courses. Do you know anything about post 16 education?

tiggytape
Your post has made me think more sympathetically towards these pupils, however one media report says;
According to the school’s sixth form rules and regulations, Year 12 pupils will normally have gained three Bs or higher if they wish to complete their studies in Year 13.

I am a little confused by some reporting:
Surely the boy who was originally offered a GNVQ in health and social care by the headmaster instead of an A level, which he described as commensurate with the boy’s ability must have scored pretty low marks in the Year 12 internal exams, lower than a grade C for that sort of comment from the head - or is this headmaster particularly rude?

Some pupils appear to have been allowed back if they signed an agreement - with the school reserving the right not to enter them for A-level examinations in any subject in which they considered the pupil would not score a B or above.

He offered a GNVQ in social care?? I am amazed such a self proclaimed top school even offers that. Where has his come form? Do GNVQs still exist?

I may be confused as have not read this source material?

The tenor of the school's own material is supremely arrogant, I must say.

Just found it : it's a BTec.

Not the usual course for a grammar school boy, must say.

On another note, I am now clearer that this is based on the school's internal marking, not ASs.

They'd better be damned sure their internal marking is accurate. and watertight....

Apparently the head originally offered the boy a GNVQ but later changed this to a BTEC - perhaps the head was just being crass.
I think there is a mixture of internal exams and AS grades.

My husbands school did this 25 years ago, it's a top N London boys school which gets amazing results. The boys who were predicted 'low' grades were made to take their GCSEs at the local college so it wouldn't impact on the schools results.

www.theguardian.com/education/2017/aug/29/st-olaves-teacher-weak-students-are-treated-as-collateral-damage

It just sounds like quite the most dreadful place. But I'm sure it's great if you are the right fit for the school. Pity those who aren't.

The Head must be being sneeringly dismissive. Am pretty sure he just doesn't know/ doesn't care about' BTec/ GNVQ/ whatever they call these tin pot qualifications' . I can hear him saying it from here.

None of this has been done with the students best interests at heart. BBC may well get them onto a suitable degree course.

BBC would get them into some really good unis . But the school on its website only seems to be interested in those who attend Oxbridge ,and medics.

Yes, Miss Eliza: I know you cannot start a course mid way through a term, but a young person has a lifetime ahead of them. They can start the following year and do not have to accept a dead-end job. That's what I meant. The year away from school gives time to plan an alternative thatg may well be better than being a square peg in a round hole.

It is interesting that some people think BTecs are below grammar school children. In Bucks, some grammar school children are not really grammar school children in the way posters are thinking. They have pushy parents who have had them coached for years and then they end up in the wrong school. They are outstanding schools, but not suitable for the child. A friend's DN passed 2 A levels with a D and an E in one grammar. At least they did not throw him out but staying on to do the A levels was a poor choice. Other children just do not thrive with the pace and greater intensity than they can cope with. What is wrong with them doing Btecs? They usually cannot wait to leave and go elsewhere for 6th form.

Bubbles what do you expect a young person to do from November of one academic year to the next September?! The school has already got its money for the year. Why not let the pupil stay on while he/she looks for a place for next year??!
Of course this situation is very specific to those pupils whose schools don't let them get past the year 12 mocks.

Of course the school should have let him stay. I was saying that in the eventuality of not staying, it is not the end of the world. Working is good but evaluation of a future career would be good too. Then plans can be made regarding how to get the necessary qualifications. I am not condoning anyone being forced out illegally.

I looked at the St Olaves web site - which is dreadful. Old fashioned and lacking in info. The best bit of info available was last years A level results. All those B grades in Maths! Lots of B grades in fact. And C grades and even the odd D grade. How did those children get to stay? Or is this a new head with a new broom? Could not find a 6th form prospectus on the site. It's like a secret society! My old grammar has handbooks, details of subjects, just about everything you could want if you were thinking of going there.