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.

My LA couldn't afford this. They are so very very close to bankruptcy. There's no money left in the education pot. Is that where the vat will go? Transporting kids who live half a mile from a school to one further away? Two of my kids get taxis to SEN schools. They cost 10k plus a year easily more. My youngest ds goes 40 miles a day to school. 80 miles round trip. No closer school can meet needs

They also mess about with catchments in larger towns/cities so that more middle class kids are put in a failing school catchment. Nice in theory but it has done nothing to close the attainment gap.

@Momentumummy while the idea of social mixing sounds honourable, the reality is rarely what you'd hope for.

The disruptive, uninterested pupils usually continue to literally"shout louder" than the more compliant ones.

The more invested and affluent parents use their money and ability to help their own children either buying tutors, experiences, extra curriculars or by helping with homework etc themselves.

The less fortunate children don't benefit from any of that of course.

While it's true some children will be helped by virtue of mixing with more focused peers, others will be further alienated by feeling "lesser".

Closing the gap is a much more complicated problem, that unfortunately can only work if the parents are willing to engage with the process.

I believe that Sure Start was reasonably successful, but obviously it's been dismantled now.

I don't think the system does well, maybe well for some, mostly a vanity

Exactly this. We don’t live in a communist society - families with more money will always be able to offer their kids more opportunities, that’s just fact. Trying to erase the differences between children’s starts in life by eradicating private school or introducing a geographical lottery is completely unrealistic. People with money will always find a way not to send their kids to a sink school. Some posters on this subject are living in absolute fantasy land.

Everyone does the best that they can for their kids with the resources they have available to them. Far better to focus on what you can do for your kids with what you have than trying to pedal some ridiculous notion of an educational utopia which is simply never going to exist. The idea that failing state schools will bloom under the efforts of all these invested wealthy parents is pie in the sky. Everyone is always very vague about how these parents are going to turn the law schools around anyway - lots of fluffy language about them being ‘invested’ but in reality between these parents will mainly have jobs and the only thing that most could actually do is donate money, so is that what people are expecting of them? If so, just come out and say it and don’t beat around the bush. You’re asking people to use their money to help other peoples kids at the expense of their own and that just isn’t going to happen, however nice an idea it might be.

I’m not sure why you think that middle class parents would be more “time rich” than poor parents? IME, it’s the middle class parents in professional jobs working every hour (often whilst paying enormous taxes and receiving no state help). Low paid jobs are much more likely to have fixed hours and an expectation to clock off at finish time, unlike many of what you might deem “middle class jobs”.

Also, it seems like a lot of your sentiment is based on the fact that your own children don’t have “innate drive” as you put it. I’m not sure any school can help kids that can’t be bothered to learn.

You put it so well.

OP should really walk away from her phone/computer now and think of ways to support her kids instead of spitting out venom because someone goes to a better school etc.
I knew someone who was a bit like OP (also a communist) and it was not a pleasant person to be around, constantly mad at everyone who earns more or everyone who lives in what they would consider a nicer house (even if it was smaller) etc.

This is a good point - you’d probably just create even more elite towns/villages where all schools are already considered good enough, and the people who couldn’t afford them would end up with the lottery system.

What do you mean by "within your borough" for those not living in London?

You sounds bitter OP. The answer isn't dragging others down but building others up. More investment in poor schools. If socialism was the answer more countries would do it

Plenty leaving at our school and either managing to secure places in the best state schools or doing homeschooling.

This would be by far the simplest and fairest option, although I’d modify it by allocating a set number/percentage of places to PP children and then going by distance to school.

i also think people really need to understand what public transport is like outside London. I live 10 miles away from a major NW city. There are 3 (maybe 4) secondary schools within a 8 mile radius. Only one of those is accessible by public transport unless you go into the city (25 mins by train or an hour on the bus) and then out again.

Wealthier kids have an advantage. That's just the way it is. Regardless of which school they attend, they will still do better. They have access to tutors, to wider life experiences, usually more educated and engaged parents.

It isn't "fair" but nothing in life is. Rather than punishing middle class families (which is all that is happening with the vat nonsense) how about working to close the attainment gap for disadvantaged children? Supporting less wealthy families so parents don't have to have 3 jobs to make ends meet, and they can spend more time with their kids. Engaging them in school activities, providing support for them so they can help their kids with homework.

There is no such thing as a "failing school" What there is, are schools who struggle to meet the demands of pupils, with more and more kids with ASN, or from disadvantaged backgrounds. Funding is cut year on year. PEF money whilst beneficial is so restricted in how it can be spent that in many situations schools have money left in that fund at the end of the year, but still have water pissing through the roof (metaphorically) because they can't spend PEF on it.

