In some of these threads, it seems to be commonplace (especially by t020) to state that Silverdale is the best state school in Sheffield. So I started researching.

These are my results, based on [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/education/03/school_tables/secondary_schools/html/373_alevel_lea.stm

1) Silverdale is best for GCSEs, Notre Dame is in second place.
2) Notre Dame is best for A Levels. 2nd best at A Levels is Tapton. Then Silverdale in 3rd place.

So if Silverdale is best at GCSEs and Notre Dame best at A Levels, with Notre Dame second best at GCSEs and Silverdale third best at A Levels, then that makes Notre Dame winner of the title "best state school in Sheffield."

Well Notre Dame's only partially a state school as it gets funding from the church as well, and Silverdale's nasty, on the open day the building was crumblng and one of the teachers was such a snob towards my old school i wouldn't touch it with a bargepole.






Not that I'm trying to shine a favourable light on Tapton, or anything..




;)

I have heard good stuff about Silverdale, Tapton and Notre Dame. My cousin went to Tapton and she came out with great results and has just finished her degree.
:thumbsup:

I went to Notre Dame, very good school. Its just hard to get in there if your not a catholic though.

It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. People believe Silverdale to be the best, thanks to its position in the league tables, and so they will move to be in the catchment area - house prices reflect this and so its intake of affluent, middle-class families is skewed.

In terms of results at GCSE it is miles ahead of the others - 84% or thereabouts - with a cluster then between 65% and 70% whose ranking varies form year to year, namely Tapton, King Edward's, High Storrs, Bradfield and King Ecgbert's. It all depends whether you believe league tables, which seem to be little more than a socio-economic index rather than an academic one.

Personally my reaction to Silverdale is "big deal". They take a bunch of kids who would probably get As and Bs anyway and get them up to As and A*s. If you put value added into the equation, the best in Sheffield are Abbeydale Grange and Fir Vale.

Bradfield has for a long time been the best Sheffield school not to have a sixth form.

If you're looking for a school, the best thing you can do is talk to people whose children go there and go and look around the place. Take particular note of the pupils' behaviour outside the school gates.

Fir vale was officially in the 10 worst schools list in th UK. So what are you on about?? They had to close it at one point!!

Fir Vale has apparently experienced something of a renaissance since its Fresh Start.

Nice to see Tapton doing so well in those A-level tables! :thumbsup:

No Thornbridge Comp (Birley Community College) then? LOL nowt changes

I go to Silverdale, and I love it! I only went for the 6th form, as I went to the City school previously... Its an excellent school, we get taught exactly what is needed for the exam and how to get the best grade... Some people may say its an exam factory, and I agree, but basically I'm there to get the best grades so I can get on the best degree course in my subject.

Look at you with your interactionism ;)

Originally posted by DannyBoy
It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. People believe Silverdale to be the best, thanks to its position in the league tables, and so they will move to be in the catchment area - house prices reflect this and so its intake of affluent, middle-class families is skewed.

In terms of results at GCSE it is miles ahead of the others - 84% or thereabouts - with a cluster then between 65% and 70% whose ranking varies form year to year, namely Tapton, King Edward's, High Storrs, Bradfield and King Ecgbert's. It all depends whether you believe league tables, which seem to be little more than a socio-economic index rather than an academic one.

Personally my reaction to Silverdale is "big deal". They take a bunch of kids who would probably get As and Bs anyway and get them up to As and A*s. If you put value added into the equation, the best in Sheffield are Abbeydale Grange and Fir Vale.

Bradfield has for a long time been the best Sheffield school not to have a sixth form.

If you're looking for a school, the best thing you can do is talk to people whose children go there and go and look around the place. Take particular note of the pupils' behaviour outside the school gates.

Originally posted by Sony
Fir vale was officially in the 10 worst schools list in th UK. So what are you on about?? They had to close it at one point!!

You noodle, didn't you see the thing about V.A.?

