Really concerned about a schools performance - is it worth the risk?

[CabbageOrGreenbeansHmm]

I really like a certain secondary school. It was up there as number 1. I had a really good feeling about it. I like the feel of the place, the curriculum, the positiveness of the teachers and the fact it’s only a 20 minute walk (other schools are all 30+ mins on the bus or select on religion). DD loved it and really wants to go there.
Other parents who have chosen it with DC in Y7 or Y8 now are saying really positive things about it. I know one parent with a Y11 who was “forced” to go there because of how admissions worked out and says it is a completely different school to what it was.

It’s had a bit of bad past but it really is getting better. They were oversubscribed last year. They turned into the new academy about 3 years ago and recently been OFSTED’ed as good. Historically alway had poor results and never in my life have they had an OFSTED higher then satisfactory. It always was inadequate and in special measures.

I was a bit shocked by this years results (see screenshots). I expected a slight below average, but the reality is a lot different.
I’m wondering whether this is just historical results from the previous school, covid and other factors such as the new management and staff changes which haven’t had time to embed into the new academy yet? I do know a few got all grades 8/9 this year so it’s not like everyone is getting poor results.

I also know another school in the trust had a similar background. It joined the trust about 5/6 years ago and this year it’s results were average, all the numbers above 0 and bang on England average for English and maths GCSE % - hoping this might be the case for the school we are interested in?

In terms of OFSTED, the teaching seems to be good and has made big improvements from what has historically happened. Below are all the quotes about teaching, learning and behaviour from the report. This doesn’t seem to be tying up with the results the school got this year? Which is what’s making me think that what is happening hasn’t benefitted the year group with those results but will benefit later years?

“Pupils respond well to the high expectations that leaders have of their behaviour and conduct”

“Pupils respond well to the high aspirations that leaders have of their achievement.”

“outcomes at the school have not been strong. However, leaders have taken the necessary steps so that most pupils now achieve well.”

“teachers use their strong subject knowledge effectively to make regular checks on what pupils know and remember”

“Teachers identify any gaps or misconceptions that pupils have about their learning. Teachers use this information well to design activities that help pupils to build their learning over time.”

“In a small number of subjects, some of the activities that some teachers design do not help pupils to develop a sufficient depth of understanding.”

“Leaders have established an ambitious suite of subject curriculums”

“Leaders have prioritised reading”

“Leaders identify the additional needs of pupils effectively”

“Teachers deal effectively with any incidents of low-level disruption that may occur. This means that most pupils can learn well and without interruption.”

id look into moving if there were no other options nearby.

Moving is not an option for us. DD will have to put up with a long journey (min 45 mins each way, traffic dependent) to a better school if we decide against this school or we are really lucky and get a place in the catholic school (not likely and probably a wasted choice). We have another one up our sleeves but that’s another one with a 45 minute journey.

Way too big a gamble. It might be getting better but it is starting from a very low point.
If my classes had those results compared to their baseline ability then I would be on performance management unless there was a very very clear reason why.

Those are shocking scores, especially for the high attainers, 98% of our high attainers got 4+ in English and Maths, we are just an ordinary school but those are the sort of figures you should be looking at.

Sorry, your pic was 5+, our figures for that are 95%, but still!
I would expect my P45 in my pigeon hole if I got results like that.

It sounds as if the school is improving especially from the OFSTED comments. However, I wouldn’t risk it without a back up plan e.g. private tuition. This is something that may be achievable for you, especially as you have mentioned long journeys to other schools.

How much is the bus journey to the other school? Is it a public transport bus or a school bus? I mention this because you can spend a lot of money on transport that might be better invested in targeted private tuition.

Having DC who are tired and exhausted because of travelling to a better school can be counter productive to the overall aim. I sent DC1 and DC2 to the better school. I wish I had chosen the closer secondary school and put the £400 a term per child we spent on bus fees into tuition at GCSE level. (Imagine a tuition fund of £6k per child - we wasted that on transport, I look back and think - why?!)
I thought the further way school with better results would be worth it. In reality we spent a lot of money on transport, DC1 and DC2 were travelling for 2 hours a day, they were exhausted and didn’t do as well as they could have done. I think they did worse than if they had gone to the less well performing local school 30 minutes walk away. They would have been better more local, to be able to do after school activities, to have local friends and for us to put the money into tuition if they needed it.

In contrast DS3 (big age gap - happy little accident) has gone to local school, it’s still performing worse than the one the other 2 went to but DC3 is happier, not exhausted and doing better. DC3 school has poor results like your school, although higher (25% 5+ English and maths, -0.7 progress). And yes, we are saving the £400 a term we would have spent on transport in case it is needed at GCSE level.

Its horses for courses and you need to do the best for your family circumstances and your DD, but I just wanted to highlight this for you so you can consider whether this if something you want to consider.

Thinking about your ofsted report:

These reports are written in code. You need to be able the decipher the code to understand it.

E.g. leaders have prioritised reading - translation - lots of the kids can't read when they get to this school and the school is investing in primary teachers and phonics specialists to teach them to read because they haven't got a hope in hell of accessing the secondary curriculum unless the secondary teaches them to read.

E.g. leaders have now taken the necessary steps so that most students now achieve well. Translation - the leadership have finally fucking noticed that what they were doing wasn't working and now at least some of the kids are starting to achieve something close to what they should be.

Most students achieve well is an incredibly damning phrase.

