application for primary with high % children from 'disadvantaged' backgrounds

[bella234]

I am looking at moving home to 2 areas which will be in-year transfer for primary place starting Sept 2020. The school that will most likely be offered in the area I prefer is one that is undersubcribed yearly and has a high % of children from 'disadvantaged' backgrounds (most parents educated below degree level and.low incomes etc). The area the property itself is in is reasonably 'desirable', with, I would say, mainly 'middle-working' and 'middle class' demographics. However, most parents in this area avoid the undersubscribed school and, consequently, the other 2 nearest schools are always oversubscribed. The other area I am looking at has more of a 'mixed' (socio-economic) demographic. My problem is, I grew up in a poor working class background, but was academic enough to achieve a Masters degree. Being from w/c background however, I never had the confidence to aim high in a job and stuck to just local authority admin on a pretty low (£20k p.a, but currently getting £13k on p/t hrs) salary. As such, I felt the schools (w/c areas) I went to never encouraged us to aim high, so had a significant impact on outcomes. My 4 year old only has me as family, so I feel she is already facing disadvantaged from not having a strong, family network (as well as the 'lower-income' background). My worry is if she goes to a school with a high % of 'disadvantaged' pupils, this could reinforce and further disadvantage her as her peers/peers patents/teachers etc may have lower expectations and aspirations, than a more 'socially mixed' school. The usual catchment area of this school also tends to be characterised by social problems such as higher crime/anti-social behaviour, drug use/dealing etc Is this worry justified???

It completely depends on the school and management. There are some amazing schools in areas like this because the staff are aware that they need to inspire the children and get parents involved in their child's education. Have you been to visit the schools to see how you felt at them?

I think your over complicating things you say you came from a low socio-economic background but obtained a masters, so presumably you went to uni, despite your background. Why shouldn’t you son do the same. See firstly which school he can get into and then see how you feel about it.

@bella234 I completely understand and share your worries (especially as a single parent myself in a rubbish area). This is why I sent my daughter to a private prep school 30 mins from home rather than the school across the road (in hindsight, I'm not sure it was worth it).

The main advantage of a prep school (or a school with children from more privileged backgrounds) is that my daughter is surrounded by ambitious children who aim high - as do their parents. It can also be a disadvantage for self-confidence of course, but at least my daughter knows that it's "cool" to be smart, achieve high grades, excel at things. I don't know how much that is instilled in state schools in deprived areas.

Do you know how long the waiting list is for the desirable schools? Maybe you should accept the place at the less desirable school and put her on the waiting list for the better schools?

I think it depends on the ethos of the school. What are their expectations? Obviously parents are choosing schools based on DC mixing with “people like them” and just be aware they might be in shorter supply at the school shunned by them. However if you are flexible in your approach and believe DC will make pleasant friends, I don’t think you need to worry.

Also parents at most schools want their DC to do well. Few primary age DC don’t want to learn. Your DC will find enough to work with and be friends with. There is no guarantee that people at private schools have a monopoly on wanting to learn and having ambition. I think ambition comes from you. Aim high. Don’t take the easy route when you are as good as everyone else! Parents instil that in DCs, not schools.

I agree with the above that it's the attitude to school and learning coming from the home environment that's most important. My children go/went to our local primary that has high % of FSM, EAL, deprived backgrounds. The staff have high aspirations for all of the pupils, but you can see the influence from home in that for those children who have poor attendance, nobody is practising reading, no support at home for their learning etc there are big gaps opening up despite the school's interventions even by Yr1. I don't think it is related to income/class though - some children who have come in as refugees have done exceptionally well, but they are being shown at home that education is valued. What is the school like in your second choice area? Have you been and visited both schools?

There are many excellent schools in London serving deprived areas that are excellent. Certainly some immigrant children come from families with a desire to learn. That’s very valuable. Go and have a good look around. Also ask about progress the DC make at the school. Not just Sats results.

At Reception age, does it matter if the other families are aiming for their children to do postgraduate study?? really?

