to be amused that the more exclusive a school is..

[seeker]

.. by faith, fees, ability, aptitude..whatever- the more diverse a community the school's parents say it is.

"seeker. I think it's really sad that you say 'my outrage about this is not actually about my own children's situation' because having read your posts is seems to me you are furious about the situation your children have found themselves in, especially your ds.
Perhaps you need to be honest with yourself. You may then start to be less angry with the world."

I- well, actually, I don't know where to start with this. So I won't bother. You should know, though that there are people in the world who are willing to be outraged and angry about positions of principle, not just about things that impact on themselves as individuals. I am not furious about my son's schooling- as I have said, repeatedly, he will be fine. I am outraged that anyone thinks that dividing children into sheep and goats at 10 is a good idea. I felt just as strongly as the owner of a sheep as I do now as the owner of a sheep and a goat!

babybarrister the school I spoke of is urban...but I actually live some fifteen miles away in a rural area. And that is very interesting.

The local schools are predominantly white working class. But because we are on the train line to La-La Land (the city), there are also pockets of huge wealth, resulting in a couple of schools being predominantly white middle class.

To get an ethnic or a social mix here is a struggle.

Sorry. I don't buy that seeker. You are stilled pissed off your ds didn't get into the grammar. You have every right to be, I don't blame you.
As for being outraged on behalf of other people, well, that is a concept I am familar with thank you very much. I wonder whether you realise how sanctimonious you sound...

'still'

A friend of mine started going to church when their dc were young (nearest school was a faith one) & I raised my eyebrows slightly, but now her dc are older and have left school and she and they still attend church. If people want to attend church when their dc are young to get them to a particular school and they are genuinely giving the church a try (and I think most do) then that's not hypocritical to me (even if they leave after). And as it's impossible to say if people are attending for this reason or not then although I'm not religious I think the principle 'judge not lest you be judged' applies here.

Interesting that you pick and choose the posts you will respond to Seeker.

seeker you have every right to be outraged at the system and you say that the internet is not the only place you are active...but this isn't activism!!!!!

This is just shouting at and laughing at and sneering at (and I'm sorry but you strated this thread to sneer) people who are in exactly the same boat as you ie trying to make use of the hand dealt to them.

And you jump wildly from one position to another. You say you hate the grammar system but you have to use it. No you don't!!!
You say you know your son will do well at the high school. Yet you're appealing to get him in grammar.

You say social diversity is hugely important, yet you don;t take up the shcool that offers more of that.

It is just so inconsistent. Which is a shame because you make some very fair points. But they get lost in all this high-drama-faux-politico stuff.

I am sure I do sound sanctimonious. It's hard not to when I have to say sanctimonious things to defend myself from the accusation that I am only exercised about this because my child failed the 11+! Of course i was a bit pissed off about that. But I've got over it. I haven't got over my outrage at the system. Which is long standing. And based on politics, philosophy and principle.

But why stamp your feet and froth when every other parent may be perfectly happy with the system and those who aren't have no doubt have chosen to move out of the area.
People have. for centuries, moved continents to improve the future for their children and you won't consider moving slightly out of your catchment area to avoid an educational system you despise.
I don't get it.

A friend teaches at a private primary and her colleague has arranged a partnership with an inner city school in an area of high deprivation. This is the sort of school my friend used to teach at. I take my hat off to both of them for teaching these children about social inequality. It is not something they would come across otherwise.

Outraged the same point has struck me.

Our local comprehensive is huge and almost totally white, because we live rurally and there just are not many ethnic children around!

My dds private school at senior level has a huge mix of Chinese, Spanish, Mexican and Asian students, so I would say easily more culturally diverse if not economically.

I wish this wasn't about me.

But. This thread is about people who pretend their choices are something they're not. I think that is a little sneer worthy, don't you?

I do have to use the grammar school system. Going to the high school is using the grammar school system just as much as going the the grammar school is. As I said, the high school is not more diverse than the grammar- it just contains a different group of non diverse white British kids. I would prefer my child to go to the grammar. If he was going to a comprehensive school, I would prefer that he was in the top set.

