worked example: Bristnall Hall school ref 139043
185 children enter the school of which:
43 Low Achievers (below level 4 in new money scaled score of 99 or below)
104 Middle Achievers (Level 4 or scaled score of 100)
39 High Achievers (Above Level 4 or scaled score of 105 or higher)https://www.gov.uk/guidance/scaled-scores
So of this intake
Just 4 of the 43 low achievers managed 5 or more Gcse's
45 of the 104 middle achievers got 5 or more
28 out of the 39 high achievers got 5 more
It very very arguable that the 11 high achievers who did not get 5 GCSE's (had they been at a grammar would have done so), so I think this is a good argument to say they will not necessarily do well wherever they go.
In comparison 99% of kids going into a grammar will be high achievers, but 99% come out with 5 GCSE's which is remarkable. I don't think you can expect the same of Bristnall Hall for its low and middle achievers, but 99% of its high achievers should succeed, and surely the die cannot be fixed for such a high % of low achievers at such an early age.
Just 4 out of 43 low achievers. Is that really acceptable???