Areas where state schools are better than private?

[Narrie]

Does anyone live in an area where the state schools are really better than the private ones? I picked this up elsewhere but am afraid to comment there.

I have lived and worked in the Midlands where there are few private schools to choose but the state schools are not very good. I have lived in Nottingham, where again I felt the state schools were poor.

Even in London there were some awful schools and private was best.

I currently live in Cornwall having got here working in Exeter, Plymouth and Barnstaple. None of the state schools were good there.

Just wondered where the good state provision is. Is it just odd schools within a mass of poor provision or are there really whole areas where state schools are better?

Thanks.

(PS I have my own DC in a boarding school partly because of the state schooling and partly because we move around so much)

Mordion- I suspect that Narrie only wants views that reinforce her prejudices......

MordionAgenos,

I did not think it was rude. I just answered you plainly. You want to talk about Devon and I do not. You are a very dominant poster from what I have seen. I guess saying that is what was rude? I am sorry. I still do not want to discuss Devon

Thanks,
Narrie

Mordion
my thought was actually slightly mean - in that picking 60 pupils would still be the top sets of a big comp, but include EVERY pupil at a small private [hgrin]

Narrie
I am not talking about Devon. I am trying to show you in cool headed numeric terms why the results of a selective school (of any type) cannot be directly compared with those of a non selective school ....

It's like the old A level Canard.
Roughly 1/3 of pupils do A levels, they are disproportionaley from selective schools - because why spend fees on a future tractor driver who would never pass the 11+

All welcome. It would be good to see you.

Seeker,

I do not have any prejudice. I just wanted to know where the good areas were. It seems that it is not as clear as it was appearing when the comment was made. I have my answer.

Thanks
Narrie

Narrie. Whwt do you want?

If you didn't want to talk about Devon then you shouldn't have mentioned it, really, then, should you.

And yes you were very rude. But I suspect that Seeker's summation is the correct one.

Do you not understqnd when people say that generally there aww not good and bad areas, but good and bad schools? And that anyone who says there is an area where all state schools are better than all private schools is talking rubbish.

Try Gloucestershire. www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/education/school_tables/secondary/11/html/eng_maths_916.stm?compare=
Selectives dominate the top state schools at GCSE but when you sort by A level results you have a comp ahead of the second best performing private school.
And, whilst there are some poorly performing schools there is also a fairly poor private school, just to even things up (hsmile)

MordionAgenos,
I mentioned the West Midlands, Nottingham, London, Barnstable Plymouth and Cornwall as well but no one else asked me to discuss them or has made a big deal out of it. I was just stating the areas I had lived in. That was the point in mentioning them.
I wanted to know what areas in the country were supposed to be those with outstanding state schools as posters had been suggesting but not saying where they were. I got my answer.

Thanks
Narrie

But equally, seeker, anyone who says that there AREN'T areas where many of the state schools are better than the private schools is talking rubbish.

Narrie, if you want an area with good comprehensive schools, try, for example, Gloucestershire. Top 10 schools for A-levels:

• 4 grammars (1 of which is the top school)
• 3 independents
• 3 comprehensives (technically secondary moderns)

Neighbouring Worcestershire has no grammars, top 10 schools for A levels:

• 5 independents
• 5 comprehensives

There are great state comp options in Harpenden/St Albans. Better than many privates. It is very hard to compare the sectors though as some schools take igsces which means they often don't appear on league tables and obvs international bac is different too.

It is disingenuous to compare a selective school of any type (private, grammar, religious etc) and even those comps in Harpenden come with a hefty house price. You don't have to go to the best school, just one that promotes enjoyment of learning and doesn't allow bullying. The 'best' schools get good results not by better teaching but by rigorous selection. I should know I attended one.

If you purely base it on GCSEs then these areas are not great

and this map is interesting

OOH, Maps and statistics.
Am happy now!!
But interesting that it highlights one case I know where a "bad" area is like that because SO many of its kids go to school over the border!

Thank you. The map is very interesting. I recognise a number of those deep purple areas.

Narrie

Have a look at Thomas Mills High School in Framlingham & Farlingaye High. Both in Suffolk - excellent non selective comps & give the local private schools a run for their money

Just wanted to add that whilst it is of course true that you can't truly call an indie school non-selective (small matter of fees) it is nonetheless wholly inaccurate to equate that with 'no bottom set' as talkin peace did up thread. Ds's non-selective indie had 20% 'low attainers' in last yr's yr 11 cohort but achieved 98% 5 a to c inc e & m. As they should.

I think that sometimes the lack of value added in the tables can actually do the independent sector a disservice in some cases, though obviously not all.

