Non-grammar schools in GS areas

[Rob Clark]

Sally-Anne, Patricia et al, could you tell me please how non-GS schools in Bucks fare in terms of GCSEs? Obviously, I realise they vary enormously but as a very general, non-specific question…

The reason I ask is that I always thought they did OK (in general terms), but was having a full and frank discussion with a couple of people at the weekend who insisted that non-GS schools in GS areas like Bucks were always rubbish, and they claimed there was research to prove this. Is there? And are they right?

I don’t have any particular axe to grind on this issue, having as you know one DC at GS and one not, but I vaguely recall reading that actually non-GS schools in Bucks do better than average, counter-intuitive though that might be. Thanks.

[Tree]

Hi Rob i think the problem with this is how do judge the statistics and define 'rubbish' it would obviously not be fair to compare their GCSE's with the grammar schools in bucks as they are not the same population of children and will have a different GCSE 'potential' equally it is not fair to compare them with comprehensives in non GS areas as these schools will have the at least some of the 'grammar school' children included in them ie kids who would not be at these schools if they where in a GS area. The best approach is probably to compare their results with non GS area comprehensives with some compensation made for the the extra 'GS kids' at these schools but the comparison is go be difficult controversial and of questionalble significance.

Ok as an example if you compare LWS an oxfordshire comp and mandeville school a bucks upper school (probably with simialr catchment demographics) last year LWS got 80% a*-c grades and MS 72% a*-c grades, a simple approach would be to subtract the top 25% from LWS (assuming that had there been oxfordshire GS's these kids would have gone there) assume that of these 25% about 95% of them (23%) would have got a*-c grades so at LWS 80% of 330 = 260 kids are getting 3 a*-c grades but of these 23% (75) would have been at GS so their results would have been ((260-75)/(330-75))*100= 72% so it would appear that this bucks upper school is getting equivalent GCSE results to a well respected comp if you accept the method of comparison however LWS has an excellent special needs provision and attracts OOC special needs kids which probably affect the figures and also some of it's catchment kids probably about 20% are from bucks and so some of these are filtered off to GS so it's all v difficult to compare.

[Rob Clark]

Hi Tree, was hoping you’d be along with your statistics Of course, it’s almost impossible to answer my question objectively, but at the back of my mind I’m sure I’ve read that DCs at non-GSs do better than one might reasonable expect, though I don’t know why that should be the case.

[Marylou]

I'm sure I have read that, notwithstanding variations between individual upper schools, exam results are generally better for all pupils in Bucks than in comparable counties without a selective system. Some would argue that this is because teaching children in groups of similar ability enables all children to achieve more overall, because streaming is the main point of a selective system such as Bucks but is practised in a fairly hit-and-miss way in non-selective systems (by that I mean that some schools do, some don't, some stream for some subjects and not others, some only stream above a certain age, etc. etc.). It's also worth remembering that there is a fair amount of cross-border movement of pupils with Buckinghamshire's many neighbouring LAs, with qualified children moving in to attend the GSs and non-qualified children moving out to comps in neighbouring counties. This may also affect overall results.

You could also consider the example of Kent, which is largely selective but has schools at both extremes of the attainment spectrum.

[pippi]

Value added ("Level 2 CVA") should give some indication if you want to compare schools in different areas etc. There's a Bucks table on the BBC web site at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/e ... ml/825.stm. A value of 1000 is par for the course, and the higher the better.

[Tree]

Hi Marylou

I'm sure I have read that, notwithstanding variations between individual upper schools, exam results are generally better for all pupils in Bucks than in comparable counties without a selective system

That's v interesting I suppose on the face of it that would be a way of assessing the non GS and grammars combined. The only issue is that i suspect a reasonable proportion of the grammar school kids in bucks would not be sent to state schools if there were only comprehensives available (we know from the 11 plus figures that around 10% of 11plus passes are from kids at private prep schools) and in grammar containing counties a larger proportion of the 'grammar school passing population' are at state schools and these kids would be at private schools in comprehensive counties, how that affects the comparison is probably controversial but it would probably disadvantage the comprehensive counties?

can someone explain value added i've never really understood on what data its based ??

[dejavu]

I seem to remember reading somewhere that when the Bucks children do the 12+ that they are at an advantage re scoring, as in the 12+ it is standardised nationally and not Bucks alone - whereas in the 11+ in Bucks it is just the Bucks childrens' score that go into the pass 11+ formula and their scores are higher than the national standard - sorry, don't mean to open a can of worms - just a roundabout way of saying that this could explain a bit why Bucks GSCE rates from non gs might be better than the national average. (Don't hit me...)

[Tree]

Hey Dajavu

I seem to remember reading somewhere that when the Bucks children do the 12+ that they are at an advantage re scoring, as in the 12+ it is standardised nationally and not Bucks alone - whereas in the 11+ in Bucks it is just the Bucks childrens' score that go into the pass 11+ formula and their scores are higher than the national standard - sorry, don't mean to open a can of worms - just a roundabout way of saying that this could explain a bit why Bucks GSCE rates from non gs might be better than the national average. (Don't hit me...)

I'm not that sure who takes the 12+ but presumably it is mainly children who have failed the 11+ the year before and who therefore are likely to be VR veterans and so probably not comparible to the national average and so i'm not sure sadly that this reflects a natural bucks intelligence but a learnt ability in bucks kids to be able to work out that annie raj and katie all started with 15p pocket money.

Hi Tree, was hoping you’d be along with your statistics

OMG that is so sadly predicable of me i would make a rubbish fish i would be caught every time (ummmm maggot's lovely must eat ow!)

[Rob Clark]

Predictable maybe, but very welcome none the less

i'm not sure sadly that this reflects a natural bucks intelligence but a learnt ability in bucks kids to be able to work out that annie raj and katie all started with 15p pocket money

But we all know that you can't be tutored for this type of test, don't we

Thanks everyone, more ideas gratefully received.

[dejavu]

Tree Some of these "Failed 11 plus" that you talk about should have passed the 11+ and did not win their appeal even though they should have! (feel free to read through my 2 years of angst and fight for my DD's right to a gs education - and eventual victory!). Surely this is why this forum is here - to help children have the best opportunity they can. When I mentioned the national average - I was talking about all those that took the 11+ and that from what I understood - Bucks normally mark harder than the rest of the UK, but when they take the 12+ their score is based on the national average of all the others that have taken the 12+ - der.... But feel free to give some more stats - as we know, stats can always be manipulated ......
.