Lists like that are based on exam results and don't have any reflection on the teaching quality, etc. The reason such schools get poor results is because of class and socio-economic reasons that I won't go into, but needless to say, try reading some scoiological research into the area. [:thumbsup:]

Nice to see Tapton doing so well in those A-level tables!]

Yes, and here I am adding to the list...tum ti tum, fingers crossed everybody!

I was thinking about this today, I am from london so went to school there and have no idea about sheffield schools. when walking to work this morning i noticed the huge number of schools in broomhill - westbourne, birkedale (sp?), sheffield high and edwards VIII.. surely not all of these can be state schools? I saw sheffield high was girls only, and I suspect Birkedale is a private school. Are some just independant with entry exams?

Originally posted by HarrietStar
I was thinking about this today, I am from london so went to school there and have no idea about sheffield schools. when walking to work this morning i noticed the huge number of schools in broomhill - westbourne, birkedale (sp?), sheffield high and edwards VIII.. surely not all of these can be state schools? I saw sheffield high was girls only, and I suspect Birkedale is a private school. Are some just independant with entry exams?
The only state schools in Broomhill are Broomhill Infants and King Edward VII Secondary (upper school only - the lower school is in Ranmoor). I'm not sure what the entry procedures are for Westbourne, Sheffield High and Birkdale, but I think they're all fee paying schools.

Broomhill actually has something of a dearth of state schools compared with the rest of S10. ;)

"I'm not sure what the entry procedures are for Westbourne, Sheffield High and Birkdale, but I think they're all fee paying schools."

These are all fee paying schools. The entry procedures for Sheffield High....
Pre-school aged 4 - child is invited to a half day at the school. No formal test takes place, it's just a case to see if the child fits in and can happily interact with other children.
Older girls have to pass a formal test to join the school.

i went to city school and even tho it has varied feeder schools i still came out with 3a's 7b's and 2c's at g.c.s.e


even tho i would have loved to have gone somewhere as snazzy as notre damm (once did some recitals there for an ex student doing a level music) i still think i turned out ok...

p.s if i would have known that scolarships existed for sheffield girls high, i would have gone for it. but it was never mentioned at my primary school and i know my parents didnt think it existed. when i have children they will either be in private education or taught from home. i know i was taught at state school but i would hate to think i had to send a child to city or handsworth or waltheof. my mum still lives in that neck of the woods and i see what the kids get upto...

what year did u leave caprice???
me.. y.o.l 98

ah right, well that clears that up then :)
what do you guys think of single-sex schools? I went to a co-ed state school and think it's a better environment for children to learn in - I think it's healthier, and i think it prepares them for life after school better.

Originally posted by Cols
"I'm not sure what the entry procedures are for Westbourne, Sheffield High and Birkdale, but I think they're all fee paying schools."

These are all fee paying schools. The entry procedures for Sheffield High....
Pre-school aged 4 - child is invited to a half day at the school. No formal test takes place, it's just a case to see if the child fits in and can happily interact with other children.
Older girls have to pass a formal test to join the school.

Entry procedure for Birkdale is pretty much same as Sheffield High - at aged four there is no entrance test. All the boys do have to sit a test to progress to the senior school though.

Originally posted by HarrietStar
ah right, well that clears that up then :)
what do you guys think of single-sex schools? I went to a co-ed state school and think it's a better environment for children to learn in - I think it's healthier, and i think it prepares them for life after school better.

I don't see any problem with single-sex schools. As for preparing them for life beyond school - surely these children don't exist in single sex communities so they will have interaction outside the education system.

I went to a co-ed school but have friends who went to single-sex school and also some who went to boarding school - its doesn't seem to have affected anyone's ability to cope with life beyond school.

Originally posted by DannyBoy

Personally my reaction to Silverdale is "big deal". They take a bunch of kids who would probably get As and Bs anyway and get them up to As and A*s. If you put value added into the equation, the best in Sheffield are Abbeydale Grange and Fir Vale.



Why would they probably get As and Bs anyway? Does coming from a more affluent area/background/family mean you're better at exams??? Or is it because the of a more stable home life? Or success breeding success?