At my DCs primary school about half the children don’t have English as a first language, we’re jn a deprived inner city area, lots of looked after and SEN children and my DCs are in the 10% white British kids.
It’s an excellent school. There’s so much support going into the school because of the levels of deprivation. There are so many experiences and trips planned because the kids would never get to go anywhere otherwise and my DCs benefit from all this. Yes, the school might not have the best results but my DCs are doing really well. It’s the support and encouragement at home that counts.
Don’t overlook it because it’s deprived.

Visit the school. Chat to the staff. A local school has huge advantages.
Our school has lots of kids who aren't wealthy but choose our school as it gets good results and offers loads of extra stuff; arts, drama, sports etc State school making the most of what they have

Drspouse: if you know anything about schools and parents, it’s not about university study in YR (as you seem to think was implied) it is about whether parents read to DC and engage with them. Whether they have managed to ensure they are ready for school. Whether the language of DC has developed without swearing and DC are ready to learn at school. PP children are recognised as most likely to have a gap in attainment by age 5, in comparison to non pp children. PP money is to close the gap. Where schools have lots of PP DC, there might be an issue regarding how well these DC will adjust to school and whether parents will support them adequately. It’s not about aiming high for university at this stage, it’s about aiming high to access the YR curriculum. Of course many DC do, but it’s long been acknowledged that deprived DC find that more difficult.

I would also read the PP report published by the school, OP. This will give you info about how they spend their money to raise standards.

I do know about schools and parents, and the school my DD is at has a huge mix with lots of PP and very good provision for them.

My DCs are not being harmed by having children who are not quite ready for school in their class. I'd say rather the contrary, e.g. one little girl in DD's class has some speech and language difficulties and can be quite difficult to understand sometimes and I think it's really good for DD to learn to listen more carefully to her; in fact they are really good friends even though the other girl can struggle to be understood at times.

(And the attitude that "these children aren't good enough for my child to mix with" is what got parents at my DS old school egging each other on to complain to the head about this dreadful undesirable child - who was acting out because school weren't following his EHCP - and how awful it was for their precious little darling to see another child be aggressive when upset).

I work in a school like this and we work our guts out to close the gaps and have high aspirations for all the children. Please don't rule it out. Go visit.

Behaviour in the classroom is, however, a reason why parents go to the more middle class schools. Probably a misplaced sunny upland though. I can assure you it’s not DC with speech delay that makes them look elsewhere. It’s always behaviour and looking for “people like us”. They don’t want to associate with any families they consider less desirable. I’m afraid that’s what it’s all about and in all my 40 years of being involved in education, it has never changed. A few people say they are happy with X school and give it a go and remain committed. Others don’t give the school a chance in the first place. Moving house to escape is normal.

Of course everyone works their socks off in all schools. Working with difficult or ineffective parents and large numbers of DC with needs requires great skill and patience. That’s why prospective parents should visit schools to see if they like them. Regrettably parents won’t like some schools no matter how good the staff are. It’s a fact.

I have a very similar conundrum except I live in a city and the catchment primary is in avery deprived area. My thoughts are the same as yours, that the biggest disadvantage of a deprived area intake is the lack of aspirations in the community culture. This is fact not snobbery. I really do think it is a big concern...for secondary school. But my current opinion is that it doesn't matter for primary school. Many deprived area schools have excellent outcomes. I was ready to move house because our catchment school has an extremely deprived intake (triple the national average of FSM, low attendance stats). But then I realised that the percentage of children reaching the nationally expected standard was higher or equal to than the more middle class schools I was looking at and this is with children from much lower starting points at foundation stage so the value added is significant. The schools in deprived areas are more nurturing because they have to be, particularly in the foundation stage. Many children have never been read to and there is a huge focus on storytelling and fostering a love of literacy that has been very successful. Parents are also welcome to stay for the first 15 minutes and join in activities, and there is a free breakfast club, something the middle class schools don't have. I feel like this more nurturing approach will benefit all children, and I should take advantage of it, with a view to moving before secondary school applications when children begin to socialise independently.

