rubbish local secondary school choices - London - did you end up moving?

I've got two boys at FHS. It's a good school, not perfect but it's pretty good. The oldest is very bright, working hard and predicted 9s at GCSE. They start doing visits to Oxbridge in year 8 if that's your thing.

Younger child less academic but loves music, maths and does lots of extra curricular clubs.

It's a non selective comprehensive in a very mixed part of London, of course it's not going to get average results that match those of a grammar school. It's also sometimes a bit disorganised, but it's not a school to run away screaming from.

Harris boys ED is a very good school. I don't set much store by Ofsted but there's is cracking. I know boys there who are very happy.

And as pp said St Thomas the Apostle in Nunhead is also very good.

I don't want to derail the thread but I know lots of families at Kingsdale who say they would be surprised if it keeps it's outstanding ofsted when it's next inspected.

No, it not like that in London. NeedmoreLego is right.

My DC went to comprehensives in London, as did all their friends. I don’t know any that attended a grammar. One or two went to private school, that’s all. And one of the ones that went private on a scholarship was then moved to a comprehensive-(academy chain) due to bullying. In my experience, parents tend not to like their nearest school, though parents in other areas would be very happy with it. Your local ”rubbish” school is possibly not rubbish at all.

@Needmorelego yes I meant comprehensive. I'm surprised at that as the comprehensives I know about all have admission policies that favour distance. Obviously the less popular schools will have a wider distance. Granted some have aptitude places & priority always goes to children in need where distance doesn't matter but they are usually a tiny % of places.

@kopiyif by 'normal' you mean comprehensive then yes it's true. Children travel all over the place for school. My daughter's Year 6 class was about 25 children and they ended up at about 11 different secondary schools.
(We are SE19). Only 6 went to what is considered the 'catchment' school.

Ofsted grade isn't everything, look at grades, what lower sets achieve, progress etc

I know loads of children who travel miles and miles to go to schools out of their postcode/borough/'catchment'. It's really not unusual in London.

This is true of faith schools & grammars but normal schools?

Also catchments will likely increase as there will be a shortage of pupils soon, I don't think it's hit secondary yet. Schools will face falling rolls & the subsequent reduced funding not too mention the COL hitting budgets now. It's a bit scary tbh

If your child is in Y2 and any good at sport or music, then maybe invest a bit there and then aim at aptitude places across London.

We live rurally in an area where nearest 2 schools are an hour away - one is okay and the other is truly awful.

DD is musical, so she sat for every single music place in London where she could feasibly get there for their morning start time (yes I had a ridiculous looking spreadsheet). We had 5 all-but-guaranteed places on the table by the time I had to fill in the CAF (and we weren't offering the orchestral instruments that make music departments' eyes light up).

If you don't want to/can't afford private or a house move, it is a much more affordable option, and you've got best part of 4 years to put in the work behind the scenes.

There is a well known disconnect in education quality between primary and secondary schools in many parts of London.

yes

We moved to the outer boroughs, so many friends left London.

@A580Hojas geez chill a bit.
You get 6 choices so if the OP wants to put Charter or Kingsdale or Wherever on there then that's her choice.
I know loads of children who travel miles and miles to go to schools out of their postcode/borough/'catchment'. It's really not unusual in London.

I am confused by the point you are making. If you didn’t go to a selective school, and you got good grades, why are you so worried about your child going to a local comprehensive?
I feel like you’ve already decided they are all rubbish without looking into it or visiting them or talking to parents.

And I'm just using the word catchment as shorthand. Everyone knows what it means in this context.

No child who lives in SE23 goes to either of the Charter schools in Dulwich unless they are in one of the more highly prioritised higher categories than distance (such as looked after or sibling). Don't waste the op's time on a pointless suggestion.

@A580Hojas I also know children who live 'out of catchment' for Forest Hill Boys and go there.
We live 'out of catchment' for Sydenham Girls - it's by distance so will vary from year to year depending on amounts applying and where they live. 2 girls who live down my road have just finished there. My girl missed out a couple of years ago by probably metres but my next door neighbours girl started this year.
I assume FHB is similar with places.
To be honest - there's no such thing as 'catchment areas' for London (non selective) schools. It's distance.

@A580Hojas I know children who live 'out of catchment' of Charter and go there. She could apply if she wants. No harm in trying.
But...her child is only in Year 2 so the whole application system could have changed by the time she needs to apply.

Well obviously if only Oxford will do for your child OP then you might just have to suck it up and pay. And of course then there's no guarantees . I live in London and have 3 friends whose 6 x children went to private school. 1 did an Art degree, not Oxbridge. 1 became a professional footballer. 4 went to other Universities, not Oxford or Cambridge.

If you only want your child surrounded by high-achievers then you really are looking at selective schools.

Any truly comprehensive school (like FHB or Harris or Sedgehill) is going to have a mixture of pupils - some high achievers for whom studying is cool, but some who aren’t.

I don’t think you can say the local schools are ‘rubbish’ just because they have a mix of pupils, when that is what they have been designed to do.
FHB have an above average Progress 8 score, which gives a better indication than pure grades - because it’s unfair to compare the results of a comprehensive school with a selective school.

What are you talking about?

OP can't "go for" Kingsdale and Charter. In SE23 she is not in the catchment for either Charter school in Dulwich/East Dulwich. She can apply to Kingsdale and hope for a place in the lottery along with all the other 400+ pupils going into Y7.

Or she can calm down a bit about FHB and go and have a look and meet the HT Mr Sullivan and stop being so flappy.

I have a girl who started at Sydenham this year and know lots of boys who started at FHB this year and previously who all seem to enjoy it and are doing well there. My neighbour who was a bit worried about her son starting there couldn't have been happier with the support he got when starting. I think if you are concerned then perhaps have a look around next year on the open days and I think you will be pleasantly surprised.

Five years is a long time too... it could be a completely different school by then!

We're local and I get confusing vibes about FHB - some people rave about it, some people will do anything to avoid it. I don't think it's a bad school. I get the impression a lot of nice kids do well there, but it does depend on their character. And the cohort, which you can't control.

Tbh it is not so much the ‘overall context’ of a school but the ‘micro context’ of a specific form or friendship group that makes the most difference.

DD and DS went to the same ‘highly regarded’ comp. DS fell in with a ‘micro group’ that was geeky, mixed sex, musical, ambitious… and thrived. DD 2 was in a different year group and different tutor griup, and was very isolated and withdrawn as her micro context was anti-academic. Did very well but didn’t really thrive until she moved fir 6th firm and found a new tribe.

Looking at FH school’s most recent GCSE data, Progress 8 for different groups etc, I am not sure why it is seen as ‘rubbish’?

Progress is above the national average, quite a bit above for middle ability boys in particular. The things Ofsted suggests need improving are in fact quite straightforward to address compared with long-entrenched teaching issues or problems that arise from deep-seated social problems in the intake - encourage GCSE language take-up, make sure the curricula aren’t too narrowly exam-focused etc.

Comparing with older Ofsteds and selective schools isn’t fair - the criteria are different and a selective school will obviously give higher results even if not higher progress.

I can see that it being single sex could be an issue. A diamond model - mixed primary, mixed 6th form, single sex 11-16 - is actually a really successful one in research (though iirc it benefits girls slightly more) and you can encourage mixed extracurricular activities like music or drama or swimming or Scouts if it is a big issue for you due to there being eg no girls in you wider family.