To wonder why when choosing a school parents go for the easiest option despite it not always being the best choice for their kids.

[Jackpack]

My Ds is due to start high school in September. We put down a catholic school with a great reputation, good feel to it and with excellent ofsted reports and results and for our second choice we put down an equally good community school, both around 2.5 miles away. My Ds does go to Catholic primary so he'll move up with the majority of his friends, most of whom live closer to the school but he'll also have kids in his year that live close by to us as one of our local primaries is a feeder to the secondary, so making friends local shouldn't be a problem.

The reason I chose these two schools is quite simple, the rest in our town are diabolical, in every way imaginable. I wouldn't ever want my child to go there and if we'd have been allocated one of these schools then I'd have quit my job to joke school him. That's how bad they are! So, there are I think seven children in our street in the same year as my Ds so they are going to secondary as well this year. Each of their parents have chosen one of the failing schools to send them to and two of my friends, and a family member have chosen to do the same.

Obviously it is their choice to send their child to whichever school they like but why on earth they have chosen these schools i don't know, but then it dawned on me, because it's easier for them, the parents not the child I mean.

Sending their kids to the nearest school means they won't have to get up early and drive them to school. One of my friends was on Facebook recently raving that she can stay in bed longer come September as she won't have to take her child to school. I mean come on. I realise that a lot of kids do go local and there are certainly advantages to that including walking with friends etc but what's more important, thier kids get to walk to school with friends or that they get a better education. If all the schools in the area are equally as good then o can see why parents would want their kids to go to the local school, but when they're all exceptionally bad why not try for a better school slightly further away. It's just seems like laziness to me.

Can,

Or that there are other overwhelming priorities - keeping food on the table and clothing on the children's backs, juggling several jobs to enable this, managing a substance abuse habit or a partner with one, dealing with domestic abuse, being in a safe house away from domestic abuse, caring for family members with chronic illnesses, disabilities or mental health issues etc etc that make education a relatively low priority at that moment.

Or that the community aspect of a school is specifically important - particularly in very static areas, there can be very great loyalty to a school that whole extended families may have attended (I remember a friend who moved their primary age child from the local primary, which was in a mess at the time: "It is the first time in 140 years that the school won't have a member of my family in it").

Or that the cost in time or money is just too great. My DBros didn't go to the better school in the next town, 9 miles away, because it was a choice between bus fare and food (ironically, I was cheaper to keep at my posh boarding school on scholarship + grant, as I only needed food in school holidays). Equaly, the OP only works part time, so her choices are different from someone who leaves the house at 6 am to go by bus to their place of work miles away.

Or that the family has no interest in education - particularly in areas of entrenched worklessness, there is an element of 'what is the point?' about school.

It may not be the best choice for the child, but children do not exist in isolation. It may be the best choice for the family.

a private fee paying might be the best choice for one child but if it damages the other children's chance of holidays etc it might not be the best choice overall.

No just entrenched worklessness, teacher. I've come across similar attitudes from some parents where there are generations who've left school without qualifications and worked in low skilled industries. They don't need education so it becomes an optional extra. Although I do think it's becoming less prevalent.

We live in a very rural area, and our local High School is only 2 miles away. Unfortunately it has had a bad reputation and poor results for many years.

My DS's High School is 12 miles away (in the arse end of nowhere), but it is in the top 5% in the country, and he is very happy there - has a great group of friends - works hard and plays hard etc.

Many parents drive miles to get their children there, but equally over the years I have seen many parents fall by the way-side, which is entirely understandable for so many different logistical/practical reasons, many of which have already been mentioned on this thread.

rafa, exactly. I came back on here to amend my post, because often a school that can seem 'not good enough' in the eyes of parents / families whose aspirations for their children are different can be 'entirely good enough' in the eyes of the parents who know that it will prepare their children well enough for the lives that they expect or want them to lead.

