GCSE pass rate when choosing a school

[BurnTheBlackSuit]

Obviously not the only criteria we are looking at! But I'm just interested- what kind of GCSE pass rate would make you worried about choosing a school.

Going on last year's GCSEs- national average for 5 A-C grades was 58.7% and for A-C in English and Maths was 63%.

Would you be worried about a school where 70% got 5 A-C grades? Or 60%? 50%? 40%?

Just want to get a rough idea of what others think...

Trampires comments about when she chose 2 years ago is pretty typical.

There will be lots of parents who wouldn't touch a particular school wi a bargepole - often because it's in a less affluent area and maybe has a bad reputation locally. However, sometimes these schools have great Progress 8 and are doing a great job for the kids they teach. Whether they will be great for an individual kid depends on the kid themselves and if they do well for that type of kid. If your kid is an able child and that school caters fantastically for the lower ability it might not be so good for them....but realistically most schools have some of each ability .....the question is whether there are enough like them for them to get what they need. Some schools do a great job with all abilities. However, many parents feel happier if their kid is in a school where the majority are if a similar ability or background ..... It might not always make a difference to outcomes, but it is how parents often think and in many ways is understandable. I would always look to see the % of high/low/middle entrants to the school to get a sense of it and it would be a key factor in my decision making. I would not want my child to be in a significant minority as either a high achiever, nor as a low achiever.

at people having a 75% cut off.

Great if you have that sort of choice but round here only one school has that sort of pass rate, the others range between 32%_65%.

Yeah I widened my eyes at but at that too Sopassremarkable.

*bit

My DS's school didn't (quite) get 75%. It's a great school, with fab results from all sorts of students. Some of them in the (just over) 25% too...

There are about 10 schools in my town. None of them get near 75%. I would think it unlikely that any school with a genuinely broad intake would.

75% A*-C with English and Maths but negative progress 8 (assuming they have an intake that has a broadly average ability profile) suggests that the school is doing very well for its middling students but probably not so well for the most and least able.

University and degree destinations for me if they have an attached 6th form. I'll be looking for traditional subjects like medicine, law, engineering, the hard sciences etc. Plus entries to the top UK universities like Imperial etc. If not Uni then i wamt to see decent work placements. Also Progress 8 score by each cohorts group and the amount of timetabling for non-core subjects that are mandatory for pupils like yoga but I do value music education and drama (not on term rotation but be integral). For middle cohort progress 8 score at least 0.20+ and positive, not negative values across board.

I mean not like yoga. Nothing against yoga but I'd much rather have drama instead.

The thing with progress 8 is that the two decimal places give an illusion of accuracy that simply isn't there. Look at the confidence interval, the true progress value for the school will (most likely) lie somewhere in that interval but could be either end. A school with a published negative progress 8 score could still actually be performing as expected, or even better.

Sorry-that's rubbish. A school should be judged by the difference it makes to it's pupils.

the measure of a school is the opportunities it offers pupils.

The school has absolutely no control over whether a pupil takes up the opportunity of n education or not.

Nor does it have any control over pupils taking up educational opportunities outside of school, such as private tutors, or even just single bedrooms.

so the way to judge a school is by the exam results of a comprehensive range of pupils, discounting the ones that wasted time and discounting the ones with private tutors and their own bedrooms.

Then, to be statistically valid, you need to look at the long term trend, rather than a one off event,

so

the average of the last 7-8 years results of students that are neither lazy, nor particularly well supported at home,

that is the only measure that has any meaning. Nothing else is valid.

"There are about 10 schools in my town. None of them get near 75%. I would think it unlikely that any school with a genuinely broad intake would."

Isn't this exactly how averages work? Why would a true comp with a representative all ability intake manage a huge increase on the national average?

I would look at the stats for my child's ability cohort. If there is a tiny cohort of high ability but each of those kids gets good progress 8 and sky high results, then you know your high ability child can flourish there. Even though they may not, have a huge impact on the overall A-C stats.

Why would anyone worry about a school with 70% A-C?

I really wonder how much class and snobbery come in to play.

My town has two super selective grammar schools, the remaining schools have averages between 30-low 50s% excepting two schools with averages in the 70s (one UTC with very narrow curriculum). It's a conundrum because on the face of it the town should have good schools, young/affluent/professional population - but it doesn't.

I don't think the problem is the grammars - they have very small local intakes - but that years of terrible schools with horrendous reputations has led to 'middle class flight' to the many local private schools, the three adjacent counties or moving house to the intake area of the 'good school' (which costs as much as private school but I guess you only have to do it once so it works out cheaper if you have more than one child). We can't afford private school or moving so went went out of county. I'm part of the problem but there is no way on earth I would send my children to any of my local schools.

The county we've 'chosen' is truly comprehensive, pretty affluent I guess, rural, completely lacking in any diversity. The bad schools, the ones people shudder about, have averages in the high 50s/60s. Everything else is 70s & the two schools you really want to get you kid into are around high 70-mid 80s (depending on year) with good progress 8 scores (though nothing like our grammars that have scores of above 0.6 )

The other two local counties have very similar results. We live in an area where anyone who can opt for anything but local schools does so - therefore the local schools are never going to improve. If you can't escape I guess you become super involved parent, cross your fingers & hope they get good enough results to go to the grammar for 6th form.

