'Pick the right school for your child'

[AmberTheCat]

There's something about this phrase that bothers me, and I can't quite put my finger on it. Can anyone help me unpack it?

I think it makes me uneasy for a number of reasons, including:

• Most people aren't really in a position to make a choice. They can express a preference, but that's not the same thing, as we all know.

• It implies that it's a good thing for 'similar' children (whether that's similar in temperament, background, aptitude, faith or whatever) to be brought together and, by definition, for 'dissimilar' children to be kept separate. I find that worrying in terms of encouraging children to understand and accept people who are different from them.

• I wonder if it rather lets schools off the hook? Shouldn't they be able to educate and nurture all children, not just ones that suit their ethos? And going back to my first point, what happens to children at schools which don't suit them, but whose parents have no choice but to send them there anyway?

Musings welcome!

Pick??!!!
There is a bus service to one primary and one secondary, here.

The other (actually) nearest secondary is in a different county!

assuming you DO have a choice (and obviously that isn't the case for many many people) there are some elements that are not to do with schools being "musical" or whatever but other factors. We deliberately chose a small village school for DS with good but not outstanding OFSTED and SATS because we felt that was the best place for him temperamentally. Our closest school is better on paper but is huge and v pushy with regards to homework etc right from reception. I was horrified when mums with kids there told me what their 4 yos were having to do every night and what happened if they weren't keeping up. In that regard I can see what is meant by the "right" school for your child.

My principle was take the top 10 or 20 schools for A level results in the country in the private sector and single sex and then see if the children could get into them. Works well. Obviously women need to choose careers to enable them to pay school fees to do that but I had the sense to make that choice in my teens. If you didn't you might well be kicking yourself now. One reason for this is that those top schools tend to be very good at most things - the music will be good (very important for me as I play and sing every day and 3 of the children won music scholarships), sport tends to be good. the top 10% or 20% by IQ of children tend to be good at most things so that makes other activities betters too and also their parents tend to be brighter and more interesting and those schools tend to be in nice building which might visually feed your soul more than the local comp might (our local comp 35 minutes from the house gets 35% A - C in decent GCSEs).

None of these top selective schools are really chosen by the parents as there are 5 applicants per place or whatever the statistics are and only the very brightest child will be offered places at all they apply to so even in the private sector the school is choosing the child really not vice versa.

Also the school can in a sense make the child. As a teenager most teenagers do what their friends do. I was talking to two of mine last night and one was just like his older siblings - what I had advised was irrelevant and what someone else had said was obviously right; so if you have procured the right peer group - 100% to leading universities it is less likely they will see leaving at 16 to pursue a career in hair dressing as a good choice.

I thought they had to band the kids then randomly select to ensure an even spread of ability?

Wellwellwell - I've never heard anything like this and don't think it's remotely true. If you're about to apply for school places I suggest you look on the school websites for their admissions policies so that you can see how pupils are really selected.

Back to OP, we're lucky. We live in an area with a genuine choice. All of the primary schools in this town are good/outstanding and most are undersubscribed. There are also plenty of schools in surrounding villages that we could add to our choices. I'll be looking for the 'right' school for my child, although I have to admit I have no idea yet what it is that will make it right - definitely not the ofsted report

I read that phrase slightly differently.

DS passed the 11+ for a very good boys grammar. We chose what we consider an equally good mixed school, but others may question that decision. For DS, we feel it was the right one.

DD was at an outstanding special school, but was unhappy and frustrated. We've just moved her to a different one with what would appear to be fewer opportunities, but with more staff to nurture her. The difference in her confidence level is incredible.

I read that phrase as. 'Look past the statistics and imagine your child there...'

Atruth -academies, that is.

Like Elephants, we too have a bus to ONE (outstanding) local secondary, so we assumed all our children would go there.

DC1's SEN weren't catered for there so he had to go elsewhere, at great expense to the LEA in taxi fares.
DC2 started there, was bullied and miserable, and left. He didn't meet the criteria for DC1's school as it was oversubscribed. Luckily the third, less shiny school he ended up at was fab for him in every way, and we wish we'd chosen it in the first place.

I use this phrase a fair bit.

