What are STATE schools in London like?

The thing is we in London are just generally pretty angst ridden about everything and choosing schools is a whole great avenue of stress for us to pick over.

London state schools are generally very good especially in closing the gap between disadvantaged and others. Our primary school, requires improvement graded, has been great and I'm glad on many levels that we choose it for our children.

The thing is that London private schools are generally very good too (not in closing any gaps for the disadvantaged, obv). They're better than most private schools outside London. We looked at them for secondary, can afford them, and our kids have so far been able to get into the most selective of them.

The state funding issue is a real factor for us having seen its effects over the years. We just thought, we can afford this for secondary and although it's clearly wrong to use private schools we're typically selfish parents when it comes to our children.

I'd also mention that while state schools in London are generally good, because of complicated admissions systems they are very segregated. If you're neither religious nor musical, you find that your local state school can have disproportionate amounts of pupils who are barred from the more honeypot schools (such as the ones mentioned above).

A lot of vocal people of influence in London are not going to typical secondaries - you only have to look at the fact that Blair and Clegg's kids go/went to the same school despite one living in North East London and the other living in South West London with probably a hundred schools situated between them.

So the answer is a little bit more nuanced than merely snobbery and racism. But yeah, snobbery does come into it.

I also should note that we put three schools on our secondary state application form. That's all the choices we had in a three mile radius. We live in H&F, which is the worst borough in the country for percentage of pupils who get their first choice of school. We have basically ONE option and the other two, only a tiny chance of getting an offer. The ONE option we have was started by the infamous Toby Young and both DH are opposed to everything he and his cohort stand for. Its a tricky situation in Central London and I don't judge anyone who is trying to make decisions in the best interest of their children.

A quick search through the league tables shows you that most London comprehensives (non-religious) are well out of the top 500 schools. There are a few exceptions, including Camden School for Girls, Fortismere and Waldegrave, but not everyone lives in the tight catchments for these few schools. There are always DCs who will thrive in any environment and go on to do very well, but a large comprehensive definitely would not suit my socially awkward, introverted and non-sporty child. For parents like us who can afford fees, it makes sense to offer her the best opportunity for learning.

Our Y6 has generally thrived at a London State Primary and there is no way we would have considered Private secondary if we hadn't seen how much it's struggled with resources (clubs closed, huge teacher churb, one TA per two classes, no homework, no trips) over the last couple of years. The head and teachers (the ones who are left) are excellent, but I'd hate to be a Y2 parent at the school now, I feel we've had the best of it.

The funding is only going to get worse, and it's going to get worst of all at London secondaries. Unfortunately, the lesson our kind-hearted country and their elected representative learn if London outperforms the regions is not how to make the regions better, but how to make London worse. So even less funding for London secondaries and a running-down of all the initiatives that have seen them improve.

We took the decision to go for a very selective independent, the one with the most bursaries and the biggest ethnic/social mix (I'm selling it to my conscience here... it's nowhere near local state level as a "representative" school, but it's the one with enough academic and atmospheric "pros" for our particular child to outweigh the "cons") because the probability is that there will be four more years of Tory government and four more years of cuts to London secondaries. Even after that it'll be a fair few years before rehabilitatory policies take hold. That's his entire secondary education, and I don't want it to be like the last couple of years at Primary or worse.

So, yes, most London secondaries have improved out of sight, but there's a natural fear that this state is not permanent.

Donations to State schools :
Books
Periodicals (New Scientist was always gratefully received by the school, it and the Economist by the college, the Wildlife magazine by the primary school)

"Comps" in London are all - every single one - within reach of selective schools
so there is much more sorting than her in Hampshire.
Many "comps" are much more like my local school than the one my kid sattended.

Well some of us realise that it's wrong to make the tax payer pay for our children to be educated when we can afford to do it ourselves. Really?!

All children are entitled to a free education. Giving your child a state education is one of the things your taxes pay for. Obviously lots pay higher rates based on income. If you do that, you're subsidising others who can't. That's fair and just how it should be. You can't kid yourself that you're doing good by paying for private education. You're removing your child from a huge swathe of society and buying something that is irrefutably elitist because you perceive it is better than whatever locally the state offers you. People choose private for all sorts of reasons, including sadly bad state schools, but it makes me so cross when people say they're sending their kids private to do us all a favour! Sorry.. I will duck as the responses fly...

fwiw, my son's in an inner city London comp. It's deemed 'good', not outstanding, but from all I've seen, he's having a great education, has a lovely group of friends and lots there do incredibly well, so straight A's and A*. I agree with others about the social values. He's meeting people from hugely diverse backgrounds and learning lots about life from being part of such a school community. You can't buy that.

