Scrap school catchments now

[Momentumummy]

If Labour wants to eventually end parents buying privilege through private schools, it needs to go after school catchments. How can it be fair to decide schools by distance to gates when it often depends on ability to pay rent or mortgage which will usually be higher in catchment for good schools?

The only fair system is a lottery one by borough (at least for secondary when kids are old enough to travel alone). You should be allocated a place within your borough but it should be randomized and not based on distance to gates.

Personally Would prefers the grammar schools to also have a local catchment and not be as superselective as they currently are in this area.

But Op you’re in London …you have buses and trains !

How many percentages of lower income family in the grammar compared to the neighbouring schools? I never seen one grammar school have higher percentage low income families than the neighbourhood comprehensive school average.

There are 3 comprehensives near me. One is very high achieving, very strict, has great value added scores and children on FSM and with SEND, on average, make as much progress as those from wealthy backgrounds. Another does OK academically. It is much less strict and sells itself as being more flexible and accommodating of difference. Classrooms are quite chaotic at times and there is quite a bit of disruption. The third school sits in between the other two in terms of culture/approach.

Children at the local primary tend to go to one of the three (with a handful going private). Different families are drawn to (select) the different schools for different reasons. There are lots of families that don't get their first choice and end up very disappointed by being allocated one of the others.

There are lots of misconceptions and false rumours about the high achieving school. It is strict but warm, it has high expectations but provides lots of support so expectations can be met. It has homework clubs where teachers and TAs provide support and resources so there is never an excuse for not completing homework. There are rails of donated uniforms so no child need not comply with uniform expectations. For those parents who work with the school, if/when their child starts going off track, together they sort it out. For those parents who aren't willing or able to work in partnership with the school, the children do end up with lots of detentions etc. The school make it very clear that they expect parents to be actively involved in addressing any issues that arise. This is what puts lots of parents off.

I recognise that parents who have had difficult school experiences in their own childhood find it difficult to trust schools or face being in them. I also recognise that the 'middle class' culture of schools feels alien/difficult for some. I also realise that their kids are likely to struggle the most in school. I can, therefore, see the attraction of a school that seems less intimidating. The thing is, the children don't do better in the 'less intimidating' school and those parents who can face the discomfort and do work with the high achieving school end up delighted with it - especially when making comparisons between their peers who went to the other schools.

If schools are well funded and run, the variable that can undermine this is pupil behaviour that is not linked to the education offer. If parents are unwilling to work with the school, these won't get addressed. OP's idea of diluting the impact by spreading them across schools would prevent some schools being overwhelmed by these issues and therefore unable to be able to offer effective education. However, it would also increase the burden elsewhere - not address the issue at hand.

The challenge is the expectation (current need) for schools to provide more than education. Many issue impacting on pupils are more 'social care' related than education related. Social care should be properly resourced to address the issues arising. Schools should have their own team of social workers to address issues arising. I don't think it is just funding that gets in the way. People don't want their parenting to be judged or challenged (there are lots of reasons for this). Instead they want schools to sort everything out, so they don't have to.

The VAT policy will end up pricing even more kids out of good school catchments so the lottery system is needed more than ever. Private school parents will just use their wealth to elbow out the middle classes - and have it paid for by us. I wish Starmer had the balls to scrap private schools all together or do what Corbyn proposed and take them into the state sector. Then apply the lottery system so those living 300 yards from Eton wouldn’t necessarily get in there.

I've not had chance to read the whole thread, sorry if this has been covered already.

One of the main reasons some schools are better than others is , unpopular as it might be, due to them having a more capable intake of pupils.

The reasons why some children are more capable is almost always down to their family situation, genetics, money, parental engagement etc and very rarely the school they attend.

If you mix up the catchment areas, you will appear to close the gap due to the more/ less capable pupils being spread between schools resulting in average grades becoming more even, however the children who currently do less well won't magically improve their results.