I am thinking of particular former pupils and their families in the following cases:

• A family with a long tradition of 'skilled trades' seeing school as a 'boring preliminary stage' before their children can undertake apprenticeships / day release college courses in those trades that will be their 'real education'.

• Traveller families, expecting their children to follow their traditional way of life, and in fact being actively fearful that prolonged secondary education will move them away from that life.

• Small town communities dominated by a single employer, where jobs have traditionally been available to the majority of people who want them in that industry (this can obviously have tragic consequences).

Not all families are driven to 'better their children' through the best possible education. Some genuinely can't do so; others will genuinely choose the local 'less good' school for its particular strengths in relation to their child (I would not send an SEN child to any of our local Outstanding secondaries, for example); others will know from their family's experience that the school is 'good enough' for the ambitions that they have for their children.

None of these people are 'lazy'. They may possess different values to you, but it does not make them lazy.

Exactly, it's different priorities, not necessarily worse ones.

And let's face it, this country isn't particularly well known for ease of social mobility. That glass ceiling/glass floor thing can get in the way if your own school experiences haven't been good and you don't have the confidence to believe it can be smashed.

Due to unavoidable circumstances we ended up moving in the July two months before DS started primary school. We moved back to the area I grew up in.

My first choice for him was my old primary school, well rated and popular, so popular we couldn't get him in. We were offered a school just too far to walk and I really wasn't happy to be bussing to primary school. I hadn't considered the local CoE primary mainly because in my day it was impossible to et in unless you were a member of the church. The school was within walking distance something I feel in primary is important for social development and when I called they had just had a child withdraw as they had just had a very poor inspection, the headmaster of many years had gone off on sick leave and there was a lot of uncertainty. Clearly the OP would consider it was an unsuitable school however 75% of my sons class (single form each year another plus school was small and super friendly) went to either independent schools with bursaries or scholarships or into grammar schools in the adjacent borough which still had grammar schools. The newly appointed head in the six years my son was there turned the school around from failing to to the school with the 2nd best results in the county. No mean feat with single form entry where one child failing can mess with percentages.

I'm sure I commented that I loved that the school was within walking distance and to a judgey, uninformed person they might have thought as the OP did as they saw no value in a school belonging to a community and miss the benefits of the walk to school chatting to their child, meeting their friends and their parents enroute and a feeling of participation that dropping your kid off in the car made hard to achieve (I'm no martyr I drove him when the weather was really crap but genuinely preferred to walk) . You can't give your child the same level of attention when driving and for some reason those walks were a time of very revealing conversations sometimes .

All schools are only as good as their current leadership and the odds of that leadership changing and the standards of the school drastically changing with it are high. In fact a well thought of head is far more likely to be poached or headhunted. Smugness can sometimes be short lived.

I agree trafalgargal . Also those different priorities may not be so bad after all. My parents saw university as a very good thing to aim for whereas we, having done the higher ed thing maybe feel less certain that it's a must have.

My DD goes to the local school but it does have a good reputation. I did factor in her independence and ability to walk to school, though. I think it's very important.

Her friends are local so it's easier to see them and doesn't have to rely on me being available to take her to them. I have a younger DS who I have to pick up from primary school so it's handy that I don't have to get her too. She can just let herself in and wait for me to get home.

I know people whose children go to grammar schools further away (5m plus) because we don't have grammar schools in our area and all of their friends live miles away. If they miss their bus, it's a pain - especially if both parents work.

I also save on petrol, am saving the planet and supporting the local school. I think that, if people don't use their local schools, it can create a kind of ghetto around them and then the reputation feeds from itself.

Saying that, I understand why, if the schools are very, very bad, people don't want to send their children there but I don't think that 'thinking about it' and sending your children further away should necessarily be seen as s superior option. I know this tends to be something that happens around here. People often deliberately choose a school further away when the local one is perfectly good because, somehow, it's seen as better and I do believe that this makes the local schools 'worse.'

