"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.....

I can tell you, Enid, that if you saw me dance, you wouldn't hold that belief for long...

True Enid, but I think that bloss is talking aboiut the 'cult of mediocrety' that you see all too often.I work with far too many kids who are happy to coast and come out with a C grade when they could get an A, simply because it isn't cool to excell. Like bloss I want all the kids I teach to excell, be that learning the year 1 words from some of my kids in Y7, to getting all A * in their GCSEs (from my uber motivated top set in y11).

I tell all my kids that I only teach the best. And I expect them to be the best. And they believe me because they know I teach a lot of A level classes IYSWIM. Many of them respond well. Trouble is, a lot of the rest of the world tells them that it isn't cool to bother.

And sometimes, dare I say this, it also creaps into the comfortable world of MN. Think of the drubbing the parents of very bright kids get when they post about their sucesses. It is ok to say that your ds made the footie team, but say that your ds made the local G and T list and often people can be quite rude.

I want all the kids I teach to excell, It doesn't matter where they start, but not all the messages they get are so positive

there's a world of difference between getting an A grade or needing to be the 'best' ballet dancer in the country though surely?

Yes, there is. I just want my kids (and I mean by that both my children and my students) to be the best they can be, and not settle for cruising through life without challenging themselves or anyone else.

But if they don't hang around adults and peers who are striving for excellence, it will never occur to them that they can be better than they are.

that's a very interesting post Bloss, but I am struck by the contradictions in it.
the kind of participation you advocate for your maths students in reading poetry - that's what I would advocate for all children, for all the arts - even if (especially if) those children do not think the arts are for them. if children do not find "art" accessible then the way to encourage participation is just what you suggest with your maths students, to ensure that they don't "write off" whole areas of culture - the areas of culture that, as you rightly say, make us the civilisation we are.
surely the way to put off as many people as possible is to emphasise excellence over participation? and that would be more than a shame

I don't think I disagree with anything you've said in your last post, but I'm not sure I've conveyed my sense of 'excellence' to you either.

It's not my job to teach them poetry, and so I didn't see it as my role to go into textual analysis with them. On the other hand, I didn't present merely things that they could 'easily relate to' - I'm absolutely not a believer in the value of studying Simpsons episodes or something. Instead, I chose Marvell and Rossetti and ee cummings and a few other things that I don't think would necessarily jump out at them. My aim was very low - just to create enough of a spark of interest that they might retreat from their previous position of 'poetry sux'. But that would not be good enough in an English teacher (IMHO!). I was also, incidentally, trying to show them that you can love and appreciate lots of different things - here was their maths teacher doing a dramatic recitation of poetry for them...

It's not good enough, for instance, just to get them doing creative writing - they also need to have their work criticised and be forced to rewrite it and improve it, and to analyse other people's writings and rack their brains over why it's so damn good... This is hard work, and very few people find this unqualifiedly attractive. (I know I don't enjoy hard work a lot of the time!) But they need to put in the effort and find the reward for it.

What I was aiming to do in my maths classroom was a much more limited role with respect to English literature. On the other hand, I try very hard to give them a breadth of understanding and appreciation of mathematics... It can be so COOOOOL at times! And there is huge satisfaction in getting a hard problem out... And it trains the mind and, and, and, and... I could go on forever. But they are going to have to work hard to appreciate this.

Just occurred to me - maybe I should specify that 'mediocrity' is, for me, defined relative to the individual's talents. Your mediocre performance in dance may be my outstanding performance. But if the teacher is herself just plodding along without any interest in excellence, how can she expect to bring out individual excellence in her pupils?

Bloss do you not think that some of the edgy artistic endeavours often come from people who had a challenging upbringing. Take for example Rap music and some of the top artist in this genre had very creative times on the streets, 50 Cent and Eminen for example. I'm not a huge fan of rap but I recognise it as an important art form.

Some of our best writers had diffult times growing up and often had to drop out of school e.g Frank McCourt author of Angela's Ashes had a very rough schooling. Tracy Emin also had a dificult childhood I believe.