Originally posted by t020
Why would they probably get As and Bs anyway? Does coming from a more affluent area/background/family mean you're better at exams??? Or is it because the of a more stable home life? Or success breeding success?

Well actually, according to a lot of sociological research, yes, yes and yes again.

Of course the middle classes are better at exams, it's apparent frequently. From my own experiences in a very divided school (half from middle class areas and half from a council estate), the 'clever' kids who got all the A's were nearly always middle class. The middle class reproduces the middle class, because from a young age the middle class child will have an environment encouraging academia, whereas by the nature of the working class ethos, the child will look for immediate gratification and therefore will see less value in achieving higher grades.

More money in the home environment will be more likely to (but will not always) lead to a more stable home life.

And success breeding success? Well it would be highly controversial (and a bit stupid) to say that the middle classes have inherently got a higher innate intelligence than the working classes, so evidently it's not genetic. However the as I said before, the middle class culture promotes academic study, so in the sense of nurture, this could be said to be true.

what year did u leave caprice???

I left in 2003 :D
Which means you left when I was a little year 7 hehe :)

While in some cases you can say that schools being in "good" areas have better results (like Silverdale ot Tapton), that's just not true for Notre Dame. It might be in Fulwood but it has a cathcment area that covers half the city. Its feeder schools vary from St Marie's at Fulwood and St Wilfred's in Ecclesall to St Patrick's at Sheffield Lane Top and St Catherine's in Pitsmoor, neither of which "good" areas. So the conslusion is that it's not the area of the school which makes for good results but most probably the ethos of the school. Which means that t020's theory about wealthy areas having better schools isn't always true. It's the atmosphere at the school which makes for good results.
I didn't go to Notre Dame, by the way.

Originally posted by fhain29
While in some cases you can say that schools being in "good" areas have better results (like Silverdale ot Tapton), that's just not true for Notre Dame. It might be in Fulwood but it has a cathcment area that covers half the city. Its feeder schools vary from St Marie's at Fulwood and St Wilfred's in Ecclesall to St Patrick's at Sheffield Lane Top and St Catherine's in Pitsmoor, neither of which "good" areas. So the conslusion is that it's not the area of the school which makes for good results but most probably the ethos of the school. Which means that t020's theory about wealthy areas having better schools isn't always true. It's the atmosphere at the school which makes for good results.
I didn't go to Notre Dame, by the way.

Come off it mate, ok, so Notre Dame's an exception however, as I said, I wouldn't class it as a state school anyway, but why do you think every single one of the 'best' state schools are in the most affluent south-west area of the city?

Tapton
King Teds
High Storrs
Silverdale
King Egcburts

Originally posted by HarrietStar - I think it's healthier, and i think it prepares them for life after school better.


How do you mean "healthier" ??

I went to a single sex secondary school and so did both my daughters...we're all pretty normal as far as I can tell.

There is plenty of scope these days for social contact with the opposite sex outside school. In school I think it's a distraction they can do better without....especially once the hormones start flowing :D

Originally posted by Greybeard
How do you mean "healthier" ??

I went to a single sex secondary school and so did both my daughters...we're all pretty normal as far as I can tell.

There is plenty of scope these days for social contact with the opposite sex outside school. In school I think it's a distraction they can do better without....especially once the hormones start flowing :D

I'd tend to disagree and say it isn't a fair reflection or preperation for real life, but one of my best friends is a boy at a private single sex school, and he has tons of mates of both sexes.

I think, however, the treatment at single sex schools shouldn't be gender biased, for example, encouraging home ec in girls' or CDT in boys'.

when i say healthier, i mean more natural, i think it's wrong to seperate sexes.. I'm not saying single-sex schools turn out weirdos, haha, i just think co-ed is better in terms of social behaviour etc. I am only talking on personal experience and the fact that my cousin went to an all boys school and has no idea how to act around women. However, there is a lot of evidence to suggest that academically boys and girls do better when seperated, which i can understand because the boys at my school did a lot to disrupt lessons etc. But I think learning how to act around all sorts of people at school prepares you for life better and adds to preperation from other sources.

