What are STATE schools in London like?

[TeenTimesTwo]

I've been reading with mild interest the issue of exploding offers for CLGS.

But it made me wonder. From what I see in media (TV news, and papers), I have the impression that state schools in London have made great steps forward over the past 10-15 years and are now considered very good.

Is that true? Not just for schools with convoluted admissions criteria (like Grey Coats?) but on average for your ordinary run of the mill local secondary?

If so, why so much angst over applying to so many private schools? And the willingness to set up your 11 year olds for such long commutes? Is the education really so much better? Or is it 'snob value' or fear of the unknown, or 'because that's what my social circle does' or old reputations?

[SlackPanther]

The vast majority of my local / London friends have kids doing well in a variety of S London comps. No tutoring.

I am pretty sure given the very mixed dynamic that there will be kids alongside them who don’t have broader interest and knowledge, there are statistics concerning high numbers boys who have never lived with an employed male relative as a role model etc. But mostly, whether in private or state, this comes from the home, so actually my kids are not disadvantaged.

The schools put a lot of effort into pushing high ability, low social capital kids into pre-University days, getting good work experience, etc.

And taking them to inter-school competitions, things on offer for free.

The top sets are full of low income kids doing extremely well alongside kids from ‘comfortable’ kids.

[ReelingLush18]

If we reach one child I'd be pleased - 99% have never seen the inside of a corporate environment but I just don't know what the answer is. Again it's about access to things that give youngsters an advantage.

Take the Year 10/11 work experience fortnight. Fine if you have family or friends who work in corporate environments who can pull strings for placements, but not if you don't. I know some schools have stopped doing it because it's unfair on those who don't have the contacts to get decent 'gigs'.

I do also think that state schools do not imbue their pupils with the same levels of confidence (and dare I say it, entitlement?) as their privately educated colleagues. My impression is that private schools educate DC to become leaders and to expect to get careers in professions and corporate environments. Do you get that in state schools in the same way? I suspect not (generally).

Maybe in some cases perceived disaffection=lack of confidence in abilities?

[Gowgirl]

Many of us pay expected donations, its something you do like listening to your young children painfully sounding out their reading books every night (i hate this, and will do anything to make dh do it).

Churches are full of parents playing the faith school game, its long winded and time consuming but worth it at secondry level.

Ditto musical instruments, EVERY child i know plays at least one. Musical apptitude plus church attendance is a winner around here.

[ReelingLush18]

TeenTimesTwo - you are right on all counts!

I think at DC1's school the 'voluntary contributions' are used to help fund the extra A Levels that many of the super bright cohort take (some do five), and for additional enrichment activities. Although 'voluntarily' I have heard it said that parents who haven't paid are encouraged to do so via a friendly telecon! We dutifully paid up for five years because it seemed to be expected, and I guess because we felt that the investment would be returned. It hasn't quite panned out like that, so this year we made a conscious decision to stop paying it. We felt that we'd be better off investing the saved monies in our own DC than helping subsidise other people's on their stellar academic trajectories! Sounds selfish? We are by no means well-off (we get by), and quite probably considerably less so than many who have not ever contributed (of whom there are a sizeable %)!

At DC2's school there was no mention of the voluntary contribution being used for academic purposes but rather for pastoral care type of activities. A much more egalitarian approach, I feel!

I don't know whether it's usual for secondary schools with high % of children from poorer backgrounds to ask for voluntary contributions at all. I suspect not.

[SlackPanther]

Reading: yes, actually. From Yr 6 onwards and all through secondary in the non-leafy (MN would probably say ‘rough’ ) area I live in, in the 3 Schools I have detailed knowledge of, and others second hand knowledge, there has been constant “Future Leaders” type activity. Specific projects, DoE, Debating, media partnerships, visits by MPs for talks an q&a etc.

Again, I suspect the majority of confidence / entitlement comes from the home environment.

[SlackPanther]

Sorry, Reeling, not ‘Reading ‘.

[CookieDoughKid]

With regards to the previous poster about Corporate Insight Days doesn't sounds inspiring. Well the headline probably isn't but the point we try to show given that we are a FTSE100 company and consistently voted in top 30 UK Employer for people is that Corporate world needn't be boring. We showed them videos of the innovative work we are building with virtual reality, that our campaigns and technology is making massive difference in changing certain public sector spends and efficiencies and that we work with many charities globally.

Our normal office campuses has a spa, hair dressers, gym, subsidised lunch, and we will pay towards your continued professional learning like new languages. We have music rooms and chill out areas.

Really, we want to open pupils eyes that things have changed alot - if you work hard, corporate office job isn't just pen and paper pushing (we don't use paper but the latest Apple Macs).It's things like this I think should make a big difference in your working lives and on the surface they are material but to a yr10/yr11 it might give them some spark and aim for something.........

[ReelingLush18]

I suspect the majority of confidence / entitlement comes from the home environment. I suspect that you are correct. Maybe if children are constantly being told how clever, confident and dynamic they are (which seems to be a very MC thing) they come to believe it to be true,
regardless of whether they truly are, or not.

