State or private for secondary?

[CandyCrush77]

I am sure this has been done to death but am having a bit of a dilemma as to what to do for secondary for DSs who are currently 8 and 6. The local state secondary is not good and so we are looking at either moving house into the catchment area of a good secondary (there are two excellent secondaries about 10-15 minutes away) or going private. We are in London and, thanks to stamp duty, it will cost around 100k to move and buy an equivalent or slightly smaller house in catchment. I had therefore decided we may as well go private but not really keen on the whole ethos of private school and, while we should be able to manage (just) it will be a stretch financially. I think I would go for private if they would definitely be getting a better education but I am not sure the private schools they will get into will be much better than the excellent state options. Interested in hearing from others who have been through this and what they decided.

Given that the privates mentioned are Forest and Northbridge and disclosing the 62% pass rate (that of Stoke Newington) it seems clear that we are discussing North London in this thread. Firstly, I'd agree that it's impossible to compare even less good private school results to any state school; not only due to being selective but in that the majority of MC parents that send their kids there have tutored their kids to the hilt. This is often in an attempt to get them into a more academic private and resorting to these through fear of the state sector. But what's often missing from these threads is Central Foundation Boys. This school was classed as outstanding in all areas last year as well as achieving 87% GCSE (grades a-c). What's particularly astounding is that it has a far more challenging demographic than other Islington school and yet achieved these phenomenal results. If parents don't see this school, I really think they are missing a trick in north London. It's a hidden gem in a super central location and a really true comprehensive by definition. And it never uses its demographic as an excuse. I find it incredible that it gets so little airtime on mumsnet. Why do you think this is?

@candycrush you just covered everything that I was about to add. I completely agree and think it's very dangerous that people assume that they are protecting their kids from feeling troubled/being bullied by paying for private. I am not anti private BTW. I think your reasoning for sending your DC is the most sound and rational there is.

Hi Naughtyboy, Central London Foundation is absolutely on my list! We will apply there but probably won't get in based on catchment. The results are very impressive and I also don't understand why it doesn't seem to be more sought after on MN. One worry I had though is sending them to a very mixed/ethnically diverse school with a high percentage of kids on free school meals and with English a second language. No idea what the support system/pastoral care is like but it would be a massive culture shock going from where he is now. Definitely worth a visit though.

HappyGardening, totally agree. I have friends with kids at Highgate who are apparently partying/drinking vodka and having sex at 14, so agree that there are no guarantees. Have to say, that is also why I am not overly concerned about getting into one of the top schools, given all the stress it will involve to get in and the pressure once they are in. Just want somewhere low key where they will get a good education with fantastic teaching and support systems. We obviously need to go and see schools to get a feel for each of them and what will suit DSs but tying to decide in my head whether to focus on state and, if so, whether we should move, or go private. Can I ask, would you have considered moving in order to get into an excellent state secondary?

Central Boys Foundation has 80% students from ethnic minority groups and just under 2/3rd speak English as a second language. Not sure my white, middle class boy will fit in there to be honest.

OP we are rural and live in a very wealthy area with "high performing outstanding" state school with places (DS1 went to one) and one of the countries top grammar schools fairly near by where DS2 got a place although the agro of getting him there would have meant I would have to have given up my job but this would have been off set by not paying fees.
Just to add that we are slightly different from many parents in that we believe in and wanted full boarding (DS2 had full boarded since yr 2) not state boarding but proper full boarding. I'm fully aware that many don't have the luxury of this option or the inclination to send their DC's!
DS2 has 5 1/2 weeks to go (gulp) before he finishes his education looking back, I have though very carefully about this over the last few weeks and looked at the large hole paying fees has made in our bank balance, I do not regret my decision to pay. DS2 has grown into the young man I hoped he would and more importantly. the young man I wanted him free to become and his school has been an enormous influence in this.
I pesto ally wouldn't pay for a "low key" school but that's just me in my situation. You must do what feels right for you and you're situation.
Fantastic teaching is not guaranteed either over the years DS2 has experienced the truely inspired, the good, average bad and bloody hopeless (as had DS1 in the state sector).
Sorry to be obtuse but what sort of support systems are you hoping for?

