Is it very important for children to go to a good primary school?

[LucyJones]

Or will they thrive whereever they go?
We live near a pretty bad school. We want to move to a better one but can't really afford to.
Dh told me last night he is beating himself up over it. He feels he has a duty to get them into the best primary scholl possible as it will have an impact on the rest of their lives. Is he completely overeacting or do we need to bust a gut to get the dcs into a good primary school rather than an average or below average one?

Lucy ~ you are already thinking about grammar schools??? I think you should wait and see how your children get on in the infants and first year of juniors before worrying about that!
My ds goes to a fairly average school (wasn't my choice put it that way) but he has lovely friends and has done exceptionally well academically and generally all round. To be fair we put a lot of effort in and I think that is far more important than just the school tbh

I'm not BH, dh is
He is really worried about the whole thing and is stressing me out!

They should have specific days when you will be welcomed.
At my school, anyone can call and arrange to come and visit- we do Wednesday mornings.
They should welcome you with open arms.

can you speak to people with kids already at the school? ofsted reports can't always convey the atmosphere of a school. have you visited both possibles?

of 2 local schools we decided against the one generally regarded as "better" because we preferred the atmosphere at the other. chats to people who knew the school reassured us that it wasn't a "problem" school. it turned out that when it was inspected this year it got an excellent report, the best locally and a great improvement on previous reports. the quality of leadership matters immensely, a switched on headteacher can make a huge difference in a short space of time.

So I need to give them a ring ?

What was OFSTED overall rating of the school. (ie. has it been given a notice to improve or put in special measures?)

My son's school has SAT results well below the national average. However it has a very high percentage of kids with special needs and a high percentage of kids living on beneifts.

I worked at a school as an ICT technician (not a teacher) which has some of the best results in the area. Meeting the kids you realised that if the school had not had good results then something would be seriously wrong. We had neighbours who spent 12K renting a house for a year in the catchment area of this high results school. Although the school I used to work at was a nice school, I don't think it was worth spending 12K cheating the admissions system.

Yes. I would go and see about four or five.
Are you in a rural or urban area? I might have missed that...

FWIW hardly any children have got into our local grammar schools (we have 6, 3 for each sex) and my ds's school have said I should try with him. So we have a tutor coming once a week at £22 an hour I think it's going to be the only way although I don't doubt for a second he can do the work iykwim!

at £22 an hour!
I think I will have a look around the schools. I hate thinking about all of this when ds is only three

This is my own personal view......

I think that the best start you can give a chaild...emotionally or educationally has to be a great investment.
Good foundations are essential in any "construction" and my personal view is that children are the same.
Give them the best start possible,instill discipline,courtesy and work ethic and my hope is that this will then carry them through...

But a school does not have to have great SATs results to have those virtues.....

I think for your DH's peace of mind (and YOUR peace and quiet!!) give the school a ring and both of you have a tour.

remind DH that senior school is EIGHT YEARS away. So much could happen up to then... you could move, a new school could be built, ds run off and join the circus

What I mean is, dh cannot plan so far ahead, it is bound to end in disaster

the way i see it my kids will always be supported academically at home. i'm most concerned that their early years at school are positive in terms of the school community - that they find positive roles to play, that strong relationships with friends and teachers are promoted. i want a school that values a wide curriculum, not narrowly focused on academic results (and not necessarily easily "graded" in reports). i want a school that values the input from all its pupils and their families. i'm confident that we found all that in the school we chose.

Know anyone with kids at the school? Neighbours' children, older siblings of your DCs' friends, people from parent/toddler group with older children?

Are they happy?

I agree Spudmasher-it really does depend on the schools available locally-fee-paying or not and I strongly agree with Puppydavies...

I wouldn't go entirely on OFSTED but I wouldn't ignore it either. Go and look at it but personally, I think a good primary school is very important. Only you can decide what it's worth sacrificing to have that.