And there are many measures by which it is impossible to fairly compare schools even with a similar intake (eg some schools encouraging taking of 'easier' subjects or of more subjects than is necessary or helpful etc etc)

All the league table stuff is a distraction though, really, as many have said, from what really is meant by a 'good' school. Surely it is the school at which your child will be safest, happiest, most well adjusted, exposed to new experiences and all round educated. Not the school where other children get a string of a*s.

I think the op is basically unanswerable because the meaning of 'good' is so personal. And even if we all agreed on what it meant it would be illogical to think that there could possibly be an area where every school got it right so much more than

Often than any other area (or sector).

What does low attainers mean in that context,kitkatgirl?

Coming in with Level 3 at ks2 sats, like any other school would mean by that. Whether you (not you personally seeker) call that a school for thick rich kids or a school with a good SEN dept and good teaching is up to you (but they do have an excellent track record with dyslexia, dyspraxia and ASD - which you know I know does not equal low attainer as ds is a 'high attainer' with AS).

There is no such thing as a non-selective state school.

Just as you have to have £13k/year to send your child to St. Thick Child's, you need to live in Exeter to go to a school in Exeter. And so on.

It might be that the input of Shittown Comprehensive is of low achievers, and therefore that school is non selective. But nobody wants to go to Shittown Comprehensive anyway, so it's not relevant to a discussion of 'good' state schools.

A few years down the line, Shittown Comprehensive gets in a new head, starts entering everyone for Btecs in Year 10, devotes Y11 to GCSE Maths and English to the exclusion of all else and is suddenly a desirable school.

At this point Shittown Comp is now oversubscribed and the parents who give a fuck ensure that they are in catchment, that they know the admissions policy, that they submit appeals, and so on.

Shittown Comp is now highly selective, as it is oversubscribed.

Meanwhile Leafyshire Comp has been motoring along with 75% A*-C at GCSE for years, but everyone there is awfully naice since the area is rich and settled and 4 police cars turn up for a burglar alarm going off.

--
The best state schools either:

• select through religious hoops, tiny catchments, exams, music, whatever
• are surrounded by miles and miles of leafy niceness

And of course if you haven't filtered out all but the 1%, then, particularly in areas that aren't lovely and leafy, then you ensure the really difficult kids are doing BTECs in Hospitality or whatever.

"According to the BBC www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-16730014 there was;t a school in the country did better than Colchester Royal Grammar school on A level results, in 2011."
Mordion sorry for not replying have been at work! We looked at four schools for my DC all independent here are their A level results Colchester grammars are in brackets A* 53% 52% 50.1% 36.1% (18.3%), A 91% 89% 80% 85.6% (57.4%). These have all been taken off their websites not the FT. I don't doubt that Colchester Grammar is the top performing state school but not the top performing school in the UK.
Ok these results show that these schools including Colchester Grammar have very able teachers and are good at their jobs. But this is only part of the picture it also shows that these schools are super super selective, and exceedingly good at selecting the brightest children and exceedingly good at chucking out children who will not do very well under their systems and also directing children to do subjects in that they are going to excel. IMO their is also the a strong parent factor most parents even if they are paying will supplement any difficulties with private tutoring rather than have their child leave after GCSE's.
Of more interest and I suspect the point the OP was asking is about an area with a high % of excellent state schools and maybe she doesn't just mean excellent results but able to get all children to achieve beyond their initial expectations.

KitKat, I genuinely don't think that many state comprehensives would regard "Coming in with Level 3 at ks2 sats" as being wholly synonymous with 'low attainers' / bottom set.

What about:

• Children transferring to secondary school on P levels or Level 1
• Children with no English
• Looked after children, often with a long history of different foster placements.
• Children with long records of low attendance, either through cultural reasons (e.g. Travellers) or through chaotic lifestyles.
• Children who have suffered abuse
• Young carers
• Children from families where drug dependency / alcohol abuse / mental illness / gang involvement / family members in prison etc etc make home life chaotic.
• Children living in sub-standard housing e.g. sharing a single room in a hostel with all family members, bed and breakfast accommodation, sharing a house with several families with very limited personal space.

It is often these 'out of school' factors that impinge much more on children's learning - and would be virtually absent in a fee-paying school - than a level of acadeic ability measured as 'Level 3 at the end of Year 6'.

teacher you are right and one of the reasons why counties like Wiltshire?Gloucestershire there are many areas that have such good exam results is that there is a high % of white middle class parents especially in the villages. So as you say the picture is complex.

Middleclass,

I teach not far from one of the counties that you mention - in a village school - and we have all of the issues I mentioned other than children with no English. 'Apparent' white middle classness from a drive-through may disguise a lot in reality!