"But school is somewhere kids spend 7/8 hours a day. The building, the teachers, the other pupils, the atmosphere, the ethos are part and parcel of their childhood.
So obviously I want all those things to be as positive as possible."
What do you mean by 'positive'? What are you assuming about the 'ethos' of state schools?
My dd's state comp school is a hive of activity. There are so many things going on.
The school's list of extra curricula clubs:
Latin club
Debate club
Strings club
Flute group
STEM club
Clarinet and saxophone group
Swing club
Java programming
DofE
Improv comedy club
Madrigal club
Tag rugby
Yoga
Film
Book club
etc etc (can't be bothered to write them all down)
This is in a mid-level comp (60% A to C) with a 'good' but not 'outstanding' ofsted. A school with high numbers of children on FSM and children with EAL.
The teachers are great - totally positive, enthusiastic, ambitious for the girls.
This school is rejected by lots of local parents in favour of a private girls school half a mile down the road.
I just don't get it. What makes this sort of provision not good enough? Average GCSE grades for high achievers at this school aren't quite as good as for the local private school (A- rather than straight A) but then they don't get the sort of intake that the private school gets. I just don't understand how someone can look at a school where there are good numbers of children achieving at the very highest level, where there's loads of extra curricula stuff on offer, and where kids seem really happy, and think it's shit and second rate. I can only assume it's a status thing - that they don't want their children to mix with the sort of children who private schools emphatically exclude.