"the more middle class the school, the better it does"

[puddle]

A study, reported in the Guardian today has found that regardless of background, children do better the more "middle-class" the school they attend. 50% of a school's performance is accounted for by the social make-up of its pupils.

Here's a quote from the article:

"In affluent areas, such as Dukes Avenue, Muswell Hill, in north London, and Lammas Park Road, Ealing, west London, the study would expect 67% of 11-year-olds to achieve level 5 in the national English tests and 94% of 15-yearolds to get five or more passes at GCSE at grade C and above.

Meanwhile, of the children growing up in more deprived areas, such as Hillside Road, Dudley, or Laurel Road, Tipton (both in the West Midlands), just 13% are likely to get the top level 5 in the national English tests for 11-year-olds, while only 24% of 15-year-olds will be reckoned to achieve the benchmark five-plus GCSEs at grade C and above.

Put simply, the more middle-class the pupils, the better they do. The more middle-class children there are at the school, the better it does. It is proof that class still rules the classroom."

This seems to me to be proof that middle class parents damage all children by taking their kids out of state education and into private schools and gives credence to the arguement that middle class parents should stick with the state sector to improve education for everyone.

Views? I know it's a total parp subject for many.....

Well I'm middle class but my son's school isn't at all (there are some of us but I'd say the make up isn't predominately mc) so I suspect we're screwed. There you go, all the people who told me it was insulting to working classes to maintain that a middle class brain drain to the private sector affects state schools, this would appear to prove the point. It doesn't surprise me particularly.

yes
absolutely true
if the middle classes absent themselves from state education everyone will suffer
it is an individual decision but with wider consequences

is this saying something more than children growing up in deprived areas do badly in school..is that not what you would expect?

Zippi it's saying that the success of a school is all down to the background of the children there - not the type of school or the quality of the teaching. the arguement of the article is that the gvmt's desire to give schools greater freedoms to select their pupils will end up with schools picking the middle class kids as they are what makes a school successful.

Yes and ideally I don't think a private school sector should not exist at all. However, I am not suprised people do what's best for their own children.

so the answer is too regenerate deprived areas to bring the standard of living up for everyone and this is not necessarily done by investing in education but by investing in business and the local economy

This doesn't surprise me either. I know it's a huge generalisation but middle class parents are probably more likely than those in lower classes to have been academic themselves and I suppose children of bright parents are more likely to be bright than not (I know it doesn't always follow). These parents might be more likely than others to spend time helping their child out of school and the children are probably lucky enough to be able to go to a good few out of school activities.

In addition, there is probably more financial and practical contribution to the school from 'middle class' parents. All of these things will influence the performance of the children at the school.

I could be wrong of course, but ds1's school is very 'middle class' and is a fabulous school both in terms of results and in terms of the extra curricular opportunities it provides. There are always parent helpers in the classroom so although there are large classes - 30 in ds1's class - they are reading one to one several times a week. The PTA is well attended (I'm on it ) and it raises a huge amount of money every year - this means that we fund an awful lot of 'extras' for the school - as well as some essentials.

The head did say to me once that a good proportion of the success of the school can be attributed to the catchment population.

It's a state primary btw. Don't want to take anything away from the teaching though - it's obviously fabulous (well, only got experience of reception so far!!) so lots of factors contribute but I'm sure parents have a big influence.

It's like public tranport isn't it; everyone knows the environment would improve dramatically if we all stopped relying on our cars and got on buses/trains instread, but it isn't going to happen until public transport is improved. Ditto schools. Improve them, then the middle class will be more than happy to not fork out on private education.

I don't know what the answer is btw. My aunt was a head of a very 'rough', if you like, primary in an inner city area and she talked a lot about how she was 'fighting a losing battle' simply because many of the parents just didn't place any value on school at all. They didn't care if they were called in to discuss issues and they would be verbally and physically abusive to her - how do we change this? How do we make sure that every parent accepts the value of school and puts the same effort into their child's education as other parents?

our primary pretty much like yours GDG.

btw... Jack is sat on my desk. Will take him to the PO tomorrow. It gets far to busy on a Tuesday.

ta!

