Is it likely everyone else right and I am wrong?

[GoldStarAngel]

There's a big comp near us that before I looked round I thought would be first choice for dd - everyone says good things about it and people we know with kids there are very happy with it. I went to the open evening and the kids there were v impressive but something made me uneasy - hard to put finger on it but just seemed a bit unaspirational for kids and the head seems uninspiring and it was the kind of place where 'polite notices' were stuck up with sellotape all over the wall. I asked about pandemic teaching and it was only 50% live teaching in lockdown 2. I then went to a daytime tour and wasn't impressed either - the atmosphere just seemed wrong to me. I much preferred another school near us - stricter, newer, very openly aspirational (maybe because in a poorer area), 100% live teaching in lockdown 2.
But - all the other parents I am friends with like school 1 and I am starting to wonder what I am missing. I came away thinking that was very dispiriting and they came away thinking what a lovely place. This is London so lots of choice (in theory anyway, also small distances to get in). Just wondering - anyone else gone against the grain schoolwise from all the other parents they know? Should we go on what felt right when we visited, or on reputation and the fact we know of kids there who are happy? Am doubting myself.

We're at the stage if making a senior school choice. We are only on catchment for 2 but DC is not sold on one of those.
We have looked at 6 other schools within a short commute and have applied to 4 of those.
Local schools are fine, many parents will send their DC there but like you, I wasn't getting the vibe.
Most favoured by us was a massive school with no subject specialisms and a gender neutral uniform. Really lovely atmosphere, excellent standard of work out on display, lots of kids and teachers about on open day, kept leaning going through lockdowns, and have invested in equipment, resources and premises.

Lockdown learning is not the same as f2f and I am not sure that 100% is always a good thing. Very strict schools can be good if your child likes order and rules but does not get anxious. For an anxious but generally law abiding child it can be stressful if they have a minor transgression. Just an observation but sometimes more academic children are given a little more slack than children who struggle more. It really does depend on your child as to which will suit them better.

From experience of making the wrong decision because I listened to the sales punch and not my personal instincts - I'd say go with what's best for you.

Ds moved after a year and in that case I fought hard for what my gut was absolutely screaming at me.

That was the right decision.

School 1 may be trying less hard, which is why you were underwhelmed.

I wouldn't necessarily consider 100% live learning to be a positive - 50% sounds pretty good!

But it may be the other parents are avoiding school 2 just because it's in a poorer area. What reasons do they give for preferring 1?

Can you say which schools you are talking about? Which school has the better progress 8? Attainment 8?

A rough school in london can be very bad. Beware.
But it might have changed nowadays, my knowledge of London secondaries is a bit dated, but in recent history, rough schools in london were dangerous places.

But on the other hand school 2 will be very strict. They achieve high standards in academies through ruthlessness. No speaking in lessons, no speaking in corridors, toilets locked, no toilet going in lessons, isolation for any misdemeanor, very strict teachers, high turnover of staff.

Prefer not to say which as v outing, but they are both east/north east London. The one I like is part of a big academy chain. Dd likes rules and hates having class disrupted. She is not (yet) massively massively academic but she does like to learn. It has really good results at ebaac and progress 8. The company everyone likes actually not great academically - 40% entered for ebaac. People criticise the academy for being too focussed on academics though perhaps at cost if other things. Comp has great school productions and bands etc.

Go with your gut. We did for DS and as the pandemic happened it became clear we'd made the best decision. It meant sending DS to a school that is a pain to get him to, but totally worth it. The other school was going down the pan when we looked round, but cracks were papered. For a lot of kids, they didn't have much of a choice going there. We had another within catchment.

Gut reaction is always right.

We turned down a place at an independent school people think of as the holy grail in favour of another which people see as a “backup”. I actually had one mum tell me to my face that she thought I was mad and we’d regret it.

Fast forward two years and my DD is doing amazingly well and is beyond happy. Her friend is utterly miserable in the school we turned down.

It’s very hard when you listen to the chatter and opinion on the street, and you will doubt yourself and have a wobble. But you know your child best and what will work for them.

Remember that what may be right for the other parents children might not be right for YOUR child, and vice versa.

I think I can guess which academy chain you’re talking about as we live in NE London too. We did consider it for DS based on the academics but decided it wouldn’t work with his SN. Whereas finding a school with a strongSEN policy and responsive SENCO was very important for us, it would obviously not be a concern if your child has no SN.

I know parents who are absolutely focussed on academic results and the number of students a school gets into Oxbridge, and others who care most about pastoral care and extracurriculars. Neither are wrong or missing something.

I think it really depends on your child and what you want for them. My dd is very bright and extremely self motivated, but she reacts very badly to strict, highly structured, rule-bound environments. She far prefers to be trusted to do the right thing and is totally demotivated by attempts to control her actions. Left to her own devices with the right amount of external input, she does brilliantly.

Some kids will do better in a more controlled environment. Others will do better in a more relaxed environment where they have to take some responsibility for their own learning. Only you know what kind of environment will suit your child best.

We went with the equivalent of school2 n your scenario. It was more difficult to get DS to as we are in a priority transport area for school1 (rural county). So we have spent 5 years sorting out public buses, lift shares etc.

DS likes the tougher rules, lack of disruptive behaviour and has stayed there for 6th form. It is aspirational for its pupils, many of whom come from homes facing challenging circumstances (rural poverty is often overlooked), it has good results and offers good enrichment opportunities.

