‘Posher’ versus ‘poorer’ school – what’s the real difference?

[stickygotstuck]

A bit long, sorry.

Please feel free to be very candid about this, I am being! I am forrin and my perception/hang ups about class/social advantage are different to DH's (or the majority of the population for that matter).

My DD will start primary school next September. So far, we have seen two state schools. Both are in our catchment, although one of them is very small and oversubscribed (we are talking 70 vs. 170-ish pupils) The larger school has a Good Ofsted, so does the small school. The larger school is in our relatively 'poor' (if you like more 'working class') village, whereas the small school is in the more affluent village next door. When I have spoken to parents asking for advice I can't shake the feeling that there is a certain snobbery towards the larger, 'poorer' school, and I am not sure that it's actually a better school.

We like both schools, but they are totally different and we can't decide our order of preference.

I guess my question is, would we be missing a trick by not pushing for the small school? Is there some sort of 'social advantage' to be gained for DD? (also could it even influence whether she gets a place in the oversubscribed local state grammar later on?). We are not the type to engage in convoluted social dilly-dallying for personal gain, but we are not so naive that we think it does not exist (we are just useless at it!) and we are aware that it's not all about numbers and academic ability.

Vintage it would be a national outcry, because it goes against the fundamental priniciples of educational funding in this country. The request of regular donations to school funds (which does happen sometimes on a very voluntary basis) is controversial, as it could discourage poorer families from applying to that school or make them feel excluded. A level of donation is never made, except maybe to show a very small donation can make a big difference.

The fact that you can buy your way to a better education by buying a house close to a "better" school is a matter of national shame. The aim is that all schools should be "good" and that all students should get an equal chance to achieve. Most people in the UK would agree to that, although they may then deal with reality by moving house, becoming religious or paying for private school fees.

PTA funds are only supposed to provide extras, although in these straightened times that might be tissues and newer reading books, rather than playground equipement.

mercybucket, it's a non-selective grammar, essentially a very good secondary. Again, that one is oversubscribed and although some children from our village do go there we are only in the 'extended' catchment, so to speak.

What I meant by DD's chances of getting there eventually is this - I know it's not supposed to happen, but is it not possible that by going to the posher (i.e. better connected) school someone can put a word in somewhere which means that those children will get a place over the children from the poorer school? Does that not happen??

"No UK state school would ask parents to commit to donating the equivalent of $1000 a year. It'd make the papers!"

Ahem:
www.tiffin.kingston.sch.uk/index.php?mod=page&page=TiffinEducationFund

If you look at the form you can see they are actually asking for £1040 as well:

www.tiffinschool.co.uk/uploads/files/TEF/TEFSTOForm2012.pdf

Can I borrow this thread please?!
We have looked at two schools for my youngest, we loved one and were not keen on the other (the one that my oldest went to). However the one we loved is near a large council estate and people are now saying to us "Aren't you concerned about Zebedee mixing with the wrong people and getting in with the bad crowd?" which is giving me doubts.
It's a no brainer in my mind, go with the one that we and Zebedee love and ignore them but it's sewed seeds of doubt in my mind.

Sticky there really is no way that the staff at the "posh" primary could put a word in at the "posh" secondary. The rules are very rigidly specified, and there's no room for that sort of informal rule-bending. The rules can be quite complex though, and sometimes the posh primary staff and parents can help negotiate the hurdles in a way that is less accessible to the parents from the less privileged school. Shouldn't be a problem if you're willing to do the research yourself though. However you should look at the entrance criteria for the secondary school now (they should be available online) because it is possible that they give priority to children attending a "feeder" primary (mind you it's also possible that they will change the rules before they apply to your DC).

Personally I'd avoid a school as small as the one you mention. Lack of funding, mixed year groups - I don't think they are the best option, as a parent or as a teacher - and the insular nature of it. In any event, go with your instincts not with what you think you 'ought' to do to please - well, who exactly?

I think the 'posh' is a complete red herring btw

MrsVincentPrice neither school is a feeder school to the good secondary. Some kids from both the small and the large school do end up going there to fill the 'spare' capacity (i.e. the places left over after all the feeder schools' kids have been allocated a place).

