Sir William Borlase

[yplx]

Has anyone looked into this year'sGCSE results? Just found out Sir William Borlase is on the top 6th! Is that I have been so far too ignorant to notice that, or it has improved so much this year?

Any clue?

[hugh]

Probably neither. Bear in mind that different news media compile league tables using different criteria. For instance the Daily Telegraph did A level rankings by only looking at A and B grades.

[Dad40]

On the average point score measure, yes Borlase is the top grammar school in Bucks for GCSEs.

[any1]

It's also worth bearing in mind that until recently some grammars (SWB included) were able use VRTS score as a way of allocating places. Effectively they were able to set their own own pass mark whereas others accepted pupils scoring 121 or below if on appeal. League tables obviously don't take this into account.

[Guest55]

Very true any1 - the new Year 9s are the first cohort where distance from the school was the major factor ....

[Hilda]

Guest 55 - you are usually right on these things. But my elder son is going inti year 10 this year (AGS) , but also considered RGS when he was 11(both catchment then). For both schools, score was no longer allowed to be a factor when he did 11+. Did the "score criteria" change at different times for different schools?

Hilda

[Guest]

Another factor which is going to come through is that the children who are about to go into yr 9 are the first year, I believe, when their highest score got them in, rather than the average. So less able students only had to"hit" the 121 once rather than twice to be guaranteed a place.

Combined with the reversal of the rule where, once out of catchment, the highest score counted to the new rule that those nearest the school are first to be offered out-of-catchment place, must mean that the average ability at grammar schools has gone down? Be interesting to see how this cohort do in comparison to the years before them as they go through SATS and then GCSEs?

[Guest55]

Guest - you did not have to hit 121 twice to get an average of 121+!

The pupils sat three tests, the worst was discarded and the other two averaged. So 100, 110, 132 got in - 100 discarded and then 110 and 132 averaged = 121 which was OK.

Hilda, I think only SOME schools had VR scores as a criteria -

[Guest]

All schools used to use VR order not distance, but the impact of this varied.
Schools who could not accommodate all catchment children putting it as first preference - result = skewed intake within catchment to higher VR scores

Schools who could accommodate all catchment and out area sibs and a few more out of area children -result = unskewed intake for catchment and siblings (bulk of intake)but skewed for out area to higher scores

Schools who could accommodate pretty much all prefs - no impact

But note - all schools took sibs first

[hugh]

But note - all schools took sibs first

If they were grammar schools, even siblings had to pass 11+ to get in.