I think that's pretty extreme thinking, Outy. It's only one step away from accusing state school families of being "scroungers" . . . Especially those of us who could perhaps partly afford to pay . . . If we gave up everything but food . . . . Like I believe some private school parents do, virtually!
Good public education benefits everyone, whether we have kids in it or not. So it is absolutely a good investment of state funds, a no brainer to me frankly.
Where I was growing up virtually all middle-class people sent their kids private (it was a bit cheaper then I believe.) My, also middle-class, parents got a lot of looks from their friends for not doing so -
but there were 4 of us so they couldn't have afforded it. But their friends' biggest outrage (I remember) was reserved for "having to pay for Your Children to take O levels!" (Yes it's that long ago). You see, my siblings and I were entered for our exams at taxpayers' expense. While THEY had to pay entry fees - ON TOP OF regular school fees! A scandal indeed!
Yes Avedon I mean the Wandsworth test. I wasn't aware of that not being in Wandsworth myself. But it's still interesting to me that so many prep school kids were motivated to take a state school exam (effectively old-fashioned 11+), and I'm assuming it's just to do with Graveney (25% of whose intake is super-selected for those who don't know, hated the place myself!)
But there were also a lot of out of Wandworth state-school kids there that day including half my DS's class . . (the only non-white kids, just about!)
And while I'm back there . . Yes I know eurochick that London private schools nowadays are quite ethnically mixed . . . maybe 25% non-white? Less probably if you don't count the Russians??! You tell me, I expect it varies from school to school.
My point is, inner London state comps are 50%-100% non-white almost without exception. In most cases closer to 100% than 50%.

OutyMcOutface one simple and practical donation is of children's books. Our local comp was shockingly grateful when we gave a few boxes of Harry Potter/Alex Rider type books. No room in the budget to buy much so duplicate copies of popular books are very welcome.

My DH and I were both educated in the state sector and both our DCs attend a state primary schools. We decided on private schooling for our eldest at secondary because of the opportunities for sport and higher levels of academic achievement. Our DD is very academic and often gets frustrated with the general chaos and inattention in her classroom. We have had continual problems with the school responding to our queries regarding bullying, learning targets and a host of other things. My biggest complaint is the school doesn't have the resources for all children to compete in sport. She has labelled herself "bad at sport" and has no interest in trying anything. She wants so badly to learn and DH and I felt if she were able to get an offer in a top private school, why not give the option to excel. If we had a grammar school option, that would have been the obvious choice for her, but we don't.

My second DD is a totally different character and she will probably do well at our local comp. Time will tell.

I agree with the other posters that the life lessons you learn in a socially and racially diverse learning environment are also very important. We accept that once in secondary, she will be in a bubble of west London wealth. Its up to us as parents to keep her grounded and encourage friendships and experiences beyond this. What this thread hasn't really recognised is that unless you are religious or have a good grammar, the local comps in London score quite low in both achievement and facilities.

Do state schools even accept donations? Ilthought that they didn't beyond small scale fundraisingfor specific things. In that case I would definitely consider sending my DC to a state school and donating the equivalent of the cost of their place. Obviously I would still send them to the best option available but I would feel like a bad person if I chose a state school.

teen
In some boroughs, fee paying schools pick up such a high percentage that the state schools are effectively local secondary moderns
but most london parents have access to several schools
apart from some of the "black hole roads" that are not in ANY catchment at all
and the big city effect mixed with a LOT more money for London schools over the last 20 years has had a massive impact.

Much of it is snobbery and prejudice and memories of parental childhood .
When I was a kid, the state school at the end of my road was a place to stay clear of.
Now I see it mentioned as "desirable" on threads on here

First up I only have experience of a normal state primary in London, so I really can't speak for the state secondaries. But the lack of resources in the state system was obvious to me (lack of art supplies, no specialist teachers etc) and while the school tried their best and provided a reasonable education it could be so so much better. I guess some parents, after feeling like that for 7 years, think the private system might be an improvement.

Well some of us realise that it's wrong to make the tax payer pay for our children to be educated when we can afford to do it ourselves. It not only puts more pressure on an already underfunded system but also means that we would be effectively taking money from people with far less than we have. I wouldn't send my child to a state school unless I was either permitted to pay for their tuition at the state school or the private options were so abysmal that I would be doing my child a disservice by sending them there. The welfare state only works when it only used by those who need it. Britain has already run out if money, we can only fund the welfare state by virtue of crippling cuts and borrowing. If people don't do the socially responsible thing and start to pay their own way it will collapse and the poor will suffer for it.

Lots of apparently high performing comps have a high percentage of private tutoring going on which boosts those grades.
Per pupil funding at some of the best schools has been cut in the past couple of years. The results of this is only just becoming apparent in lost staffing, extra-curricula cuts and the total culling of whole subject areas.
Unless your DC is in the top 1 per cent academically and can withstand a hell of a lot, I would beg and borrow to go independent if I had my chance again.

Are you saying that only children who go to private school know how to behave and only their parents are likely to get involved in PTA/fundraising stuff? .

I was baffled at the CLGS thread.

All the years of preparation and planning and pushing to pass exams and the time you have to research and visit these schools and you get an offer and sit on your hands and dither about it only to have it withdrawn as you weren't quick enough

Unbelievable. I guess money doesn't buy common sense.

I think you are way off the mark with the racism points, not least because london indies are generally ethnically very mixed.

We have a child heading into reception and are deciding on indie or state at the moment. We just want what we feel will be the best school for her, regardless of sector. Of our local schools my favourite is actually a state one, but due to a shrinking catchment she won't get in there. My next favourite is an indie.