State Secondary Education In London

[eekareindeer]

I am hoping for positive stories from parents whose children are surviving or have survived or are even thriving in state secondary education in London.

I am vehemently opposed to private education and love London and do not wish to move when my pfb turns 11, as so many middle class parents do. I happen to be really happy where I am and would hate to relocate. Friends are very important to me.

I would like my children to go to local secondary schools and to hell with the league tables (a la Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper).

Will they be ok?

Hopeful bump.

Should have put "inner city secondary education" in the thread title cos the issue doesn't apply just in London. Duh!

'Local secondary school' covers a multitude of sins though, eekamoose.

Our local school is one which is considered desirable (ie people move into catchment) but is not hugely outstanding in either league table or ofsted terms. Lots of people go to some lengths to avoid it also.

I looked round for ds (dd1 is at a different secondary) to see if we'd consider it as a possible option and really liked it. More than eg. the London Oratory which is (obviously) considered infinitely more desirable. I don't know that the local one will be our first option, but its definitely a strong contender. Conversely there are other secondary schools that I wouldn't want ds to go to (and I don't think he'd want to go to either).

It all depends on what your local options are, what your child is like and where you fall on the laid back/pushy scale. As long as the school has reasonable teaching and a sufficiently mixed intake for your child to find themselves at least some like-minded friends, then it will probably be fine.

But I think you do also need to let your dc have some input once it gets a bit nearer to the time. How will you feel if one of them wants to try for one of the grammar schools, for example? I think it is important for the child to feel they have some ownership of the choice rather than just having it made for them. And also to be honest about the pros and cons of each -- eg. for us the downside of the local school is that you can only do one modern language (ds is good at languages, and quite keen to do more) and very low on team sport (he's very into cricket and rugby). We've discussed how he could get round the lack of these at the school, and how being local = no travel time = plenty of time for out of school activities. But he still prefers a v. trad sport academic grammar school, so we'll probably put that first just on the offchance.

In summary -- I think it will be fine as long as the school is okay and suits your child. Having some disruptive and disaffected kids in the class isn't the end of the world unless you're very precious about your dc. But spending 5 years in an environment where nobody really 'gets' what you're about must be miserable. So look carefully before you leap.

Thanks so much for your reply, Frogs. When does your ds start secondary?

Are there still grammar schools in London?

We are very near Kent, I know about the grammar system there.

And yet would still rather not move.

He's in Y5 atm.

There are grammar schools in London, mainly in Bexley and Kingston, wiht a smattering in N London. People go a bit loop-the-loop over the schools thing I think. And yet I think it's still necessary to exercise a bit of judgement -- really not all schools are created equal, but conversely there is life outside the schools currently considered to be desirable.

There's no substitute for going to look yourself and feeling the vibe, imo.

I spend far too much time thinking about this given that my children are way off going there. Here are my thoughts.
Some interesting research
www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article3405934.ece
It seems to suggest that how your child does is pretty pre-determined or highly influenced by their home lives and not as dependent on the school as we all tizz about. It's also worth remembering that most schools are streamed so while maybe only 40% in a school get the requisite number of GSCEs, in your child's stream it may be 100%.
Looking at the league tables today, it really struck me that how a school does seems to be directly linked to how selective it is. So maybe if the very same bright children that go to one of these highly selective schools were to go to the local "sink" school, they'd do just as well.

I'm in the London Borough of Greenwich, and our secondary schools are among the worst in the London. The top three schools are catholic, so the vast majority of people would not be considered for these. I am catholic, so I know that I am fortunate in being able to apply for these.

However, I do know people who have chosen to send their children to the local community school, and they have been very happy with their choices. This is particularly the case if their children are very academic. These children tend to be taught in academic sets and so are cushioned from the bad behaviour which occurs in other classes. In fact, some children at my local 30% GCSE A-C school do come out with 10 GCSE's at A or A*.

However, I do think that our local schools fail average children miserably. An average child can easily get 5 GCSE's A-C, so surely a non-selective comp should have at least 60% of children getting 5 GCSE's. In Greenwich, schools also face the particular challenge of many brighter children being educated out of the borough in the neighbouring Bexley Grammars. This reduces the number of children in the upper sets of the local comprehensives, so bringing the results of the local schools down. Prospective parents then see the indifferent GCSE results of the their local school, and tutor their children for the 11 plus from year 5 onwards, because they want to avoid the comprehensive at all costs.