‘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.

MN is a bubble of a particular type of middle class left leaning porfessional.

Back in the real world parents do whatever they can to secure a place in the best school they can.

Gawd that's really funny. I agree with first statement but couldn't disagree more with the second. Because in the world I see most parents weigh up a load of different options with convenience being a super high priority factor. Precisely because they aren't from MC educated professional backgrounds, so don't have so much MC angst about getting the choice "right".

I agree with those who say visit the schools & go with the one that feels however slightly better. Hopefully you'll feel fine about schools so it won't matter if child doesn't make it into small school.

My fear with "posh" schools is that they'll be full of angst-ridden or snooty parents & their offspring & have a culture of not appreciating each child as an individual (ie, some aren't all that academic, some are academic but need support in other ways, etc). Also I want my children to mix with a variety of other types of people. We are very weird family ourselves (highly educated MC left-leaning etc. fused with foreign laid-backness & ideals). DC need to learn how to relate to all kinds of other types of folk.

Thanks lljkk

Thing is, in the world I inhabit convenience is key too. But I have also seen some people living at the end of my road going to extraordinary lengths to go to the smaller, less convenient and, on paper, slightly academically worse than the larger 'poor' school down the road. And, not having grown up in this country, I find that illogical and can't help but wonder why.

Now angst I can cope with, I have plenty of that myself. Although, I categorically disagree with it being an MC treat. On the other hand, snootiness I cannot (or want to) bear.

Like you, I also want DD "to learn how to relate to all kinds of other types of folk". But I'm beginning to think that in our case, "the other type" may actually be the people from the 'posh' school. [hhmm]

Ideally, you would have a really wide mix from all walks of life. It's not ideal to be with only one type as it's not representative of reality and can warp your understanding of things that are unfamiliar. Surely it's best to have as wide an experience of other people as possible. If forced to make a call on posh or poor, I would go for posh as I want my DS to feel the equal of the children of more affluent parents, be confident in their midst and know that they are no better than he is. My friend has made the opposite call - her son has the privilege of the full range of extra curricular activities and a highly successful, intellectual and affluent extended family, familiar with worldwide travel etc. He goes to the poorer school.

Re the 19k from the PTA. My kids' school gets 100k pa from the pupil premium...

In the real world, most people send their children to the nearest school they can get in to. To suggest otherwise suggests some confusion over what the real world looks like.

stickygotstuck - ignore what other people are doing and decide for yourself. Peoples' reasoning normally revolves a bit more around fear and prejudice than fact.

Reasons for other people avoiding the bigger, poorer school could be for a whole host of reasons, including (and you will find after a while that the reasons get a bit repetitive, as the same fears are expressed in slightly different ways):

• local knowledge indicates that the big school has a huge bullying problem, staff with low morale who keep leaving and dreadful SATs results;
• I'm not convinced that the school doesn't spend more time on the children with SEN or low achievement on entry, working to get them up to a level 4 in their SATs, and leaves the more able children to underachieve (and, of course, I assume my child is one of the "more able" sort);
• my retiring violet of a child would get lost in a big school and I prefer the lovely cosy atmosphere of the smaller school (where all children will be like my child, from a similar background, so I'm sure he/she will find a few friends);
• I don't like the look of the parents at school pickup time - some of them smoke and swear in public;
• I didn't choose to live in the village that school is in, because I was told it was a bit rough and common, so why would I want my kids to go to school there - I might as well have bought a cheaper house and lived there if I was going to end up sending my child to school there;
• I assume my child will be more advanced than all the other children when he/she starts school because I do lots with him/her at home and assume that parents "not like me" will not have done as much and might even be sending little brutes to the school who will pick on my little angel;
• I do not believe schools actually can differentiate very well, so want my child to go to a school where the level of achievement on entry is high, so that my child does not get bored waiting for the other children to "catch up" and has lots of role models in terms of academic achievers;
• I am a little bit concerned that if I mix my child with children from different backgrounds, he might pick up some of their bad habits and what's more develop a lousy work ethic, because only people from my sort of background have a work ethic and manners that I understand;
• I don't think I could be friends with any of the parents as hardly any of them are from my socio-economic class;
• everybody else I know is trying to get their children into the other school, so that one must be good and this one bad.

