stopped believing in decent state schools

[innercity]

I guess I need reassurance that in some parts of the country, in some areas, there are good state schools? That actually teach numeracy and literacy?! I don't believe this anymore...

DS is in Y4 in primary, which is a very desirable local south London comprehensive. Their class was consistently failed by a succession of NQT (3 in a row) and supply in between. This year they finally got the most experienced teacher in school.

But what do I see? They have not been taught formal division or multiplication (this is top table, supposedly working at 4c/4b); they do not do basic maths practice almost at all (15*3 or 128-45); maths provision is so scarce, it is safer to assume they are not taught anything.
How can differentiation work if the class hasn't been introduced to decimals, but you (individual pupil) can take decimal addition (choose that sheet) if everyone's doing addition?
OK, I explained to my son about decimals, but what kind of differentiation is that, this is just jumping without any plan?

They write 1 story in two weeks. I have taught DS spelling and he is now the best speller in class (english is his second language) - way ahead of others. How ridiculous is that?

I've checked maths and english papers for 10+ fro some independent schools and unless I work with him really seriously there is no way on Earth he can pass this in a year, not only because the topics asked there are not taught but also topics leading to topics there had not been taught or practised enough.

I am really wondering whether there is a huge cover up and dishonesty and English understatement and double-layered meaning when ppl (here on mumsnet) talk about "not tutoring," and how wonderful their child's school is??
DS school appears so creative, with workshops and art, bla bla, it's just that it doesn't do what the schools are for...

You commented to me up thread that literacy and numeracy should be taught in school and not by parents at home.

You misunderstood what I said about parental support.

I do not teach my children literacy and numeracy at home. They learn that at school. I do read with them and I do test them on their times tables. (which they have learnt at school) But the parental support I am talking about is broader than that.

statistics show for example that children who are read out loud to become better readers. Children who are used to discussing things at home, who are exposed to broad experiences, like museums etc and who have good wide vocab, all do better at school. Children whose parents believe school is important and value it, do better at school.
But, in relation to rote learning, children who do a lot of imaginative play age 3-4 are the best story writers age 7-8. So that is where the creative become important.

Our school is not London. It is a large city with a poor reputation. It has a larger percentage of children from a big estate with issues. It is also one of the top 200 schools in the country. The teachers differentiate very effectively in the class. In year 1 there are for example, kids who are barely able to recognise their phonics, and children who can read full chapter books. they are each taught at their own level. I help out and see the teacher do it, and it is possible and it works.

I actually find your whole attitude a bit offensive. I am sorry your school has let you down, but you are writing off a whole country and a whole education system, because you don't like how it is working for you.

it's not just state schools ...some private schools are not as great as they make out either ...there are just good schools and not so good schools and then failing schools...it's just the private sector probably has more of the top end good schools and some truly outstanding ones and somewhat less of the failing ones because the parents vote with their feet....and you get to apply to as many as you like....but the best ones are just as oversubscribed and competitive to get into at senior school level.

When my dss' school tried setting for maths (across two year groups, so 120 children to set), the school's maths results plummeted, because the teachers teaching the children maths didn't know them as well as the class teachers who weren't teaching their own class maths any more... the actual result was whole-class teaching by teachers who didn't know the kids they taught very well and therefore barely differentiated within the sets... also, lots of time was wasted moving children about into different classrooms, depending on their "set," and the lessons before were disrupted, because teachers had no flexibility in finishing the lesson they'd started, given that their kids had to move classrooms at a particular time for maths. All in all, it did not fit at all well with a topic-based, rather than subject-based curriculum. However difficult it is to deal with a class in which at one end of the spectrum you have children barely capable of counting to 10 and at the other end, children working at a level 6, this is something you have to deal with in a state primary school. In the days of rote learning, the most able were bored shitless and the least able didn't understand a thing, so it wasn't really a golden age of teaching which resulted in 100% literacy and numeracy.

lack of setting for maths at the higher end of primary years is terrible for the both the least and most able.

Depends what you mean by setting... Different ability groups doing differentiated work within the same classroom, or pretending you are setting by sending the "more able" children off to a different class, where the ability range is still pretty large, and then failing to differentiate for the continued differences in ability, because you have already "put them in sets."

Or, small, well targeted groups being pulled out to do different or extra work, rather than whole classes moving about aimlessly...

agree with rabbitstew. Why does setting have to be across a year group? It is perfectly possible to teach 5 groups at different levels within one class. Primary teachers have been doing it for a long time.

I think it works in our school though because they are really on the ball about where each child is, what level. The bottom set in each class usually gets targeted support with reading, and there is a TA in every class so you have 2 adults with 5 sets. It really isn't rocket science.

having said that they set for phonics across 2 classes with 6 adults in year 1.

The problem with differentiation is that it is only as good as the effort an individual teacher is prepared to put in. As previous posters said, you can give a child a worksheet with stuff that he/she has never been taught before, they will attempt to do it and if they have been taught by a tutor or done it at home they will manage it and the teacher will be able to demonstrate differentiation.

Another teacher instead, will take time to explain the new concept, give the group an activity to practise it and understand it and ensure they are therefore moving on as they should be.

In 5 years of state primary so far, we have had one teacher who differentiated and 4 who pretended to. I am curious whether Ofsted can truly get to the bottom of it, as I suspect they can't in the short time they are there.