DizzyHoneyBee that's exactly what I've been told - do we want DD to mix with kids who will swear and behave badly? I slightly prefer the larger school but like you, doubts have entered my mind after some people's initial reactions when mentioning we are considering this one.

ninah yes, those issues are sticking points with the small school. The main reason to go for the small one is that we and her teachers all think that DD would do much better in a smaller school.

And for what it's worth no, I don't think the 'posh' is not a red herring at all. The 'posh' is the main reason (aside from size) why we feel perhaps it will be a better option in the long run.

Oh, and MrsVincentPrice I am very relieved to hear you think rules cannot be bent in such way

We have two schools nearish to us, one is an 'outstanding' school, parents go mental each year trying to get their children into, it has a tiny catchment area, and there is a lot of disappointed parents. The others one is on a dog rough housing estate.

My daughter goes to the rough estate school because I chose it. The teachers are brilliant, the children are so well behaved, they really take pride in their school, and the things they do when the parents come to the school (school fair etc) the parents are a bit rough, but as my dad would say 'salt of the earth' .

Over the summer I have had some awful stories about the outstanding school, bullying is rife apparently. I was told that a lot of parents who send their children there can't quite afford to send to private school, so they send them there. Which is where the bullying is coming from allegedly. Lots of snotty kids playing up to how much mummy and daddy buy for them. I've heard this from a few people now. Do you think posh children don't swear or behave badly?

Vintage

"but it would seem like the only people who should be outraged would be the parents with children at the school; after all, they're the only ones being solicited for donations."

This is one of the fundamental differences between our systems, as you will no doubt come to see. As mummytime points out, it goes against the principle of education for all.

There would be national outrage, as people would see it as the thin edge of the wedge, a chipping away at the fundamental principles which our education system is founded on.

JoanBias

When Tiffin asked parents for money, it did make the papers, e.g. in this report, under the headline "Tiffin boys? school in crisis as £800,000 reserves disappear".

Incidentally, Tiffin is not a bog-standard state school. It's a "voluntary-aided" school. Wikipedia defines that as follows:"A voluntary aided school is a state-funded school in England and Wales in which a foundation or trust (usually a religious organisation) owns the school buildings, contributes to building costs and has a substantial influence in the running of the school. Such schools have more autonomy than voluntary controlled schools, which are entirely funded by the state."

The US, too, ostensibly has a principle of "education for all." However, for reasons I don't understand, few people seemed bothered by educational inequity in our public (state) schools.

I admit, the fact that our daughter's school manages to raise so much money from private donations only serves to increase educational inequality. Her school is overflowing with money while other schools in the same city-funded by the State at the same rate (dollars per pupil) as our daughter's school-are struggling. It's a sad reality. However, I do my part to help. I vote in all elections, including elections with ballot measures related to education funding. I happily pay my taxes, and I support paying more tax if it means our schools are going to be adequately funded.

Perhaps part of the issue is that older Americans are far, far more likely to vote than younger Americans. Older voters are more concerned with their own welfare than the welfare of younger citizens. They're more interested in keeping taxes low, for example, and less interested in maintaining quality state (public) schools since their children have long since graduated from school. If more younger people (e.g., young parents with school-aged children) voted, perhaps the educational opportunities of all students in our country would improve.

Bill of course I know posh kids do swear and misbehave. Which is why I am so to hear people object to the larger school precisely on such grounds.

About a year ago, when school still seemed to belong to the distant future, I said to a friend's DH that having seen the Ofsteds we would certainly consider the large school when the time came "oh, no, you don't want that, the kind of language your DD will hear!". This, I thought, was a perfectly reasonable man. I was surprised to say the least. Not less because, like I said, we live in that estate.

Your daughter schools sounds very, very similar to the larger one near us.

Gosh, so I guess my 'claim' to send my children to the local school means I don't live in the real world.... How odd!

In the real world, that is precisely what most people do actually do.

What I meant by DD's chances of getting there eventually is this - I know it's not supposed to happen, but is it not possible that by going to the posher (i.e. better connected) school someone can put a word in somewhere which means that those children will get a place over the children from the poorer school? Does that not happen??

You would need would need to check the published admissions criteria of your desired secondary (usually available on-line) as some schools do have designated feeder primaries. However, there is no way that anyone could put in a word to influence getting a place - that is absolutely against the law!

But is there an argument that the "posher" school would spend more time preparing the dc for the grammar entrance exam?

