What would you consider to be a "good" state school?

[SparklePrincess]

Would it be school A in an affluent area that gets 65% A*-C (with English & Maths) or school B thats struggling with a problem intake yet still manages to get just under the national average?
If I had a choice id go for school A purely to avoid the social problems associated with a school like school B. My dd is the type that will always gravitate towards like minded naughty kids so needs as little encouragement in that area as possible.

[TellusMater]

They're probably both good schools. Which would be best for your child would depend, as you have suggested, on more than just exam results.

[pukkapatch]

can you keep up with the joneses though? because it really isnt a good idea to be the only child in the school whose family has very little money.
ds1 came home and wanted to know why we never went skiing. apparently all his classmates do.
they dont, but a fair few do. and if they all turned up in designer gear for every mifti day, i wouldnt want dd to be the only one dressed in george from asda. too big a social difference is a really bad idea for a childs self confidence.

[UnquietDad]

The more important underlying question is, do you want your child to go to the kind of school where people make judgements based on the clothes they wear and the kind of holidays they have?

[ProfessorGrammaticus]

But we live in a society like that, don't we? You're never going to get away from it.

[Vacua]

god just look round all of them, which one do you like the feel of for your child? use your instincts

[UnquietDad]

But to go to a school where the majority of kids do not realise that skiing and designer clothes are for tossers... I'd hate that.

[lionheart]

Is 65% considered good?

[VictorianSqualor]

My DD went to a school like school b, she was assaulted a number of times, she was often (I felt) ignored at school as she wasnt one of the little shits that was on report or needed 'extra help' (because they were little fuckers whose parents taught them no respect for teachers, not valid reasons).

I tried so hard not to judge but we since moved towns and into a nice estate where the houses are all private, mummy stays at home and goes shopping in her chelsea tractor with daddys credit card etc, DD is now a million times happier, she has come on leaps and bounds because the children aren't as hard for the teachers to control, therefore less disrupted lessons etc. If it means letting DD wear her best clothes to mufti day then so be it, she's happy now.

So, sorry if I sound like a snob but because of my experiences DD will not be going to a school like school B again.

[glitterfairy]

All three of my kids go to different schools. All three are state schools.

My youngest is at primary school alongside children who I would consider very different from us and often fairly disadvantaged. I think this is good for her although she does have to fight to understand that different is not a bad thing.

On the other hand this primary school has an ethos of understanding and reflection and allows her to progress incredibly fast. the results they have with these kids are exceptional and the teaching staff are committed to getting the best out of every kid regardless.

[SparklePrincess]

Where we live now is quite an affluent area, but the people are all really nice & normal. You get your odd snob, but very much the minority.
Trouble is we will probably be moving area since my dh decided to dump me & I probably wont be able to afford to remain here.
Completely disregarding the other issues, what sort of percentage of % A*-C would you consider to be acceptable? Our local school had around 65%, as do most of the villages around here. The nearest big towns with a wider social mix have results going from 20% (over my dead body) to 53%, with a fair few hovering around or just below the average. Is the national average acceptable, or should I be moving heaven & earth in order to remain in catchment of a village school? Bearing in mind my dc will already be at a so called disadvantage coming from a single parent family.

[SparklePrincess]

VS you sort of answered my question there.

[VictorianSqualor]

Sparkle, not all schools will be the same as the one DD went to, I could just be really lucky with the one she is at now and really unlucky with the one she went to before.

Personally if I was you I'd try and stay within a reasonable commute to the school your child is happy at (whatever type of school that may be), easier if you drive, but a bus route away could be just as feasible, or a walk that wasb't too long, it all depends on your personal situation, and what you think is most important to where you have to move to, with me it was DD's school, with others it can be close to family, friends, work etc.

If you're going to be housed by the council you can ask to be rehoused near to the school, if it's going to be private rental then a smaller house may enable you to be able to reach the rent.

I don't know if you're a sahm/wohm so not sure about how it would affect you.

[ScienceTeacher]

I'm not particularly impressed with 65%, tbh, because it means that 35% have little to show for their five years in school.

With the dilemma you have, it may be useful to look at value added scores.

A visit to the school is essential, and then you need to find out what their policy is on how they determine which GCSE papers the pupils go in for (eg foundation, intermediate, higher).

An example of the diservice that a 'good' school can do to their individual pupils in the name of league table position: the child of friends of ours was put in for foundation level science (max grade C) despite both parents being scientists and his mention of wanting to do chemistry later on. He duly got his C, and then the school would not allow him to do AS chemistry, because B was the minimum. They were more interested in him getting a dead cert C for GCSE for their league table position rather than doing what was best for him. Shocking.

I have little sympathy for the parents because they have stacks of money and could easily afford to send him to a school that would do right by him.

[rantinghousewife]

Actually I have to say I would completely disregard the stats and go look at the school.
Only by looking at it and talking to the teachers will you get any idea of how they would interact with your child.
My SIL made her decision for my dn based on stats, sent him to the better school (with the RIGHT kind of pupils, grades etc) and he was utterly miserable beyond belief. Two years down the line she had to take him out and let him attend the original school that she didn't want him to go.