[comeinpax]

Saman 2010" I am not saying that everybody should be taking Further Maths or scoring A in A-Level Maths, but I would at least like to see a group of 10-15 kids at that level. Also, what does it say about the level of teaching if none of those who chose Further Maths achieved better than a C? "

Entirely agree with this. When results at some outstanding comps are put under the microscope, all is not what it seems.
The top 20 per cent of lauded London comps will include pupils of very high ability. Many would have aced the entry exams for the indies. A fair few children I know of, now attending comps, did gain places at such schools via their entry tests, but were unable to attend, due to parents being unsuccessful in the bursary application process. So why the mediocre results?

[comeinpax]

Further to Sanam 2010's point.
Those A grades in the rigorous subjects are absolutely crucial now if pupils are to get anywhere near RG universities - even the second tier ones.
Most entry requirements at RGs will ask for at least one A grade in the mix. The rest have got to be Bs. For anything competitive, AAA is standard.
Lots of parents on these threads will have attended uni at a time when a decent tertiary education was doable on BCD or even E grades. This is no longer possible. Our universities are global businesses and our children need the A grades to compete. It's not enough for just the moneyed or those able to access the foundation/outreach schemes, to have a realistic prospect of success. There are millions of us in the middle who pay for this mess via our taxes. We are being let down and it's a bloody disgrace!

[daisypond]

My DC are at the leaving-secondary school stage. First DC attended a London comprehensive, the youngest one went to a private secondary. Older, brighter child (top of the class in a two-form entry primary school) we felt sure would do fine a comprehensive. Younger, less academic child (average in primary school) went to private school -there was still an entrance exam, though. As she would be placed in lower sets in secondary school we wanted to avoid rowdy behaviour and larger classes of a comprehensive. Teaching was both good and bad in both schools, depending who you got. State school seemed to produce much better quality of work (but more academic child, so perhaps not surprising). Behaviour at the state school was often poor - tale of teachers weeping in class, computers being thrown, etc. Behaviour at private school vastly better, but the teaching often seemed worse. State school had vastly more options at both GCSE and A-level. Private-school child would have wanted to do some of those options that weren't available to her. Private-school child went to another comprehensive for A-levels. Also picked "mickey mouse" subjects (think photography/media studies, etc) but did well and is going to a RG university

[user1471450935]

See this thread follows all MN ones, slag off state comps
Ours gets less than £4900 student and less £4000/ 6th former,
Inadequate, still got 70% above C at Gcse, sends 96% of year 11's into work/FE or apprenticeships.
We have 25% from one of most deprived areas in North and are also rural & coastal.
But 90% of both kids and teachers do amazing work everyday, with everyone from the 12 in LEA back Autism group, the 5 with major disabilities and the Down syndrome to the ones who go to RG universities. Wonder how many super London independents, A) cater for all the above in one school, guess none and B) could do it on £24500 for Yr7 to Yr11, or £32000 for Yrs7 to Yrs13.
I believe most charge that per year
State schools educate 93% of UK population, many of the nastiness and dangerous jobs in this country are performed by state educated kids, we should forget the private schools and remember, most police/ ambulance/ fire fighters, nurses and military personnel and their support services are populated by state educated people, and they work hard to keep you all safe.
Unlike the bankers( private schools) who royally fucked us over

[daisypond]

The state comprehensive that my DC went to was better (perhaps much better) overall than the private school that my other DC went to - apart from one area, and that was behaviour of the pupils.

[AnotherNewt]

I don't think all posts are as polarised as you describe user

But do remember that once you are looking at sixth form about 20% of school pupils are in private schools (the 7% headline figure covers all age groups, and the proportion in pre-prep is tiny (except in a few bits of London - and to be fair, this thread is about London) rising at prep, increasing significantly at secondary and again for sixth form.

London already has significant problems with ensuring there are enough school places - the demographic bulge which cause such problems with primary places in recent years will be reaching secondary age very soon. If your DC is in that cohort, then you may well find that state schools are creaking a bit in those years as they have to cram them all in somewhere. Fewer to private schools will make the existing and predicted difficulties a little more severe.

I think we are stuck with London's private secondaries being much as they are for the next few years at least. Perhaps when that demographic bulge has gone through, there will be a good time to look again at what secondary schools should be like and make sure that state ones meet that expectation. Which many London state secondaries are already doing.

[daisypond]

I think there was a good point upthread -can't remember who said- about the changing demographics of bits of London. In my DC state primary years, out of 60 children, maybe 1 or 2 went to private school per cohort. Few would have considered it/been able to afford it. But now, maybe seven years later, that same primary school now has 30% going to private school, as those who move into the area have to be considerably wealthier to live here (zone 2). So, I suppose it becomes more of a norm.

[RaindropsAndSparkles]

DD's naice state cofe secondary raised the annual donation from £100 to £300. Effectively the middle class parents paid so their dd's could suffer a punitive regime where the supposedly deprived could run riot at the expense of others. Just another nail in the coffin that made us walk. I understand sponsoring piano keys came later.