Harriet

In my view at lot of the 'hooligan' behaviour that some boys exhibit comes initially from showing off in front of girls; and my eldest granddaughter (15) thinks much of the cattiness and spiteful behaviour she experiences amongst girls at school arises from the competition for the attention of boys. I'm sure a lot bad behaviour is down to peer pressure that doesn't exist in single sex schools.

I did also once read that teachers found single sex classes generally easier to manage but doubt I could find the reference now.

'Course when I were a lad people had bigger families (I had two brothers and two sisters), times were hard with rationing etc. so we had to learn to share and tolerate our sibling's friends coming round to tea etc.

i'm sure there is a lot of truth in that, but I do believe that even with a group of just girls, cattiness would still be an issue, and I think peer pressure would exist in any social group. I do think that discipline and academic achievement is better in single sex schools, but I think there are other factors such as environment, social skills and ideals that contribute to a good 'education' to.

Originally posted by fhain29
While in some cases you can say that schools being in "good" areas have better results (like Silverdale ot Tapton), that's just not true for Notre Dame. It might be in Fulwood but it has a cathcment area that covers half the city. Its feeder schools vary from St Marie's at Fulwood and St Wilfred's in Ecclesall to St Patrick's at Sheffield Lane Top and St Catherine's in Pitsmoor, neither of which "good" areas. So the conslusion is that it's not the area of the school which makes for good results but most probably the ethos of the school. Which means that t020's theory about wealthy areas having better schools isn't always true. It's the atmosphere at the school which makes for good results.
I didn't go to Notre Dame, by the way.

That's because Notre Dame is a religious school and religious schools do tend to achieve better results. There is definitely a correlation between area and state school performance, and I'm not entirely sure why, but I put it down mainly to more stable upbringings and success breeding success. I agree with most of what noseyrosie posted.

Well we can agree to differ over some aspects of single sex schools. :)



Originally posted by HarrietStar

but I think there are other factors such as environment, social skills and ideals that contribute to a good 'education' to.


Of course there are. But too often the one thing parents overlook,in how their children behave and how well they do at school, is their own contribution to the overall picture. No one can doubt that the majority of teachers strive to do the best for the children in their charge but in many cases their work is undone by the attitude of parents.

Bad parenting didn't seem much of a problem for my generation. These days parents have too many commercially driven bad influences to contend with...TV adverts, console games, displays of sweets at supermarket checkouts specifically designed to arouse insistent desire....

But this is turning into a rant so I'd better shut up, ....except to mention that one of the root causes of inadequate parenting is the need for both parents to work.

yeh, i think agreeing to disagree is a good idea :) it is a shame that some families don't eat together anymore, or all the kids have their own tvs in their rooms so there seems to be a sort of social breakdown in communication at home, which in some cases is bound to influence behaviour at school.

Ok everybody....you need to be reading some Bourdieu...a sociologist who wrote about cultural capital, i.e. that middle class kids do better because their parents had better educations, and therefore have more money, reproduce the middle class, and make an area 'affluent' and therefore only attracts middle classes (I'm thinking Fulwood :D) because only they can afford it....etc etc...


Basically covers most of what we've been saying anyway.

Originally posted by noseyrosie
Come off it mate, ok, so Notre Dame's an exception however, as I said, I wouldn't class it as a state school anyway, but why do you think every single one of the 'best' state schools are in the most affluent south-west area of the city?
Tapton
King Teds
High Storrs
Silverdale
King Egcburts

Yes, Notre Dame is a totally different kettle of fish. People attend there from as far afield as Stocksbridge; it's not a "catchment" school.

The list above misses out Bradfield, which is the exception that proves the rule! It knocked Tapton into fourth place a couple of years ago. (Look, I have to big it up, it's where my children will probably go in 7 years' time!)

But broadly Rosie is right. You only need to look at a very simple statistical skill, namely that of correlation. You can plot Sheffield schools' exam results against the average house price in the catchment and you will get an almost perfect positive correlation. This is not a coincidence!