[UnquietDad]

In Sheffield, where I am, there is one state school which gets about 80-85% and then a cluster of 5 or 6 which always jostle for second place around the 65-70% mark.

So yes, 65% is seen as good here... which fuels my cynical belief that people don't want the poor schools to improve, because the fact that our local poor schools are so shit makes schools which would be mediocre elsewhere in the country look great...

[alfiesbabe]

rantinghousewife - excellent advice. I think the bottom line is, you need to visit the school and see it in action on a normal day (NOT just the showcase open evenings!) and get a feel of the ethos of the school. I started a similar thread, so will be repeating myself a bit, but basically, these are the things that I would consider to be 'good':

• a GCSE pass rate of around 70%. I believe that once you have this, the culture of the school is that academic success is valued. There is a high chance that a good percentage of parents are interested and supportive.
• a good range of extra curricular activities WHICH THE CHILDREN CHOOSE TO GO TO. I emphasise that because my ds has just moved from a private school which prided itself on extra curricular stuff and claims in it's prospectus that all pupils do at least 2 after school activities per week. Bolleaux I'm afraid - most kids hung around the town with their mates.
• broad curriculum. A large enough school to be able to offer a good range.
• a 6th form. Not essential I know, but I think the chance to teach A level is a big draw for many teachers. I also think it helps if younger students can see what there is to aspire to.
• good pastoral care. Tutors/Heads of Year who KNOW the kids, talk to them and will deal with any problems quickly.

[alfiesbabe]

Re: the exam % thing - I honestly believe that once you have a school that hits around 70%, then the precise figure doesnt matter. I (and I expect most parents) couldnt really care less what exams other kids get, it's our own kids we're interested in! As long as my kids achieve their potential, does it really matter whether 75 or 95% of kids get those magic passes? I think a good pass rate proves that the school values academic achievement and is evidence that this is the culture of the school, but I really dont get why some parents get so hung up on actual percentages

[UnquietDad]

Oh, for a local school with a sixth-form....

Thanks to Blunkett and the havoc wrought by his fucking chip-on-the-shoulder pinko cronies in the 70s and 80s, we have NONE here, apart from in the affluent south-west of Sheffield. Hi, Nick Clegg. Nice to know your kids are OK, isn't it?

[cory]

Why is the assumption that children from an affluent area are bound to be well behaved? I've seen rather too many cases of problem behaviour from affluent children to be unimpressed by this line of thinking- and we have never had a problem with the kids from our local council estate. I would want to have a good look at the two schools first.

[rantinghousewife]

Actually Alfiesbabe, I completely agree especially about the pastoral care, this is a good indicator of how much the leaders of the school care about the welfare AND teaching of the children.
Ds' middle school was poorer performing (sats levels) than the other one that we looked at but, we sent him there anyway, simply because they seemed to really care for their pupils. In the years he was there, they really looked after, dealt sensitively and conclusively with any bullying issues and by the time he left, he was scoring well above the national average (cringe!) academically.

[larry5]

You can't rely on exam percentages to choose how good a school is. Dd was at a church school which had results of 70% 5 A - C (not necessarily including Maths and English) before she started. Her year were was very difficult - lots of disruption in lessons - and the teachers did not seem able to deal with it. My dh took early retirement and we moved to another part of the country and bought a house in the catchment area of another school with 70% A -C but with a very different attitude and a head who is in charge.

My feeling would be that the only way you can find out if it is a "good" school or not is to visit during the school day and try to speak to parents with children at the school.

[VictorianSqualor]

They aren't cory, but unfortunately the type of parent that I saw at the bad school DD went to was all too often one who fell into the 'had children too young, didnt have a clue what to do with them, and sat at home on benefits all day' therefore couldn't afford to live in an 'affluent' area, plus many of the children I know that do live in an 'affluent area' have parents who worked hard to afford where they are and appreciate education because for it, therefore may have problems with their childrens behaviour but not as often WRT school .

I think the respect a person gives to a teacher also makes a huge difference, and many of the parents at the 'bad school' were of the mentality that their child was being picked on by the teacher, and that the teachers were jumped up snobs, because they had been boguht up the same way by their own parents, and perpetuated the cycle, not realising that attitude was partly to blame for why they had not become finacially successful in life.

I just want to point out however, that I too had children young, had no education behind me, have lived in council properties, been a single parent on benefits etc, I am not saying all, or even the majority of parents in those circumstances are like those mentioned above, but more the reverse, parents like the above are less likely to achieve because of their frame of mind.

[rantinghousewife]

I don't agree with that VS, I used to work near one of the most expensive fee paying schools in the country and the children there would quite often start a riot on the train on the way home.

[VictorianSqualor]

Ah, maybe so, but would they be working hard at school and achieving good grades?
That's my point.
The behaviour isn't necessarily as bad in the classroom.

[pukkapatch]

one of my local grammar schools gets only 99% a-c.
i think that is appalling. why?
well, to begin with, they are selective. unless your child is on level fb or 4c at end of year five, then they tell you not to even bother sittingthe test. in the test, they cream off the most academically able. then someone please tell me what happens to the one percent of kids who were academically able enough to get through tht grammar selection test, but not able enough to get a measely c grade in gcse?
wtf is that all about.