To dislike the fact my child is assumed to be failing

[sandsandthesea]

Because she’s on free school meals?

Wow, free music and language lessons would be amazing. There's no way my child wouldn't take advantage of that.

Children on FSM generally end up behind where they may otherwise be

It is a massive generalisation and frustrating as a parent that your child is seen in this way. Statistically, of course, it is true, but all children and all family situations are different, and it is not the only factor. As a teacher, I find the assumption that a child on FSM will be X frustrating as my own children are PP! It is worth pointing out that even a short claim for FSM follows a child for 6 years. It is also worth pointing out that schools are measured on their ability to ‘close the gap’, hence the tuition initiatives that many schools seem to engage in with PP money.

I don't have children on FSM and I get it. But I think the school must be handling it really, really badly.

I agree with this. From OP's latest post, it looks like the school may be just ticking a box. It is a shame that extra funding isn't used to really add to a child's education.

Jesus, there’s thread after thread where lack of funding for SEN is the issue and then there are situations like this????
OP I get where you’re coming from.

Most of the Indian families on FSM that I know welcome the extra tution even if their kids are at the top of the class (most are). OP is taking this negatively rather than the opportunity to learn that it is.

In our school, they always ask for people to claim their entitled free school meals, so the school can claim this pupil premium money. The extra money benefits all the children as it buys nice things and experiences for the children, mine included who aren't entitled to free anything!

I find the school's approach bizarre.

The Pupil Premium money is given to schools for every pupil on free school meals. It is based on evidence that pupils on free school meals have (on average ) lower school outcomes than those who don't.

It is of course a very rough measure, but it provides a simple way for the government to allocate more money.
Our school for example has 35% of pupils on FSM, which is higher than average, due to being in a deprived area.

Of course it is a crude measure, and the money can be spent in any way that the school likes, with one proviso, it must be spent to
narrow the gap in acheivement between the children receiving FSM and those not receiving it. If there is no gap, the school can spend it where it likes!

The school has to justify how it spends the money and the data will show how it is doing on whether it has closed the gap.

At our school the money is used for all the lowest acheivers, FSM or not, with the aim that all kids will get up to standard

ohreallyohreallyoh
I think assuming PP = lower ability would be wrong.
But PP = has a socioeconomic background which means wherever they are now, they could benefit from some extra (regardless of ability) is perfectly reasonable.

Smeddum
SEND ans PP are different pots of money for different things.

Some of (again generalisation here) the issues with PP students also include literacy levels, parental engagement, ability to fund revision guides, access to an enrichment curriculum, parental views tjat their child doesn't need to do x y z to get good grades because they are 'just fine', literacy gap by social background starting from 3 years old.

Not all PP students will have the same profile but there is a reason money is available. Just because SEND funding is a mess in places doesn't mean other funding shouldn't exist because one parent thinks a child wanting to go out with friends i the priority for their child.

the sentence about narrowing the gap was supposed to be in bold, that is the legal use of the money. Not music, not anything else, but to narrow the gap.

FOr all those deriding the OP for snobbishness, how would you feel if your own child was being singled out because YOU were being deemed to be providing an inadequate environment for learning?

But step if you have students studying GCSE music/drama then access to classes/tuition out of class is helping to narrow tje gap because advantaged students will already have a rich extracurricular experience where they develop their skills.

For GCSE PE, many students in schools like ours are playing for county and a handful trying out for nationals. That requires a lot of parental funds and engagement. Using PP money so the child can be kitted out/attend a sporta team beyond school is narrowing the gap.

She qualifies for pupil premium because she’s qualified for free school meals, it just gives extra money for schools. My daughters’ school uses it to run free after school clubs for all the children in the school and buy things to benefit learning. It’s nothing to do with whether they think she’s failing or not

You don't have to accept it.

My friend's son is half indigenous (Australian) and as a result, she was offered extra and free nursery for him here in Australia.

She and her husband (He's indigenous) are very middle class...excellent income and both work in professional jobs but because of Australia's efforts to redress the balance, to sort out the problems and injustices faced by indigenous children, they were entitled to this free and extra nursery thing.

They took it and didn't think twice about it really being "for poor people" because they didn't care....they know they're not poor...they know their son has every advantage.

