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...

shooting that's true.

No applicant from a grammar school or a high achieving comp will receive a contextualised offer.

However, I do think we have no right to pat ourselves on the back for the crude figures! 60% state schooled students might sound fab, but less so when you unpick it and take out all the young people who attended selective secondary schools.

What we're really interested in here is how many students are there from ordinary comprehensives.

Bruffin that is exactly as it should be!

I'm no fan of Gove, but I do hope his refusal to accept equivalency amongst qualifications trickles down.

Far too many students are out of the game before they even realise they might want to be in it. It infuriates me!

word Not arguing at all. I think all the teams who develop uni fair access strategies would agree with you. The problem is that it isn't that easy, there are multiple reasons why certain areas and schools are without doubt underrepresented. There are stats eg those produced by unis themselves and the Sutton Trust. But how do you reach that clever pupil who is not equipped with the right information, motivation and role models. That is what the outreach and mentoring schemes are focused on, though there is still too much of it that remains most accessible to those with the nouse.

We keep being told that to best equip our children for the 21st Century we should encourage them to follow their passion at the expense of everything else.

It is much easier to reach clever pupils if everyone is receiving the same correct and unambiguous information about which exams will qualify them for HE. The easiest way to do this quickly is to reduce complexity in the system.

Cliff, not sure about the passion thing. For most boys that would be masturbation or computer games and for girls some kind of dross TV show or being famous. Unless they really have some kind of career passion (which is sadly very rare) it is best you give them strong guidance and say they can ditch the career as an actuary or surgeon later if they don't like it but for now go for it.

Laurabridges
you just made me spit my tea.
your summation of teenagers is spot on!

Bonsoir's comment is true also for Higher Ed itself. The proliferation of institutions with similar seeming titles and huge variety of attractively marketed but slightly misleading courses leads students who are less able to research and analyse them to many a poor decision.

Iit was done to encourage upward mobility and has often resulted in the opposite. I have a bee in my Binet about this aspect of the system.

Bonnet even. I know nothing about Binet.

Laura you can see it now.

A level American Reality TV Shows.

Set texts include Dance Moms, Cake Boss and Sixteen and Pregnant.

Come to the Highlands - all good here!

Word Do you think you are joking?

AQA A level media studies curriculum "Case studies might be of a chosen group or place, eg refugees in British newspapers or Los Angeles in Hollywood films and television. Thus candidates might study a variety of representations across the media platforms over the period of a term such as teenagers in TV soap operas and British films or celebrities in magazines and newspapers. They could widen this approach to study such representations across different media platforms, where appropriate. Areas such as these would allow them to consider a variety of current media issues and debates such as media effects, ownership and control and news values."

Teenager ennui and preference hardly ever to get out of bed is more common. A passion for your own pop band is not necessarily a bad thing and a good few teenagers have made a lot of money through their own youtube channel but most don't have the drive or energy even for that so a nudge in the right career direction can be a good plan although I am sure plenty of us have teenagers who if we suggest a career will then decide that is the one they definitely do not want to do.

Hi OP, I'm in SW London myself and I wanted to share my experiences.

I was hopeful of finding a decent state primary for my children. However, when I went to look round primaries in the area, I was horrified to find that state primary schools rated as 'outstanding' by Ofsted I wouldn't personally rate above 'poor'. Even quite mediocre prep schools in the area were better than the so-called 'top' state primaries.

This is a nice leafy suburb, but I can assure you the state primaries here are no better the the ones in tougher areas, because I went with friends to look round schools in other areas too.

I went to a top London independent myself, so I know the entrance requirements and the preparation that entails. None of the state primaries I saw taught to the required standard.

The Evening Standard did a a campaign a couple of years ago on the literacy crisis in London. I can't remember what research it was based on, but the figures indicated that 1 in 4 London children leave state primaries without having mastered basic literacy. I have to say from what I saw, I am not at all surprised.

www.standard.co.uk/news/a-city-of-children-who-cannot-read-6406797.html

If you can, I would move your son to a good prep school for next Autumn, get tutoring to bridge the gaps between the two schools, work with him yourself, and try and get him into a decent grammar.

bruffin Your DD's school is doing it right then.

Just recounting the story made my colleague so mad, I thought he was going to explode any second...

Twinklestein - I am in Scotland, so not quite the same in terms of applying for schools. Here you automatically get a place at your catchment school so there is no "shopping around" and schools tend to have less variety.

However, I taught in a top London independent and saw some amazingly clever children, and know a lot about education. I would be wary, were my only expertise my own education (North London Private All Girls), of dismissing a school rated as outstanding based on a quick visit. Also, of dismissing other schools on the same basis. All schools have strengths and weaknesses and, to be honest, you come across as rather ignorant.

If you can afford private, by all means go for it. You may get an excellent education for your child, you may not. But do try to be a little more open minded because your attitude will colour your child's and we are living in a world where academic, financial and social advantages are NOT only conferred by an expensive education.

I agree with hamlets sister, if i were to judge all primary education on my own (n. london selective) experience, it would not look good - but then it hasn't actually got me any further in life than the local school might have iyswim, thinking about education not only in terms of having nice handwriting and doing long division.

Twinklestein I live in South West London as well and really do not understand what you are on about. How come very selective schools like Lady Eleanor Holles and North London Collegiate manage to recruit more than half their pupils from London state schools? And contrary to popular parental myth they do not need years of tutoring and cramming to get in. The entrance exams are carefully designed to test ability and potential not cramming. I have current experience of a very select SW London school and I can assure you that by Year 8 you really cannot tell who was at a state school and who at a Prep. Certainly not when they are getting strings of A*s at GCSE and A level. I assume you are one of those alpha mums sat in prep school playgrounds at this time of year spreading all sorts of tosh around about what is required to get in. And then surprise surprise the cleverest get into the most selective schools, irrespective of tutoring and parental hothousing, end of, simple.

Yes, half the intake at those schools gets in at 11+ but there is no doubt if you're in them at 4 or 5 as our children were you have a much better chance of staying there through to 18. That was our plan and it worked a treat. However that depends on mothers (or fathers) earning enough to pay the fees for selective schools at primary level of course.

On the other hand laura your DD may have had seven very happy years in an outstanding primary school with lots of other children from all sections of their community as many of my DDs peers have done. The advantages are really not all one way. The only problem with our local state schools is that there are not enough places in them. We didn't go private because it was better, we went private because we were one of hundreds of parents not allocated a place because all the local state schools were so oversubscribed.

And frankly having had to go through the admissions process with those deranged prep school mums anxting in the playground having gone through it the first time on the other side of the world from the equivalent of a good state school I know which I would have preferred. Yes my second DD was more thoroughly prepared but at cost to her self esteem and certainly with much worse provision for her SpLDs. And both were successful.

I think there are definite advantages in not staying at the same school right through, though.

such as?

in an area where miles separate them?

It's an antidote to narrow-mindedness to move around. And since education is all about broadening your horizons and learning to think, more than one school experience is better, IMO.