Why Wilson's has more students taking GCSE than A levels?

[coulsdondad]

The admissions arrangements for the Sixth Form at Wilson’s are transparent and there are no unlawful exclusions: (https://www.wilsons.school/admissions/s ... sfadmcrit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;).

The Sixth Form Agreement explains that:

Our students have high aspirations and inevitably the very best academic institutions and employers have high expectations. As a result, we set certain conditions for matriculation into the Upper Sixth: Obtaining at least CCC at AS is an indication that our students have a good understanding of the A level content and that as a result they are likely to reach their potential. If a student’s AS results are below this level, they will be given the opportunity to re-sit Year 12. This will enable them to have a second chance at achieving their potential.

In 2020 Ofsted wrote that:

Almost all of Year 11 pupils progress to the sixth form and nearly all complete their studies, with 99% going to university. A small number of students do not achieve as well as they or their teachers would like or expect at the end of Year 12. These students are offered the opportunity to repeat Year 12 and improve their performance, increasing their choices in Year 13. This affects a small number of students each year and these decisions are made in the best interests of the student.

[mitasol]

As a result, we set certain conditions for matriculation into the Upper Sixth: Obtaining at least CCC

This is what I am questioning. It is highly likely to be sensible to repeat the year but is it lawful to enforce academic conditions to matriculate to the upper sixth. There may be reasons it is permitted, for example, students are only enrolled on a one year AS course but even then I think it could be challenged by asking how that is reconciled against a 2 year modular A level in the final year.

In my opinion the school is acting in the child’s best interest in offering a resit year to children who have not obtained CCC at AS level. This should be mutually agreed by school and child/parent.

However, I’m still of the opinion that a parent/child may have grounds to challenge if it is lawful to prevent a student proceeding to year 13 on the basis of academic attainment. I’m including information below to illustrate my reasoning.

https://questions-statements.parliament ... -10/112310" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(Parliamentary Questions)

Schools are not permitted to disallow pupils from progressing into the second year of A level study on the basis of their results. Once the pupil has been admitted to a school sixth form, they can only be removed from the roll if they meet one of the criteria set out in the Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006, as amended. Where we have received correspondence on this matter from parents, we have set out this position very clearly.

If a school sets academic entry standards for pupils to progress into the school sixth form, the regulations say that they may remove pupils from their register at this point, if they have failed to meet these standards and will cease to be of compulsory school age before the school next meets. At all other points, including between academic Year 12 and 13, it is unlawful to remove pupils as a result of their academic attainment.

https://schoolgovernors.thekeysupport.c ... -sub-topic" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(Advice for School Governors)

Exclusions which require special consideration

Pupils in the sixth form

Pupils over compulsory school age can be excluded, but only for behavioural reasons as set out in the statutory guidance.

Asking a student to leave for a non-disciplinary reason, such as academic attainment, would be considered an unlawful exclusion. Similarly, using the threat of exclusion to convince parents to remove their child from a school is unlawful. Both of these are examples of off-rolling.

To be clear, a school can set specific academic standards for entry to year 12, but the expectation is that the student will progress to year 13. They can't be asked to leave the school for failing to reach a certain academic standard at the end of year 12.

https://cds.bromley.gov.uk/documents/s5 ... 202018.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(Report on St Olaves)

This investigation arose following a challenge by a group of parents in the summer of 2017 to the school’s practice of withdrawing the places of Year 12 pupils who did not achieve a certain level of academic performance at the end of Year 12. They were not allowed to progress into Year 13 and had to leave the school
The parents took legal advice and gave notice of Judicial Review, naming the school and the Local Authority, to mount their challenge. Legal advice obtained by the Local Authority confirmed that the practice was illegal. The school withdrew the policy and agreed to allow all Year 12 pupils to progress to Year 13.

https://educationhub.blog.gov.uk/2017/0 ... mber-2017/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(Department of Education)

We are clear that schools are not allowed to remove pupils from a sixth form because of academic ability once they are enrolled.

[GlynisTally]

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ ... ng-1923032" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As you can see from these numbers no one progressed as an exception to this rule, they either left or repeated.

[Oneoftwothings]

I understand it to mean they'd have to have CCCD or lower from their 4 AS levels to be in this position, so AAD would be fine.

[coulsdondad]

Ask the school. They said that the conditions are not enforced and that the current version of the Sixth Form Agreement does not refer to conditions or matriculation.

Also the sixth form year groups are the same size as yrs7-11 now - an extra form was added in yr7 some years ago so that maybe explains the answer to the original question.

You can't conclude that any student has had to leave with only AS levels on the basis of that data.

[GlynisTally]

I understand it to mean they'd have to have CCCD or lower from their 4 AS levels to be in this position, so AAD would be fine.

AADD would count as only 2 grades C or above.

If they meant a 3C grade average. They could have said that.

https://www.wilsons.school/shared/docum ... aviour.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; still mentions the Transition Arrangements

Did they say the 'conditions are not enforced' verbally or in writing?

[Oneoftwothings]

It just says what CoulsdonDad posted "...If a student’s AS results are below this level, they will be given the opportunity to re-sit Year 12." Nothing about being a prerequisite to continue.
It only talks about being "permitted to continue" in relation to Further Maths, which does tend to be treated differently at the schools that offer it, for obvious reasons.