Originally posted by DannyBoy
You only need to look at a very simple statistical skill, namely that of correlation. You can plot Sheffield schools' exam results against the average house price in the catchment and you will get an almost perfect positive correlation. This is not a coincidence!

Which is also what I've been saying all along.

But I'm not saying this is a good thing, and I'm not saying results are everything. I also feel strongly that the league tables are very misleading and give parents no real idea of how much additional input the *school* will give to their children and how much is just down to their coming from a stable, motivated (sometimes pushy), middle-class background.

The school where my wife used to teach regularly fetched up at the bottom of the league tables (not in Sheffield) - but, through the hard work and diligence of the teachers, they got kids passing a few GCSEs who would otherwise have got nothing. It's a huge leap from a fail to a grade E; not so huge from a B to an A.

On the other hand, I am not convinced that having loads of people sitting GCSEs is a great idea. Successive governments have ignored the fact that a successful economy needs a *mix* of skills - it doesn't need everybody passing lots of academic exams. The German and French systems recognise that selection is not a dirty word - why can't we?

What we will have in 10 years' time is a glut of people going off to University to read Media Studies, Peace Studies and Sociology and being funded by Mum & Dad to do so. What we will *need* in 10 years' time is more highly-skilled carpenters, plumbers, welders, and people in other such specialised manual skills. Unfortunately all too few middle-class parents are happy to let their children follow an apprenticeship path - they all think university is the be-all and end-all...

Originally posted by DannyBoy
... Media Studies, Peace Studies and Sociology and being funded by Mum & Dad to do so.

DOn't be mean about Sociology!
It's currently my favourite A-level and I'm planning on pursuing it at university and becoming a social researcher for the government (or similar).

I'm not getting funded by my parents either, I'll have ye know!

Originally posted by DannyBoy
What we will have in 10 years' time is a glut of people going off to University to read Media Studies, Peace Studies and Sociology and being funded by Mum & Dad to do so. What we will *need* in 10 years' time is more highly-skilled carpenters, plumbers, welders, and people in other such specialised manual skills. Unfortunately all too few middle-class parents are happy to let their children follow an apprenticeship path - they all think university is the be-all and end-all...

I would be more than happy for my son to have a trade - he's not the most academic of kids and I have a feeling that when we get to it his GCSE results will reflect this. Now if he were to take a more vocational qualification in plumbing or carpentry I am sure he'd be a high flying A* student at that!

danny boy i completely agree with your points, nosey rosie what the hell? Media Studies, Peace Studies these are mickey mouse then are they? right. dont be so pathetic. what about drama then? any more to add to the list? bit of a stupid thing to say isnt it. get off your high horse.

Originally posted by DannyBoy
The German and French systems recognise that selection is not a dirty word - why can't we?



You must be joking! That may be true about France but Germany selects at the age of 10 and it's not just a choice between a grammar and secondary, but between THREE different schools (grammar, technical or secondary), meaning that ethnic monority kids get lumbered in seondary schools and are branded as failures for the rest of their lives. Swapping between schools is very difficult, not like swapping between sets in a comprehensive. The German system was slated in the PISA report by the OECD, which incidentally rated the English system as one of the best in the world (after Finland and Korea).

Another point: Just because Notre Dame (or All Saints for that matter) are voluntary aided by the church doesn't make them private schools. They are state schools like any other. You don't have to pay or pass a test, you just either have to Catholic or be willing to put up with the RE overkill.
And as for catchment areas, they do have them. I went to All Saints but only after a near legal battle with the council who said that we lived in the Notre Dame catchment area, but my parents didn't want me to go there. So there are cathchment areas, but they are huge.

Originally posted by mimicraze
danny boy i completely agree with your points, nosey rosie what the hell? these are mickey mouse then are they? right. dont be so pathetic. what about drama then? any more to add to the list? bit of a stupid thing to say isnt it. get off your high horse.

Sorry.....:blush:

<snip>

:banana:

forgiven :P :) :cool:

Originally posted by mimicraze
danny boy i completely agree with your points, nosey rosie what the hell? these are mickey mouse then are they? right. dont be so pathetic. what about drama then? any more to add to the list? bit of a stupid thing to say isnt it. get off your high horse.