CandyCrush, if your boys are "in with a chance" for City (27), Highgate (31) or UCS (40), then they should walk into Forest (not in the top 100) (I've never heard of Northbridge House.) Forest isn't bad at all and is getting better because of its location. Forest has a lot of scholarships and routinely offers 50% on academic merit alone. You could find yourself in a position of a scholarship at Forest or a fee paying place at City, for example. If you are considering Forest, you might consider Chigwell (not in the top 100) or Bancrofts (17) as well, both of which are also on the Central Line.

(I have listed the schools GCSE rankings of As and A*s from www.best-schools.co.uk/uk-school-league-tables/gcse-grades/ to give you some context. Obviously this is not the definitive list, nor are academic league tables everything, but it is a starting point. Coed schools tend to have inflated ranking compared to boys only schools. Girls tend to pull up the average.)

Candy, we looked round Central Foundation. Their results are v.impressive and the boys showing us round were lovely. There were a fair few white middle class boys from what I could see. The building's not v.inspiring though as it's just so old and a bit grim. In the end we didn't put it down as it's all boys and we felt DS would do better at a mixed school. Definitely worth a trip to the open day though.

I have tried both systems at primary level and I could see the differences. Although the state school was outstanding rated my DS1 was bullied, unhappy, not stretched enough and felt lost in the crowd. My DS2, being shy was always left in his little corner. When they were in Y5 & Y3 I moved them to the local prep and they have been thriving, especially DS1 who is very bright.
He got offers from Tiffin, Hampton and LU and decided to go for Hampton only because we experienced the differences between private v state. As mentioned here before, the super selective private schools will offer so much more on top of academia. Visit the prospective schools and just try to see how your children will fit in, how they will be prepared for the future, adult life not only for exams, what friends they will make.
I also agree that not all the parents at private schools are super rich. We are very hard working parents and so are most of the parents at our prep school.

Naughtyb0y, I disagree that Central's not on MN radar - I seem always to be seeing posts extolling its virtues in a very eager attempt to make it happen. I don't see that it's an undiscovered gem because it's in the Islington booklet and its amazing results/ofsted are plain to see.

The reason why I don't think it's a honeypot (nor will ever be) is its location. It's very few people's local school as it's not a residential area. One of the most appealing things about state for us was walking to school and Central didn't offer that. Plus the pollution off the Old Street roundabout is shocking. As Traalaa says, the buildings are grim, you could film a prison drama in there without changing a thing, though it will be much more appealing post building works.

If we'd have had Stoke Newington as option I don't think we would have gone down the 11+ route. It looks great.

Agree with coffee about Stoke Newington. I know several kids there and it is v.good. They're all happy. We were too far away to both applying. :(

oops, meant 'bother'!

@candycrush77 This perception is exactly what alienates the MC Mumsnet audience. I'm not condemning that concern, I think it's completely honest. If you could spend 5 minutes amongst the children and parents I know who are devoted and passionate about the school, I feel strongly that you'd change your mind. The parents I know that send their boys there could afford to send their kids literally anywhere. The result of this is that the intake encompasses extremely academic and high achieving kids who recognise the schools strengths and leadership, unlike schools such as NBH which serves predominantly as a dumping ground for those unable to make selectives. As far as facilities go, what it lacks in outside space, it makes up for by utilising outside resources and amenities. Who needs an indoor pool with the incredible refurbished Ironmonger row baths across the Rd and designated tennis courts across Islington?
True there a mixed demographic (my perception was closer to 50% and would dispute those stats on the basis of being outdated. But a large percentage of those are Bangladeshi whose culture attaches vast importance to progression and drive towards education. Have you ever toured the most selective school in London; Latimer Grammar? If not, you might be surprised to find that same cultural group dominating their intake. As for any other ethnic group, they are clearly as driven and motivated as the white middle class kids at these mediocre privates. And as for % of kids with English as a second language then even more of an achievement to have maths/English results ranked in the top 10% in the country!!
As for pastoral care, it dedicates an entire hall to yr 7 for the entire academic year. It is full of facilities and all kids are closely monitored and nurtured throughout that period.
Jamie Brownhill is an inspiration and I challenge anyone to come away from his tour without being infected by that passion.
One last thing!! They take the entire school skiing every year from yr 8 one and not one single child gets left behind because they can't afford to attend.
Thank you for letting me get this off my chest!