I think it matters. We were very focussed on getting them into good school at 5+ in the private sector and I think it's paid off - first three at university now and I wanted them to go to a private school etc as I had done. But depends what you want. A lot of parents pay at primary level so children can get into good schools at 11 but it depends on your region whether that's worth doing and 96% of children are state schools and obviously do okay on the whole.

hiya. a friend of mine moved house when her eldest was about to start primary, she wanted him to go to a school in the next village which had a better ofstead report than the one which was on our doorsteps.

i decided to send my eldest to the school which was nearest, even though the ofstead report was'nt as good. i went and looked around, thought it was fine, and so sent him there. i did'nt see the point in battleing in heavy traffic every day when we could just walk there in 2 minutes!

for the first 3 years, my friend went on and on (sometimes quite annoyingly)about why she had made this decision and how it was the best one,and why had'nt i done the same. in her eyes,i had been negligent! she got really really involved in school activities, fund raising events and voluntary helping out there.she was actually at the point of mixing with teachers in the staff room.

now that her child is ready for leaving to go to high school, she readily confesses all the faults she has discovered with the school,eg favouritism,lack of organisation,unprofesionalism of staff,outspoken headmistress..the list goes on! i guess what im trying to say is,don't rely solely on the ofstead reports to make your decision.

imo opinion yes as it is their first experience of education and so many foundations for the future are laid down.

but it does depend what you mean by good.

I teach in a secondary school where many of our kids come from quite poor primaries for some it has set down a path of underachievment that is very dificult to break and for some it never will be but others will thrive wherever they go.

As a teacher I echo nell12 post of 21:45. IN the school I teach in a lot of our problems come from home, those with a supportive home are thriving as they would do elsewhere.

It depends IMHO what you mean by "pretty bad".

Yes, I think primary school is important, but what is bad about yours - and what would be better about anothe rone? It's not as tho it's cut and dried or set in stone.

Just like many things in fact. If you're looking mainly at league table results then you should remember that they are not the only thing...

Myself, like others here, I am not so concerned about results, but do feel strongly that I want a pleasant atmosphere, stimulating teching, a good attitude from the head etc etc. Such a school might for example be in quite a deprived area, and hence probably get poorer results but might still be a place where my child would do well. Sorry LJ but I don't think looking at the Ofsted tells you that it's not a very good school. Our school got "satisfactory" but we are very very happy with it.

(Oh I see that reallytired and others have posted what I think as usual)

At primary level, it's mainly whether or not the parents are keen to help the child or at least give him or her time and a quiet place to study, help with it etc and take an interest.
Unless the 7 year olds are carrying guns and there are smack dealers outside the door, most primaries are pretty much OK for most kids. And when it comes to secondary education it;s important to consider what kind of person your DC is becoming - is he/she academic, sporty, maverick, conformist, etc. A lot of so-called 'good' schools are high-pressure exam factories which stifle all creative thought - or they are gruesome rule-riddled bully zones which value sporting skills above everything else... Passing a lot of exams is not the only thing to value in life and remember, these days i'ts only likely to net you a huge debt and a shitty job in a call centre.

I'm really torn on this one. I went to a primary school which would now be described as underperforming. I think that it took me about three years at a better secondary school to catch up to other people. I was lucky though because I was very self motivated.
Presently I send my Ds (aged 5) to a state primary school which is 'OK'. However he tells me that at least four of the children in his class are very disruptive and as there are 30 children in his class with only 1 teaching assistant (which is shared with another class) things could no doubt be better. Sometimes i feel very unhappy; other times I think, does it really matter at this age. We support him and his end of year results were fantastic. In short, I don't know the answer although I do entirely relate to the OP's Dh who is beating himself up over this.

Echo a lot of what's been said here.

We also live in a grammar school area and there are 3 primaries in our town:

School A is perceived to be the best, with high SATS results, an outstanding Ofsted report and a good percentage of pupils passing the 11+.

School B is pretty average all round

School C is perceived to be the worst with very few children passing the 11+ and low SATS results.

But...

School A streams for classes in Reception in the first month and pins the class lists up for all to see. There is good SN provision in the infant school but most SN pupils' parents are strongly advised that their child's needs would be better served at a different junior school with a SN unit attached. The junior school therefore has very few SN pupils. Friend found the Infant school so pressurised for her low-achieving child that she bailed out and sent him to school C where he is thriving (albeit in a low-achieving type way). Parents at school A thought she was barking.
The school has no social housing in its catchment area and not everyone in catchment gets in, even with a sibling at the school. You have to then reapply for the Juniors.

School B has a very mixed catchment area, from £1.5 million houses all the way down to social housing. There is an average number of pupils with SN. Parent satisfaction with the school is high.

School C has a high level of social housing and an above average no. of pupils with SN. The school is undersubscribed and class sizes can be as low as 13. Parent satisfaction is high, staff are very committed.

Are any of the schools "good"?