It isn't just about funding, taking the schools which are successful and rolling out what they do across the board so all schools succeed, seems to be something nobody is able or willing to do.

The system in England is a joke. Academies and free schools, where the local authority just gives them money and pretty much leaves them to it, a recipe for disaster. Bring all of education back under the local authority, and make them accountable for making sure there is no postcode lottery.

But once again, the target for all the problems are the "squeezed middle" People who are working to improve their lot but who keep being told "no you can't do that because there are poor people out there" And none of what is being done to those people is actually improving the lot of poorer people.

We are just over the income bracket to be considered higher rate tax payers. We're comfortable but by no means wealthy. We pay more tax (even higher because we live in Scotland) and so we should, because that's what living in society should be about. I'm all about giving a hand up to people who are struggling, I don't want any child to go hungry, or any parent to worry about how to feed their kids this week. But despite me paying more tax, nobody's life is getting easier, the attainment gap is widening, and that's because education is not properly prioritised.

Me sending my child to a school where she has fewer advantages will not help that attainment gap, but could impact on her future. Meaning she won't be able contribute back to society in a way that helps others.

And in case you think 2 x 25 mins isn’t so bad, that’s 25 mins in, wait 45 mins for the next train, hope it isn’t cancelled (again) so pretty much 4 hours travelling per day. Of course, the more MC parents will find some way to drive their kids to school, it’s the poorer ones who will be doing 3 hours extra travel on top of schooling, do you really think that’s going to help their outcomes?

Would you like these middle class parents to instead purchase property in cheap areas with rough schools? Or would you then just moan that they’re pushing up prices and demand in those areas?

You seem to think you’d do very well under a socialist system, which strongly suggests that you’d like others who are currently in better circumstances to accept a worse life to benefit you.

Has it ever occurred to you that these middle class parents that you hate so much maybe got where they are through the “innate drive” that you feel your own children are lacking? And that perhaps it’s not surprising that they then go on to produce equally driven children?

But Eton wouldn’t necessarily be good if it wasn’t a private school. It’s getting £50k per child at the minute, if it was getting around £6k a child it would struggle to even pay for upkeep of its buildings never mind employ staff

@Newposter180 Oh the irony! I have a lot of drive and have done very well in my career. There is a cap on earnings in my industry but I have other baubles to show for my efforts. My DC don’t have innate drive but they are exceeding expectations across the board according to school reports. I wish they did have more drive and maybe they will get it once they are at a more mixed secondary (and I don’t mean more privileged, quite the opposite).

I’m going to assume everyone arguing with me is also against VAT on fees otherwise they’d be utter hypocrites trying to protect their privilege whilst endorsing the removal of it from others…

@Momentumummy I'm pro VAT, removal of faith and grammars. In theory creating a level playing field by mixing catchment is a good idea if you are seeking equality in chances. Practically it is going to be difficult to achieve and almost certainly not achieve what you want it to.

So much of success in education is down to parental background and input.
Also the environmental and other impacts of the bussing of students around are profound.

Reading this thread and your responses it feels like you haven't replied to any of the reasonable objections to your policy. Really feels like you have a 'naice house' chip on your shoulder.

In some parts of London, houses can cost six figures more just for being in a good secondary catchment.

Please link to comparable houses with the same space, garden, parking and access to the same length journey that demonstrate this.

The thing about London is that smart housing in conservation areas backs up to an estate or cheaper / high density housing, even the most sought after secondaries have relatively high numbers of pupil premium / FSM.

The catchments for small primaries lead to more restriction, but again there are many many Outstanding and Good primaries that primarily serve kids from challenged socio- economic groups. The education is good in many cases.

And the idea of people commuting 5 or 10 miles across London at rush hour when transport is already under pressure is ridiculous.

Fair banding. Ballot. Means tested school transport. Sorted.

I think it’s too long and a four year old doesn’t need to get used to commuting. I wouldn’t choose a school further away.
How would the buses work for school transport? In rural areas there is only the school bus to pick the pupils up, no service buses.

Oh dear - the OP is floundering and has resorted to strawmen arguments - everyone who doesn’t agree with my stupidly impractical idea supports VAT-free private schools.

To be clear - I support completely charging VAT on private schools. The idea of bussing hundreds of thousands of kids around the country twice a day is barmy, expensive, time consuming nonsense seen through the narrow lens of someone who lives in a big city & doesn’t understand life outside her narrow sphere of reference.

Except private schools already pay VAT on all purchases. This is an additional tax on parents who already pay their taxes to support the state sector.