Year 5 and 6 parents- secondary schools

[jim_the_chin]

The value added score is the worst in Southwark.

[Queenie23]

No one is comparing the results to private schools. All London schools have large sen and English as second language percentages. No excuse.

[Ondine]

And the important point is the huge dip in performance - compare against Kingsdale's own performance over the past 4 years

[Hollandforlife]

Firstly Ofsted refer to the school's 'dip' in performance. A dip would suggest they have come up over the other side. This is a plummet.

Value added is a measure of progress from start of secondary school to GCSE it is a score of 1000 and is in line with national average, over 1000 above etc. Kingsdale scored 970.9, this is the lowest in Southwark by a significant distance. Charter(which has been mentioned)by comparison, has a higher value added of 1037.3. Compare Kingsdale's GCSE results with Harris Academy Peckham who scored 56% they have a Value Added of nearly 1040.

Kingsdale has not met the government's 'floor target' is one of the lowest performing schools in London and features in the BBC's list of 'worst GCSE results'.

Looks fairly clear to me!

[gpercival78]

How the mighty fall!! I remember some parents talking on the train how they were fighting to get their kids in...let's hope they didn't- based on my personal experience.

[BB100]

Hi Cora,

I've noticed that lots of schools have very dodgy Value Added Measures this year in comparison to previous years, probably due to the English GCSE issue, so I don't consider VAMs as very reliable for 2013.

The very recent Kingsdale Ofsted report (which are now much more harsher/robust inspections since Sep 2012) attempts to explain the dip, which seems to suggest that the problems they had with staff last year adversely affected 2012's results. Having to change children's GCSE courses midflow will really mess up any school's results. Askes admitted having a similar (but less public) issue a few years ago when their results took a nosedive when they lost a whole department of teachers.

However, Ofsted seem to be satisfied eveything is back on track:

"The school leadership team had to deal with some exceptionally challenging issues in the last academic year. In tackling these issues robustly, bold decisions were made to switch the courses being followed by some Year 11 students. In addition, circumstances led to a significant reduction in the amount of additional support and revision sessions that had, in the past, taken place beyond the school day. This change, plus staff absence in some key subjects, such as science, led to a significant dip in Year 11 students?? attainment and achievement in 2012. This was particularly the case for boys.

?? During this inspection, all groups of students were making good progress in the large majority of lessons and outstanding progress in some lessons. Changes to the courses available made last year are now fully in place and beginning to have a positive impact on students?? progress. Issues that led to a reduction in the range of support and revision sessions have also been resolved. As a result, the progress made by all students, including boys, has now returned to the good levels seen in the past and attainment is rising rapidly across the school, particularly in English, mathematics and science."

[Queenie23]

Hello

[prickle]

Quote from ofsted: "In tackling these issues robustly, bold decisions were made to switch the courses being followed by some Year 11 students."

I've heard that some Yr 11s this year are having to take 2 English GCSE exams for 2 different boards for the same exam period. It seems that the school's strategy is to spread the risk - let them take both and choose the best result as 'the one'. Robust and bold, maybe but educationally sound?

[BB100]

Ofsted has graded Kingsdale as a 'good' school. This is the official judgement. Why anyone would be 'pleased' that children didn't get the GCSE's that they could have got to prove other schools are better is beyond me.

[BB100]

prickle Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Some Yr 11s this year are having to take 2 English

> GCSE exams for 2 different boards for the same

> exam period. It seems that the school's strategy

> is to spread the risk - let them take both and

> choose the best result as 'the one'. Robust and

> bold, maybe but educationally sound?

What's that got to do with last year's students?

Anyway, schools up and down the country have been doing this for ages. There was an article in TES magazine recently about it and how the government are planning to have one exam board per subject to stamp it out.

[Hollandforlife]

They had to change exam boards after the investigation too...it wasn't necessarily a choice.

I think people need to look at this carefully in 2011 the results were 60% this year people whistleblew and the investigation began, the investigation which still hasn't finished. The following year when the exam boards are watching the school like hawks, and the school follows proper procedures, the results drop to 36%.

It is time people stop defending what is quite clearly unacceptable.

[Queenie23]

BB100 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ofsted has graded Kingsdale as a 'good' school.

> This is the official judgement. Why anyone would

> be 'pleased' that children didn't get the GCSE's

> that they could have got to prove other schoo is beyond me.

[prickle]

BB100 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> prickle Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > Some Yr 11s this year are having to take 2

> English

> > GCSE exams for 2 different boards for the same

> > exam period. It seems that the school's

> strategy

> > is to spread the risk - let them take both and

> > choose the best result as 'the one'. Robust and

> > bold, maybe but educationally sound?

>

> What's that got to do with last year's students?

>

> Anyway, schools up and down the country have been

> doing this for ages. There was an article in TES

> magazine recently about it and how the government

> are planning to have one exam board per subject to

> stamp it out.

I didn't say that it was anything to do with last year's students.

Also the fact that other schools are doing this does not make it right. What struck me was that if this was true, the lengths the school was prepared to go for good results regardless of what the actual education benefits are to the students themselves. Given the track record of the school (being investigated for exam cheating), I was surprised to hear that the school was still using rather questionable (but probably legal) means to pursue good results (but not very successfully!) Its all desperate really. I feel really sorry for these Yr 11 students.

