Below average secondary school - what lengths would you go to in order to do better for your kids?

OP, is the school being taken over by a single academy or a multi-academy trust? What is the performance of that school/trust like?

Academisation could be a positive move for the school in the long term because it will bolster the finances. Also, multi-academy trusts are able to share expertise across their schools.

Losing staff isn't always a bad thing - it depends on the quality of the staff. But in the current climate, the trust will need to work hard to replace 37 in one year.

The thing is that ‘good’ schools can also become poor very quickly. Or slowly, in the case of outstanding schools that haven’t been inspected for a long time.

@Curlewwoohoo If the schools SEN and reading provision has been flagged as key to the RI rating, and there’s new leadership in place, you can guarantee that SEN and reading are going to be a huge priority for the school.

Does the school teach in mixed ability groups for all subjects across all year groups? I’d be surprised by that. Most secondaries will have mixed ability groups in KS3 for some subjects eg drama, music, DT, PE.

My DD’s school aggressively streamed from Y7 and for a while it seemed to be working as they had great Progress 8 data. My ds’s school split the year group into two streams - a higher and lower - and all academic subjects were taught in those streams. I wasn’t mad for this system at all, but they’ve just had their first set of gcse results (new school) and they’ve smashed it. Most importantly for me re streaming, was that when I got the chance to ask the head about how they set in KS3, he explained the rationale behind it in a way that made me appreciate the schools perspective.

For what it’s worth, new leadership will review setting quite quickly anyway.

The environment in education 9 years ago was drastically different to the environment today, though. 9 years ago it was much, much easier to recruit experienced teachers, for example.

Are the other commutable schools closer/further from the grammar? Or is it an all grammar type area?

IME, in somewhere like Devon or Gloucestershire where there are just a few grammar schools and very much not commutable for everyone in the county, then there is a difference between schools with a grammar nearby and without IMO.

I think there's a noticeable difference between schools that are losing say 10% of their intake to the grammar, and schools who are just losing 2-3% of their intake (all other things being equal).

It sounds like the students with committed and involved parents are maybe going elsewhere, which also isn't great for a school.

I think when the time comes, there will certainly be no harm in looking at other local schools. You may even be able to have a nose around open evenings next year (some schools will let you if your child is in Y5) and this gives you time to think about moving/grammar/etc as well.

It sounds like you have options other than private if that's going to be a major financial stretch (and personally I would budget for 10%+ fee increases each year based on the last few years).

In our case it’s working our way through a 5 year plan to move house for last and final move into dream house/location. Should occur when eldest is finishing year 4, so lots of buffer time. All being well. All going well so far.

When I was in this situation, I spoke to the in coming head to see if I thought they had a viable improvement plan. I thought it was worth a punt and when dd joined the school, I joined their governing body to both see if I could help ( I had lots of experience in school governance) but also to sort of keep an eye on what was happening. The school has improved out of all recognition over the past 9 years and is now most definitely a good school. My DC's both did exceptionally well academically there and recently the broader school offer has flourished. Schools with big issues take time to sort themselves out and need strong leadership.

I think it's naive to think the school will improve in the current climate. The fact that the top 20% go to the grammar is not great news for the other school. It all becomes a cycle - families who are interested in their child's education don't choose the school, it goes further downhill, etc.
I would seriously consider private, most have bursaries and scholarships on offer that make it a little easier.
Failing that, I would move.

Schools do not always turn around when they are academised. The school near us has been an academy school now for nearly eight years and it still requires improvement. It has got better in terms of the children feeling safe and the behaviour is better but the results are not great. It still has a very long way to go even after eight years.

I would be looking at moving house or commuting to school.

When my neice & nephew were about to start secondary, my SiL put them in a school 15 miles away rather than in the schools in the nearest town. The nearest town had one crap school (my former school actually) and one good school. Both are academies. What the extended family found was that neice & nephew had good schooling but their friends were scattered over a huge area so they couldn't easily see them outside school. So they missed out a lot, socially. They are both very quiet shy young people. Why SiL hated the good school at the nearest town is a mystery, though my DB says, "she just didn't like it". 🤷‍♀️

Since both have left my oldest friend has sent her son to the "good" school in the nearest town and he's thriving.