Yabvvvu and e trembly judgy, you don't know individual circumstances.

Teacher and Raf, I agree with you. There may be all sorts of reasons a parent doesn't prioritise education - nothing to do with neglect. In fact I think many cases will be because of other priorities. In cases of putting food on the table then of course you do what you can and everything else is a luxury. but if it is a case of "well our family are always electricians" or whatever, then I think the parents are doing a disservice to their children. Where I am I encounter a lot of very stressed children whose parents are putting them under immense pressure to do well in school and go to a good university - they are also doing a disservice to their children.

The truth is that in today's society, for most people, the more education you have the more choices you have. the education system isn't perfect but if you master it at all or even do ok at it, chances are you will have more choices than someone who doesn't. Maybe you will still do an apprenticeship or go to the local factory but at least you will have a choice if you aren't good at your dad's trade or the factory or closes down or you would just like to do something else. And maybe the child of the traveller could be a phd in english lit if given the chance, maybe the child of an electrician would rather be a lawyer or a teacher even if he could earn more as an electrician. but unless he/she finishes school there is no real choice.

No one is lazy but if you want for your child what you had yourself and no other choice, then you may be limiting them. DH and I went to university and post grad. I can see one of my children not wanting to do that at all. If I forced her into a uni career path I would be making her life a misery so I am thinking differently with her about careers/next things. Surely the reverse is also true.

None of this has anything to do with choice of schools as described by the OP though.

Canyou,

I absolutely agree that by choosing an education for your child that prepares them for the life that you have yourself and that you expect them to have, it can be limiting - and can be a real problem if, for example, the main source of local employment disappears, or if the child becomes frustrated with the life chosen for them but does not have the foundations needed for something else.

However, I think we need to bear 'happiness / contentment' in mind, as well as what could be seen as 'wasted potential'. In the specific example of a traveller, is the inevitable separation from cultural roots and tradition that would come from e.g. a PhD better or worse than not getting that further education? Would the lawyer from the family of electricians be happier than the rest of the family?

When I have lived as a 'highly educated transient resident' in very settled rural villages, have I and my high aspirations and professional job been happier or less happy than my much more settled neighbours who are surrounded by generations of family and friends who have lived very similar lives for many years and want nothing more for their children than the contentment that they have had themselves?

It is a really difficult balance to strike - and it can be hugely painful as an education professional to see a potentially very able child channelled by their parents' expectations into a very different path.

I teach at a "dire" school. It's lovely. Small, so hardly any bullying (nowhere to hide as everyone knows everyone else plus we have a student-led anti-bullying initiative) and the kids are happy and feel safe. We're in special measures after several years of poor management - head left suddenly Feb 2015, then we had an interim head until Dec 2015 then the new one who started Jan 2016 lasted about three months before going off sick and is still off. That's where the problems lie. OFSTED came Dec 2015 - into SM. HMI came March this year - Head went off almost immediately afterwards. Lots of staff have left/are leaving this year. Kids don't know though because we work our butts off to keep things stable. The OFSTED report acknowledged areas of excellence in the school and that kids felt happy, secure and safe. Management got a 4 though. Special Measures does not mean that the school is full of children throwing chairs around whilst ineffectual teachers weep in corners. In the subject I am HOD for, the GCSE results last year were better than those at the nearby super-selective best-state-school-in-the-country grammar.

Not RTFT but how big is your town?! Our local school is the only one in town and all the children from nearby villages go there too. Not really any choice. School I went to was about 5 miles away and the only choice.

The OP title is about not choosing the best school for the child, not necessarily the best school based on results/ofsted/reputation. We chose the best school and used DH's (mine to a lesser extent) faith to get entry. It probably isn't the best school for her, we chose the best school rather than the school which best suited her and her needs - struggling with undiagnosed SEN which may have been dealt with better in the non selective community schools with poorer results but higher challenges - FSM and English as a foreign language. Our chosen school is full of snobbery/sharp elbowed middle class parents - one prospective parents asked the head if the school prepped kids for private secondary school entrance exams!

