FT ranking of Tiffins

[2outof3]

It's undoubtedly a useful table for comparing results - one of the things we all look at when deciding on schools.

It's probably more useful for those of us on here to just look at the grammar school rankings and all the Kingston schools and Sutton schools fair pretty well on that basis.

From my quick calculation Wilsons fares best at 8th place for grammars, Tiffin Boys 14th, Sutton Grammar 16th, tiffin Girls 17th, Nonsuch 21st, Wallington Boys at 23rd. Apologies to those looking for Wallington Girls but they were down on the second page, so too much to count!

I think it shows just how lucky anyone is who has children at any of these schools and to have 6 out of the top 25 grammars in Kingston or Sutton is fantastic. Of course you have to bear in mind that the FT methodology looks at "core subjects" and this will skew the results where schools enter more pupils for non-core subjects.

Still very useful - thanks Tiffinboys for highlighting it

[MyUniMoney]

Yes but you can't get anywhere else to see the rationale so it's not very helpful.

If you hover on each heading at the top, e.g Points/ Core Entry, Core Points , points / Candidates, it will indicate what it is and perhaps someone could make this out. The Core Points for instance indicates a diminishing number which seems to determine the ranking.

If you hover on "FT Score", it explains / indicates the FT Ranking methodology.

Can someone work with me on making this clear?!

[Golgo13]

Marginal differences in GCSE aggregate data are froth. Biggest determining factor will be individual aptitude (talent + effort). School average Data is fine, but your own results are your own responsibility. Don't give too much credit to a school brand.

[tiffinboys]

Biggest determining factor will be individual aptitude (talent + effort). ......... Don't give too much credit to a school brand.

Absolutely correct.

[ThreeKids]

Indeed it is all about value added, which is measured. Basically a measure of what level each child was at the time they joined the school and how they progress after that.

I don't know what the league tables are at the moment but I do know that WCGS was the top grammar in the south about 2 years ago when measured by value added. I think it was about number 7 nationwide.

Not sure if this link will work http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/educa ... m?compare=" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Results for 2012 are

Wilsons 1044.8
WHSG 1036.3
WCGS 1034.9
Tiffin Girls 1034
Nonsuch 1032.5
Tiffin Boys 1030.2
SGS 1028.2

By comparison taking two other single sex local schools
Glyn (outstanding ofsted) 998.1
Rosebery 1008.6

[2outof3]

That's really interesting Threekids, particularly when you consider that Wally Girls was way down the list using the FT Methodology, when in fact they have produced the second highest jump in achievement of all the local grammars.

I also think that the FT ranking definitely works against girls schools as well as it only measures "core" subjects. Now I can't find the definition of "core" subjects in the report, but I think from memory that it excludes subjects like PE, drama, psychology, sociology etc. Please don't flame me but I do think the girls' grammars are more likely to offer these subjects - and have a reasonable take up of them as well - and so they are automatically marked down on the rankings. I actually think that there is a place for these subjects in education and particularly if you are sitting four ASs, why not throw in PE or psychology to mix things up a bit?

The moral of the story is very much be careful with how you read these tables

[ThreeKids]

I wonder how accurate added value is at the upper end. In a system that is presumably designed to cope with the majority you may find that there is a maximum score that a child can be judged at the start and again at the end. So if a school takes in a different proportion of those children than another, and accelerates them beyond the highest they can achieve at the end I wonder if they are effectively downgraded as a result.

So if a child comes in on let's say an hypothetical score of 100 (but actually should be 110) and goes out on 100. Then they will be deemed to have added the standard amount of value whilst in fact they have achieved less because the child should have gone out on 110.

Just a thought. Wonder if the added value is truly a good indicator for the grammars.