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

"Local schools with rigid catchments is good all round, in my book. Walking to school and socialising with your fellow pupils is what I would like for my dcs."

That is the system that has been in place in France for many years. And that has resulted in a massive flight to private schooling...

"It concerns me that London is the only place where this banding system is used."

It's used in Cheltenham, too: my nephew has just taken the tests. It's not the only place.

Thanks: London had been the only place mentioned before in the thread, hence what I said. Do any of the factors I mentioned about London secondary schools apply to Cheltenham too? (I've a vague feeling it also has a high proportion in private too).

Its about the buying power ..always has been, and the attitude that most parents from deprived backgrounds don't give a shit about education ..very insulting to those of us that do

Agree this is old news in London. But it's a system that isn't really compatible with a Govian every school for itself scenario, imo. I think it used to work quite well in the Londinium olden days when I were a lass and many state secondary schools were local authority maintained. The LA (or the ILEA then) could ensure some semblence of mixed ability intake across state schools because it could take a meta-view and ignore the popularity factor of schools when choosing and administering the test. But it works far less well when the majority of schools are "free" from LA control and can therefore set their own criteria with a view to being as popular as possible and attracting the kind of child applicants who will reflect well on them. My twins did 4 different non-verbal reasoning banding tests last year- 1 for borough X schools, 1 for borough Y schools, (we live on the border of X and Y), 1 for Shiteboys Academy and 1 for Hogwarts. Each test was slightly different and separated the children into different numbers of bands. One of my twins is consistently a bit better at NVR tests (suspect it would be the other way round for VR) but the outcomes showed just what a lottery it is. They were in the same band for local authority X and for Shiteboys, neighbouring bands for local authority Y and wildly differing bands for Hogwarts. (This last fact was interesting as it showed how Hogwarts is able to claim mixed ability intake while achieving 90%+ GCSE results- their top 7 bands are the equivalent of everyone else's top 2 bands.)

This showed me in a rather personal way how schools that are independent of LA control do their tests for varying reasons (e.g. Shiteboys want more higher band pupils, Hogwarts want to play the system to keep their results up, Ringside genuinely believes the tests give an indication of raw talent, St Jessops think parents will feel sold short if they don't have some kind of test since everyone else does one, Musshill is committed to comprehensive education etc etc) and it makes little difference to where people want to send their children, to which schools are oversubscribed, to getting some semblance of mixed ability intake in schools across a local area. If there is one test that all local schools use it can be a useful way of evening out intake but used by schools in isolation it is not so effective.

I don't think it is to do with buying power. It doesn't divide that neatly. How that buying power is used is far more interesting.

Good grief, that was a terrible post (mine). Ignore please. I meant that plenty of families that would identify as not middle class have incomes on a par with plenty of families who would identify as middle class (because there's such a huge range) yet their money is sometimes spent totally differently wrt opportunities for children.

Uneprune, (off the top of my head), wonder if that's cause your average MC parent on £x has a degree, more likely to be pushing education on their kids. Whereas WC person on same £ more likely to be self-employed/own business, pushing their kids to develop skills or business ability, considers paper qualifications irrelevant/useless?

We lived in a grammar area. When the DCs were born there was no way they were going to attend our local secondary High school, as it was dire. By the time DS1 actually went there it was a fabulous school and oversubscribed.

It was still in the middle of a very rough council estate and it still took about 50% of its pupils from that estate. But what made the difference was the new Head and the SMT.

They were really strict on uniform and on attendance. I don't know why uniform makes so much difference but IME it does. They really pulled that school up by its bootstraps and its pastoral care was second to none. The Head knew every pupil by name and was approachable for the kids and the parents. Problems were dealt with immediately and properly. DS1 did have an incident of bullying in Y7 (any school that says they have no bullying is lying) but it was investigated and swiftly dealt with. It wasn't repeated.

DS left there in 2004 after GCSEs. The Head retired on ill health grounds in 2005 and sadly the Deputy Head died. The new Head wasn't interested in the uniform and started to let standards slide. By 2008 it was a sink school again :(

A school can be made or broken by the quality of the leadership team.

Well I don't really subscribe to the view that a good education only equals a degree or other paper qualifications. Success takes many paths but some sort of respect for education, practical or academic, is pretty important for all but the most exceptional (or exceptionally well-connected ) people.

Lots of top comps do this already.

Sorry, was using 'education' as shorthand for GCSE => A-level => degree. My bad.

Heathen I think that traditional path is used by a lot people with degrees as a failsafe - in that you get the chance to study for a degree almost handed to you on a plate, and you know that it means that certain doors won't be closed to you in later life.
It's like a safety net (with cheap beer).

What about the parents that don't have the income though ...low income = don't give a shit according to MN ..easy to sit in your oh so middle class world and slag off the undesirables ..

That's crap, though, usualsuspect.

You don't know my income or anyone else's. I don't know yours and I don't care.

Money makes some things easier but it doesn't mean that there's only one way to skin a cat.

"id. Do any of the factors I mentioned about London secondary schools apply to Cheltenham too?"

I don't know: my brother lives in the authority, but not really in the town. What Cheltenham does have is surprisingly high levels of diversity: there are some fairly run-down council estates that were built in the fifties, and a large volume of people with extremely exotic post-graduate qualifications who are paid very badly (GCHQ). I can't imagine being a maths teacher in south Cheltenham is easy. The private education is used by people from all over the area and further (Cheltenham Ladies' College draws nationally, not locally).

What'll happen? Oh we'll spend a fortune on administering tests and banding pupils etc etc

Then people will do the maths and realise that 7 x 12 = £84k for secondary education - easily a much better option than paying the removal costs into a desirable catchment area

unless you have more than one child and it becomes £84k x 2or3.

You can get discounts for second and subsequent children [helpful]

Thank F*ck we live in Scotland

This is why I like grammar schools because those parents on low incomes do have as much chance of getting their bright child a good education.
The exams need to change so they cannot be tutored for and there needs to be more of this type of school.

How does Scotland differ Maisie ?

Because this won't affect us - we have a devolved Govt which manages our the education system here. What 'national' news often omits to tell us is that it's national insofar as it actually only refers to one part of the UK.

"The exams need to change so they cannot be tutored for"

Unless someone can produce something solid as a proposal, I'll settle for the conclusion that such a test is, in fact, impossible. It would require the production of a task for which repetition and familiarity don't improve performance, which is almost inconceivable. Schemes like "we won't tell you the structure of the exam" simply make tutoring more expensive (because it needs to range wider) and more effective (because the tutored now have a more substantial difference to the untutored).