Op, state education in the UK is incredibly patchy, and you, the parent have no real control over whether the school allocated to your child will be in a good or a bad patch.

That being said, even in the very best patches, the education on offer won't always be to your taste.

I know full well that what I want for my DC is not available in s state school within a 200 mile radius of where I live. So I pay.

That's not to say there are no 'good' schools, with contented parents within that radius, just that those schools wouldn't please me .

Thanks everyone who posted. I agree that differentiating is very difficult and some teachers pretend to do it rather than actually do it. There is no point in giving children worksheets with percentages and fractions if they haven't been introduced to them, and this is along the lines of what often happens.

steppemum I don't mean to offend anybody and I don't write the system off, I am just being critical of it. Being critical also means seeing what is wrong, thinking about it and imagining a better future. One can't create a better future if one keeps saying: "everything is fine and where it should be." Fair enough, it is just my experience and I might be a weirdo which I probably am. That's why I post on an anonymous blog, not to make real life people uncomfortable and that's why I am asking about other people's experiences here - and some say their school is good.

I wasn't really that happy with the Maths provision in my son's infant school - he just found it far too easy and spent 3 years doing stuff he already knew. When he moved to Juniors they started streaming and this made a big difference.

They also have "seats": so you move up and down seats and tables depending on your results. This is a great motivator for children who like to compete and are not generally given the opportunity to do so in state schools.

*I guess I need reassurance that in some parts of the country, in some areas, there are good state schools? That actually teach numeracy and literacy?! I don't believe this anymore...

I just think that this country never acquired a proper decent primary school education system.*

These statements sound very like you are writing the whole system off, and making sweeping generalisations based on your experience of one school.

No-one has said you can't be critical, it is good to be critical of a system. But you are not being critical based on wide input, you have said, more than once that the whole system is rubbish, based on YOUR ONE experience. When people have come on and said their experience doesn't match yours, you have ignored them. So, you are not actually being constructive at all, just critical. Fine, rant about how bad your sons school is, or that lack of connection between the ''official'' approval level and your experience, but you can't say

''this country has never aquired a proper decent primary school education system'' based on one school, which is why I think you are being offensive.

The system isn't perfect, there is a vast difference between some schools, it varies from place to place and even from teacher to teacher, as I said before. There is lots of room for improvement, as our level of literacy of 16 year olds shows.
But I would not want to compare our schools to those in China or far East. I do not want my 11 year old doing 12-16 hour days in tutoring etc. If that means he wouldn't beat them in the league tables, then so be it.

In your case, innercity, I suspect they haven't been taught the material they were supposed to because they've had too many teachers and no consistent approach. Also, schools are sort of 'in-between curriculums' at the moment.
Ask current teacher about what is taught, and speak to the head.
I've found that maths provision varies between schools quite a lot.

Personally, I think the last few years of primary school are not as strong academically as they should be - hope that changes with the new curriculum. Maths should definitely be more advanced, and they should move away from topic-based approach to separate subjects to prepare for secondary school. IMHO.

Personally, I think the last few years of primary school are not as strong academically as they should be - hope that changes with the new curriculum. Maths should definitely be more advanced, and they should move away from topic-based approach to separate subjects to prepare for secondary school. IMHO

I agree with this 100%.

I agree with this 100%
me too i am afraid - this is an age when language learning could be really effective and they just repeat the same French lessons (counting clapping and singing) from year to year without progressing one jot - history lessons are a joke - they came back thinking ww2 was about anne frank and not much else.....rant rant moan moan....

Thing is, if you've decided that your son's school is rubbish, and have extrapolated from that that all state schools are rubbish, nothing is going to change your mind.

My children go a very mixed, distinctly non-leafy, primary school. And they've had a pretty good education.

Yes, the upper years of junior school are often a wasted opportunity.

DC at this age are perfectly capable of understanding subjects at a much deeper level. Proper setting and subject specific teachers, with each subject given its proper weight, are highly beneficial.

At my primary school we did absolutely stuff all work for a whole term as we were staging the school play.

It was private, selective and gets glowing threads on MN

talkin at my school we had a term off to prepare for the Silver Jubilee .

DC state schools are not glowing but they are okay & DC have fairly intelligent fairly supportive parents (who do not tutor or coach). So DC are all meeting their potential (imho).

DH & I both attended fairly mediocre schools but turned into high achievers so we do see achievement as something that comes mostly from within. I don't have high ideals about education.

Sorry you're so bummed, OP. London school system does sound alike another world.

Steppemum - is it your patriotism that I've offended? When I criticise here, I don't criticise the "country," or its people, but its political history, class system where I see this rooted, and the ways in which it is getting more and more entrenched in neoliberalism.

And what you do is criticise me for a generalisation about UK state schools - but you give yourself freedom to generalise about the Chinese schools (and far East too) without any restraint (much larger population, statistically it's more probable that you're wrong as you base what you say on rumours about at least 1,3 bln ppl whereas I do on one experience in relation to 60 mln).

State schooling in general in the UK is dreadful. I should know having spent 20 years working in dozens.
They could be so much better.
Best book ever written to sum up the whole sorry mess

I regard school as primarily an opportunity for socialisation.
Everything useful I have taught myself.

moondog
shame you had no good impacts in your 20 years then.

DH goes to over 100 schools a year and he sees some really good ones doing really good things - and helps them to be even better

Delighted to hear it-what does he do?