I would say to beware of the live teaching thing. Schools which didn’t offer that may have very specific reasons based on experience. We offered live lessons in the first school closure, but in many cases our target pupils were sharing devices or working around parents’ jobs. In the second lockdown we all recorded lessons so they could be accessed more flexibly. This also meant we were available for online chats, phone calls etc throughout the day.

The [school] everyone likes actually not great academically - 40% entered for ebaac.

Ebacc entry is a pretty pointless way to judge - it's just a set of subjects. Rates will probably boil down to "Do they make the pupils do a MFL GCSE or not?". If they don't, they might get excellent results but a poor Ebacc rate. If they do, then the child that gets a 5 will have passed their Ebacc even if that meant they couldn't have done a subject in which they had more interest (and would have got a higher grade). Some schools care about Ebacc rates, others don't.

That is helpful @GolfForBrains as that is exactly the case re modern language and which school has it as compulsory

Yes I was going to say the same as a previous poster about ebacc. One of our local school which is lovely doesn’t make students take a mfl so they don’t score well for ebacc but have good attainment 8 and progress 8 scores.
My children wouldn’t do well in an ultra strict environment so it wouldn’t be for me but each child is different. Despite my children being pretty well behaved having strict teachers just makes them feel anxious.

You seem to be focusing on rather bizarre metrics - % of live teaching during lockdown and % entered for Ebacc have zero relationship to quality of education or teaching.

Large academy chains are sometimes soulless sausage factories with a high churn of teachers so maybe worth checking out their reputation (e.g. Harris).

For me, a strict school would be a deal-breaker. Kids don't need to be treated like subhuman robots. I would be looking at how happy kids are, the type of extracurricular opportunities, arts, music, sports. My kid isn't a computer, I want him to have the beat chance of developing into his own, individual human, I didn't birth him to sit down, shut up and get lashed if he speaks at the wrong time or needs to use the toilet. What a nightmare.

I had heard that about academies too but when we visited kids were in corridor between lessons chatting like normal kids. Def no rule of silence

You need to choose as best you can for your child. You clearly prefer one school over the other. There are two local comps near me. One a big chain which some people hate and another a new partner school for another local school. Some people prefer one, some people prefer the other. Kids are pretty much happy either way.

It can take a long time for public perception of a school to change unless there is a major incident. Everyone may talk positively about a school but it doesn't mean that they will have any direct experience of it. Even if they do, whether your child has a good experience or not will largely depend on things entirely out of your or the school's control such as whether she happens to get on with the people in her class & likes her teacher.
We spent a long time deciding about our first choice for DC1. In the end, we went with the popular one but it was for our own reasons. We put the other one down as our second choice knowing we had a high chance of getting it and that was unusual amongst our friends. What became clear, was that they had different priorities and concerns to us. Views on single sex education, diversity, modern foreign languages, number and variety of sports teams were all relevant as were family ties.

We said no to the one virtually all DD's friends went to. It is very highly thought of locally, indeed there seems to be a bit of snobbery attached to sending your child there in some quarters. In her case they were dismissive of her dyslexia diagnosis, but there were other warning bells, a governor publicly criticising the other local comprehensive, a very pushy staff member coming into years 5 and 6 doing a hard sell on the pupils. Most of my friends DCs have been absolutely fine there and they are not snobby at all. But I'm still very glad DD didn't go there.

We are north London, too. DD is year 8. I think that for many of the parents I have spoken to it comes down to (perhaps not acknowledged) racism; they want the white school. And have actually said that to me. But they couch it in more acceptable terms (to them). Things like “people like us”. They just mean white and middle class.

Its so difficult isn't it. I mean schools now are falling apart . You have such high hopes of feeling like its the right place for your child and you leave puzzled at why this crumbling crap hole with chewing gum stained carpets desks with holes gouged in to them has so many peope raving about it. Didnthey not see the missing ceiling tiles and the door that's clearly been kicked ?

Yesbits all down to funding etc not the teachers ir the kids faults but this is what they poor buggers are supoosed to teach and learn in.

I'd say go witg the one the kids seemed happiest in. The building will soon resemble a crap hole after all.

I think some schools are good at marketing and doing a hard sell. I was very impressed by one of our local ones at an open day expecting to hate it, very engaged staff and pupils with a very aspirational message, new bright classrooms. The other mixed school that lots of parents favoured seemed much more chaotic and less ambitious, in an older building. But talking to parents, they were overwhelming positive about school 2 and pastoral care was a particular plus. One parent also told me that school 2 was the only one where all children show prospective parents round, rather than the ones who have been cherry picked for the role.

We didn't end up going for either as put a single sex one and grammar school as 1 & 2 but would did put school 2 above school 1 despite initial impressions.

It can be hard to tell just from a couple of visits, OP. I sent my DD to the distinctly underwhelming bog standard local comprehensive.
The staff were brilliant. One even tutored DD in her house while recovering from chemo, as she was concerned the supply teacher wasn’t up to scratch.
They also arranged for DD to attend part time at a different comp down the road, to study a subject they didn’t cover.
DD came out with 5 grade A Advanced Highers in STEM subjects (Scotland - roughly equivalent to A levels) and went to a RG uni for a maths degree.
Meanwhile, the hugely expensive private school in our area (“stabling for your child’s polo pony provided”!) had dismal exam results.