[BB100]

Hollandforlife Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It is time people stop defending what is quite

> clearly unacceptable.

Quoting directly from an official report vs gossip/conjecture is hardly defending but putting the official line across. I have no connection with the school so I have no agenda. However, since Cora, who perhaps has put her child's name down for the school and is understandably concerned, has asked for some background on the results, it is not helpful to her to offer unsubstantiated explanations.

It's next year's results that will be telling.

[Hollandforlife]

I have to say I think this year's results have already been telling...why are people dismissive of this? Let's look at the background of the results:

2009:47%

2010:59%

2011:60%

2012:36%

The school has boasted about its ever improving cohort and even if this was a bit of a weaker year group, it would have been weak when it started, hence why the Value Added Score is so incredibly low. There is no excuse for it being so low, the school has failed very many low achieving students which is unacceptable.

I know I have said most of this in a previous post, but I am not entirely appreciating being told I have made unsubstantiated explanations, so a result of 36% 5A*-C GCSEs including English & Maths is :

* below the floor target set by this government of 40%

* 22.8% lower than the LA average and appears to be the lowest in Southwark.

* less than half that of The Charter School which became an Academy at the same time as Kingsdale, has a very similar intake and regularly compares itself to.

* close to the top of the BBC's list of 'worst GCSE results'

On top of this, these are the first set of results since the exam investigation of 2011, which makes it very telling indeed.

Yes next year's results will be telling, but so were the 2012.

Every school in the country shown had their results taken before retakes and therefore there is no excuse that can be given for this very poor set of results.

[Hollandforlife]

Queenie23 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sorry - Exceptionally challenging issues? Due to

> the senior management's desire to inflate their

> gcse results no matter what surely! The problems

> with staff were all their own making. I for one am

> pleased that the other schools in our area are

> finally being proved to be good schools with good

> results and parents will now take off their rose

> tinted glasses re Kingsdale.

Agreed Queenie23, it is great to see that other schools are able to shine and show how far they have come, they have been hidden amongst the smokescreen caused by K'dale over the past few years. Well done to all the other schools in Southwark who have improved this year in spite of all of the English exam issues.

[prickle]

"The school has boasted about its ever improving cohort and even if this was a bit of a weaker year group, it would have been weak when it started, hence why the Value Added Score is so incredibly low. There is no excuse for it being so low, the school has failed very many low achieving students which is unacceptable. "

Agree that the score was unacceptably low. If you look at Southwark's results, 11 out of 15 schools achieved a score over 1000 (which is the baseline above which the school is adding value). Of the 4 that has lower scores, Kingsdale is the lowest. Also two of the four have GCSE A*-C on or above 60%.

What I can't work out is how this disasterous results tie in with the 'good' outcome for the attainment section of the very recent results. Looks like there is a discrepancy there?

[BB100]

Hollandforlife Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I have to say I think this year's results have

> already been telling...why are people dismissive

> of this?

It's not about being dismissive, you just can't look at the results in isolation. There are too many variables here to make your assertions without any further evidence. Actually, according to the DfE website, this year's A*-C GCSE result (without maths/English) for Kingsdale is 65%, which is similar to previous years. I personally can't see how they could have maintained this statistic, under intense examboard scrutiny, if all their previous results were faked. It suggests the drop is directly due to either maths or English - and there has been major problems with English GCSE in 2012.

[albert]

I love the spin on these results from kingsdale supporters. They're awful results and the value added is shocking. I hope the school turns it round. They have many many inspired and bright pupils and keen parents so hopefully it will. Equally, I hope the head's attempt to spin the results at future open days does not make the presentation any longer because that really would be interminable.

The Harris schools, especially the girls school and the academy at Peckham have done brilliantly. Waverley was a failing girls school, which the local authority could not turn round. Under Harris leadership it has done amazingly well. As for other schools, such as charter, bacons college and st saviours; the results speak for themselves. Well done most southwark schools.

[intexasatthe moment]

From what I understand albert different year groups at Kingsdale can have very different experiences .

I think the higher years have had a very different time from those just recently joining the school .

So those who have good experiences find it hard to believe that anything could be amiss at the school .

[optimum]

albert is right - the results for Kingsdale are awful and the value added is shocking. Yes there have been major problems with the English GCSE in 2012, but that's the same for all schools.

My experience of secondary schools is recent - my child transferred to one in September 2012. I found it interesting to compare the content of the presentations at open days. The focus I felt at Kingsdale School was on as albert also mentions attracting 'bright children and keen parents'. I didn't hear anything about the quality of teaching and learning in the school or the procedures for tracking attainment and involving parents. Trying to change your intake by an unnecessarily confusing admissions policy and an unclear scholarships route can only take you so far in raising standards over time. Historically, the school was in a difficult position and the management I think has done well to make the school a popular choice. But the decisions they made five years ago to manipulate their intake now seems rather short-sighted.

How have the local schools that have delivered far superior GCSE results to Kingsdale achieved this? My guess is by outstanding teaching and by nurturing high aspirations for all students no matter what their ability on entry was. Well done to them!