The Real School League Tables

[Xenia]

Only using subjects Cambridge accepts (top 1000 are ranked in all sectors). I like the fact they give earlier rankings too so you get to see the history rather than just a blip year.

www.ft.com/cms/s/0/53840c30-327e-11df-bf20-00144feabdc0.html

"The FT?s school league tables focus unashamedly on academic achievement defined by ?core? subject A-level results, as set out by Cambridge University in 2006. Subjects such as drama and media studies are not included in our analysis.

By contrast, the government?s summary scores for schools at GCE/VCE, A-level and AS-levels this year (for 2009 exam results) again included various other qualifications in subjects such as animal care, and make-up, which we feel give little help to students and parents aiming for places at top universities.
...

Apologies to readers in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, but the devolved assemblies (education is devolved) have decided that school performance data is not a public good and have made school level data nigh-on impossible to access. Sadly we cannot include their schools.
...

Like the government?s, our analysis uses the QCA points system, as follows: grade A A-levels = 270 points, grade B = 240 points, C = 210 points, D = 180 points and E = 150

But if maggie's doctor husband were right why do people with private education do so much better than those without? If the education and knowledge they gain in good private schools were a kind of smokescreen of their lack of ability to ability to think (which incidentally I think you learn much better at private schools than state) then surely they might well get a head start but then fail like people who join their uncle's company. They don't last long if they're incompetent. But the answer is they are more not less competent than state schoolers and that's proved in spades - just look at the top of any business or other area in the UK to see the proof of the pudding and thus those who can afford it keep baking as we like the results.

He did not even suggest that one group could not think - at that level you will not survive if you cannot think. He was more curious in the differences in how people worked things out.

Ha, I'm with maggiethecats DH. Talk round the dinner table sounds good to me A much more realistic view.

Being educated privately certainly gets the exam results, no doubt about that, but it certainly doesn't equate to being more intelligent in the first place.

Good exam results these days does not equate to being highly intelligent.

Hi Xenia- how do QE, Habs, Watford Grammar and Merchant Taylors do (i am not registered- if you don't mind?)

Xenia- just found my login for FT. Thx

A private education isn't going to make you more intelligent, but it will often make you more skilled than a state education by virtue of the fact that private schools offer a lot more opportunities for development than state schools.

Good point. I console myself that I am less likely to regret "wasting" money on education than thinking "what if".

But I have to say that our generation of middle incomers have raised expectations too high and this sort of stridency can be pretty stressful. Watford Grammar is an excellent state school that only selects 30pc of its intake and yet performs very very well and produces well balance, fun loving boys and girls. But no, we have to send him to the school with acres and acres of land that he will never see and use!!

I have heard other parents bemoan the fact that they are paying £££££ in fees for investments in, and maintenance of, facilities that their own DCs will never, ever benefit from, given their disposition and innate talents!

That is one of the arguments for a "basic" state education, that parents are free to supplement with extra-curricular activities in accordance with their own DCs' disposition. That is the French model. I don't think it works nearly as well as an integrated model, personally...

Bonsoir- you have thought more deeply about this than I have. I am paying partly out of "fear of regret", partly because DS really wants that particular school which suits him very well and he has backed his desire up with his results and drive- he has fun learning and accused me of trying to put him off!

I benefited from a state system (private schools were nationalised by the govt!) which did level out the playing field and made it more meritocratic. I would have preferred not to have the private option so that we were all in the same boat!

Good points Bonsoir and Diddy. I have a few years yet to make this decision but I pray that I will be guided by my instincts and what I feel is really right for dds rather than external influences whether it be state or private.

I hadn't planned tosend any of my 3 DCs to private school. Just missed out on very good state primary for DC1 due to high number of siblings in his year, then scrambled around and got him into a prep school. He really took to the hothousing and they other two followed and they are all happy in the school....so here we are staring at private education * 3....this from a centre-leftie. I am the first to point out my own contradictions. Funny how I exempt my children from my ideal principles.

TDiddy. Where did you go to school? If this country invested more wisely (and more in total) in education - then our private school sector would be smaller. A large number of privately educated children have been 'failed' by state education in some way, or parents feel (like you do) that local state options are not right for their dc's.

A friend of mine is head of Year 7 in a selective Sate school, which has a large intake from both state primary and prep schools. She says that in general the prep school children know more, but the state school children are better at finding stuff out. Please note the in general!

jackstarbright - i can CAT you to tell you where I went to school- I think i would be giving way most of my ID if I posted it. Regards

TDiddy - Yes please do CAT me - I am CATable!! I think we in the UK can learn much from other countries education systems - though there are often many differences in culture and attitudes.

Seeker Imo the very selective private schools take a 'narrower ability' range of children from state schools than they take from preps. The brighter children in a prep school will, typically, be a year ahead of state children in maths by year 6 and will have done more science, french, history and geography. In the selective senior schools they expect the state child to 'catch up' pretty quickly. So a state educated primary child needs to be both very bright and very motivated. This is also an 'in general' point.

Xenia, I think your pride in NLCS/HABS/MTs is overated. I think you'll find that the NW London crowd would chose Westminster, SPGS St Pauls over 'your' schools given a choice. Why? ... because of the prestige and exclusivity associated with these super-academic schools. My point being that even within the top 20 ind.school list there is a pecking order. So where do you draw the line in your case it's the top 20 some others would argue it should be top 10 in which case HABS and MT's would not appear.

All in all I think there is an unhealthy fixation with league tables