Parents in the North need to be more pushy like their Southern counterparts.

(I meant specifically, UK nations)

And then there's the discrepancy between England and the other nations in the global rankings www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-38157811

Insofar as "Northern" is a proxy for "economically deprived" (i.e. to some extent) I think the problem with some schools is partly because teenagers aren't stupid. If a teacher in Hackney tells a working class teen of average intelligence "work hard, get good grades and you can get a decent job" then the teen will see that this makes sense. They can get decent grades, maybe do a degree at one of a huge range of tertiary establishments within a bus ride while still living with family, or maybe just go straight into a job and then shift at regular intervals into something that pays better with more prospects, still a bus ride away from Mum's flat. Yes it's tougher for some London teens than it is for others, but for a lot of them the basic equation of
Work => qualifications => job => money
does make basic sense.

If you're a working class teen in Burnley or Great Yarmouth (because this is not just a Northern issue) however then this reasoning will not stack up in the same way. There just aren't well paying jobs with decent prospects visibly out there for the taking for the students with the best grades.

Sixisthemagicnumber Tue 06-Dec-16 16:57:47 Did I read that data and art lie differently to you mum? It seems to confirm that independents schools are doing very well.

Erm, no. It confirms that some are. Unless you think the schools at the bottom of that table are "doint very well". As my nearest state secondary school achieved 30% A and 57% A/A, I would say that a number of those schools are not "doing well" in the context of league tables.

You did also note Many schools boycott the tables, which means that not every school is listed.

Did I read that data and art lie differently to you mum?

No idea what you are going on about tbh

I don't really care what they mean by 'be more pushy' - the report is just another way to say 'I blame the parents' really isn't it?

Maybe they mean 'be more middle class'. Maybe they mean 'don't send your kid to school with a bad attitude to learning or an empty stomach'. Unpleasant either way. And so Tory - consumers must shop around to get a reasonable energy supplier; parents must push if they want schools to be good. Either way, it's not our fault, or our problem.

There may well be a North/South divide but it isn't so black and white as that. Preps and Grammar schools a plenty in my bit of the North and there are very many pushy parents up here

Badbadbunny I believe the same to be true, but only to GCSE level where the work isn't actually that difficult nor intellectually challenging - it is more a matter of hard graft, rote learning etc to get the top grades.

Really, so you think every child is capable of achieving A* or Level 9 at GCSE, it's just a case of working hard?

I haven't rtft but I live in the North and am somewhat frustrated by the absolute assumption that pushy parents and pressure on children is a good and desirable thing.
Aspiration is good, helicoptering and frantic pressured schedules are not

PhilODox Tue 06-Dec-16 16:00:00 mumtrying- resits are not included in performance tables. Fee-paying schools in my authority are included in performance tables.

Well if this table really does contain the top 300 performing private school, I would say that fee paying schools are not doing too well:

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2016/09/02/gcse-results-2016-independent-schools-table/

...maybe I'd be more successful if I could type a bloody post properly....

"I think there is a growing mindset that natural academic ability has nothing to do with academic success, it's all about effort and working hard".
That's bollocks isn't it? To achieve full potential you need to work hard and have good teaching (or the means and ability to teach yourself) but what that potential is for different subjects varies enormously between individuals when it comes to academic success. Which isn't the same thing as having a successful life.

I'd agree that success in life will be correlated with effort and

mumtrying- resits are not included in performance tables. Fee-paying schools in my authority are included in performance tables.
Reallytired Private school parents are supportive of education - how many do you actually know? Many I know say education is school's business, that's what they pay for, and are completely hands off and non-supportive.

I think there is a growing mindset that natural academic ability has nothing to do with academic success, it's all about effort and working hard

I believe the same to be true, but only to GCSE level where the work isn't actually that difficult nor intellectually challenging - it is more a matter of hard graft, rote learning etc to get the top grades.

I think it's different for A levels and beyond. I know loads of kids from family, neighbours and colleagues who did OK at GCSE but basically couldn't cope with A levels, in fact the number I know who were unceremoniously dumped out at the end of year 12 is quite shocking, who then had to take a step back and go to College instead.

Private schools often do well because of their ablity to select students and kick out under performing students. You can't compare private schools with state schools. There are so many factors other than money per head. Private school parents are supportive of education and that makes a bigger difference than anything.

Lots of countries who do better than us spend less on education. How well children do is down to how hard children work. It's not down to having fancy ICT or interesting school outings. Having a well trained work force who are happy and moviated makes a great difference. British teachers (including England, Scotland, Wales and May Northern Ireland) often leave the profession within five years.

London is an odd case. It's schools need more money as having a school in London is very expensive.

"I think there is a growing mindset that natural academic ability has nothing to do with academic success, it's all about effort and working hard".

I think there is a lot of truth in this.

Not that natural ability has 'nothing' to do with academic success, but that it's over emphasised to a very high degree.

PhilODox Really? Why do you think fee-paying schools do so well then?

Do all fee-paying schools do well? How many of them include resits in their results? How many of them actually place their results in the public domain in a way that they can be easily compared to state schools?

Why do you think fee-paying schools do so well then?

Perhaps the kids that attend have a greater work ethic? If their parents are so bothered that they pay for a private education, they're probably "pushy" parents who are on top of their kids' education and make sure that they do the work etc.

Even a mediocre teacher will have better results if their pupils turn up to class motivated, engaged and willing to do the work.

I am not sure how much of a relationship there is between money and quality of education.

Really? Why do you think fee-paying schools do so well then? The children attending them are no more able than other children, in general.
I think money has a lot to do with education.

The planned national teaching service which would have parachuted exceptional teachers into under performing schools has been scrapped.

It was scrapped because no one wanted to do it. Offering £10k to outstanding teachers in order for them to uproot and move to Blackpool or similar didn't have any takers. £10k. I mean, FFS.

This article is interesting.

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/11473308/School-funding-is-a-postcode-lottery-head-teachers-warn.html

Certainly London schools are well funded, but they have to pay a London weighting to attract staff. Areas outside London are expensive yet schools in these area don't get extra cash.

I am not sure how much of a relationship there is between money and quality of education. I don't understand why schools in notthingham should get more funding.

I heard this on R4 this morning and it was all about funding and unemployment poverty etc, absolutely nothing to do with being pushy?