Rosie please take back the apology - actually that was me with the list of "Mickey Mouse" subjects. :) Sorry. I didn't mean to have a go at anybody's chosen A-Level options - I'm in favour of people having more choice of subject, after all. It was just part of the general point about us needing more skilled manual workers in this country and how we're going to face a shortage in 10 years' time.

When I was at University (1987-91) it was still, to some extent, a time when you could just choose to study whatever you wanted and worry about careers later. There were still grants (up until my final year) although they were paltry. sadly, young people nowadays (God, I sound like an old git!) don't have that luxury.

Students today realise the need to be more hard-headed and career-orientated, and for some that means doing something which they think is vocational. For a lot of students that means the big growth subjects of the last decade: Media Studies and Leisure/Tourism. Unfortunately there aren't enough jobs in those industries to support all the graduates who want to work in them, and ultimately work experience in those industries will often count for more than a degree.

I just think it's sad that Blair and Co. have a stated aim of getting 50% of young people into university when this is neither in their long-term interests nor those of the country as a whole.

fhain29, I take your point about Notre Dame having catchment areas. Mine was just that it dosn't have one in the same sense that Silverdale, High Storrs et al do.

I'd be interested to read the report you cite - or a summary if it's huge! Is it on the Web anywhere?

This emotive phrase "branded as a failure" is often used when people want to argue against selection, probably because that's what selection ended up doing in the past to those who didn't pass the 11-plus. That doesn't mean that would be the case again if some form of selection (or choice) were re-introduced into our "system". (Not that we really have one - we seem to have several different education systems rubbing along together.) I wouldn't want to go back to the days of the 11-plus but neither would I want our current situation to continue - it's a tough one.

I suppose it's a matter of perception - how the different types of school are presented. The sad fact is that the secondary modern was seen as the second best choice to the grammar school, which didn't necessarily follow. It should just be a case of horses for courses, without judgmental values being placed on academic versus non-academic education. It's difficult to argue for selection in any form because people see it as a right-wing policy (and I'm not right-wing in any other way) and tend to assume that you mean you want to go back to the "bad old days"...

Originally posted by DannyBoy

I just think it's sad that Blair and Co. have a stated aim of getting 50% of young people into university when this is neither in their long-term interests nor those of the country as a whole.

I agree. there is such a thing as over-qualification. Although everyone should have the equal opportunity to go to university (not so at the moment, if you ask me...ask another sociologist, Boudon's positional theory :thumbsup:) it should not be seen as preferable if your talents lie elsewhere.

What's the point in 50% of the population having a degree, when we need less than 50% of the population to do highly skilled jobs that require one? Brickies with a degree in History? Why?! Ok, ok, so there is the argument for self interest, but in terms of vocation, with 50% of the pop. looking for skilled jobs, we will suffer from a deficiency in labourers.

It's sad but true - although our school system seems designed to push every student towards academia, if education actually worked in the way that the government claims it should, society would break down. Get your head around that one!

Originally posted by noseyrosie

What's the point in 50% of the population having a degree, when we need less than 50% of the population to do highly skilled jobs that require one? Brickies with a degree in History? Why?! Ok, ok, so there is the argument for self interest, but in terms of vocation, with 50% of the pop. looking for skilled jobs, we will suffer from a deficiency in labourers.


Why on earth should a brickie not have a history degree? It will be as useful to him/her as some of the degrees currently on offer are to anyone. (Women's Studies was on offer at Sheffield University at one point ?!!! Why ? ) There are some that would also consider brick laying and construction a highly skilled job.
Whilst you may not need a degree to work as a brick layer, there are also plenty of students taking degrees who's choice of careers will never call for them to use any of the knowledge gained at university.

