Results from this year’s league tables show that dividing schools into academic groups when mailing is a good idea.
At the top end of the charts there are the schools where all pupils are getting 9 or 10 GCSE passes between A* and C. Talking to them about improving GCSE grades is pointless. At the other end, the situation is serious, but those schools are often more worried about behavioural issues than academic. It is, after all, very difficult (although of course no impossible) to improve exam grades if there are severe behavioural issues in the school.
Today’s figures however go further, and show that half of the pupils taking GCSE do not get a basic qualification in science and 70% do not have at least a C-grade language GCSE, figures released today show.
The figures also show that at the bottom of the league 10% of schools have failed to meet the targets set down by the government in terms of basic academic success as measured through exams: that 30% of pupils should get 5 or more A* to Cs by last year.
This is the first year the government is showing how many pupils got a C or above in a language GCSE or a double science qualification (worth two GCSEs). The figures suggest deep specialism going on within schools where A-level entries in chemistry, biology and maths have risen. It may be that pupils who are interested in science are groomed for the subject from an early age, while others are left behind.
60% of pupils met the target of getting at least five good GCSEs. At A level there is a further narrowing of the gap between pupils in poorer and wealthier regions. The gap between girls’ and boys’ results at GCSE and A-level has widened and the huge differences between independent and local authority schools, and between comprehensives and selective local authority schools.
It is certainly worth looking at marketing science and languages programmes to schools on the basis that they will raise GCSE grades.