to avoid a primary school that has a high proportion of traveller children

[APeePleaseBob]

I live in a catchment area for several primaries so when we were thinking about schools for my DS we started be looking at Ofsted reports for the closest ones.

One of them got a 'good with some outstanding features' report but in the school make-up section it said it had a high number of traveller children in the school. It is near a well-known traveller site so this makes sense.

I have to confess this put me off and I didn't even go to see it. We have since made our selections elsewhere.

I still think about it though - AIBU to be put off? Would you have felt the same?

yabu
I went to school to school with travelers and they were just people.........shock horror

Absolutely curlymama. I love mumsnet but the tendency towards sanctimony is its downside.

Valium, the point is, the school in question doesn't have a lower than average standard. "Good with outstanding features" indicates that it is, erm, good, with some outstanding features.

Seriously this "race" reaction does prevent and is preventing proper discussion of educational outcomes.

Race is not an issue if outcomes are good. Not for most normal people.

Race is a minor issue when it comes to travellers and education. Major issues are mobility, turnover and parental commitment, especially with an NC that demands so much from parents.

Race is an excuse to avoid the real problems.

No I'm not Valium.

I don't have a picket fence and i would hazard a guess as to say that i have more experience of the travelling community than most on this thread.

as with all memers of society there will be good and bad families.

The op has already made her decision so this argument is pointless in as much as solving a dilemna but i do fear that shows like BFGW (apart from using an outdated and a term considered offensive) are not doing the communities any favours at all.
If any other show was edited as negativly as this one about any other ethnic minority there would be widespread outrage.

BUt i would say that the Op says that the school is situated next to a well known traveller site so presumably mid to long term settlements. That would suggest that the school will not have a significantly higher turnover than any other school.

Valium, I would rather be so called "sanctimonious" than ignorant.

To think you can not be racist to white people has to go down as one of the most ignorant post I have ever seen.

FFS this thread is shit stirring bollocks and it's working a treat.

Did someone call?

The point is the fact that you've been in a caravan doesn't make you an expert on travellers!! I don't want to out myself by saying where I live but there are travelling communities here and people are all aware of who goes to what school and so on. It's something that I take for granted here. We can accept that their are different ways of life between settled and travellers without working ourselves up into a tailspin trying not to say or do the wrong thing. Part of life 'round here. Plenty of travellers do well 'by settled terms' and if that's what they've achieved then that was what they wanted and people are happy for them (most people).

Err what rhadegunde? Do you know that the op lives like this? Actually your kind of proving my point.

Yup ladybiscuit, shouldn't bother getting into it really. should have just let posters savage the OP. what do i care really.

g'night

I have to chip in on this thread, with a few facts from my experience.
DS' school has a highish percentage of traveller children. They are what I would call semi-settled, in that some live in ordinary houses, but the majority in traveller yards in mobile homes which are not really mobile at all.

I wouldn't have known the difference except that we had a project on family history and some of them did the most fantastic displays with photos of the old caravans, stories about the travelling fairs etc. It was not something your average 8 year old could have produced without help, so that refutes the accusation that the parents aren't involved with their children's education.

We have been to parties, and had "traveller" children attending our DS parties, which disproves the theory that they don't mix. I do reading at school, and the traveller children (that I am aware of) have just as much reading at home noted in their books as anyone else, so it would seem that the parents are just as keen on education for their children as the rest of us.

I'm on my way!

Appletrees, I think you are wrong. Apart from children in care, as tethersend pointed out, outcomes are worst for black boys. We are perfectly able to talk about raising the achievement of boys who are black without making sweeping statements about not letting your precious white middle class children into school with them. The reason we can is because most of society perceives prejudice against black people to be entirely wrong. However, there appear to be quite a few seemingly intelligent people who think that showing outright racism to another sector of society is fine.

Curlymama, in this case, the OP doesn't talk about high turnover or absence of pupils. She states that she has no evidence for her perception, but that she acted on it. This shows that she is prejudiced (and probably a troll too). Otherwise, she would have looked at the Ofsted report, viewed the school, met the staff and based her decision on fact. The fact is, she is racist, and to racist people, fact will not overcome fears and prejudices.

"tethersend, your comment is valid, but not ,wholly accurate, the children in care, over 92% off them think school is a break from their home environment, hence fewer social problems in school."

altinkum, I suspect that you are quoting a statistic and rephrasing it, so would be interested if you could link to the source. I'm afraid it sounds ridiculous.

27% of looked after children have a statement of Special Educational Needs, compared to 2.7% of all school children

0.4% of looked after children are permanently excluded from school, compared to 0.1% of all school children

46% of looked after children achieved level 4 in Key Stage 2 English, compared to 80% of all school children

46% of looked after children achieved level 4 in Key Stage 2 Maths, compared to 79% of all school children

Only 68% of looked after children obtained at least one GCSE or equivalent, compared with 99% of all school children

Only 15% of looked after children achieved at least 5 grades A*-C at GCSE, compared to 70% off all school children

Factor in the emotional effects of abuse, being separated from family and attachment issues, not to mention the frequent change of care placements and you have a group of children who statistically present a far greater 'threat' to your child's education than a school made up exclusively of travellers.

But you should know this.

The attendance would not affect the overall OFSTED if it has a high number of children froma a traveller community. Same as most special schools (SLD/PMLD) have a 4 for attendance due to medical complications of pupils - they can and do still get good and outstanding OFSTED.

I would judge a school on its ability to educate and protect the well-being of my DS. I wouldn't worry about the pupils backgrounds as long as it didn't directly affect my DS, and if it did the school dealt with it.

OP if your regretting your decision go and see the school. If your not - why the AIBU? what will you gain from it?

altinkum caould you explain this again plese, I'm not really understanding you:

"Why loopy?, children are happy, settled,no fear, rested emotionally etc... you may not like it, however its true and factually if the studies are to be believed. They are not unduly in school, they are crying out for help, being moved to foster homes, schools, area etc,,, have a more detrimental effect, to the child in what ONE school has.

If the school is consistent, then its a good school for the child, its all the other factors in the child's life that is considered, in these studies, not the school's education, but the numerous schools education, and outside factors!."

Re the OP, yes we would have been put off. An Ofsted can be very complimentary about the leadership and care of pupils but at the nearby primary, which is exclusively traveller, most pupils do not go on to secondary education and the learning is focused on a culture that isn't the dcs', plus there's also the issue of disrupted friendships. None of this I see as racist, this would be a very odd choice of environment to put my dcs in.

Also Penelope 7%? that would be what 2 children in a standard class. I'm assuming in the op's case a higher percentage of travellers.

We did have a couple of traveller girls attend our secondary, they were normal,just people. However they were there for one or two terms only. This would be dispuptive if a higher percentage.

Sorry for the shite typing today folks.

Bully for you rhadegunde, blah.