Originally posted by beckb
Why on earth should a brickie not have a history degree? It will be as useful to him/her as some of the degrees currently on offer are to anyone. (Women's Studies was on offer at Sheffield University at one point ?!!! Why ? ) There are some that would also consider brick laying and construction a highly skilled job.
Whilst you may not need a degree to work as a brick layer, there are also plenty of students taking degrees who's choice of careers will never call for them to use any of the knowledge gained at university.

i see your point, but what i meant was that it would be far more useful for a brickie to do a course that bettered his/her own skills. Ok, so a lot of degrees do not go towards particular jobs, but the jobs that require them do so because tehy need a measurement of a certain level of whatever it is that they require from a prospesctive employee. With the increasingly complex economy , there has become a need for higher levels of qualification in all sectors, but a degree is not the onyl route, and not the most useful route for a builder, surely?

As I said however, if anyone wants to do a degree for the pure hell of it, why not?

Why would they probably get As and Bs anyway? Does coming from a more affluent area/background/family mean you're better at exams??? Or is it because the of a more stable home life? Or success breeding success?
#
lol im in silverdales 6th form, and ide absolutely love to get A's and B's for everything..

King Ted's is good.

I hate Tapton, it;s such a protentious school, the only six form the didn't accept me( I apllied to everone of them in sheffield) they only seem to cater for their own middle class, cross pool types.

I hate Tapton, it;s such a protentious school, the only six form the didn't accept me( I apllied to everone of them in sheffield) they only seem to cater for their own middle class, cross pool types.
Did they give you a reason, like spelling perhaps? ;)

I went to Silverdale for GCSE's, was fun. I went to Highstorrs for A Level's, was very fun also.

I wouldn't call Tapton pretentious. Liberal, if anything. I reckon they just hated you.

no, i blame government qoutas,

havent you lot got better things to do than pratcitce corretc spelling,
idon;t care as long as i get the message across.

Tapton= tory elitism

Nice to see Tapton doing so well in those A-level tables! :thumbsup:[/QUOTE]


I went to Tapton and came out with 8 GCSE's and 3 A'levels :thumbsup: it was a great school and i'd send my kids there, if its still standing when i have any!

x

I've just spent 10 mins reading this thread and just discovered most of it is 2 years old!

Anyway, lets add my two cents. I have taught at 2 very different state schools, one is at one end of the league table, one at the other. In terms of quality of teaching there is no difference. Silverdale et al get good results because of their intake. You can predict their GCSE's at Year 7. Most of the intake arrive with good levels of English, Maths and Science, hence classes get off to a good start. At the other end, some pupils arrive who can barely read, and the school works incredibly hard to cater for every single pupil.

If a pupil want to get 10 GCSEs then they will get that, the resources are there. What makes schools stand out is the opportunities they provide the pupils - trips, events etc. Lets judge schools on this and not on league tables.

havent you lot got better things to do than pratcitce corretc spelling,
idon;t care as long as i get the message across.

Apologies, I don't normally pick people up on their spelling, but as this thread was about education.................... :roll:
And, although misspelt words can be understood, they don't make the written word flow - and they are not a good idea on CVs or application forms! :nono:

Well Notre Dame's only partially a state school as it gets funding from the church as well, and Silverdale's nasty, on the open day the building was crumblng and one of the teachers was such a snob towards my old school i wouldn't touch it with a bargepole.






Not that I'm trying to shine a favourable light on Tapton, or anything..




;)

Its being rebuilt you idiot and the teachers are snobs thats why they work there

In some of these threads, it seems to be commonplace (especially by t020) to state that Silverdale is the best state school in Sheffield. So I started researching.

These are my results, based on [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/education/03/school_tables/secondary_schools/html/373_alevel_lea.stm

1) Silverdale is best for GCSEs, Notre Dame is in second place.
2) Notre Dame is best for A Levels. 2nd best at A Levels is Tapton. Then Silverdale in 3rd place.

So if Silverdale is best at GCSEs and Notre Dame best at A Levels, with Notre Dame second best at GCSEs and Silverdale third best at A Levels, then that makes Notre Dame winner of the title "best state school in Sheffield."


I go there you only get good results because your parents make you

Notre Dame screws your mind with religion - took me years to get over it.