Double Oscar winner Hillary Swank was brought up in a trailor park. Anyway, I am sure that there a loads of other examples of truely gifted artist who did not ever go to private school but by most people's standards have taken the art world by storm. Do you really think it is only in private school art can be cherished?

talent will out, dros, talent will out
bloss, your encouragement of your maths students to appreciate poetry is tremendously worthwhile. just because you are not an expedrt" at it, does not mean it is not worth doing.
that's absolutely my point.

I have to say that my reasons for choosing private school for my dds are very different from Bloss'. I will not be pushing my kids or expecting them to 'excel' at anything just to do their best and many of the kids I teach and have taught have been disaffected and turned off education because too much was expected for them and their best not accepted and praised. I do not believe that students can only excel at private school (and I have taught many students who have reinforced this for me) and I see nothing wrong with mediocrity if that means the same thing as 'average'. By definition the vast majority of us are mediocre at most things if not all things. Only the top 5% are defined as G & T. Writing off or criticising or even seeing the 'mediocre' as somehow inferior means writing off the vast majority of the population. My only reason for opting for private school is my dd's happiness. Yes, you have to work hard to improve and to be rewarded (by yourself as much as anyone else) but I teach students who work really hard to achieve a grade C at GCSE and that's a fantastic result for them and therefore for me. I suppose if you had a child who was truly 'gifted' at something/s then you might feel his/her needs might best be accommodated at a school where students and teachers were able to challenge and support her best in this area and that may mean private school is the best option but I'm not sure that's what you're saying Bloss.

What I mean by 'excell' and also bloss, is for kids to do their best. And that doesn't mean get all A*s

What I want for my own children, and those that I teach is that they fulfill their potentential. Be that all a* grades, being in the fottie team, gettibng a single grade G, learning to say please and thank you. As long as they do their best, and are helped to reach their potential fine.

But I work with far too many kids who are happy to coast, ger a C when they could have got a B, made the second r=team when they could have been in the first.

In my class I try to engender a feeling of sucess and attainment....to whatever level the kids are capable of achieving.

Both bloss and I have said that we feel excelling means doing your personal best.

excel....and all the other typos

Oh and I'm an English teacher. And I have used The Simpsons with an AS English class on more than one occasion. The last time was an episode called 'Bart's Soul'. It was an introduction to the philosophical and religious and historical issues raised by Dr Faustus because that's what the episode was based on. The Simpsons is actually produced by a highly educated and intelligent team and is really quite a sophisticated text. As you will have gathered I'm not an intellectual snob. I do like to challenge and push my students but I find the best way of doing that is to appeal to what they know and like first.

Martian, show me a teacher or parent who doesn't want their students or kids to 'fulfil their potential'. But I thought Bloss was condemning mediocrity and saying private school was the only way to avoid it??? Maybe I've got that wrong but that's a whole different argument from 'doing your best whatever that means'.

Always helps to find a 'peg' to hang the lesson on!

I have a very depressing week with the sixth form next week. 3 lessons on cancer (dh has cancer) and 1 on alzheimer's (mum has dementia)

I could so with some Simpsons to lighten the load a bit

NO, but I must confess that there is a sad air of 'mediocraty' in many schools (some state , some private) because of the lack of credability in pushing yourself to the limit. Fueled by celeb TV, quick fix fame etc.

I find so many kids honestly feel that someone will 'discover' them , so they don't need to work.

If a kid wants fame and so they learn to play guitar or sing etc great. If they want to be famous and expect it all just to happen, crapola.

And lots of the kids I work with seem to feel like this. I blame the KS3 drop off and puberty meselk No longer cool to be good at something, such a sad way to think.

