Financial Times - Top 1000 Schools
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
Re: Financial Times - Top 1000 Schools
Moseleymum:(Quote)That's the whole point - you can't rely on a single year's results as they vary in their pupils and parameters. They don't necessarily let you know which is right for your child.
Is a £65k+ school (according to the other reply) placed significantly enough above a free school to make it "better"?
Is it worth putting your child through "harder" programmes of study (iGCSE and IB) when they will be judged against those doing "easier" exams (GCSE and Alevels), when those doing "easier" exams are in the vast majority.
Who knows? ''
Well, put like that.... However, i do think it depends on how much of an advantage to your child's education the ib can provide over A levels, and if a high score at IB is actually more 'impressive' than high grade A Levels. Of course, it also depends of the confidence you have in your child's ability ... :
Is a £65k+ school (according to the other reply) placed significantly enough above a free school to make it "better"?
Is it worth putting your child through "harder" programmes of study (iGCSE and IB) when they will be judged against those doing "easier" exams (GCSE and Alevels), when those doing "easier" exams are in the vast majority.
Who knows? ''
Well, put like that.... However, i do think it depends on how much of an advantage to your child's education the ib can provide over A levels, and if a high score at IB is actually more 'impressive' than high grade A Levels. Of course, it also depends of the confidence you have in your child's ability ... :
Re: Financial Times - Top 1000 Schools
It is safer to send your DCs to school to be educated in the widest sense of the word, rather than to second guess which school will get them the highest grades/best subjects/university places you think they will need in 7 years time. Things can change a lot politically and educationally over that time.
If the school is just a means to an end, the "best" outcome would probably be achieved by sending them to a really bad school (plenty of choice in Brum, after all ), keep them off sick a lot so as to preserve their sanity, and get high quality tutors in on the quiet to teach them. That way they won't be discriminated against by university admissions tutors for the school they have attended. If on the other hand you want them to enjoy 7 happy years before they get to that stage, most of the schools we have been discussing here would do very nicely, so go for whichever you can afford and/or think will best suit your DC's personality and aptitudes.
If the school is just a means to an end, the "best" outcome would probably be achieved by sending them to a really bad school (plenty of choice in Brum, after all ), keep them off sick a lot so as to preserve their sanity, and get high quality tutors in on the quiet to teach them. That way they won't be discriminated against by university admissions tutors for the school they have attended. If on the other hand you want them to enjoy 7 happy years before they get to that stage, most of the schools we have been discussing here would do very nicely, so go for whichever you can afford and/or think will best suit your DC's personality and aptitudes.
Re: Financial Times - Top 1000 Schools
And the top universities perception of these easier courses of study,
-
- Posts: 659
- Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 8:59 pm
Re: Financial Times - Top 1000 Schools
Of course I have faith in my DS's ability!succeed wrote:
Well, put like that.... However, i do think it depends on how much of an advantage to your child's education the ib can provide over A levels, and if a high score at IB is actually more 'impressive' than high grade A Levels. Of course, it also depends of the confidence you have in your child's ability ... :
I have noted that Oxford, as an example, requires 3As or 3A*s at A-level or 38-40pts at IB (out of a maximum 45) with 6s and 7s in the Higher Level subjects. KES states on their website that most students achieve this, I worry for the ones that may not.
I have read also that according to the tariff system, a modest score of 30 IB points is roughly equivalent to 3As at A level and 1 A at AS level, but the top Universities ask for much more than this.
Yes KES provides a rounded education of course, we may well choose it over the Grammars because of that, but I also looked at an IB league table for the UK, and only the top 5 schools had an average IB score of 38 or above. The rest were below this level....
I am more confused now than before!
Re: Financial Times - Top 1000 Schools
The one safety net we have if we go the KES route, one I do not agree with totally, is that 5 years ahead if our DS's would have gone through IB from KES. If things have not gone well, then there is a chance to bail to the grammars for A levels.