It's funny but the incredible (I think) location was the original draw for me. The heart of Shoreditch and incredible links with the City! I never hear City Boys or Girls alienating anyone on the basis that there's pollution.
Stoke Newington results were below national average last time I looked. But I know (I'm not suggesting you) that for many, the cohort is more imp than results.

@coffeeismy.. Sorry but what do you mean by 'attempts to make it happen'? It's been granted outstanding in every single area and results have surpassed many privates throughout the country. Presumably you make it happen for more white, middle class parents? (For the record, I'm white middle class).
I don't mean to sound ranty but I can't help but feel frustrated by some misconceptions of this school.

Naughtyboy it sounds like a great school, I had never even heard of it before. I appreciate you giving your experience and positive point of view. It's always great to hear about new places and opportunities.

I would say that City boys is on the river and City girls is in the Barbican, both nestled away from the roads where most of the Nox/Sox (diesel particulates are). I've never thought to pick a school based on pollution, but for people who care and are "in the know" on this stuff, it may make a difference. A friend who has a phD in environmental engineering, with a special interest in indoor air quality told me that road pollution is very localised.

Also, Latymer School is seen as very "blond" (that's the euphamism that I have heard for white around where I live) for a London grammar school. Most have much higher minority intakes. When it comes to the steep competition of grammar school entry some cultures are more prepared to succeed in the tournament.

Anecdotally I hear that private educated children are at a disadvantage when it comes to university selection.

But I am in Scotland where there is not the predominance of independent schools.

@80K girl. Thank you for this. I do care about pollution and as the mother of a chronic asthmatic, I was compelled to google the pollution levels which are not great. However, I the process, I discovered imminent development plans to pedestrianise half of the roundabout, which is of great interest;

The 1970s roundabout at London’s technology epicentre in Old Street will cease to exist, with one side being paved over to make a large pedestrian square with seating and trees.
The radical re-design will begin next year when the north-western arm of the roundabout on the Islington side of Old Street will be paved over to create a new public space. The Tube station will have a new entrance installed centrally – where the island stands presently.

Which Latymer are you talking about? The one in Edmonton or the one in Hammersmith? I have heard the one in Edmonton is v academic and, as you say, 90% Indian/Bangladeshi. Agree their fantastic work ethic is what undoubtedly makes these schools the successes they are. I still have reservations though that culturally it would not be the best fit but will definitely have a look. I also share other posters reservations about not wanting to send DSs to a school in central London. The commute in is doable for an old bag like me but would really prefer DS to go to to a local school or at least not have to commute into the centre when they are so little. Also agree that Central Boys is in a bit of an odd location. I had assumed it's intake was basically from council estates within the city. I checked and think we are just out of catchment anyway although, who knows, we could get in on a waiting list.

Still wanting views as well as whether it's worth moving house to get into a better state secondary. I hear that people to do this but seems a massive decision.

@candycrush I'm sorry if I've started to sound evangelical. I think it's party because, I've not been without my own concerns prior to connecting with many kids and parents there (one boy grade 8 piano and rejection a place at city boys!). I'm 200% reassured not but perhaps without that association I may have not had the conviction which would have been a huge oversight for us.
Am in LOVE with the school and my sons found a gorgeous group of boys. Best of luck and do check out my last post re roundabout ;)

