BBC article: Outstanding schools take too few poor pupils

[Ginmummy1]

I spotted this article today, and wondered what others thought of it.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-36926766

I thought the title was misleading. It implies that outstanding schools are deliberately choosing not to take poorer pupils, which I don’t think is accurate.

The report apparently found little overall bias in council-run secondary schools, and also that primary schools appear to be fairly balanced in terms of their intake. I am struggling, therefore, to understand the issue?

It says “the intakes of grammar schools, single-sex secondaries, non-Christian faith schools and schools rated outstanding by Ofsted all fail to reflect the proportion of poorer children in the areas immediately outside their gates“. It also suggests that the figures are likely to be partly “the result of different school choices between social groups”.

So what it appears to be saying is that poorer pupils are choosing not to apply to these types of schools, so this is more about the choices made by these pupils and their families, than about the schools themselves. I can’t see any claims of the schools discriminating against poorer pupils.

It also refers to the attainment gap between rich and poor being wider than the national average in Kent, Buckinghamshire and Surrey. Presumably this is partly due to parental influence (discipline with homework, private tutoring etc) which cannot really be the fault of the schools?

I’d be interested to know what others think.

[BertrandRussell]

And faith schools discriminate against disadvantaged children as a class. Not as indiciduals- obviously there are disadvantaged families just as capable of jumping through the appropriate hoops as anyone. But many, perhaps most, won't be.

And, all other considerations aside, people who have, or profess Christian faith have access to nearly a third more tax payer funded schools than people who don't. I can't imagine a planet on which that is right. Substitute "hospital" for "school" and it becomes blindingly obvious.

[404NotFound]

London is a very different picture to other parts of the country. Mainly because of the large number of schools close together, but also because of the ready availability of public transport (and buses are free for u18s).

Without even considering the selective/semi-selective or faith school options, we have 5 comprehensives within reasonable walking distance, all of which are at least acceptable and some are very good indeed. If you factor in a short bus journey then that probably increases to about 10 schools that we could have applied to with a realistic chance of getting a place.

So there is a real choice in our area, which makes it even more interesting to see how some families choose schools that, on objective criteria, are less good than the other schools they could have opted for.

[gillybeanz]

Bertrand

It isn't always the case with Faith Schools, as I said previously where i live they are no different than the community schools and cover the same areas, streets, terraces and semi's.
They are all wc, the odd mc parent, but they all attend same schools.
I was surprised to find out that faith schools were considered as somehow better or more appealing in other areas.

[BertrandRussell]

Well that means that your faith schools must not be oversubscribed them. Because it's only when they are that faith based admissions criteria kick in.

[gillybeanz]

Sandy

here you go to whatever school you meet the criteria for.
Mine went to a variety of Faith and community schools.
The only time you don't get a faith school is if it is a full year borough wide and then obviously they go on church attendance with LAC always as a priority in any of our schools.
You may have a problem where you are, but we don't.
I don't know why you can't see this.
I can see it must be difficult if your faith schools are somehow better, and you can't get in because you aren't religious, but it's not like that here.
Our nearest school is a CofE secondary, just out of special measures and under subscribed.
There is no applying to grammar as we don't have them.
Parents round here just tick the box for their preference and sometimes they get it, sometimes they don't.
There is no other choice, so never a case of narrowing choice.
The only way out is to have a G&T child and have private fees paid, which has been great for one of our children.

[BertrandRussell]

Faith schools are only "better" when they are selective. And they are only selective when oversubscribed. Undersubscribed faith schools are no better or worse than any other school in the catchment. It's selection, not God, that makes them "better".

[BertrandRussell]

And gillybeAnz's posts prove my point. Her faith schools are undersubscribed, so admit only on proximity- so no better or worse than any other school.

[gillybeanz]

Bertrand

yes, this is true and the majority of the time children can go to whichever school is the nearest that has a place.
My dc really did have a mix of Faith and community schools.
One who went to a particular faith school (primary) was told that it didn't guarantee a place at the school which it fed if it was over subscribed with those attending church, meeting all the criteria.
I guess all areas are different and have different outcomes for the children living there.

[gillybeanz]

Must add though, the oversubscribed are no better either, they just get full as cover more streets due to the parish boundaries.
They are all either satisfactory or good, and weirdly some have families where children have attended for 3 generations, or even more
people tend to stick to their own Parish irrespective of church attendance, even the community schools attract generations of families.

[Andrewofgg]

teacherwith2kids Parents who value education will tend to have children who value education.

And the advantage to a child who values education of being in a class with others who value education is too obvious to need saying.

So parents who value education will seek out schools sought out by other parents who value education.

You can call them middle-class parents with sharp elbows or you can sey they are trying to get their children the best out of their one and only chance at an education.

[teacherwith2kids]

Andrew, the point that i was making was that if spread equally, and therefore in relatively small numbers in any one school / class, children who might not start off valuing education can make enormous progress without disrupting anyone (DD's education is not affected one whit by the presence of the child who has returned from the PRU, but that child's education is HUGELY improved by being in a class full of children like DD)

If we perpetuate a situation in which such children are segregated into certain schools in very large numbers, without very greatly increased funding, because the schools in which they thrive best are denied to them by admissions policies that favour engaged parents, then we reduce the total possible progress of the cohort as a whole, with obvious impacts on society.