I don't understand what you are talking about tbh.

seeker, you pop up on just about every education thread stating that parents are wrong if they:

do no support their local school (ie go to your nearest school, as then everything would even out)
go out of catchment for any reason (as above)
go private
want a different set of subjects/extra curricular activities (although this formed part of your issue with your ds going to the high school - but for other posters, it is not a valid reason to choose another school)

you are massively frustrated by the fact that your dd's school is a reasonable distance away, and you counsel other posters to never consider a school so far away, as it makes life so difficult. you hate the fact that you live in the county you do (educationally speaking) but you do not want ot make other choices (re: work, family, and lifestyle) which wuld enable you to not have the divisive education system you have.

all this is fair enough - it is all your choice (even if you do feel constrained by those choices, such as distance from school). but to then sneer and be snarky about other people making different choices form the ones you made - eg by opting to make that move, or by choosing to go private (for whatever reason), is quite frankly, bizarre.

I have never seen a poster post that their child is too 'bright' for the local state school in the way that you mean. I have seen people worried that their above-average-academically child might be constrained by the choice (or lack thereof) of subjects at the local state school (which you too were worried about, iirc), and then go on to make a different choice fromt heone you have - move, go private, go out of catchment, whatever. but that is just taking action and not being constrained by their circumstance. obviously not everyone can do this (although it can sometimes be achieved by various different means - again, I know htis from personal experience)

I would like you to clarify exactly what you mean by diversity within a school - as has been pointe dout several times, and you have yet to answr the poitns (sorry if I have missed it) - is it 'just' economic diversity you are worried about?

Interesting that you pick and choose the posts you will respond to Seeker."

I don't deliberately. But I am doing other things as I mumsnet. What would you like me to answer that I haven't?

I'm glad you said that rosettes because I didn't understand seeker's post as well.

would you prefer your ds was in the top set at

this comprensive
or maybe
this one?

Well, the high attainers at both those schools seem to do OK at GCSE- I don't get your point?

seeker I'd like you to answer my question about ethnic diversity, about why you think economic diversity is more important than ethnic.

The choice to send your child to a comprehensive school is fine, but don't pretend it guarantees diversity, it guarantees it no more than any other kind of school. Economically diverse may be more likely, but not necessarily ethnically or religiously.

As Boss has said, I'd like you to answer why you come across as valuing economic diversity as so much more important than religious or cultural or ethnic diversity.

You say this thread is about people pretending their choices are something they are not. But I don't think people are doing that. When I say my ds's grammar school is diverse, it's because it is diverse religiously, ethnically and culturally. And I think that is brilliant and as much as anyone can expect.

I would like you to answer my question about what you are doing about increasing diversity in your childrens' lives as you are happy to question the amount of diversity in my childrens'.

Of 8 high attainers at one 2 didn't get 5A -Cs, of the 18 at the other one didn't (One I'm OK with really, they might have bee ill or missed an exam or had a personal life crisis, but generally speaking all high attainers should get 5A-Cs).

How many of the 10 at your ds's school didn't? (I can't look it up I don't know), Is this really so much better that you'd be happy for your ds to be in the top set?

The CVA is rather low at the first.

Would you be happy for your dc to go to either of these? There's no grammar taking the more able away, but the more able don't seem to be there in droves either.

I plucked these schools out of the ether by the way, using the suggestion someone gave to identify a sink school by choosing the lowest ranked in an LEA. Using my own LEA and Bristol which I knew didn't have grammars and is known for having rather mixed areas. I'm sure there are worse to be found in the country.

Oh, is it just economic diversity you are worried about? That's ok, I can take them with me when I go to Lidl

Ok. I agree that many independent schools have a much higher level of ethnic and religious diversity.than state schools in some parts of the country. Where I live for example. But in my experience, the children have more in common, socially and economically than they have differences. So an affluent middle class black child has more in common with an affluent middle class White child than either of them have in common with a poor working class child of any colour. My own children's non white friends are all from independent schools, and are much more like my middle class children than many of my ds's friends at his very socially ( but not ethnically) diverse primary school. It seems to me that the socio economic divide is, in many parts of the country, the one that is most hard to bridge. And one which is becoming more and more entrenched- and not much seems to me to be being done to do anything about it.
And it's easy to forget about it, particularly if you can look at your child's class mates and see lots of different colours. The temptation to feel "job done " must be very strong.