It isn't just bad results - they lack everything that a sharp elbowed parent would look for - no MFLs, limited sciences, crappy 6th form options, no music, very limited sport & extra curriculas, timetables padded out with non subjects or narrowed down to the absolute minimum. Lots of intervention classes but nothing at the top end. They are either snazzy new builds that scream 'we were a failing school' or depressing smelly dumps that scream 'not quite failing but no-one really gives a fuck'. I honestly don't know how they can overcome that. Maybe as house prices become ever more insane people just won't be able to leave!

[Quote 1] There are about 10 schools in my town. None of them get near 75%. I would think it unlikely that any school with a genuinely broad intake would.

[Quote 2] Isn't this exactly how averages work? Why would a true comp with a representative all ability intake manage a huge increase on the national average?

Thanks, that was kind of the point I was trying to make. OP was asking about the level below which you would worry about a school; some posters have mentioned ridiculously high levels - but if you're only looking for schools with very high A*-C what you are really saying is that you will only consider a school with a privileged intake from educated families. Depending on the area you live in this may not be a beast that even exists!

OP was asking about the level below which you would worry about a school
Does this only apply to state schools? Most of the independent schools in my area have a 0% pass rate for English and Maths GCSEs as they do iGCSEs that no longer count in these Tables. That doesn't seem to put people off applying though!
The Progress 8 measure was new and 2016 is the first set of data.
I think I would want to make sure that a school would enter pupils for the GCSE qualifications that work best for my child rather than those which would give the school the best Progress 8 score.

I wasn't chuffed when local HS dipped to about 32% one year. Back to 52% the next year, though. DS may go there. Our county averages about 60% in GCSE league table.

MNers worry so much about whether the school will prepare their darlings for Medicine at Oxbridge. I mainly hope mine won't turn into low life drug dealers.

Cookie: Quite frankly there are comprehensives in some areas that would send one child to Imperial in 10 years. Or maybe never! Some young people are never going to aspire to that or Oxbridge. My relatives think it isn't for the likes of them and take the easy route to the local university, even when they are capable of better. Wanting better is an invested parent activity and schools definitely don't push Oxbridge if they rarely see a child of that calibre. Many teachers think other universities are just as good and so do parents. Therefore it is not a sensible way to judge a school. No parent will get info on bedrooms and the detailed background of parents so this isn't worth considering.

As only Law is the only worthy humanities degree in the world of Cookie, that may cut out a lot of good calibre schools too with unworthy children. Pity all those doing Geography, English, Economics, History, MFL etc whose choices are deemed worthless by choosy parents. The world of science dominates!

No parent paying for an independent school looks at league tables showing 0% in some subjects and doesn't know what that means. That info is totally irrelevant to most!

We've just removed ds from a order gate school with a phenomenal pass rate because they were rubbish with his asd & he couldn't cope with the pressure.

He's moved to a school with about a 58% rate but they have a good mix of high achievers & lower achievers & provide different pathways for them all.

Thank you for all your feedback. These are the three schools we have to choose from

A: 5 GCSEs A-C: 48% ; A-C English and Maths: 58% ; Progress 8: 0.01

B: 5 GCSEs A-C: 65% ; A-C English and Maths: 70% ; Progress 8: 0.16

C: 5 GCSEs A-C: 58% ; A-C English and Maths: 63% ; Progress 8: 0.08

From the stats: B. However this will not tell you whether your child would actually like this school. Will they fit into the ethos? What values does it, and the others have, that you agree or disagree with? Distance from home and friendship groups are often seen as important. High quality sport, music, art, drama and anything else you value - is it on offer? If school B is just not the right one for your child, the stats pale into insignificance. A few poor teachers in key subjects can make all the difference and a change of Head can alter the quality of a school too. Also, any given child is never the average child. If your child is very bright, where would there be more like minded children? So many variations and considerations that are not stats!

Would you be put off school A for its results though? They seem very low, but not sure if I just have high expectations.

The progress of School A suggests that their results are in line with those expected of their intake.

Do you have the results the wrong way round by the way? It's odd for the general A*-C value to be lower than the one with English and maths.
The results of School A (particularly if the 5 A*-C with maths and English is 58% i.e. dead average!) would not put me off in themselves, but I'd want to know way more - what is the intake, is this a "normal" result or a blip, how would my child likely fit into the school?

Just look at the English and Maths score. And it depends on your child. If they are a high flyer, you want a school whose results (and intake) are in line with that. If your child may struggle then look at the progress 8 thing. Added value means nothing if your child is already a good achiever. I'm pleased if a school helps the less able, but a huge focus on this at the expense of more able pupils would be something to watch out for.

MNers worry so much about whether the school will prepare their darlings for Medicine at Oxbridge. I mainly hope mine won't turn into low life drug dealers. That's what they call poverty of expectation!

They seem to be the right way round, but I did take them from different web pages.

The results of the schools are fairly stable over several years.

When checking this, I have found the progress 8 scores split across different attainment levels:

A. Low 0.14, Middle 0.05, High -0.15
B. Low 0.1, Middle 0.17, High 0.16
C. Low 0.14, Middle 0.08, High 0.01

Progress 8 isn't only relevant to low achievers. In fact if you have a high achieving child I'd say it's much more relevant to you than the 5A*-C including Eng and Ma score. If your child is very able then the number of children getting the magic C is really not terribly relevant, if your child is likely to be C/D borderline then it's vital
to know how good the school are at getting kids over that C boundary. The progress 8 for the high attainment band is what will tell you whether the bright kids are getting good results. Are they coming out with As and As or As and Bs? The A-C headline doesn't give you any indication of how those kids have done. A selective school could in theory have 100% A-C and awful progress 8 because kids who are capable of As and A*s end up with Bs and Cs.