Middle-class parents would be unable to guarantee their children places at the best state schools by buying houses nearby

[mrz]

Middle-class parents would be unable to guarantee their children places at the best state schools by buying houses nearby

On another note Michael Gove seems to think that mothers have nothing better to do than ferry their teenage children around because I can guarantee there will not be any investment in school buses.

At a time when fuel duty is going up, VAT is going up and petrol prices are going up.

Bend over, folks.

Why is it the fault of the parents that won't send their DCs to St Crap's Academy that the school is shit? Why isn't that the fault of the government and local authority? How is sending little Tarquin there suddenly going to make it a better school?

Okay in my area, the two worst schools (not that bad) are surrounded by poorer housing. Parents from those areas mainly want (1st choice on application) their children to go to the local school. So they would be cross if they had to travel across town to one of the two "better" schools because of banding or lottery.

The RC school is already becoming exclusively RC, something they don't actually want.

And parents like me would probably home educate rather than make our kids do an awkward journey to a not very nice area and a not very good school (espcially for my dyslexic DC).

I thought it was to encourage people to use local schools in their own catchment areas, and not to move for the best schools..so can't understand why more travelling would be involved or maybe thick as already stated on this thread

I don't know how it would work in practise they would need to put a distance sealing on it. So in an inner city you have 4 schools, two in a better area so better schools and 2 that are deemed as 'sink schools'. All the 11 year olds are tested and put into schools within the area so that each one has a mix of abilities, no bad schools, hopefully and each child has access to reasonable teaching and resources. The tests will no doubt be 11+/CATS type so will identify under achievers who have the potential to do well. Sounds OK to me tbh.

We live in an area that is truly comprehensive. Children of all backgrounds and abilities at the same schools. They are all tested at 11 once they go into the secondary schools anyway and then streamed. Some end up getting 3 A's at A level, going on to Uni and some leave school at 16 with a couple of GCSE's.

The nearest grammar school is 40 miles away so only a handful of children bother applying.

We have a private school in our town which some local children attend but the results at the comp are better.

And does anyone know how this idea fits in with free schools - as I thought one if their freedoms was to be setting their own entrance criteria (along with VA schools and those already partially selective for various areas of ability/potential)

Another attack on the middle classes, from an upper class Prime Minister and his Eaton educated cronies.

Make all schools rubbish because actually who cares as they will be sending their kids private anyway and so will their friends.

It doesn't encourage people when you try to ram it down their throats. It just pisses them off and makes them more inclined to give it all the two-fingered salute by home-educating or leaving.

"Advocates say that reserving some places for children with the lowest scores ensures that children from poorer homes are more likely to get places at the best schools"

Doesn't this imply that poor people are thick??

It won't solve the problem that some schools are shite though. Whatever method you use, some children are stuffed by having to attend a crap school.

Why do the Conservatives suddenly have an interest in making schools "socially comprehensive"? Oh, I forgot... they won't have to use them, will they,because they all send Tarquin and Jocasta private. Bring back grammar schools, Gove, you prick.

Maybe I don't really understand the angst of some parents ..my dcs all went to the local comp with kids from all different backgrounds and cultures , some from council estates, some from more affluent areas ..seemed to work fine..some parents might see it as a sink school though .I dunno? In my ideal world all kids should have the best education without it ever having anything to do with money ..ain't ever going to happen though

'Maybe I don't really understand the angst of some parents ..my dcs all went to the local comp with kids from all different backgrounds and cultures'

In some areas, such as the 'hood where we lived in Edinburgh, there was no mix of different backgrounds and cultures. There was just a high school where 96% of the pupils left without achieving 6 or more standard grades at all, and a not insignificant percentage left with 3 or fewer.

In other words, dropped out at 16 with no qualifications.

That could be a reason why some parents might have angst.

And this was in Edinburgh, not a small town.

It's not an issue for us, we moved to a place where there's only one secondary school for a very large geographical area, and there are no private schools available.

As a result, the school performs very well.

But we're about as far removed from anything Tories care about in a million years, thankfully.

Oh good grief, how far are they going to throw the net as to which of your local schools your child may get in to? Do they think hard-working parents have nothing better to do then ferry their children miles to school?

Are there really so many people who move house to get into a good school's catchment area that they are actually significant? I live in a middle-class area, but there are very few secondary schools, and none of them in the better parts of town. All anyone here hopes for is to get the school closest to home to make the school run shorter.

Why don't they just have strict catchment areas like we used to have back in South Africa? Primary Schools W, X, Y and Z all fed into High School A. Simple, end of story. Everyone stays with their friends from lower school, everyone knows where they're going from day 1, no stress, no hassle, no long school run. Why can't they do that here? The only exception should be special needs if one secondary school suits them over another.

well, it could be rigged...

i tell DD to fail. the local school has a low admission standard..so failing wold give her a chance of going elsewhere. succeeding over-average however would guarantee she went to th local school...

wouldn't you tell yours to do as badly as possible?

As others have said, surely the best use of resources is to leave well-performing schools to it, and invest in poorly-performing schools to improve them. It shouldn't be up to successful parents and children to improve poor schools, nor should children be shifted around randomly in a vain attempt to even the playing field.

I know the school you are talking about Expat and if my DCs were sent there I would go into prostitution and drug running to send my Dcs private.

I'd happily prostitute myself to avoid sending my kids to a crap school. I wouldn't hesitate at all, if no other means were available to me.

I live in a middle class area but coming from a sink estate comp myself, I don't worry too much about where dd ends up in this context. At present, she's going to the local secondary school which has a huge range of cultures and backgrounds and will soon be taking on the kids from a failed secondary school in the city. This should increase the ethnic diversity and improve the soci-economic spread too. It may impact negatively on results, but dd is either going to be motivated enough to get on (which I think she will be) or not, in which case, we start looking at her non-academic options for her future.

Other parents in this area are up in arms about the absorption of the failed school, talking about the high degree of knife crime in said establishment and insisting it shouldn't be allowed. Where the hell else are these kids going to go?

And I'm sorry, but society is changing in so many ways and our kids are going to have to be much more streetwise than we were. We can't live in a bubble and neither can our kids, as much as we'd like them to. Some people can pay to keep them in the bubble a little longer, but if you can't you may as well accept that your kids are gonna mix with some awful people and some great people, just as we do as adults.

If you can't pay, you can't control their environment. And I think life's too short to worry about what I can't control.

I didn't vote for the tories, but they got in and surprise, surprise, they're trying to attack the normal guy in the street. I won't let that worry me as I can't change it. So instead, I'll find the most constructive way I can to deal with whatever crap they throw at me. Most people will have to do the same in the long run anyway..

"Advocates say that reserving some places for children with the lowest scores ensures that children from poorer homes are more likely to get places at the best schools."

What's all that about? I do hope that this is lazy journalism? I see that some children from poorer homes might have got higher scores if they were coached but this seems to be equating being poor with low IQ?? Lowest scores only come from poorer homes?

huffy aren't the kids from that school going to be split?

in our area, school closures in the long term are inevitable due to decreasing numbers of children (so presumably, they'll lose the crap schools and spilt their intake amongst the rest) - might this be the case in your area too (it is a national trend in any area where no new housing is built)

thecrackfox i believe abolishing private schools was looked into by a labour govt - that decided it coldn't do that without also losing e.g. schools for the blind...

'Lowest scores only come from poorer homes?'

Which seems to be a common misconception as to why some parents won't send their children to what they perceive to be sink comps....imo