Such a shame for those bright and willing pupils who end up in these schools though. Not everyone can pay their way into a better catchment area or a private school and being bright and willing does not always depend on money.

I agree FM - in fact my aunt used to say it broke her heart to see some of the children who were bright and really wanted to learn - the classroom was always being disrupted and they just never got the attention they deserved.

It's awful - I don't know the solution.

I don't know what the solution is, but i agree with GDG.
If, as parents, you care, you would take time to help with homework etc.
Parents that care, really make a difference.
I care.
Will I try to get my son into the best possible school ?
Will I assist with his homework ?
You bet your life I will.

The gap between a good private school and a sink state school is huge. Better schools attract beter pupils, better teachers and better parents. This creates sink schools that any one with any choice would not send their kids to. Some parents do not have a choice, or basically don't give a toss where there kids are, let alone which school they go to. It is sad that these kids are being let down by the system, but ultimatley being let down by their parents.

I grew up on a council estate in Teesside and went to the local comprehensive. It had a bad repuatation, terrible truancy record and a drugs problem. Fortunatley, my parents cared about my eduacation and took an active role from day 1. I left school with 9 GCSE grade C and above. What I'm trying to say is that I beleive bright kids acn flourish in any school with the right input from home. This is what needs to be changed. We can have good state schools and private school. The two are not mutualy exclusive IMO.

You can't take away parental right to choose.

I'm probably going to get jumped on here but how can you say that "middle class parents damage all children by taking their kids out of state education."

Surely it is just proof that middle class parents care enough about their children's education to ensure the schools they send their kids to are up to scratch - whether it's private or state.

We should be turning this around and berating those parents (middle class or otherwise) who don't care what their kids get up to in school and show teacher no respect when they're hauled up about their kids' behaviour or performance.

so depressing that 4 of dd1s classmates are being taken out of her tiny rural state village school and packed off to private school. Really bad for the school and personally upsetting for dd1.

bloody middle classes (I am totally middle class btw )

I'm a middle class parent who sends her children to an inner-city state primary school which does not have stunning results. Actually, the school does a good job and my children are doing fine. Which is just as well as we could not afford private education.

However, I do not accept the argument that those with the money should "stick with the state system to improve education for everyone". There may be some with the time and other resources to make a difference, but by and large I doubt most parents could make that much difference to their children's school, though they almost certainly could do a lot for their own children.

"Surely it is just proof that middle class parents care enough about their children's education to ensure the schools they send their kids to are up to scratch - whether it's private or state. "

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

nothing wrong with dd1s state school. in fact it is the second best in dorset according to league tables and widely accepted to be excellent.

A lot of middle class parents just LIKE the idea of private schools, plus all that guff about Ludo doing so much better now he can learn to ski on horseback whilst playing the piano in Greek

but isn't the point that in Tipton the second best school is rubbish

Now I am well-known on mn for being ant-private schools, better just make that clear from the start.

However, if you have an improving school with a critical mass of middle-class children, what tends to happen is that other middle-class parents get wind of this and start moving into the area or doing whatever else they need to do in order to get their children into that school. Which means that the school takes in more and more middle class children, thus squeezing out working-class (for lack of a better term) children. Thus the influx of middle class children, taken to extremes, actually damages the educational prospects of others.

I don't know what the answer is either, I'm afraid.

I don't know what the answer is either but I don't think blaming middle class parents for choosing to educate their kids privately or in a particular state school is the answer.

Oh god, this is one of my parp subjects really but I prob ought to shut the f up since I've admitted to being a total turncoat who will pay if we have to for secondary education. We are in Bristol, widely accepted to be shite for schools and this is, according to some, partly as a result of middle classes deserting the state sector in their droves* here. I am going for a lie down I think (really, dd was up at 5am).

But will come back to witness the row later and will lurk, nodding at various posts but not saying much :)