Poor leadership, politicised and opaque governors, demoralised staff with high turnover, whinge culture, falling standards, shocking behaviour. It was the A grade pupils who left. The hardworking and well behaved had no chance of supporting standards to rise because the leadership had no idea of what high standards looked like. A leadership on £100,000 who wanted to inculcate socialist principles rather than educate. There is no chance for as long as that misplaced dogma remains in schools.

[SchnitzelVonKrumm]

Haven't read the whole thread but two things:

1. People talk about tutoring to make up for supposed deficiencies in state schools but I have met three people (entirely separately) in the last couple of years who described being hauled in by their children's expensive London private schools and told they'd need to tutor, with the implied threat the child would lose its place if they didn't. So your 20 grand a year fees may not cover the school actually teaching little Rollo or Freya how to do sums. One parent had paid up for tutoring, one removed their child to a state secondary, one was undecided when we spoke.
   
   
2. Latest wheeze among the sharp-elbowed middle classes seems to be to go private until GCSEs then send to state school sixth forms (which mostly now require a fairly high set of GCSE grades). Assume this is so child can claim to be state-educated when applying for university. There is a particular micro-trend for boys to leave single sex private schools and join the mixed sixth forms at girls' schools eg. Camden

[user1471450935]

Another
I think London once again for 20% of sixth formers, our 3 local private 6th forms are smaller than our local comprehensive's, and it loses 85% of its Yr11 to other places.
Our 2 local colleges have over 2000 students each, and then you have a further 4 Fe colleges, plus 11/12 school sixth forms in 25 miles of us.
Seeing all kids have to stay in education/work until 18, I would think the 20% figure is highly out dated.
I wonder where all these parents who can't afford private school fees for 11 years, suddenly find £20-55000 to educated their year12 % 13's.
Really I am now convinced that the average Mn/London private school user doesn't have a clue about life outside your SE bubbles.
The average earning for our and its 6 nearest counties are around £23000-27500, that would struggle to pay for a place at most of your acceptable schools,
Then people wonder why many northern areas voted for brexit and can't stand London and the people who live there, it is because non of you have a clue. 85% of London's state schools are better then ours, we cope, but not you lot, they too crap, well poor you, we survive, on what London centric planners deem acceptable for our kids, it is bloody galling to think you all believe you have it bad. Bet the schools you decide where too crap for your kids are better then mine attend, but that's ok, as we not southern/rich/ or hypocritically enough to throw our ideals out of the window so that our kids can access the best universities too continue shitting on the peasants, who have to use state schools.

[TalkinPeace]

anothernewt
once you are looking at sixth form about 20% of school pupils are in private schools
Do you have a link for that?

Just that since the school leaving age rose to 18 I suspect it is no longer the case.
Certainly here in Hampshire, the number of kids who transfer from private to state for A levels massively exceeds the number moving the other way.

[comeinpax]

Schnitzel: Surely, it's necessary to declare all schools attended since 11 on the UCAS forms. Are the admissions people so overwhelmed that this part gets overlooked?
I, too, have noticed the micro-trend to send Indy kids to comp for Yr12/13.
Can be a mixed blessing from all accounts. If the incoming pupils are bright it can raise aspirations in some of the smaller classes. But in some of the more sedate sixth forms has led to a rich kid party culture with negative repercussions for some.

[daisypond]

User - my DH earns 22,000 and I slightly more. We live in London. Not everyone in London is on mega-salaries.

[Traalaa]

Raindrops, your experience sounds far from good, but I've heard of private schools with poor leadership, where kids leave in droves. My son's comp has great leadership, is inclusive to all, doesn't tolerate disruption and the kids thrive. My nephew's private school has bullying issues and he says there's a fair few teachers who just can't keep control. That's a selective indie. You can't generalise.

[TalkinPeace]

schnitzel
The college that my DCs attended is well known for the massive intake of private school kids.
If they were at private for even one year after the age of 11 they count as private on the admission stats
the college are very clear that they are not a shortcut to contextual offers

[AnotherNewt]

"Do you have a link for that?"

Dept of Ed tables, but you're right I might be outdated as the last time I needed to look in detail was a couple of years ago. I'm not even sure if they still present the school data the same way (they've fiddled with a few aspects recently and I Don't Like It!)

I'll have a google and see if I can find more recent figures. But the basic point - that the 7% is a headline figure, and not the 'true' number in secondary and particularly not in 6th form, and definitely not in London (the subject of this thread) still stands.

BTW - did you see carltons q to you earlier, about whether your characterisation of dire London private schools included any secondaries (again that's subject of thread). I was wondering too. (Sorry if I've missed a reply somewhere already)

[TalkinPeace]

another / carlton
Yes, of course some of the dire schools are secondary.
The ones that keep their results up by kicking kids out just before GCSEs because the standard of teaching is poor.
The ones who tell teachers they will be sacked if the whole class does not hit grades - when the teachers have to work with what they are given.