Do parents improve schools?

[justanotherdaduser]

I see this frequently mentioned that 'sharp elbowed and pushy' middle class parents can improve schools by demanding better service. Often it is implied that all else equal, an influx DCs of such parents will improve state schools at no extra cost to tax payers.

Does this actually happen? Has anyone experienced such transformation triggered by parents?

My own experience, albeit with a data size of exactly one, is nothing like that. DC went to a state primary that for 7 years remained firmly in 'Requires improvement' mode or worse, went through 3 headteachers.

Concerned parents, many middle class (though not all), made no difference whatsoever. The school as an institution had an inertia of its own, firmly set in its ways, low academic expectations from its students, and little incentive to change based on parental pressure. Those who could, left the area over the years and bought houses elsewhere. Is our experience an exception? Were we not middle class or sharp elbowed enough?

The HT at one of the big London comprehensives certainly thinks so.

Built in the 50s, by the 70s it was somewhere you avoided - bit stabby and terrible results - and was in special measures by 1998.

Head's way of turning it round were to remove the catchment area, bring in music, sports, maths and art scholarships and advertise widely and heavily in middle class areas. They then got a £30 million redesign on the building.

By 2013 it was one of the most popular schools in the UK, and is now one of the most over-subscribed schools in London and Ofsted Outstanding.

HT has done a number of interviews talking about what he did to turn the place around.

He pulled it up enough that we very happily send DD there despite a very long commute (I would definitely include myself in sharp-elbowed middle class). DD's friends are all solidly middle class with degree educated, aspirational parents (and a very wide range of backgrounds outside those factors).

You description of the school is way off beam - no school is like that. It is is if you think it has some sort of "spirit" or self determination of its own. A school is made up of the people in it, and the people in it would have had at least one hundred percent turnover in the time frame you mention. So I would say it is your perception and expectations that are stuck in a rut

Not really no. Yes a middle class catchment means there's likely to be a well funded parents association which means that the school has more money to buy things such as new equipment, fund new buildings/renovations, increase the amount of school trips etc etc but it won't fix things like teacher retention, teacher wages, burnout, lack of teachers etc.

Pushy middle class parents might be able to fix aesthetics of a school and demand changes such as behaviour policies (which still need to actually be implemented by the head) but they can't fix/solve systematic issues.

No because things like Ofsted, crappy national curriculum and funding impact schools more than parents.
I'm sick of reading that private school parents can swoop in and create amazing changes in schools.
93% of kids go to state schools so why can't their parents create that change now rather than waiting for an influx of a few private parents?
Rich MC parents send their kids to state schools, why haven't they wrought changes?

It's a valid point - there was churn of staff, three head teachers in few years, and some teaching staff too, but well below 100%.

I guess from my point of view it remained stuck because ofsted's rating remained stuck for the duration DC went there, pupil's average score in reading, writing and maths remained consistently below local authority average, and progress score in reading, writing and maths remained negative. So despite churn, and concern from parents (many of them admittedly were leaving too), the educational outcome produced by the school did not improve.

Which school is this - would be an interesting case study to look at - I think it’s interesting and have known schools go up and down.

Kingsdale Foundation School in Southwark

It's not perfect, but when you read the newspaper articles about what it was like and then look at it today... huge difference.

I dont think parents can improve teaching practice, safeguarding practice, leadership or things like that.

I think cohorts can change a school a bit. My sons school got 'better' because the better school was full, so people had to go his school and it filled up. When a school isnt full, they can end up taking in all the children at risk of, or having been excluded from elswhere, so you end up with lots of struggling children. Not full classess also cause funding issues, so money gets too stretched.

I guess it depends on the numbers. One pushy middle class focused mom/dad isn’t going to have much impact on a school of 1000, but 10 in a tiny or 50 in a larger school certainly can.
letter writing, political lobbying constant push can make a difference.
threats of police and legal involvement can make a difference.
teachers and students are entitled to be safe and able to do what a school day involves without distraction and disruption.

I wonder whether this is perception based then rather than borne out in the data.

Kingsdale Foundation School has actually had a negative progress score with their latest cohort. The children have made less progress through their time from Y7 to Y11 than the national average and noticeably less than average progress made by other local schools. The children perform well but it could be argued that part of that is due to higher attainment when starting at the school and, if they school were doing the right things, they should be creating higher attaining children than they are.

but there has been 100% turnover in the children, and the fact that there hasn't been in the staff suggests that it is a better than average school

I agree.

I don't think parents can change what happens in a school by being demanding. But cohorts of interested and supportive parents will help make a school a lot more attractive to ambitious teachers.