That cohort would have had lockdowns in years 8 and 9. By the sounds of it, the intake is very weak and disadvantaged. That probably means weak reading skills, and limited access to technology at home. I would guess that lockdown learning would have been very limited in those circumstances. School with fewer children in those categories were probably better able to loan laptops, and could probably argue need for selected pupils to be in school during the second lockdown.

Changes will always take a little while to have their impact, in any case.

It's a pity that we no longer have the year 9 SATs, as that might give a useful indication of whether the changes are working for the more recent intakes.

To be honest, I find the mismatch between the comments on the OFSTED report and the actual figures completely baffling. It's almost like two different schools!

@Octavia64 thank you again for the translation - is there a useful website or even a place somewhere on MN where OFSTED comments/code has been translated into normal people language? That’s something that would be really useful.

@lanthanum yes, Y9 SATs would certainly help in this situation if we still had them.

Exactly! This is what is so confusing! The report quotes and the results are 100% the same school. It’s really baffling me. This is why I had so much hope in the school, although, knowing now they are written in ‘code’ I’m not so convinced, I am however, even more confused.

This is also what’s got me thinking that the changes that have taken place just haven’t had time to embed themselves and the results are reflecting previous mismanagement, problems etc and not what is actually going on now.

The 2023 GCSE and school performance results of all schools have been published on gov portal yesterday.

We had a similar situation with a local school that had a poor past and had recently become an academy. The reality though was that due to past issues it was going to take 3 or 4 years for the new regime to filter through and translate as good results at GCSE level.
We had a couple of meetings with the school (including one with the head) before deciding to take a bit of a risk and go to this local school. I'm so glad we made this decision, it really paid off, and my DC is now doing A levels at the same school, having had brilliant GCSE results. And the huge benefit of the local school is that he has local friends who all walk to the school and each other's houses, and all should be heading off to good universities next year.

My advice is to talk to the school and see how you feel after that.

These are 2023 results, well, 2023 provisional results.

I thought I had it all sorted, my plan was to have a quick look at the results when they were released yesterday (I actually ended up looking this morning) just to check they were going in the right direction. I knew they wouldn’t be perfect because of the history of the school, but I did want to confirm they were at least improving, before I submitted the form, and then this happens…..

@Gumbo I think I will do just that. I will speak to them next week and see what they have to say. I also like what @Neveragainamidoingthat is saying about cost of transport vs available funds for tuition. If the school really is having a ‘blip’ this year due to historical factors is may be worth taking a risk knowing it will improve and we could have some private tuition if needed. I suppose there is always the option of moving to another school if needed as well - our 2nd choice has been undersubscribed for the last couple of years. (Different town and falling birth rate rather than anything else).

If the school we are interested in really are underperforming then the back up plan is 2nd choice school goes first, 3rd goes 2nd and this goes 3rd. Will mean a guaranteed long journey for DD though.

I could really do with DD being a Y5 right now so we could see what happens with next years results.

From what you said about this school the exam results are poor. Along with this it has a lot of students who are disadvantaged ect. A school with poor results can also attract a cohort of students that can be loud, unruily and disturbe every class making it harder for the other kid's in the class.
The reality is that most parents won't say that they are sorry they sent a child to this type of school but will try to say something positive about it.

My advice is to look at a school with better results, a good principal, good pastoral care and a good range of subjects. Even if your child has to travel to school I think long term its worth it. You want them to do as well as possible in their exams. You also want them to be friends with kids who's parents want them to do do their best in school and are not causing trouble in every class.

Not every child will get top results but a good school and teachers can help them achieve to the best of their ability.

Clearly, this is rubbish though, because pupils aren't now achieving well. Which makes it hard to trust other aspects of the report.

Pupils can also "respond well" to something without it necessarily impacting their attainment.

It seems like a nice school with really poor progress and attainment. 16% English and maths is a disaster for a school, as is -0.98 progress 8. That's not just about the demographic of pupils, it's saying effectively some of that remaining 84% would have passed English and maths at another school.

Yes, it takes time for changes to filter through to results, but these results are so poor that even big changes would still lead to a school with below average attainment and below average progress.

If your child is academic, bear in mind it looks like only one set may be doing the higher paper in maths (for example). And with the best will in the world, you child may not get much stretch and challenge towards top grades. If most pupils are underachieving, then those who are on target will likely be allowed to coast.

Basically, it sounds like this is a school that's got it right on the surface but actually has deep problems with teaching and learning. It's not just about the intake- that progress score suggests this intake would have done better at another school. 3 years is the whole time these students were doing GCSEs, and during that time, this school has had a negative impact on student progress.

FWIW I teach rurally, and 45 minute journeys are pretty normal for our students. They manage fine. It's also very normal in places like London. I get that there are disadvantages, but even if these results are a blip, you have to understand they are a really terrible blip! I wouldn't be willing to gamble with my child's future like that.

Tutoring is all very well, but how do you sell a child who will likely be outperforming their peers, told by their teachers that they are doing fine etc, that they will need tutoring every night? In order to cover english/maths/science/one other to get 5 decent GCSEs, that's likely what you would be looking at.

An OFSTED report is the opinion of a few inspectors (who may not be inspecting subjects in which they have expertise) over a few days. It is very possible to put on a show, or jump through all the right hoops. These results show parts of that report are factually wrong, so how much faith can you really have in the rest of it?