Agreed to a certain extent. Wasn't there a survey where they asked teenage boys what they wanted to do for a living and the no. 1 choice was, surprise, surprise, to be a footballer and the 2nd choice was to be a fighter pilot. Neither of these are particularly realistic and I think you're right that a lot of boys are secretly or not waiting to be 'discovered' for these options and dream away their time in class. While there was a study last week that said one of the reasons why there's still a difference in pay between the genders is girls' low aspirations. There's a girl at my sixth form college who is predicted A grades and could be an Oxbridge candidate but doesn't want to go to uni at all and already has a job lined up at a local nursery. Nothing wrong with working at a nursery of course but it so badly paid and not respected. Her mum is beside herself.

Having said that I don't think this is anything new in fact I think things are very much better and continuing to improve. There was a time (not long ago) when many boys left their secondary modern to go down the pit at 15 and the girls to get married. Now nearly a third of students go on to university and they know they have to compete for places.

Also, teachers can't afford to let kids 'coast' or 'fail' as much as they used to. Not when their position in the league tables depends on those kids getting their C grades or whatever (and at sixth form level I actually don't pass the threshold and get paid unless I meet my targets for results and retention).

I keep seeing this thread bobbing up AND I AM NOT BEEING SUCKED IN!

Sorry about your dh and mum by the way Martian. And I agree about the anti-boff culture although again returining to the original post this depends very much on the school (and again although I'm choosing private for my dds that's because of the schools in my area. I know there are some brilliant schools in the state system).

Scary isn't it Carla? I should probably be marking books or something.

And yes there's footballers' wives on the telly but there's also that spelling bee programme etc Martian. Or indeed The Simpsons!

dh is a fighter pilot or at least he was....flys a multi engine one now because of his medical problems.

He always said he wanted to go back to his old school as say 'see, you can if you try!'

Granted not everyne could, I couldn't be a pilot, but his school actually humilited him for wanting to try. (he was in a comp and came from a single parent home you see. He also happens to be astonisingly bright and driven but the school rather ignoed that. He also put himself forward for oxbridge, mush to the schools surprise and he got in!) Ah the good old days of the 70s!

and ditto re the kids choice of school I also have choisen private for mine, for the same reason as you, and also their provision of wrap around care that lets me go to meetings etc after school

....and I also have 15 books left to mark......argh I hate marking with a passion! My least fave part of the job!

....and I also have 15 books left to mark......argh I hate marking with a passion! My least fave part of the job!

springintheair - you clearly must have missed the post in which I stated that ' 'mediocrity' is, for me, defined relative to the individual's talents'.

I also don't have a problem with using a Simspons episode to introduce the 'real' work - Faust. What I'm not a fan of, is studying Simpsons episodes themselves with the same earnestness as TS Eliot. I love the simpsons, agree that it can be very intelligent etc. But I don't think it stands in the canon of great English literature.

Harpsichord - I'm glad you approve of our poetry forays. I also think they're worthwhile. But I'd be very p*ssed off if that was the extent of my child's teaching in poetry. My point was that an English teacher should be doing something much more demanding of them.

drosophila - I agree that many of the best artists have had little or no training. But I don't see that anything at all follows from this fact in terms of the ordinary curriculum. Are you suggesting that we don't actually need to educate people on any of these things because genius will out? But what about the rest of the non-geniuses? That's my concern... They need to be taught to do things as well as they can too, even if they'll never make waves in the wider world.

Mmm... Bloss, of course I agree that everybody should (be encouraged)to try their hardest to fulfil their potential in whatever field but you seem to be talking about the outcome rather than the attitude IYSWIM. Although I appreciate 'excellence' in the arts, education and in people and would like to encourage it in my students and kids and help them appreciate it too I understand that, in the way you mean it, by definition, only a tiny minority of people can achieve it. And some people just aren't academic. They may have other interests. This doesn't make them any less valuable as people. Sorry if I've got it wrong but you just seem to have the view that you and yours need to be trying to be the best, taught by the best and surrounded by the best and that feels like such a recipe for pressure and disappointment and so far removed from reality for the overwhelming majority of real people. What about just being happy and getting pleasure from simple things?