You are talking here about primary not secondary. I think this is important. At primary level, I didn't want my children in a middle class bubble, I wanted them to know and play with alll the children in the village they lived in (now in the area I live in in a city) It was important to me that they and us were part of the community where we lived.
We wanted a school that was mixed socially, culturally and ability wise, because real life is like that, and we wanted our kids to know how to relate to all people.
The school gate is what you make it. if you are friendly you can make friends anywhere. People are people after all.

Our school has a very mixed intake, and is on the edge of a big council estate. So the most important thing was that the able children were encouraged to acheive no matter where they came from. The school works hard to give the children big ideas to aim for, they take year 6 children to visit Oxford uni for example.

The social climbing part of it really isn't relevant at this age, the friends they make at secondary will be much more significant in the networking social connections stakes (if that concerns you)

Now we are considering secondary and there are different issues. The local school is full of kids whose families are not aspirational. There isn't an atmosphere that it is ok and normal to go to university, strive to get a career etc. Now those issues are going to matter. My ds will still have local friends from primary, but now we need to think a bit bigger.

Don't underestimate how good it is as a family to be able to walk to your local school.

It's always been a high priority for me, too, to be able to walk to the primary.

I agree that aspirational differences are more apparent & important at secondary. DD is very ambitious & prefers the secondary that felt most aspirational to her.

It's interesting to see what comes up in people's choices for secondaries. I have been surprised at how many people said simply "I want to keep her close".

Local high school is a 25 min. walk away. DD's first choice High School will cost us £500/yr in bus fares (windy bus thru the villages). Longer day as a result of extra travel, potential of transport headaches if bus breaks down. Lots extra travel costs if she does any after school clubs & needs picking up in the car. Most people locally will find it hard to justify that outlay, or can't swing afterschool pickups due to work commitments.

I agree that considerations for primary school and for secondary school are different.
Fwiw, my children are at the local, large, mixed intake (socially and developmentally!) primary and they are incredibly happy there and thriving academically. It is not an inner city primary school with barbed wire around its perimeter, it is neither at one extreme end of the social spectrum or the other, but has a smattering of all types of the sort of people who live in the part of the world where I live. Yes, that does result in less support for the PTA (only a few people in the school with the will and time to support it, rather than the entire parental population), but it does not result in badly behaved children and loutish parents - it has the feel of a real community of which you would want to be a part and it caters well for all the children in the school, not just the least able, just the middle or just the most able.

ps our town does have a couple of schools which attract the upper middle classes, for want of a better description. The main reasoning for getting children in there does seem to be mixing with the right sort of parents (PTA-joining, nightly-reading and extra tutors sorts of parents) and the right sort of children (minimal special educational needs, good behaviour) - because once there, there are quite a few whinges about the teachers not making the most of the raw talent with which they are provided, and some children who turn out to have anything more than mild dyslexia end up moving to other schools.

If I was the OP, I would go for the local school. Not because I want my DC to mix with all sorts of children, but because it is local, it is larger, although still a nice size (should work out as one not too full class for each year) and it is non-denominational. The only thing that would put me off is if I had heard of bad experiences from a few people who had recent direct experience of the school.

I get the feeling that OP wouldn't have thought twice about it but for negative comments from friends who have no direct experience of the school. I don't really get the feeling that the school is that rough because if the area was all that bad, the OP would be desperate to leave.

What really swung it for me was the way the teachers at the poorer school seemed really enthusiastic, they spoke directly to my DC and got involved with doing stuff together whereas the other school (the more middle class one) seemed very flat and only interested in talking to me.