Re: Financial Times - Top 1000 Schools
A splendid piece of advice from KES parent.If on the other hand you want them to enjoy 7 happy years before they get to that stage, most of the schools we have been discussing here would do very nicely, so go for whichever you can afford and/or think will best suit your DC's personality and aptitudes.
League tables should play a very small part in the equation. So KECH is 80th to KES's 40th. Does that make it so much worse a choice? By logical extension, then, KES must pale into insignificance compared to the top schools. And that is patently absurd.
Re: Financial Times - Top 1000 Schools
I’m feeling a little peeked and disappointed by this thread. I have so much to say, no time to say it – and little point in saying it either because March 1st will probably settle everyone’s minds wonderfully!moseleymum wrote:I have noted that Oxford, as an example, requires 3As or 3A*s at A-level or 38-40pts at IB (out of a maximum 45) with 6s and 7s in the Higher Level subjects. KES states on their website that most students achieve this, I worry for the ones that may not.
I have read also that according to the tariff system, a modest score of 30 IB points is roughly equivalent to 3As at A level and 1 A at AS level, but the top Universities ask for much more than this.
Yes KES provides a rounded education of course, we may well choose it over the Grammars because of that, but I also looked at an IB league table for the UK, and only the top 5 schools had an average IB score of 38 or above. The rest were below this level....
I am more confused now than before!
But... here goes...
The Oxbridge 'A' level requirements seem low because the A level system is not deemed capable of discriminating between candidates at this very high level.
Oxford and Cambridge ask for the highest grades which they feel the A level system can reasonably be used to detect suitable candidates. This is far from the end of the process; it’s just the best use they feel they can make of the current 'A' level system. Many, many candidates with these grades will receive no further consideration because of deficiencies elsewhere in their application, many will fail to impress in additional testing (commonly required), and many will fail at interview.
The IB is supposed to be able to distinguish between very high performing candidates and, I’m guessing here, is used to do just that.
It does not follow that a candidate who failed to gain a place after taking the IB would necessarily have done better via ‘A’ levels. Any individual candidate may well prefer one examination system over another, and that could prove an important choice, but “I’ll do the ‘A’ levels, they‘re easier” is not sensible .
{BTW, I’m defiantly not applying for membership of the ‘Oxbridge or Bust’ club but I hope some of what I’ve said is useful}
Choosing a school. WAS: Re: Financial Times - Top 1000 Schoo
Some more stuff, where I can't even remember who prompted me.
:: The Oxbridge Card::
The ‘best’ schools feel they have to trot out the percentage of successful Oxbridge applicants, but if they have any shame they’ll also have the good grace to look embarrassed when they do so – it plays well with (some) parents and that’s just about it. I do not believe it makes any predictable, material difference to a child who has (parents with) Oxbridge ambitions whether they study at a school which may have a couple of Oxbridge students a year or in a school which regularly expects far more to gain places. If the school has the experience and the child has the talent, it can happen – or not – and for the most capricious of reasons.
::Beyond the curriculum::
I've found myself too easily impressed by the trips/extra curricula opportunities of schools because I just looked at the school calendar, or listened to the Head, and thought “Wow, that’s a lot of stuff.” If you think of an individual child’s experience as they pass through the school, then it can seem much less impressive. KES really does win out here, I think. Though KES does have some very ambitious trips, which I certainly could not afford, many are far more modest. Lots of day/weekend trips – quite a few ‘Friday Afternoon’ and CCF jaunts. The five/seven/10 day trips strain the budget but I have seen my son change more than I could possibly have hoped over the last four years – for much of this I have to credit KES, and their extra curricula work is important.
::Why I like KES::
Less homework, a decent lunch hour, a 10 minute safe walk from University station, shorter terms, ‘Friday Afternoons!’, no mad GCSE’s crammed in merely to improve the school’s points-per-pupil score, the sports!, the music!, a genuine commitment (and the resources) to develop the whole child – not just ‘the academic student’, A wonderfully relaxed feeling when I remember that the latest politically inspired nonsense about the curriculum/exam system isn’t going to affect me, the I.B. (how I hate ‘AS’ levels!), the pride my son takes in his school (he never had any doubt about where he wanted to go) and, of course, the teaching.