If you have the choice between Outstanding school with lots of middle class parents with kids who are in the main well-behaved and keen to learn, you are more likely to apply for the post there, than at the Requires Improvement school down the road with a cohort who are there (if they are there) because it's what they got landed with because forgot to submit CAF or excluded from everywhere else. (Massively generalising there).

Where I saw a big difference was at primary level between the kinds of teachers we had in London (young, ambitious, still pretty bushy tailed, lots doing Masters degrees, basically felt a bit like a finishing school for future super-heads) and those my siblings' kids had out in a rural location (all in their 50s, been there forever, moaned about any changes that ever came in, jaded with the system and their jobs). The SATS result differences were stark - and yet the London school was massively more deprived: 72% FSM, 65% EAL, 28% SEN at the time.

Concerned parents, many middle class (though not all), made no difference whatsoever.

IME true as well but heads can over years.

DC secondary had turned round but then it all went with next head - and those middle class parents who were willing to give it a go - like us - now avoid if they can.

The rest of us with kids already there and no good options try and get our kids though with home support and get them somewhere better as soon as we can. So wouldn't surprise me if results drop further in next few years.

If they'd kept on the upward swing - they were changing local perceptions so over time may have found their take being more and more middle class as it became less and less a school to avoid.

@CancertheCrab
but there has been 100% turnover in the children, and the fact that there hasn't been in the staff suggests that it is a better than average school

Sorry, I am probably missing something; I didn't understand.

If the cohort in each year are similar to the last one, and the progress score is negative each year, how does it follow that the school is better than an average school? Shouldn't an average school produce a zero progress score?

At our primary we had several SAHMs who appointed themselves fund raisers and raised between £35k & £40k a year for the pta.

It made a huge difference.

In a school of just over 1k I don't think parents can effect change. The parents I know who aren't impressed with schools, leave! I think at smaller primaries where there tends to be more parent interactions and ? More parent governors? Then things can change. But by the time kids reach secondary school, there is such a huge range of parent / guardians that any change is driven by the principle / LEA. I don't know any parents at dc secondary, whereas I knew lots at primary. The school does sometimes put out an SOS to help raise funds for some departments, and will do surveys on things like school lunches/ extra curricular activities / uniform etc, but if there is a PTA I'm not aware of it, and dc have been there for some years. It is a very good school though, and the SLT listen to feed back. So I think what really makes a good school is if the senior leadership team take time to consult and listen to parents (they may not be able to implement parent/ guardian requests) but I think communication is key.

Yes at primary I think parents can make a massive difference, but not at secondary.

Wish app had edit,
Not so much difference at secondary, left out the 'so'!

You are right, something like this happened eventually in 'our' school too. The classes were not full, all parents wanted to send their DCs to a nearby 'outstanding' primary, eventually the school switched from a four form year group to three form year group and became part of a MAT. Becoming an academy doesn't seem to have made much difference- last year's results were no better than previous years.

Intake reflects the parents. So kids who can read quickly on entry. Our primary improved maths sats from average to over 50% getting exceeding. Just by having maths apps and cgp workbooks, basically through homework.
If you get more kids whose parents refuse to do homework..

I think that parents, mostly through their children, do change schools. I live in a private estate, there is a very busy main road, then a council estate. Each estate has its own primary school, the school on the other side has a better building, more funding, and higher staff ratios, by far. But our school excels by a mile. 99% of parents are supportive of the school, we do the homework, support policies, very busy PTA who raise thousands a term, the kids arrive well rested, fed and ready to learn.

The parents at the other school have more difficulties so can't necessarily engage with the school so well, it shows both in the outcomes of the school, and the people who choose it. I have a friend who works there and she says the attainment levels are miles apart.

It's desperately sad and unfair, but I think it definitely matters.

“Head's way of turning it round were to remove the catchment area, bring in music, sports, maths and art scholarships and advertise widely and heavily in middle class areas. They then got a £30 million redesign on the building. “

How is that turning around a school?
That’s replacing a school.
Bring in the scholarships and get funding for a new building on the same catchment.
Then come back and talk about improving a school.

But the question was do 'sharp-elbowed middle class parents improve schools'

The school is in the same location with the same HT... what changed was bringing in a different set of parents by removing the catchment and offering 'bribes' to get them there (scholarships are worth £1k a year in specialist tuition and other goodies).

You wouldn't get that same cohort if you had the old catchment - and the school had spent best part of 50 years failing on the old catchment.

bit stabby and terrible results

What does a bit stabby mean?

By 2013 it was one of the most popular schools in the UK, and is now one of the most over-subscribed schools in London and Ofsted Outstanding

Isnt one reason Kingsdale is so oversubscribed is because of the admissions process & the general lack of schools in that area?