CecilyP: "I get the feeling that OP wouldn't have thought twice about it but for negative comments from friends who have no direct experience of the school. I don't really get the feeling that the school is that rough" - absolutely spot on!

rabbitstew yes, I think after all has been said and done we'll go with our gut feeling. DH is totally sold on the poorer school, and I'm still dithering .
I love your list of reasons, the last one ("everybody else I know is trying to get their children into the other school, so that one must be good and this one bad") describes our situation to a T. I also have a bright shrinking violet of a DD

steppemum, that was my first reaction - it's 'only' primary, too young to worry about that sort of thing. Glad to see there is some agreement on that. In my OP I did mention the fact that the smaller school may make it easier to get to the supposedly better secondary.

And yes, being able to walk to the school is one of the things I value the most, even though we might move slightly further away.

That's an interesting one too. I have a couple of posts here referring to the 'worse' secondary as 'shit', but from what I can gather it used to be so-so about 7 or 8 years ago. A lot of water under the bridge and it's doing brilliantly. The secretary from the small school seemed to think that there is no real difference between the two secondaries and they are both good. Oh well, I'm sure I'll be back on MN banging on about how we can't choose a secondary school either!

We'll go visit the third school and, unless that one bowls us over, I'll try and speak to a couple of actual parents with kids in the larger school, see what they say. No point listening to hearsay from people who don't really know the school, is there?

Sorry, I meant I have read* a couple of posts here

op - the primary you are in makes no difference what so ever in whether or not you can get into the secondary. The entry requirements are to do with where you live. how far from school etc. There is no advantage to being in a feeder primary school, as it is your house address which counts

We have feeder primaries that will put you ahead of someone who lives closer to the school but is outside catchment and not at feeder primary. Feeder primaries come way down the list behind catchment with sibling etc but they also put you ahead of non catchment, non feeder but with sibling at the school. In an area where the school is filled by catchment children then being in a feeder would make no difference but it does make a difference here.

Asprations do matter at primary school. My daughter is in what I would call an ordinary primary, Good ofstead but certainly not brilliant by any means, and one of the hardest things now she is getting older (in year 4) is the negativity of teachers to the grammar schools in the area. This is not just a question of not teaching to the test, it's a question of them actively criticising parents who go that route, even though it is to a state funded grammar. One parent in the last parent's evening said she was thinking of trying for the grammar school and was told 'well, if you want to ruin your child's confidence and self -esteem, go ahead'. It's old school ideologically minded anti-elitism, which is fine if you like that kind of thing, but if you were hoping for a supportive school where they would help with grammar entrance, forget it.

It depends where you are, Mumsyblouse. If the 11+ is based on NC levels, the school will be teaching those things anyway. If it is VR and NVR, it is not only not on the curriculum, but in many areas, the schools are forbidden from teaching to the test by the LEA.

As I understand it you prefer the local 'poorer' school, it's within walking distance and it gets better results. It seems like a no brainer to me OP!

My advice: do not even look at Ofsted, itis meaningless IMO.

Secondly, a small school, of 70, may only have 3 or 4 classes, so your child will always be in mixed year classes. IME, this is great for a top set child who gets in with the higher classes, and not brilliant for bottom sets who may be in spelling grpups with kids 2 years younger ( as was the case with my DS1). I do not think smaller means better, smaller school does NOTmean smaller classes ( my DS was in a class of 36). In a small school, they will have the same teacher for. 2 or 3 years ( that can work both ways, great if teacher is fab and gtes on with your kid).

See which head you liked best ( very important! and very personal too), which group of parents you think you would fit in with.

If you lived in a inner city council flat and you was offered a house in some leafy 'burb would you turn it down? Of course not. Would people call you a snob for making that choice? Of course not. Most parents would rather their kids go to a university like Oxbridge rather than South Bank University.

So why do people chuck the label 'snob' at parents who want their kids to go to a 'posh' school? Why is this any different?

No point jumping at the chance of the "posh" primary school if the education is not as good there - that would make you a bit of an idiot, surely?

The OP said that both schools had a good Ofsted report so no one is saying that the OP should send her DC to an underperforming school simply because it is 'posh'

So if both schools are perfectly good, the OP liked the less posh school when she went round it and the less posh school apparently gets better SATs results, then why the comparison with an inner city council flat?

It's not as if most inner city council flats get good reports from anyone or anything, if even the people living in them would rather live elsewhere.