Argh, my spacing has disappeared sorry.

So, parents who don't have a degree aren't bothered about their children doing well?
Parents on a low wage do not care about their DC's education or encourage them?
Seriously, is this correct?
You're on a low wage. You're a single parent.
Won't you're DD also be one of the 'disadvantaged' or does your degree take her out of this bracket?
I have a degree but am currently choosing not to work. Are my children 'disadvantaged'?

Your

If your DC qualify for free school meals they will get pupil premium. Choosing not to work is a luxury for many and of course you are educationally able to support DC.

The real disadvantage is having no parent providing a stable home. DC might be in the care of social services and have very chaotic families. There might be a parent in prison or they might be a carer or have had a recent death in the family. DC might be in overcrowded homes or be shunted around various homes with a variety of boyfriends/girlfriends trying to parent.

If parents can barely read themselves or have had a poor experience of education this can have a detrimental effect on their DC. Some parents are aggressive. Some parents are alcoholic and are drug addicts. Some parents don’t get DC to school on time. They don’t pay for lunch and a packed lunch might be a bag of crisps. Where there are larger numbers of deprived DC it is vital to have a school that does its utmost to “close the gap”.

I don’t think someone that chooses to be poor is quite the same as some of the issues I’ve outlined above.

My niece is in y6 in a school in a school with a very high intake of disadvantaged children, while my DD is in y7, having come from a primary school with a very high intake of well supported children. So I’ve been in a position to compare the two.

The two biggest differences have been firstly in facilities and opportunities. The deprived area school has had a lot of local resources spent on it, equalling a lot of trips, groups coming into school for special events, up to date learning resources and a lot of clubs, whereas the leafy school had the bare minimum of these things.

The second is in DN and DDs perceptions of their academic abilities, which are about equal. DN has always been top of her class for everything, given lots of extension work and generally feted by the school as being a shining academic star. DD wasn’t even in the top five brightest children in her class, they had a couple of children working at secondary level in maths from around y5. She did well but by her school’s standards she was just above average. I’m hoping for DN’s sake when she starts secondary she’s able to adjust to not being a big fish in a small pond anymore.

From my personal experience of my children attending a school in a deprived area with a high proportion of children from disadvantaged backgrounds, the school was excellent.

They really worked hard to have high educational standards and expectations for all the children. Results had to have worked for, unlike local schools with affluent parents.

Schools like this can be excellent, but it all depends on the individual school.

A school with a high percentage of pp children does have significantly more money. The school decides how it will sound the money. The money is not really spent on it by an outside body unless you are talking about buildings. The pp money should be spent on raising standards for the pp children and must account for this spending and for success in raising standards. However there can be spin offs for other DC which benefits the school population in general.

Where I live it’s often the leafy lane schools with a wide variety of clubs, often run by parents, and even grandparents, the best trips and the best facilities. Parents raise lots of money themselves. Not all areas are the same.

The school in our area that has highest scores at yr6 sats is the one in the disadvantaged area. They get more support, funding, etc. There were people who moved their kids from that school to ours, and they were gutted.
Disadvantaged back ground doesn't mean lower expectations. Every child is different, and every teacher is different too. At primary level, parents' involvement and teachers determinations to do good for their pupils means more than anything else, as well as how much funding the school have.

If disadvantaged background means nothing then why is there pupil premium funding??? Every bit of research shows disadvantage can mean lower achievement and it’s measurable from age 3.

Schools in disadvantaged areas get their money via the pupil number formula. It’s not based on where they are. What makes the difference is pp funding. Some local authorities might tweak their formulas to support disadvantaged area schools but this would be at the expense of other schools and mostly this practice has died out, for obvious reasons in times of austerity. Heads choose how they spend their money and what support services they provide or buy in. Local authorities don’t have the ability or the funds to pour money into these schools.