Our local massive grammar school produces ones of the best results in exams in the area and has an excellent reputation all round.

You contradict yourselves by wanting good education but hate good state schools that provide good quality education.

Race to the bottom.

You sound like you want a system that will stop you having to worry about other people’s children doing better than yours. It won’t work though because you can’t stop parents putting money and time into making sure their children get the best education that is available to them. You would have to ban tutoring, music lessons, extra curricular clubs, academic holiday courses, parental support etc.

Best result and reputation because it take the most able children? Or actually providing a good education?

So should we let private schools continue without any obstructions then @Luio? Why bother tackling any inequality - especially if we are all subsidising it?

The catchments are bizarre in my city. There are no catchments for secondary. Primaries however are a different story. We live 100 yards from a primary, but are not in its catchment. Our catchment school is nearly a mile away. My parents live across the road from a primary school and are in a similar situation with the primary school they are in the catchment for a mile walk.

So is there no merit in forcing a bit of social mixing by shaking up catchments then @Noideawhatiam ?

Do we really think there will be thousands and thousands more kids in state schools though because of the VAT increase? Quite a lot of kids near me go private, and while parents aren’t happy about the increase, they’re not changing schools because of it. Won’t the majority just pay the increase?

Both. They have high expectations of the children and bigger work load than other schools from what I hear. If those children are willing to do it, then why not?

Don’t trash a system that is working very well. Improve the non grammar state school systems to make them just as good.

Stronger leadership, zero tolerance for bad behaviour, improve teacher retention, etc

Those children are the future tax payers and they will be funding everyone else’s pensions and they are the ones who make and break the economy. We need more good schools not less.

How are you subsidising private schools They save the state over £4 billion per year. Seriously please show me exactly how the tax payer subsidies them? You can't because they don't!
You are starting to sound like Rachel Reeves!

Rachel Reeves has done nothing to address the far greater impact on inequality: selection by house price so I don’t think I do sound like her @twistyizzy.

No because £3-4K extra per year is a tipping point for many.
Could you afford that extra on your mortgage each year?
We are already seeing kids being pulled out in anticipation of VAT in January.

Don’t be so ridiculous - we don’t live in a communist country so suggesting all economic advantage is irradiated is just ridiculous. If you want communism I suggest you start researching where you would be happiest living and prepare for the move.

How would it work in very rural areas? My school starter is going to have a 45 min bus journey to the nearest school also the catchment school. If it was a lottery as we are in a sparsely populated area it could be over an hours journey

The "get rid of all private schools" is directly out of the Reeves/Raynor playbook

She’s doing it more sneakily than that - trying to bleed them dry so they fold. I’m more concerned about the folk buying privilege and then being smug about it as they don’t pay school fees upfront. Though I still can’t agree with private schools so we will have to disagree on that.

It isn't the fault of private schools that state schools have been chronically underfunded.
We live in the NE which (along with Midlands) has yet again got lowest GCSE results in the country. Move up here and tell me you wouldn't look at private in order for your child to achieve their potential? When less than 25% gain grade 7+ at GCSE.

@Autumn1990 Pupils in London often travel for an hour and that’s in a densely populated area. That’s often by choice or by default. It actually gets them used to reality after school/hni: commuting!

Inequality begins from before conception and sustains. Really we need to push resources into maternity and early years to help parents to be understand their crucial role in the long term success of their children.

Jiggling around with location based selection which is practically hard to overcome will have negligible effect if you don't look at it more holistically.

I agree with you that equality in education is something that should be promoted, but you seem to be missing the point that schools alone do not create the ideal learning conditions we aspire to for every child.

Schools that have good reputations are part of a community that people are engaged in with parents who are invested in their local school and their child’s education. If you break that sense of community and create a system where it’s difficult for families to make local connections to their school, those schools will no longer be the most desirable schools.

By far the biggest inequality in education comes from parents. Scrapping private schools and making everyday life more difficult for normal families isn’t going to fix that.