Super strict schools like the Swan in Oxford?

[Deisogn]

We went to see the swan school in Oxford and came away fairly horrified. The no talking in the corridors or halls seemed fairly extreme. The punishment for talking to a friend was isolation which seemed harsh and not in the best interest of the child? I do understand trying minimise disruption but at what cost? They don't stop emotionally developing at 11. Surely all those soft skills come from unstructured interactions. It seems like it would produce very brittle kids and SEN need not apply or they'd spent the entire time in isolation. I wondered what others thought of the super strict school model?

@TizerorFizz I think we're probably in agreement!

I.know several folks choosing Swan over Cherwell even when they're in Cherwell priority catchment - so it obviously really appeals to some. Will be interesting to see what happens when Cherwell inevitably gets re-ofstedded soon....

I don't know either of these schools but I definitely think it would suit DD (only year 3) who has asd. I know she will find the transitions and disruption difficult and will struggle with 'banter' in class. I also think the structured approach to lunchtimes would be great for her.

Instinctively I hate this kind of approach, but I think it would suit her. I do agree that you can expect a very rules based approach to behaviour without being too rigid about uniforms or hair though.

[quote TizerorFizz]@bluetowers
As I understand it, there were no options nearby for some parents. They were offered schools that were not in Oxford! So presumably parents would choose this school over travelling for miles as it’s walkable.

Army cadets for some would be the equivalent of hell. If takes all sorts but many DC don’t like being barked at and existing in regimented schools. Chatting with friends in corridors simply isn’t the same as being unruly. I would anticipate most of the Oxford children in this catchment would be capable of good behaviour.

Ready to learn is a perfectly acceptable aim. Silencing children in all other areas is not acceptable in my view. Of course Michaela has very good PR - would you expect the head to ever say she was maybe mistaken? Of course not. Also you never know if these well supported DC would have done just as well elsewhere. The more challenging DC barely gets near the place![/quote]
Is that what you know or what you think?
Lots of sweeping generalisations in your post.

? @50ShadesOfCatholic
Did you read other posts? Or just mine? Try reading the whole thread maybe? Do you object to what I said about Michaela? Surely talked about as much as Eton? (Yes - that’s a guess!)

@TizerorFizz

? *@50ShadesOfCatholic* Did you read other posts? Or just mine? Try reading the whole thread maybe? Do you object to what I said about Michaela? Surely talked about as much as Eton? (Yes - that’s a guess!)

More assumptions... 👌

@50ShadesOfCatholic
Have you had a humour bypass?

Why so rude? Why not just converse convivially? Is it because I challenged you?

For whomever asked, in the 2021 allocations:

Swan school - intake of 180
1st preference: 161 (of which 145 offers made)
2nd preference: 271
Last place offered 3.1 miles away (which shows that people are applying from far away for their own reasons -74 children were out of catchment)

For comparison, Cherwell - intake of 270
1st preference: 378 (All offers made from 1st preference)
2nd preference: 259
Last place offered 1.6 miles away (None from out of catchment)

The Swan pan was 120 in 2920. Not sure we have 2021 figures yet. See attached from Oxfordshire.

The figures I gave are from the OCC website, 21/22 intake is definitely there.

At the bottom
www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/residents/schools/list/4016

@TizerorFizz

The PAN is 270 children at The Cherwell. That is a lot of places. Their admissions criteria is fairly standard. Catchment is operated as a final decider and that’s normal for Oxfordshire. As it is in Bucks where I live. However they get more applicants than places so inevitably people are disappointed.

The thing is, the North Oxford kids probably can get into Cherwell. Just because the Swan catchment is broad, doesn't mean that the kids applying to it (in order to get a reasonable place) won't be predominantly from one side of the catchment.

The temporary buildings for the Swan the first year it opened, were on the Cherwell school site.

I think some of the way the Swan was set up was deliberately setting out to be a contrast to other schools available. (And it and Cherwell are part of the same MAT) So, Cherwell is non-uniform, Swan will have a uniform, etc etc.

If there are enough school places for children to have real choices, having a variety of school approaches makes loads of sense. When places are still tight this can cause problems rather than help, I suspect.

In terms of long-term planning, I think the timing of Oxfordshire changing from first/middle/senior school to primary/secondary roughly coincided with what turned out to be the low point in birth rates some 18-20 years ago. So they reduced school sites (eg Milham Ford sold to Oxford Brookes) and, probably like other areas, have been slow to recognise the need to expand and play catchup.

Those figures indicate rate 90% ish of those getting Swan wanted it as first preference. As PP said, they are offering two different types of ethos.
Odd that it's same MAT tho as MAT normally dictates common policies & ethos ( assuming PP correct)

Actually yes RLT MAT has large number of schools and another high joining. Looks more like a conscious decision to allow the schools to have own individual ethos & cultures

@Pythonesque
Yes. I can see all of what you say. However it’s not possible for all who want Cherwell to get it so I’m sure they will apply to The Swan instead of being sent to schools much further away. So I don’t think some parents get much choice at all. It’s strict or miles from home quite possibly. Not much of a choice really.,

Interesting pan has gone from 120 to 180. I’m assuming this reflects expansion of buildings. Once a school expands, traffic in nearby roads goes mad! My local secondary modern doubled in size and it’s been awful for local residents. Especially as an infant school nearby did the same!