[Andrewofgg]

I see your point; but there is also great social and educational value in children in a class being able to meet out of school, which is only possible if they live reasonably hear each other.

And if you want parents to be involved with the school they need tobe near each other too.

[gillybeanz]

Our borough is quite big and about 8 miles away there is a town with lots of little terraces, like coronation street. rows and rows of them all with schools at the end of streets.
These schools are ofsted outstanding and serve the poorest kids in the area.
it isn't always true that the rich get the best schools.
The difference I see is that up here for some reason parents don't make a fuss about schools and unfairness they just get on with it.
We don't see those with big houses and flash cars, selling up to live in one of the terraces, they make do with their satisfactory or good schools.

[SandyPantz]

I can see it must be difficult if your faith schools are somehow better

oh my days!

even if your church school isn't "better", you are still potentially limited for secondary if your kids go to a state primary instead of a faith primary

Faith secondaries give priority to kids from faith primaries - Comps don't give priority to secular primaries - so you're at a disadvantage for secondary from reception if you use secular primaries. It doesn't matter if the faith secondary is undersubscribed at reception, that could change by yr7!

[gillybeanz]

Not here Sandy.
My ds2 went to a Catholic Primary, we never went to church and aren't Catholic, then transferred for 2 years to community primary, then went to a CofE secondary with most of the friends from community primary.

My ds1 went CofE infant, community primary, community secondary.

My dd went to CofE primary, then don't know where she'd have gone after this as she is private now.

We aren't religious, don't go to church, couldn't get vicor to sign the forms that we had attended church as we hadn't.

As I've said so many times. It depends where you live.
Our Faith schools are no different to community, unless they are over subscribed. Which is only ever if the whole county had a boom birth year, so not very often. Twice in the last 15 years iirc.

[BertrandRussell]

How long ago was this?

[gillybeanz]

It is still the same Bert

but my ds are 24, nearly 25 and ds2 is 21.
Dd is 12, but not in this equation.

I know it's still the same due to the small communities which we live in and listening to what friends and associates say about the schools.
Also, still keep in touch with secondary schools as never know if I might need one, one day.
Hopefully we won't.

[BertrandRussell]

Oh, right. 20 years ago.

[SandyPantz]

gillybeanz just because in the particular year your DCs went to the church secondary it cut off at a lower priority criteria than the church primary priorities, dosn't mean that the priority isn't there! it is there, even if you got in on a lower priority

Church secondaries prioritise kids from church primaries (even if in particular years they ALSO take from lower criteria), comps DO NOT prioritise kids from secular primaries… ergo, you are less limited for secondary options if you go to a church primary! regardless of whether you have other options or not!

[gillybeanz]

No, dd is 12 and if we had chosen the same school as her friends it would have been the nearest school which was CofE, it's not very good though so loads of places and it wasn't a full school year.
My ds1 didn't get the same school when it was good and a full school year, he had to go to nearest community school.

It wasn't full for ds2 and was good at the time, he got to go.

The time span has nothing to do with it as I told you it is still the same

[gillybeanz]

Sandy

Please read my posts, it's obviously not the same at all.
I don't see what is so difficult to understand tbh.
In years when the county had full years/ baby boom/ whatever you'd like to call it, then it is exactly how you say, except for having to have attended a faith primary, to attend faith secondary.

But we tend not to have full years very often so the fith schools don't have to be as strict with the criteria as when they are full, they need bums on seats and don't care where the kids have come from.

[2016Blyton]

It's hard to generalise. As people say above in London (where the comps get results often 2 grades at GCSE ahead of say Hull comps) there is lots of choice.

Out of London there will often be one staet school for anyone in a paticular rural area and most areas have no grammar schools at all. Where I am from (NE) the RC primaries have children of lots of faiths and are no better than any other state primary.

[gillybeanz]

2016

We are NW and I agree it's similar here.
Most schools get the same results have the same facilities and you usually get the one you choose first.
It doesn't make any difference though and there isn't really a choice to make.
As for those who may talk of Latin, the nearest school to us is Faith, just out of special measures and the only school in the borough to teach Latin.
hardly anyone chooses it

[NobodyInParticular]

Gilly it sounds like in your area these problems do not occur often because you have under subscription even for the best schools most years? You're very lucky! It's certainly not like that in many other bits of the country.

[gillybeanz]

Nobody

It seems that way, but honestly there is no gain. All the schools are pretty much the same and even the outstanding ones in the next town aren't as others describe where people move to be in catchment.
They are at the end of a few streets of terraces and the parents are wc.
Its an education hearing about other areas, I find it interesting tbh.
I have a PgCE and some Masters level credits in Education.
The parents are just the same as anywhere else and some are invested others not bothered. Nobody has tutors as we don't have grammars, the stories of the SE and schools are very interesting and hard to imagine at times.