Remember this...your child is already winning because she has you as her parent.

BUT OP'S DAUGHTER'S SCHOOL ISN'T USING THE MONEY TO PROVIDE RESOURCES OP CAN'T AFFORD

Op's daughter's school is herding all the poor children into a classroom with a supply teacher on a Tuesday after school.

They are SPECIFICALLY targeting the Op's child's education, which OP says has never been a problem.

They aren't actually offering the sort of help that alleviates poverty. they have made an assumption about Op's child and have stuck to it despite evidence to the contrary.

We have a nasty habit in the country of not hearing people because they're poor. Poor people have told this country's government again and again what they need and they aren't being heard.

FOr all those deriding the OP for snobbishness, how would you feel if your own child was being singled out because YOU were being deemed to be providing an inadequate environment for learning?

It doesn't have to be claimed, the OP could have just not claimed and paid for lunches or sent in a packed lunch and nobody would have been any the wiser. As she does and continues to do so, the school have a duty to the child.

It's not just about having an adequate learning environment, it's about lack of work ethic and motivation , lack of opportunities for clubs, culture, sport etc. All these things contribute to the gap between none FSM children and those on FSM.

I was on FSM and at the time there was no extra help. I did fine at school, but I still think most people don't realise how much harder it is if your background is really poor.

how would you feel if your own child was being singled out because YOU were being deemed to be providing an inadequate environment for learning?

Exactly. My children were at a primary school where a lot of massive assumptions were made about the quality of the children's home life, based on statistics about the neighbourhood where we all live. It gets pretty annoying when it's assumed that because you live in a "poor" area your child must be at risk of failure. Or you must personally be in need of educating about basic literacy or numeracy. Children are individuals, not statistics. If the OP's daughter is already reaching her potential at school, she should not be singled out for extra tuition purely on the basis of her family income.

It doesn't have to be claimed, the OP could have just not claimed and paid for lunches or sent in a packed lunch and nobody would have been any the wiser.

Op qualifies for her children to have free school meals, why on earth do you think she can afford to not claim them? You don't need brains and parenting skills to make lunches, you need money which is what the OP and everyone in her position lack.

Exactly how high do you think the threshold to qualify for FSM is? It's really not very high.

It's not just about having an adequate learning environment, it's about lack of work ethic and motivation , lack of opportunities for clubs, culture, sport etc. All these things contribute to the gap between none FSM children and those on FSM

I qualified for FSM because my Oxford educated Dad went back to university. You’re making huge generalisations.

I would take every additional educational opportunity available to my kids if it were offered.. and especially if it's free .. this is a fantastic opportunity OP .. don't be offended .. grab it with both hands... for your precious child...

You said, "she isn't musical at all" is an example of low-aspirations.

Look at it like a private tutor for free.

She might not be behind but there is nothing to stop her getting ahead.

They are SPECIFICALLY targeting the Op's child's education, which OP says has never been a problem.
Because a child can make expected progress from a starting point but if (as research seem tp suggest) that socio-economic factors affect the starting point, there are many children who are doing well enough but not reaching their full potential.

We have a nasty habit in the country of not hearing people because they're poor.
Poor people have told this country's government again and again what they need and they aren't being heard
Well I tell you what, you go away and tell schools the solutions for large inequality in education. Come and tell us how you plan to solve the fact there's more category 3/4 schools in deprived areaa vs leafy ones. Come back and explain how you solve a literacy gap that starts from kids being toddlers.

And then maybe we can start getting into why you think it's so damn wrong of schools to try and help children who fall into a category which is known for lending itself.to lower educational outcomes.

Dear me. A less than perfect policy with good intentions is clearly the worst thing on earth.

"how would you feel if your own child was being singled out because YOU were being deemed to be providing an inadequate environment for learning?" I would feel like crap. Which is why this should never happen if the school is even halfway decent. However, I would hope that I would also realise that many parents with children on FSM cannot, however hard they try, provide the environement for learning that better off children get automatically and be pleased that something was being done about it.

maisy - yes absolutely, if studying GCSE, then the money can help narrow the gap.

many schools do use it to fund trips etc, on the basis that developing the whole child helps with their whole education, and so helps close the gap.

But they do have to prove to ofsted how it helps close the gap