Usually if a school is failing the HT is replaced and a ton of money is thrown at it, and/or it's academised. I think watch and wait is a good strategy. Have you visited all the schools? My DD went to a very average inner-city school and did very well. She also has an active social life. I think you have to consider your child's social & emotional wellbeing alongside the academic rigour.

That's really tricky based on your update. I think I'd move and get in catchment for a better school if your dc aren't grammar kids.
Not just because of the quality of teaching, but because of the poor behaviour / bullying. Even the brightest child can't excel if they are getting bullied, I'd be worried about self harm, eating disorders etc. Imagine signing up for 5 years of hell.

It's a sad state of affairs where engaged parents swerve the local comp, but I wouldn't be the one to let my child be a guinea pig of a new academy.

Anywhere that removes the top 20% is not great if your child isn’t in the top 20%. Are you close to a non grammar school area?

What size is local school & what is trust policy on sets / streaming as might well change

Can you share which Trust is taking over? If one with lots of schools in the area and a good reputation, the teacher issue would worry
Me less. They may share resources. A trust near me trains a lot of its own too.

Why is the school bad? That would decide my answer. Our local comp is horrible because it draws 80% of its pupils from a sink estate, and those poor kids have far too much going on to engage with learning. They've been under special measures, had hot shot head teachers flown in, had money thrown at them...it's still a shit school with shit outcomes, and always will be. I've made sure my children won't go there.

Why is your local school bad?

We are in a similar situation. We live in a fairly nice area however the state school provision aside from first schools is incredibly poor. There is no way I could send my DC to any of them. I’d feel awful.

We decided to prioritise schooling over everything else and enrolled DC into a very good local private school.

It will of course cost us a lot of money however we have offset this by deciding to stay put in a fairly modest house and use the money we would have spent on buying a bigger property on school fees instead. It’s similar to having a new mortgage so not as unaffordable as some may claim.

I'd go and have a look around one or two if the other secondaries in the same MAT.l and see if you can get a handle on the ethos,l. You may even be able to meet the Chief Exec or other MAT staff and get an idea of the direction of travel for the school you're considering.

Oh just seen this, yeah I think I might run like the wind from that 🙈

We didn’t do anything. We let Dd go to the local requires improvement comp where only 35% of kids got 5 GCSEs at grade C and above. We did pay for a tutor for English as they’d had a revolving door of supply teachers and she failed her mock…..got an 8 in the real thing!

dd got good GCSEs, mainly 6s, 2x7 and an 8. She moved school to a much better school for sixth form, got poor A levels, 3x D I think, maybe a C, (due to missing most of year 13 due to health) but thankfully had an unconditional uni offer. Got a 1st class degree.

She probably would have got better GCSEs at a better school as going from a 2 to an 8 from her mock to her actual result shows with some good teaching she was capable. She said prior to the mock nobody ever explained how to answer the questions in a way she understood.

the problem with moving house is you could move and the other school slide downwards over a year or two? Only needs a change of head for things to go south ime.

I'm a single mum and I basically mortgaged my soul to send my ds to a local independent, but the state school offered was in chaos. Even Ofsted said it wasn't safe.

DS helped by getting a partial scholarship to his new school and we've muddled through somehow.

But I only have one dc. If I had more than one dc, I'd move house.

The hidden factor for a school being "good" or "lacking" for a child is the peer influence. At the secondary age, they get more influenced by the value or the behaviours of other children in the environment. (That's a big factor why grammar schools do well as the type of admitted children is rather even - aspired for high goals). The influence that your family value can apply to them will be a lot less significant than at primary age. (Independence plus a lot less interaction by the parents with the school.)

So it depends that school, what kind of admission intake portfolio they generally have, any chance of improvement on that or not, it will reflect back to the "changeability" of the school.

A school has poor reputation would scare away decent family sending their children to, therefore leading to the environment even less desirable for children to learn positively. But that's being said, I do think the head teacher is another decisive factor - we have an example locally with a head admirably turned around a school 's culture and got lots of local family willing to send their children there after seeing the improvement made.

So surely it's a risk that nobody can tell how it turns out in five years time...

Sorry but this is incredibly naive. How can DC achieve their full potential with a school with unchallenged bullying behaviour, significant understaffing which mean lack of regular FT teachers (not to mention no subject specialists) and no doubt disruptive behaviour in classes.
So many parents are ignorant to what is happening in our schools. Hoping it will improve doesn't make it so!

I sold my soul to the devil for their education and I’ve no regrets.