Are London schools getting rid of students they don't want?

[RB1981]

I've got several friends who are convinced children are being bullied out of top London state secondary schools before the 6th form, because their grades weren't 'good enough'. Do you think this could be true? Schools like Camden School for Girls, St Marylebone and St Aloysius do seem to get less diverse in their sixth forms, I don't know about some of the other top performing schools. But maybe it's just that kids from certain backgrounds are less likely to take A levels. Either way, interested to know if other parents have thoughts or experiences on this.

My local schools have minimum 6th form grades and some subjects have higher minimums. Not everyone wants to do 6th form so there is a natural selection. So there is a selection process there. Maybe some schools have higher minimums due to
Popularity.

Lots manage out kids that don't behave. They generally don't get the good scores.

It's common in a lot of schools to have a required number of grades to get into 6th form. Even my comp in 1983 had a requirement.

ah yes, that's true. Should have clarified, I've heard that even when kids are meeting the minimum grades, if they aren't getting 7's, 8's, 9's schools are encouraging them to go elsewhere!

If they have 250 places and 1000 applicants they have to decide somehow. They can accept who they want I guess.

Maybe they're encouraging them to have a plan B in case the 7, 8 and 9 turn into actual 6s and 7s which would mean they couldn't continue?

Lots of schools and 6th colleges have always got rid of children who they decide won't make the grade.

I'm surprise people think this is new.

Back in the 90s my college had an 100% university success rate with their science A levels. Most of us were headed for Russell group universities.

Roll on to early 00s one of my nephews was told by his school may not be for him before his GCSE year as he wasn't getting enough As. He stayed and did his A levels there.

They are telling the children they don't think they are capable of getting decent A levels and to go elsewhere to do other courses.

The alternative is to try to move them on elsewhere after the first year of A levels.

As some schools have now openly been caught doing that it is more difficult for schools to do that.

State schools have to follow their own Year 12 admissions policy, and the policy has to comply with the National Admissions Code.

Year 11 students have an automatic right to transfer to Year 12 unless they don't meet the minimum academic criteria. Behaviour can't be taken into account in the decision - if it was, that would be a breach of the code and wide open to appeal.

In parallel, schools are also legally obliged to distribute information about alternative options to sixth form.

@RB1981 , perhaps you should ask your friends for their evidence.

Well a top performing school near me got into some trouble a few years back for doing exactly this. I doubt they were/are the only one.

When schools get into 'trouble', it is usually followed up by tighter checks on all schools. Ofsted ask schools searching questions about students who are de-registered from courses mid-year. That is obviously different to students being discouraged/bullied from staying on to year 12, but I don't see how anyone could prove that was happening one way or the other unless they have a transcript of any "advice" conversations that took place.

May have been one of the ones I saw in the media and rolled my eyes because I knew "top performing" educational establishments have always been up to it...

Being selective for Sixth Form entry is perfectly legal. Often it is harder to get in as an outsider than a student already there so it is perfectly fair. However, consideration should be given to students who have suffered health issues, bereavement etc - but lazy kids who don’t make the grades should really give way to harder working kids who couldn’t buy their way into an expensive catchment.

The problem on the ground in London now seems to be the tutoring frenzy. Parents tutoring to get into top set, do well in eg end of year exams in earlier years so they can stay on. That then inflates grades for all. Translates to oversubscribed schools becoming more and more competitive.

This year, and the next couple of years, are the massive baby boom now going through post 16 and then uni. They were a huge problem at reception, then secondary allocation and now the same will be happening for post 16. There has to be a criteria and if the grades are met but there's 2 kids one with good behaviour and other not, the school is allowed to not offer them a place in their sixth form if that's their admissions criteria. Being encouraged to look elsewhere is not the same as being managed out though.

There has to be a criteria and if the grades are met but there's 2 kids one with good behaviour and other not, the school is allowed to not offer them a place in their sixth form if that's their admissions criteria.

@Foxesandsquirrels state schools are not allowed to have behaviour clauses in their admissions policies. It would breach the national admissions code. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/school-admissions-code--2

That's really interesting. I doubt that would work in reality though. Is this the case for post 16 too?

Yes, it's true of all state schools, including 11-18 schools. Unless a child has been formally excluded, they cannot be prevented from transferring from year 11 to year 12 if they meet the academic criteria.

Internal students must take priority for places.

Schools can't use external applicants' behaviour reports into account for admissions purposes (see clause 1.9g of the code).

Sixth form colleges are not schools and are not required to follow the Admissions Code. Schools must follow the Code. As part of this, they must publish their admission arrangements (which define how decisions are made) and follow those arrangements. Any failed applicant is entitled to an appeal, which is heard by an independent appeal panel. If it becomes apparent to the panel that behaviour was taken into account in making the decision, the appeal will go very badly for the school.

They were funded per pupil. Now they have set budgets to manage themselves.

They can’t get enough teachers for the previously varied choices.

They need to trim back the same as any other business. They aren’t going to keep those less likely to do well.

@RB1981 This behaviour has gone on for years. Some state schools do not offer BTechs/ or any other qualification aside from A-Levels and even then the A-Levels on offer are the "traditional academic ones". Some set the admission criteria for entrance to 6th form with very high grades requirements, in full knowledge that those on lower grades have no chance of admission.

They are still funded per pupil. However, the funding is tighter than it used to be because they need to deliver more for the money and because wages have risen.

Not true. Whilst there are a number of factors involved in calculating funding for sixth forms, the biggest factor by far is the number of students and how good the sixth form is at retaining those students.

It is, however, true for all schools that funding is determined at a fixed point in the previous year. For schools, for example, funding for 2024/25 is determined based on pupil numbers at the autumn census which took place in October 2023. Any increase or reduction in pupil numbers after that is not taken into account, although there is a mechanism whereby an institution may get more funding if it has experienced exceptional growth in student numbers.

Two separate issues are being conflated in this thread:

• The op @RB1981 asked if students are being "bullied" out of schools. The answer seems to be that there is no evidence of it and, if there was, the schools would get into trouble. A few people have said they have "heard" it happens, or that they read a headline a few years ago, but so far nobody has mentioned any direct or recent experience.

• As @OnlyTheBravest says, some schools have a high academic bar for entry to their sixth forms. This is perfectly legal so long as their admissions policies comply with the Admissions Code and they follow them correctly. However, this is not "bullying". Schools routinely advise all year 11 students to have a backup plan in case they don't meet the grades.

Minimum GSCE number or scores for admission to a sixth form are nothing new. Though it is valid to question the impact of this and whether it disproportionally excludes people from certain ethnic backgrounds or areas.

@OnlyTheBravest my school (a high performing comp) offers 2 BTECs and would love to offer more, but can't afford to take on ring-fenced specialist BTEC staff. The existing BTEC courses are run by teachers with specialisms in other subjects, who are being given appropriate training. The courses are aimed at students who want to mix A levels and BTECs. Students who want to do purely BTEC will be better off at one of the local colleges. They have specialist BTEC teachers with many more years of experience, and much better resources.

Schools need play to their strengths and use their resources efficiently. Having a sixth form focussed on traditional academic subjects helps them to attract good subject specialists who can teach in all year groups.