Fortunately we have the finances to get support if the school doesn't meet DD's needs. And it is likely to be the best school for her younger sibling who starts this year - logistics of two school runs at the same time would be madness. Sometimes you have to compromise. I also feel a little sad we aren't more authentically part of our community by going to our nearest school - our second choice which was in special measures but a new head led to improvements and a good rating - cue a surge of middle class parents moving their kids from other schools.

I have also sensed some parents not really thinking of applying for schools except their nearest - perhaps just not realising they could or should, this has been the case with two immigrant families I know of so perhaps this school thing isn't such an issue in their home countries - these are professional parents who value education. We also met several families who refused to apply to the religious schools on moral grounds, I total understand and find it odd that so many parents fake religion - DD's school is very 'in your face' religious, I would hate that if I wasn't comfortable with the religion myself.

My children would never go to a Catholic school - I firmly believe that education and religion should be separated.

As it happens, all 3 of mine are at a "requires improvement" school and are doing very well - both academically and emotionally as the teaching staff are fantastic as are the support staff. Going to an excellent school does not guarantee success.

Going to an excellent school does not guarantee success.

Exactly this IMO
Ds went to the local comp that was satisfactory but soon after went into special measures. He and his friends were incredibly happy there and the teachers worked incredibly hard one HT left,one went sick and another one was "questionable" in his ability to be a HT IMO.
SIL is very like OP, was very critical of my choice of school and dn went to independent schools from age 3.There is a week's difference in age dn manged 2 D's at A2 fundamentally because he has SEN (dyspraxia) that would have been better catered for in a state school rather than the small classes that they believed would be enough. DS did A2's, degree and Masters.
SIL is much quieter now about school choice in fact she is quick to change the subject if it's mentioned

I wouldn't send my child to a Catholic school if it was at the foot of my bed.

Personal choice. Perhaps some of these "lazy" parents feel the same?

I don't particularly care that you wouldn't choose to send your child to a catholic school. My kids are getting a brilliant education from some brilliant enthusiastic and caring teachers as opposed to getting lost in a failing school be taught by teachers who don't give a damn.

why would you ask 'AIBU?' when you are so obviously convinced that you are 100% right and everyone else is wrong?

oh I know - goadyness !

I'm so glad you are happy with your choices OP - well done - not sure why someone so happy feels the need to constantly justify and boast about those choices though - especially comparing to family members - it actually smacks massively of insecurity

I chose the school I thought would suit my DD best. I even moved house to ensure she would go to a better school than the one that was closest to my old house. But, in all honesty, I couldn't give a shiny shite what other people do with regard to choosing a school. Why would I? It's fuck all to do with me.

I don't particularly care that you wouldn't choose to send your child to a catholic school. My kids are getting a brilliant education from some brilliant enthusiastic and caring teachers as opposed to getting lost in a failing school be taught by teachers who don't give a damn.

This is ridiculous on so many levels. For a start, you've started a thread to criticise other parents' decisions but then react like this to anyone who questions your own choices.

Also, how do you know anything about the teachers in any of these schools? I refer you to my post further up. Schools go into special measures for a number of reasons, not because the teachers don't give a damn. When we were looking at school open evenings this year, the one where I was least impressed with the teachers was the grammar school that refers to itself as "the best school that money can't buy" They didn't give a shit on open evening because parents fall over themselves to get their kids in.

My kids are getting a brilliant education from some brilliant enthusiastic and caring teachers as opposed to getting lost in a failing school be taught by teachers who don't give a damn.

There we go. Goady fucker.

I went to a boarding school and hated it. Couldn't understand why my Parents loathed me so much that they shipped me out. My dd goes to an independent school but there's no way on this earth I would make her board.

Goady as fuck.