We are in the unusual position to have choice of 2 good comps.

One has better Ofsted, has very rigorous setting, is quite formal. Most parents choose this school.

Others, like me, choose the slightly more liberal friendly school which uses flexible banding, as that would suit my DS more.

So some people question my decision.

That is when I roll out the phrase in OP!

Interesting question, OP! V few of us are experts and often it's only in retrospect that we know whether we've done right by our kids in all sorts of ways. Also it is often a false choice- unless you're in a city and/or go private what are your realistic choices other than local comp in most cases?
We actually haven't gone for local option which seems to have been right choice. I hope!
As for setting, think i read that compulsory setting is to bevintroduced in all outstanding schs if they wish to retain this status so flexible groupings may go. Anyone else know more about this?

I think choice is an illusion, firstly most people don't have a choice and secondly most UK state schools have broadly the same approach to education. We are choosing a school for DS in the Netherlands and have looked at Montessori, Dalton, Steiner, bilingual schools all within the state system. Where there are different educational approaches you genuinely get to choose a school you think will suit your child.

I think the same school can suit very different types of children though.

Interesting swift! I hope not.

As predicted, DS was put in a low band to start with but has "worked his way up".

This is only possible in mire flexible schools.

If kids (well it would be mainly boys) are set in fixed sets at 11, they are "written off" at too young an age.

At the school DH teaches, the bottom sets are 80% boys.

Dear OP,

I don't have a problem with the phrase at all but don't interpret it the way you do. For me it is not about choosing the music or sporty school but choosing the school that "feels right' for your child, that has an ethos that you are comfortable with. We are very fortunate to have a a choice of very good primary and secondary in our local area. There are no "poor" schools so it is very much about what will suit DD. When we chose her primary we were most concerned about the pastoral support and arrangements for individualised teaching as she was an end of August baby. The schools that were 1 and 2 on our list did not have quite as good SAT's results or OFSTED reports but felt right. She got into our first choice and thanks largely to their patience and care has absolutely thrived and is now top of the class in maths and English. So I absolutely subscribe to picking the right school for my child and will do the same when it comes to the choice of secondary in a couple of years time. I do accept however that we are in the relatively unusual position of having a real choice of several good schools which many parents are not.

Apologies for the late response.

as they now have academy status they can not be forced to expand

True. In theory a selective community school can be forced to expand by the LA. In practice the LA would face severe opposition. It would probably end up with the Schools Adjudicator. Now the school is an academy the LA can't force expansion at all. Of course, expansion brings additional income. The question for the school is whether that outweighs any perceived dilution of standards.

they can't be forced to change their catchments to prioritise local children

If their catchment disadvantages local children there may be a case for the Schools Adjudicator to intervene. However, if you are talking about the school I think you are referring to there are probably enough local children in their intake to keep the adjudicator happy.

Interesting that different people interpret the phrase in different ways. I hadn't really though of it possibly meaning 'don't write off schools that don't seem brilliant on paper'.

The compulsory setting thing was an idea some bod in the DfE floated, which was rapidly disowned by Nicky Morgan when it didn't get a particularly favourable response...

Haven't rtft, but I agree with the OP. In some ways it would be better if everyone had to send their dc to their nearest school. You don't really get to 'pick' - well, not in a fair or reliable way anyway. I have sent my children to an outstanding primary 15 mins drive away rather than the ok-but-a-bit-rough one in our village because I can. But the village school might be better off if people like me didn't boycott it tbh, and that would benefit everyone.

Holmes, snap. Tricky choice as ideally wd be part of community fully. But our chosen sch is in an utterly different league from local one - ethos, calibre & dedication of head and staff. One of the v best in the country. And not rough either. We're v lucky but it is a pain to drive and constantly feel we have to justify our choice for not automatically going local.

prh47bridge If their catchment disadvantages local children there may be a case for the Schools Adjudicator to intervene.

What do you think the chances are of that happening on the based on:
in 2013 the outer cut off for music was 35, the inner cut off for music was 37. So an outer catchment child (therefore living further from the school) on a lower score (35) had more chance of a school place than an inner catchment child on a higher score (36).

This is the scenario that I refer to when I say that the schools do not prioritise local children BTW.