CecilyP, what you say matches what MrsVincent said, that makes me feel better.

mudipig, the grammar is actually a non-selective secondary with a very good reputation. But I see your point if it was selective!

Hi OP

I have 2 dc and live in a very 'picture perfect' village with ofsted outstanding, high performing schools. It was one of the reasons we moved here.
DS (now 5.5) has glue ear, significant hearing loss at times and as a result had very delayed speech and language development.

He went to the village, very 'posh' nursery school who were awful- they wouldn't even have the speech and language therapist in, as they felt he did not have an issue- he was just lazy! (despite the fact at that point the speech therapist thought he might need a hearing aid) At that point he was not only behind with speech, certainly wasn't beginning phonics etc like many of the other children and had no confidence, he didn't really play with the others. It broke my heart.

We went to view the 2 village schools with top reputations, explained his issues to the heads that we saw and their reaction said it all- you could see they weren't happy that they might have to take a child who wouldn't give them instant good results.

So we looked around at a school in the next village which has a very mixed catchment area, much higher percentage of free school meals,SEN, English as additional language etc. The head and teachers were lovely and we decided to send both our dc there- i'm sure some of our neighbours thought we were mad but we are so happy with the school- he's now Y1 and dd is in the pre- school.

The reception teacher was beyond amazing- he went from a shy boy who wouldn't speak or join in to a happy sociable boy who finished reception either on or above target in all areas, is reading relatively fluently, writing well and gaining confidence all the time.

I would say go with your gut instinct... I am doing primary PGCE at the moment and the more I see the more I am convinced that parents and families are what drive children's aspiration levels and attitude to learning- not schools.

Our school is much less cliquey- I am well educated and switching career to my second professional career, dh owns his own business, we own a nice house and cars, went to private school, I got a first from a good uni, we are middle class by pretty much anyone's terms, but these bloody dinner party holding, people carrier driving, boden wearing yummy mummy types who exist purely to brag about how gifted/ talented/ ambitious/ multilingual their 4 year olds are are my idea of hell and I am glad to be away from them. (I do realise that that last paragraph does not do justice to my English degree or chosen career but it does express my feelings about this type of person well!)

Also please ignore posters who claim their children are held back by teachers in any school, anywhere. There is immense pressure on teachers for their pupils to perform highly- it would be absolute insanity on the teacher's part.

Good luck whatever you decide- it feels like a huge decision at the time :)

We had a similar choice and I went for the "posher" one.

I thought my dd would fit in better with the dc at this school. We probably don't have as much money as some of them, but just in terms of the parental involvement and the expectations for the dc.

Our school probably has one or two difficult ones behaviour wise in each year but mostly the dc don't have many problems and I've not really seen any bullying. Some of the parents are interfering busybodies quite difficult but that's another matter.

VintageRainBoots interesting insights, thanks :) Have been following the US elections. Nail biting stuff!

(Sorry for the hijack people!)

Vintage - are you going back to the UK earlier than expected? (tad from Oregon)

Actually the schools in the rougher areas here get lots of extra-funding, so that they can have all-day kindergarten for free, whereas we would have to pay for that (equivalent to yr1), but the catchment area is quite strict.

Definitely walk round there at the end of the school day or during break time and see what the atmosphere is like then. I think you can tell a lot about the ethos of a school by how the children are with minimum supervision, speaking as a teacher. Good luck!

Anotherteachermum, your story is very reassuring, thank you. Gald your son's fortunes have been reversed, must have been very hard for you.

You description of the cliquey crows made me laugh, I sympathise enphatically.

It does seem awfully important, doesn't it, I don't want DD to be miserable in school any more than I wish to be among the other parents!

mudipig good to hear your positive experience of the posh school. Hope the busyboodies are bearable.

I do agree with what's been said before that parental involvement is likely to have more weight than the school itself though.

tad, Hubby and I will be in Guildford next month (early November) to find a place to live, sign paperwork for his new job, check out schools, figure out transportation, etc. At the moment, Hubby's start date for his new job is 2 January 2013, though there's some flexibility there. I'd rather him start his new position later rather than earlier-I'm in the middle of a research project at school!-but since we need an address before February in order to enroll our daughter in school for next academic year, we may need to be permanently settled in Guildford by January.