High school open eves.... ofsted.... how to choose high school for DD?

If it is possible to arrange a visit outside of or in addition to the open day then I would strongly advise this. Open days can be a bit hectic with lots to take in and there is not always the time to speak to teachers or ask questions. A visit within school hours lets you see the school in action rather than on show.

I agree that open evenings can be difficult to judge but generally at the dc's school anyone can go in and help out.

I think you do have to be aware that the children helping out on the night are probably the best advertisements they have. You are not going to get the most difficult and behaviourly challenged child anywhere near the place. I think open evenings can be very difficult to judge and often parental views carry more weight for lots of peope and anopen evening backs that up - good or bad.

Watch how the children talk to the teachers and the teachers talk to the children (the children who are there helping out on the night). It tells you a lot about the ethos of the school imo.

The security was one issue out of four that needed improvement as this grammar school in Cumbria. The other two very serious issues were progress of children in English and that of SEN children and also failing to keep the required registers of attendance. These may be negligible to some people but the school was not failed on a single safety issue. Parents will make up their own minds about a school but none of what Ofsted found appears to be untruthful. The school of course has spun it as being a single issue about fencing and an unreasonable judgement. What is unreasonable, is children not making good progress. So that's what I would take away from this report.

jobergamot,

I would second BackforGood.

It looks, from where I live, as if I have a choice of about 4 secondary schools.

In fact, there is only 1 I would have got into every year for the last 5, and it is not the one I would 'choose'. Even that one, as my neighbours found out, is no longer the 'school of last resort I don't even need to p0ut on my form because I'll be given it anyway' - all places now go to people who put it on their form somewhere, and commutes of 5+ miles are now needed for those who don't put that 'banker' on their form.

I would have got into my first choice 3 years out of 5, and my second choice never, even though they are pretty much equidistant and you see people [siblings] with that uniform on walking from further down my street.

So i can choose the order I put them in, but not necessarily the final outcome, if that makes sense.

I didn't read it as being arsey. A lot of people genuinely think they decide which school their child will go to. In a lot of areas of the country that simply isn't the case, so it is good advice to those parent - and poster hasno idea if that applies to you or not - to let them know.
Every year you get parents who just haven't given thought to their 2nd, 3rd, or more choice places then they are floored when they don't get the school they wanted.

I read it as poster being helpful.

Yes Burn, technically it's a preference, but in some parts of the country it really is a choice

There are five undersubscribed secondary schools within a reasonable distance of my house. When DS is ten we will be able to choose which he goes to.

It is not a choice. It is a preference.

You are state what school's you'd like you child to go. They look at what school's you child fits the entry criteria of and place you firstly according to that and then your preference.

Bubbles,

I would agree that it is quite reasonable to refuse an individual visit for every parent (though most primaries manage, IME - as an oversubscribed multi-form primary with a huge waiting list and high numbers of appeals each month, we still show parents round individually - it is a daily occurrence) if they can possibly make the open mornings and if they have a child who has no specific SEN.

However, I found that the attitude of each school to a parent who couldn't possibly make the open mornings and had a child with an interesting history of anxiety-related SEN pretty much mirrored their approach to dealing with individual parents and with children who didn't 'fit the standard mould' - so in my case it was a very useful discriminator.

Depends on the area @shhhhhh. Round here you do.

Hate to tell you, op, but you don't get to "choose" as such.

I think DCs secondary - the toilets are too disgusting, there just aren't enough - something I have said the PTA should raise money for (there is even space as there are two cloakrooms no longer used for coats but just storage).

Beka I'm sure there are exceptions but it is not an opinion, it is research based information. Schools with clean toilets stocked with hot & cold running water, soap and towels, are better schools than those with messy, smelly toilets.

I think we're arguing the same thing: read the report, see the school, make your own judgment

YogiYoni you're right that the report does state support for SEN students and sometimes English for boys is weak - but that is, to be fair, the only other issue outside of safeguarding and therefore without the register/safeguarding issue it would probably have an overall "good" or "satisfactory" rating. And though it is very concerning (purely out of fairness!), it wouldn't affect a large portion of the student body. It makes sense why you wouldn't choose the school, but as my younger children are girls and luckily won't need a lot of support at school, I don't think they would be negatively affected by going there - unlike your son. Which illustrates my point perfectly! Some schools work just fine for one child but would be absolute hell for another.

Check out the toilets. There is a direct correlation between the state of school toilets and the quality of the school

Except the worse thing about DCs secondary according to them is the toilets. And their Primary was very proud of its toilets.
However DC all massively prefer the secondary which gets pretty good results. Primary was a bit marmite, and massively underestimated most of my DC.
I would say the better school had the worse toilets.

I agree about reading the content of reports, and as the parent of a boy with SEN, ksgs is firmly off my list. That report is not all good and not all about fences.

The other one round here that some people would have you believe was about a fence, definitely wasn't just the fence!

There won't be many Heads who stand up and admit they have a bullying problem!
ALL schools have bullying.
As a former colleague said to me, you should be wary of a school that claims not to have bullying.
Where there are children, bullying can occur. The question is what do the school do about it?

In the same way it should not instantly be assumed that an "outstanding" school shall be outstanding for all pupils - the "outstanding" grammar school not far from us has dreadful sports facilities and in the last few years has had a number of big cyber bullying problems. That may not bother some parents, but it does bother me - hence why my daughter won't be going in for the 11+.

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/04/30/outstanding-school-put-special-measures-did-not-have-fence-headteachers/

www.ksgs.cumbria.sch.uk/content/ofsted-report

www.ksgs.cumbria.sch.uk/sites/default/files/attachments/page/Ofsted%20Report%20Published.pdf

Is an example - if you read the report the three areas marked as "inadequate" are purely inadequate as a result of "safeguarding" - specifically registers and fences. The teaching is all reviewed as good, progress is good, leadership is good. While this issue may bother some, I personally wouldn't be particularly interested or concerned - I would be happy enough to send my child there because all the other areas (teaching, wellbeing) are deemed good (though I totally understand that some may not feel this way). This was the point I was originally trying to make (which has sparked a lot of debate!) - it's important to actually read why the school is in special measures rather than just assuming that because it is it's a school to be avoided. Ofsted reports should certainly be read, but for the content - not the rating. The overall rating gives a poor snapshot. The whole report gives much clearer picture. A school in special measures should not be ruled out purely because it's in special measures (or even satisfactory for those who are picky!), it should be ruled out if the reason for it receiving that low rating concerns you.

I have had the pleasure of doing a site walk with an Ofsted inspector. They definitely are interested in perimeter fencing.