Do Jamie Oliver's children attend private schools?

[tryingtobemarypoppins2]

Just been watching his C4 series and wondering.....

'Surely if you asked a state primary teacher what position your child was in class in a particular subject they would tell you?'

Are you kidding?! No, not at our school; they won't give you any indication whatsoever of how the child compares to other children, not even vaguely.

I think this is quite common in state primaries.

Is that because the state sector doesn't believe in competition? I can't understand if it's a confidential parent teacher meeting why they wouldn't tell you. I don't think most private schools give you a place in the class but if you ask you're told at least roughly and if yo're give their exam mark in that subject the teacher will usually give you the median or mean. How can you decide if your child is being uselesly lazy or not doing as well as they should if you don't know if they're bottom or top of the class or may be it's obvious from their exam marks or don't they get tests in each subject in state primaries?

It's because, Xenia, most parents are interested in their own chidlren's progress, not other peoples'. I will tell the parents whether they are +/- national average, and whether they are on course to achieve their individual targets for the year. I will not compare them to other childern in the class.
Where they are in the class depends on the cohort - obviously.
Whether they are on course to achieve their own targets is much more pertinent. At that point, I would say whether Little Johnny is being lazy, would explin next steps and would discuss what could be done at home and at school.

It doesn't matter where a child is in teh class. It matters how they are doing according to the national benchmarks for all children.

"What intersted me rcently was one of mine saying they had no problem with others knowing what they got in their class (and I imagine it wasn't that great a mark) and why did others not want it known? I don't know - I imagine it's just just a personal view of that child."

Generally speaking, school kids want to blend in with their peers and not stand out. So if you get an average mark in a test, that's great, you don't stand out.

Most consistently top-scoring kids would hate to be identified, as would the consistent low-scorers.

xenia has no idea how the state sector works, but she has to justify spending thousands on a private education somehow doesn't she.

if they were genuinely clever they wouldn't need the extra help a private school gives them would they

Soooooo getting back to op;

I think the jo programme is shite, in my opinion he has spectacularly missed the point.
Children suffervin education when their parents are not as engaged as they should be. You can have the best teacher in the world but if your parents don't support your education you are unlikely place enough value on it to achieve your potential.

My friends dd is in her gcse year. I asked what a levels they were looking at, she replied that a levels were pointless, her dd would getting a job at 16 the same as she did.....
Her dd is really bright, nowt wrong with starting work at 16 if it has the potential to take you somewhere in life but her mum is in a dead end job, she thinks her dd should do the same.
The school she goes to is an extremely good state comp. No amount of dream teachers will change her outcomes.

Suffer in. Sorry.

The piont about not telling parents in state schools where their child is so the p arent can live in cloud cuckoo land thinking little Jonny is a genius who can fufil his ambition to be a brain surgeon is interesting. Presuambly state schol chidlren do so badly compared to private schools ones now (although not in the past) in part because of this difference - as soon as you leave school ka pow you are in a fiercely competitive world. You may have achieved your own mediocre target to add up but if the other children out there are miles ahead then you'll get l eft behind (hence if you look at most position sof power and well paid jobsi n the UK they are full of pupils from private schools who weren't cushioned from competition.

Presumably state primaries differ though and some of them will tell you your position roughly in a class surely?

ds(17) knows his position in class, he's doing A levels

I used to like JO a lot. I took DH (boyfriend then) to the first Fifteen restaurant for his 30th, and Jamie was there, in the kitchen, supervising his staff, with not a sign of a TV camera. I very much doubt he would do that now.

I watched the first half of Dream School and found it enormously insulting and patronising. As a secondary school teacher, I know that there are some kids who are failed by "the system", but I don't think that the answer is to get terribly clever academics to "inspire" them. David Starkey certainly didn't seem to be managing it.

There is so much more to underachieving teenagers who lack motivation than poor teaching.

Jamie obviously has a bee in his bonnet about this one, as he came out of school with poor qualifications too, but at no point (in the bit I've watched anyway) did he admit that he has to take some responsibility for that himself. Also, he has to realise that the education system has changed somewhat since he was in school himself.

It's just fun television. There was one poor girl who kept telling everyone to shut up and she was certainly very very frustrated by the others. They might as well not be there if they aren't going to listen.

I couldn't understand why they left the class room either. Surely if you know you're on TV and you have chosen to take part coming and going during a lesson is clearly not on.

JO is an advertisement for don't bother about school work because you can still make millions without it. He's not exactly the right person to convince people to go back to school and redo their GCSEs when they probabnly aren't bright enough to pass them anyway or the NVQs or whatever those who cannot manage GCSEs do.

"They might as well not be there if they aren't going to listen."

Xenia for Secretary of State for Education.

Genius.

Not.

If you are talking about when children get out in the world, surely it is more appropriate to know what level you have reached compared with children in the rest of the country, rather than how they compare to their class? We are told how children compare with the rest of the country.

sorry just seen pointy dog already made the same point.

My DC attend a bog standard local village primary. Since Reception ( DS now Y2 ), I have been told where he is in relation to his classmates. Last year, the entire school from Y1 was streamed, so most parents have a good idea where their DC are.

And we are told what ability group/table they are on.

Please listen Xenia.
We tell parents where their children are compared to the national average.

In my maths set, being 15th out of 28 means that children are performing above the national average. Telling parents that a child is 15th in the class would have absolutely no meaning whatsoever. Instead, I tell parents that their child is working above the national average, at a 2a with elements of 3c.

The parents, therefore, are not 'in cloud cuckoo land', as you so ignorantly put it, but are aware of their child's performance. I will also tell them next steps, so that they can help their children's learning at home.

You are obsessed by competition with other parents.

That wasn't what was said above. If children are thold how they are doing that's great. Obviously in a selective school where most children can't get in as their IQ is low being compared with the national average is worse than u seless so positino in the class - top of the top set at Manchester Grammar or middle of the middle set or bottom of the bottom set is more helpful than against a natinoal average where the average or median or whatever it is IQ is 100.

If parents need that detail of marks etc they can take children to schools where you get that information. Most women can earn enough to pay a set of school fees of £10k if they really want to.

Xenia - every time I read one of your posts, I can't help but think that you are the most frightful snob, and that you have absolutely no grip on reality.

In the real world, no one gives a shit whether you were at the top or middle of your maths set in Yr 10. It's not the kind of information one can put on a CV.

No, what's important is knowing targets and performance against targets for the individual (e.g. in Y10 target an A* at GCSE, and then give termly checks against target).

It is of no consequence whatsoever that the child is top of the top set. It is completely meaningless, and will always depend on cohort, whether it be at Manchester Grammar or Deptford Comp.

Each individual takes an exam - exams aren't marked against where a child is in a class!

What use is knowing that you're bottom of the bottom set in maths FGS?

"Most women can earn enough to pay a set of school fees of £10k if they really want to." That would be an extra 10k wouldn't it? You know, just for the fluffy stuff. Presumably what they do earn is spent on normal living expenses.

I do love Xenia

Did someone mention 'cloud cuckoo land'?

I think I have a problem with national averages really. DD was above national average for year 2 before she went into year 2, she is still way above the average, and bored shitless, incidentally. So I find the whole 2b, 2c stuff pointless for my particular child.

I also find that making a whole TV programme about how kids fare better if not bored shitless a bit pointless. Anyone has a better time if not bored and ignored for 6 hours a day.

I'm quite happy to put DD in a school outside LEA control because, in my experience, our entire LEA is staffed with people who are less intelligent and less educated than I am and they have all the caring insight and compassion and interest in children as a dead wombat.

What, me, bitter???!!!!!