We were almost in exactly the same position a few years ago. When our kids were younger I thought 'people must be mad to pay for private, state schools are fine here' as our kids were (and still are) absolutely fine in a state primary.
Then we had to find a secondary school for DS - he's now in year 6. So first we looked at state secondaries. We were in catchment for an outstanding faith school that everybody was raving about, but still would have to move to have a chance of getting in, and several good/outstanding other secondaries. We visited all of them and were only put off by one, the rest seemed fine. Then I compared the figures on the DofE website a bit, and found out that in terms of results, the faith school wasn't so fabulous as it seemed, at least not for high achievers. (For low or middle achieving kids it would be great however, really good results.) So not worth moving for, in our case. Then I found out that some of the secondaries we were considering didn't offer more than one MFL (which is really an issue for me) and others had mixed ability teaching all the way to GCSE for all subjects except maths, which we didn't want either. At that point we decided to look at grammars and private schools, including some of the ones you mentioned. DS then passed the 11+ for a grammar school, got an offer from a top private school and a scholarship from Forest, a good (but not top) private. The grammar still didn't offer all the subjects we wanted, and was quite far, and so was the top private. So in the end we chose Forest: it's close and offers everything we want, curriculum wise, and thanks to the scholarship the fees are managable for us too.
If you can afford the fees, you simply have more choice. Look very closely at all the schools you are considering, state and private, and ask yourself: if they would all cost the same, which school would be the best fit for this particular child?

Naughtyboy, once that work is done the area will look soooo much better. It shouldn't matter, but I am sure that it will give the school a little boost too! We are all so sensitive to our environments. The boys will get a buzz from being in town near all the action and feel quite special if the area looks cared for.

Candycrush I am talking about the state grammar Latymer which is in Edmonton. I never looked at it or considered it because we are just out of catchment. I just know from parents at different after school clubs with whom I mingle and gossip that it is preferred to our closer state grammar because it is coed, more racially diverse, and has a wider range of extracurricular activities.

You got me thinking, so I tried to Google the racial mix of the grammar schools and couldn't find any statistics at all.

Traalaa: You are right - we'll have to agree to disagree.

I don't think all the children on all the estates are rowdy. Many of them aren't but the quieter ones I know have told me some of the things that go on and I'm horrified.

With regard to the situation which I touched on before, this involved bullying of the worse kind, had been going on for six months, and had terrified the poor child into silence. When his mother, who was distraught as you can imagine, found out she removed him immediately. Then she had someone from the LA saying they'd take her to Court for not sending him to school.

The bullies were 11 and 12 years old and threats were of a sexual nature. What did the school do? Absolutely nothing. I am afraid I count detention as "nothing" in this case. My friend contacted her MP who said it was very serious and she would take it all up with the school but nothing happened. The little thugs are still there and probably have a new victim.

Even more appalling was that my friend's elder son knew what was going on and he didn't tell her either. Apparently "you don't tell" because (his words) "nothing is ever done about the bullies and it just makes it 100 times worse."

This is a "good" school with 72% A-C but my friend said the children who now attend the school include a much higher percentage for whom the school receives the pupil premium - and she is pretty certain this will apply to the bullies and the school doesn't want to lose the cash.

Her son now goes to much nicer comprehensive school in another (outer London) borough. He is happy and doing well.

And, yes, when I've driven past that school and another comprehensive in the same borough at 3.00 lots of happy cheerful children are coming out.

Yes, It sounds like, given your priorities, you've made the right choice. I just sometimes think some chose forest for the sake of being private. As one mum put it; "...it's about the cohort, not the results!" Not just that snobbery but not realising that a large chunk are kids of Essex cabbies, which is totally fine, just don't think what they have in mind!!!
I think (as in almost every case) it depends on the child. My biggest reservation regarding less academic privates is lack of high achievers at the very top of the spectrum which states, as well as top privates have. Forest are obviously addressing this by offering such generous scholarships. This will surely, given over subscription of top privates, improve the results until it becomes more academic.

Cleo, that's awful that the poor child to have to go through that. Horrendous that the school didn't take action to sort it too. Clearly that is a very bad school, but it is just one example and I do find what you say about children on pupil premium more than a little offensive.

Just to counter - again ridiculous as it's just one example - I have a friend who's dd, at a rather elite London private school, was bullied so much she attempted suicide. The school failed her too, as it was reported to them several times and nothing much done - the perpetrators are still in the school and as in your example barely punished. One example though does not provide a valid reason to tar a whole sector. It's a rather ridiculous way to argue. You must realise that surely?!

Most schools - both sectors - will have very good pastoral care and a zero tolerance of bullying. There will always be examples of schools that fail at that, but I think largely schools these days do a good job: private and state.