By the way, I also love Five Ways and Aston and others. Never really took to CHB, but... there ya go.
:: One for all and.. ::
I’m a little taken aback by the feeling of some that, because a school is good in one area, it ‘must’ be weak in another – and indeed that because a child is currently good in one subject then they ‘must’ remain weak in other areas. You’re going to be astonished, truly astounded by what these schools can do with the children we give them.
:: The Oxbridge Card::
The ‘best’ schools feel they have to trot out the percentage of successful Oxbridge applicants, but if they have any shame they’ll also have the good grace to look embarrassed when they do so – it plays well with (some) parents and that’s just about it. I do not believe it makes any predictable, material difference to a child who has (parents with) Oxbridge ambitions whether they study at a school which may have a couple of Oxbridge students a year or in a school which regularly expects far more to gain places. If the school has the experience and the child has the talent, it can happen – or not – and for the most capricious of reasons.
::Beyond the curriculum::
I've found myself too easily impressed by the trips/extra curricula opportunities of schools because I just looked at the school calendar, or listened to the Head, and thought “Wow, that’s a lot of stuff.” If you think of an individual child’s experience as they pass through the school, then it can seem much less impressive. KES really does win out here, I think. Though KES does have some very ambitious trips, which I certainly could not afford, many are far more modest. Lots of day/weekend trips – quite a few ‘Friday Afternoon’ and CCF jaunts. The five/seven/10 day trips strain the budget but I have seen my son change more than I could possibly have hoped over the last four years – for much of this I have to credit KES, and their extra curricula work is important.
::Why I like KES::
Less homework, a decent lunch hour, a 10 minute safe walk from University station, shorter terms, ‘Friday Afternoons!’, no mad GCSE’s crammed in merely to improve the school’s points-per-pupil score, the sports!, the music!, a genuine commitment (and the resources) to develop the whole child – not just ‘the academic student’, A wonderfully relaxed feeling when I remember that the latest politically inspired nonsense about the curriculum/exam system isn’t going to affect me, the I.B. (how I hate ‘AS’ levels!), the pride my son takes in his school (he never had any doubt about where he wanted to go) and, of course, the teaching.
By the way, I also love Five Ways and Aston and others. Never really took to CHB, but... there ya go.
:: One for all and.. ::
I’m a little taken aback by the feeling of some that, because a school is good in one area, it ‘must’ be weak in another – and indeed that because a child is currently good in one subject then they ‘must’ remain weak in other areas. You’re going to be astonished, truly astounded by what these schools can do with the children we give them.
Re: Financial Times - Top 1000 Schools
Thank you Dibble for your thoughtful comments.
You did remind me, however, of one forgotten drawback to KES - the Summer holiday is one or two weeks longer - now that's enough to send me running for a state school
On the other side of the coin, this could mean cheaper family holidays...
You did remind me, however, of one forgotten drawback to KES - the Summer holiday is one or two weeks longer - now that's enough to send me running for a state school
On the other side of the coin, this could mean cheaper family holidays...
Re: Financial Times - Top 1000 Schools
Thanks Dibble.
Can someone please give me an insight into how, with longer holidays, school trips, after school activities etc etc, that children seem to be able to fit in homework and actual learning?
Sorry if this seems a pretty stupid question, as in "obviously the kids are brighter and quicker at learning"...but I would appreciate the actual details of how its done.
Is it the classroom environment? discipline? eager to learn?
TIA.
Can someone please give me an insight into how, with longer holidays, school trips, after school activities etc etc, that children seem to be able to fit in homework and actual learning?
Sorry if this seems a pretty stupid question, as in "obviously the kids are brighter and quicker at learning"...but I would appreciate the actual details of how its done.
Is it the classroom environment? discipline? eager to learn?
TIA.