All I really want from a primary school...

[MilestoneMum]

...is that when DD leaves she is good enough to be in the top stream for English and Maths at secondary school.

She is only 4 years old but I think she is bright, not G&T, but has no difficulties either.

But the school she has been allocated got an OFSTED rating of "Requires Improvement". Does that mean I will have to do tutoring or, dare I say it, Kumon, to ensure she is stretched enough?

Simple maths dictates that whilst we might all WANT our DC to be above average, 50% of them won't be (that's why it's called average!). It's also very rare for children to be above average in all subjects - much more likely to be strong in some areas and weaker in others.

Yes, but my point is that "average" is perhaps not what it once was in many schools (re spelling as an example).

My mother used to mark GCSE exams. She notic (like Jaqueline Wilson) also noticed that the standard of written english has really dived during the last 10 years. Unfortunately although the papers are blind she could always tell which papers came from private schools. They might not have the best content, but the written English was good and the spelling competent. Often the same could not be said for the state school papers. And this is why the OP is concerned. Satisfactory is not satisfactory, as the new ofsted rating has shown, it "requires improvement."

Ah, the myth of decline from a golden age: that's been with us since the Ancient Greeks. With as little foundation, then as now.

I used to teach at a Russell Group university, in a subject that had a high proportion of students who had come through private education. They had obviously been well tutored, and could write extremely competent essays in full sentences. But the ones who made your eyes sparkle, who had interesting ideas that they'd thought out for themselves, the really intelligent ones, were invariably those who'd come from state schools. Frankly, some of the rest were second cousin to the ox, and had been very expensively taught how to parrot what they thought tutors would like to hear.

Yes, but it's no good if you have ideas that make your eyes sparkle if you can't express them in written english. Perhaps these students could, as they may have been the highly intelligent 5-10% who would achieve wherever they went to school. What about the following 90%? These are the children that our state system can let down. And it shouldn't.

There are usually plenty of below average attainers at "Outstanding" schools with High SAT results. Find me an exception to that rule (non-selective state schools with 20+ yr6s).

If I say DD is sitting L6s for all KS2 SATs, after almost 7 years at a merely "Satisfactory" school, does that give you a teeny tiny hope that maybe a "Requires Improvement" school might possibly maybe perhaps be able to adequately stretch a moderately clever child?

If not then I suggest give up, just go private.

(DD Who I thought was completely ordinary at school until long after her 6th birthday, btw.)

DD by far not the only high attainer in her cohort.

I used to think that my foreign education was ever so superior because I was able to spell not only my own language but English as well, whereas my English peers were often more than a little wobbly. Later I realised that they had learnt all sorts of other things, including the presentation of facts and the marshalling of arguments, that I had to pick up laboriously when I was writing my PhD. These are still my weak areas: I wish we hadn't spent all our time on spelling tests.

I think I need to do as MrsTruper has done. But maybe not everyday, I wouldn't want to put her off.

I have read that teachers can predict what a child aged 5 will be doing when they reach age 16, so maybe it's not so unreasonable have some idea of how a child may fair.

I could have looked at 100 schools but I knew I would be allocated this one based on distance, so I just need to make the best of the situation.

Teachers can predict roughly.....

Give her access to nursery rhymes, stories and songs and get her started on a musical instrument to optimise her cognitive development. It makes a difference.

Praise her efforts as well as her achievements to encourage her to try hard. (Children who sail through primary school sometimes give up too easily later.)

Depends on the teacher and the child. There are plenty of late bloomers- a lot happens between 4 and 7 in particular.

I really don't believe you can predict a child's performance at 16 on the basis of what they're capable of at 5. They mature at such massively different rates - there are just so many other factors at play. My decidedly average DCs1 & 2 became above average at High School purely because they became more engaged with specific subjects and just, well, grew up a bit.

Needs Improvement is the new Satisfactory - so take it as Satisfactory. If your DD is happy and enjoys learning then she'll be fine.

Milestone, your child is an individual not a statistic.

My dad works in the criminal justice system, he tells this story: He attended a workshop which profiled early life traits & predicted future likely criminal behaviour. There was a checklist (the more items checked, the higher the risk of future criminality).

My dad looked down this list of like 11 items and realised that he could check off all but one item in his own background. But Dad is not a criminal, never was, he's on the other team.

Still, explains a lot about why my dad is more compassionate (than many of his colleagues) in dealing with people from deprived backgrounds.

I was told by a headmaster when my DS1 was 4 that he would never be grammar school material and I should send him to the special unit. He refused to have my son in his school and I cried buckets for days and days.

That no hope son who would never be anything worthwhile and I would just have to accept that, is just about to graduate with a first and has been accepted to study medicine on a graduate entry course.

So the teachers can predict comment is, in my humble opinion, a pile of crap.