According the Swan data, very few who only put it second got it. It was mainly people's first choice. So no different from the National picture re how many get their 1st choice etc

Hello,
Not trying to convince anyone of any particular view as I see both sides on this. My kids both attend this school and they do not experience it at all in this oppressive way. Silent corridors mean there is no bullying or physical aggression between lessons (my recollection of school was constant horrible aggressive bullying from girls in corridors between lessons). The kids understand the rules pretty quickly and tend not to break rules if they don't want to get a detention. They do talk quietly if no teachers around. A number of SEN kids with behavioural and emotional issues transferred from primary and have settled really well. The structure seems to suit them. Another local school has a reputation for being more relaxed/free and easy but the same kids end up in detention and isolation, etc. I don't think the system is any different - it is just applied in stricter schools. It's a calm environment; teachers are kind and they have fun at school. By contrast, friends with kids at some other local schools say a number of kids spend entire lessons on their phones. There is constant disruption to learning. The ones who want to concentrate do the lessons, the others watch stuff on youtube or worse. Very low expectations of children whose parents already have low expectations of them. At our school, they seem to really believe that all kids can achieve and work towards this. They accept no excuses, because no excuses will be made later in life. But they are kind and calm and there is no shouting or vicitmising. It is not perfect and some kids don't like it, but neither is it the Stepford school. The kids are happy and playful like in other schools. I have been into a number of local schools to give talks and my impression is that kids are more arrogant in the less strict schools, and less respectful of adults and visitors. I didn't have a choice of school but I'd choose this one over the rowdy ones.

@Susie202 How do you rate the Swan academically? I’m planning to put it down for DD1.

@KleineDracheKokosnuss So far very good. They seem very ambitious and there are some very able kids there and the school seems to rise to the challenge (and the students!)

@Susie202
Other then hearsay ( in order to back up the reasons for wanting a strict school) what evidence do you have about DC watching U tube in class and being on their phones 100 % of the time? One would truly think this is hyperbole. I think most oppressed DC are quiet and outwardly respectful. It’s conditioning. People choose a school because they want this ethos. It’s self fulfilling. Of course these DC act as they do. Whether it’s prep for the wider world is another matter. Conversation is very important. Having healthy disrespect when something is truly wrong is also vital in this day and age. Not accepting that older folk are right all the time is definitely vital. I prefer my DC with more spark.

Low level constant disruption is a major reason why lower to middle ability kids do not make good progress. Teachers spend masses of time dealing with it. Parents underestimate the impact largely because they know their kids are like this.

@cansu
That’s not necessarily correct. Lower ability children suffer the most disruption and in many schools make the worst progress. The main things that affect the progress made by DC are high quality teaching and home life. How SLT deal with difficult children is of course important but it’s not the main reason why DC underperform. Continual supply teachers, poor curriculum planning and poor teaching are most often highlighted by Ofsted. In some schools poor behaviour is an issue but most schools never allow phones in class or poorly behaved DC to continually disrupt. Schools, in the main, don’t put up with this.

I disagree. I have been teaching for over 20 years and see the impact that low level chatting and messing about have on kids who need the quiet atmosphere to make sense of what they are learning. I have a lovely class full of children for one subject of various abilities. They are not on phones. Most people would judge their behaviour to be good in general. They are however chatty and need lots of management which does interfere with the time I can give to individuals. I couldn't for example sit with one student for ten minutes to help her whilst the others get on without kids getting off task or being noisy. I recently had the opportunity to work for ten mins with one of weaker send students while the others were doing a drama workshop. Her whole demeanor was better. She did better in the session. She told me it is easier to think when it is really quiet. It really struck me how noisy and busy our schools are. Learning is easier when there is calm and space to think and to ask questions. The super strict schools provide this.

@cansu

You don’t teach in a great school then. You really would not expect children to have 10 minutes of your time as one to one coaching in class regularly, surely? What happens if three pupils need that? Rather sad the child couldn’t do the drama workshop. I fear you are in a school that doesn’t suit you.

it’s still mostly lower ability children who underperform.

You are so full of assumptions and the concern to prove someone else wrong.
The child has asd and sensory difficulties.
She asked to leave the room as it was too noisy and was making her uncomfortable. Should I have forced her to stay? I took advantage to work with her one to one hardly a bad thing to do.

Yes I work with kids individually. It is however not always silent whilst I do so. For some kids this means that it is not ideal conditions for learning. Some kids are easily distracted. If you have very strict rules it is easier for all kids to concentrate on their learning. I am not sure what is contentious about this or why you want to denigrate me for saying this.