High free school meals percentage - how does this affect the school?

[ElizabethTaylor17]

Hello. I am starting looking at secondary schools for my daughter for a 2027 start. We live near the Wandsworth / Merton border in SW London.

Looking at the free school meals numbers for the schools we are in catchment for, they are around 26-32% which compares to her primary school where the figure is 10%.

The 25-30% figure is similar to my own secondary school where I was bullied for trying hard / wanting to succeed at school and for being “posh” (I’m not!)

I know there will be a range of children from each background who want to work hard. But obviously my own experience colours the decisions I might make for my own children.

For those of you at schools with these levels of FSM, how have you found the experience?

Thank you

It seems very nice from what we have seen so far. I was surprised at the FSM / persistent absence numbers there but some years it has offered places up to 4km away. The other option we would likely get a place at is St Cecilia’s. You are right the results from Ashcroft are outstanding but I’m not sure the ethos will suit my daughter. But then you don’t want to look back and regret not choosing the highly academic school do you…

Higher pupil premium usually means a much better funded school. I think you'll find in populated areas that most of the stats will be similar in regards to fsm and persistent absence. It's the results that count. Not only that but what the results are not for hitting minimum national statistics but the results on students who would have otherwise lost. They may never have had the chance to achieve a grade 6 but instead of a 2 they are steadily achieving 5s.

One of the schools we've chosen and (hope to get into) has a very rough reputation, higher than average fsm/pp and high absence rates. But! In the last 3 years huge amounts of funding has made its way to them, they have new senior leadership, new teaching staff and are actually fully staffed (although I'm aware that can change at anytime). Their results for the last 2 years are higher than the national average, with 95% of students continuing on to higher education and 35% who have achieved higher than a A.

And most importantly the school was incredibly well presented and the cleanest by a country mile, students we happy and chatty. On the open morning the students were engaged, well presented and seemed genuinely relaxed with their teachers and surroundings. Everyone was smiling. The head teacher also fully admitted that it still had it's share of challenges but had put into place things like being a no smart phone school. It felt right. I didn't want it to but it does and I wouldnt be at all upset if this is the one dc goes to.

Hi OP, I used to teach in a school near to that area with very high FSM numbers (and all the range of additional needs, EAL, SEND, looked after children, children with extremely low reading ages). Incredible teachers but I have to say behaviour was absolutely appalling and I wouldn't have wanted my own child to go there. Many lovely and incredible students who worked really hard but were having to tolerate classes with children literally throwing chairs, derailing the whole lesson, children doing all sorts at a really young age (vaping in class, bringing a knife to school for example).

I also think the strict behaviour systems aren't brilliant for some kinds of SEND.

Thanks @ridl14 can I PM you?

We have had the same experience with Elms Academy in Clapham (56% PP and higher absence rate) compared with other local schools like Chestnut Grove and Bolingbroke Academy where PP is much lower. Making it very hard now to choose between these schools given the strength of open day performance and strong academic and discipline focus from Elms Academy!

Primary schools have tiny catchments. So reflect a small well-to-do area. Secondary schools much bigger - and in London you get conservation areas and £2m houses budged up against high density social housing. It's normal.

My Dc went to a S London comprehensive with a PP % considerably higher than the national average, and did really well. Top GCSE and A levels and now higher ed / post grad qualifications from very well regarded Unis.

A wide range of demography is fine if the school uses a setting system well, and if your Dc is high ability there just needs to be a critical mass of other high ability kids. Which is highly likely and completely normal in S London schools.

And you may well find that in a well run school the top sets do well by children on PP, while - shock horror - some of the middle class children are equally responsible for any bullying and may be over-represented in drug use. Those middle class liberal parents who are cool about their children smoking weed - and giving their children an allowance that means they can afford it (looking at you, a v popular and sought after SW?? school)

To be completely honest, schools like RL are almost always segregated in a way. The posher girls stick together and the girls from rougher parts stick together. I am not saying this is RL, but in my experience schools like these often struggle to look after the less affluent kids or the ones without pushy parents etc and those kids don't do so well, but the middle class kids come out with top grades. So you may find that your daughter may well end up with a very similar friendship group to the one she had at primary.
The schools with a very high % of FSM and very good results usually do this by literally taking over completely and assuming the child has nothing at home. Money is pumped into Chromebooks, after school interventions, extreme discipline is usually present and overall the expectation is that they all achieve despite their upbringing or home life. This is often a golden ticket for kids that absolutely need education for social mobility and the discipline and structure they may not have at home.
Neither of these schools would be bad for your child, posher schools tend to fail a certain type of child and that is not your child from your description. But your child would have very different experiences at these schools. Ultimately it depends on what is important to you and at what cost. Every school will have it's pros and cons. This includes privates and grammars.

@StewkeyBlue I agree completely. Liberal middle class parents with loose morals create very problematic kids.

A hypothetical scenario. A high paid single mum lost a job due to redundancy. Her daughter got free meals. That mum got a new job within 5 months and again is high earner. But the daughter continues receiving free meals because once she has been granted free meals she gets it to the end of this level of education.
The conclusion: free meals means nothing when looking at the school without other demographics

In primary schools, all children get free meals in Yr R,1 and 2.
This skews primary FSM numbers as they only have to claim for the remaining three years

Pupils entitled to PP still have to apply in Earlier years for the school to get the extra funding- that's separate to the Universal Free Neil's (which is up to Yr6 in London anyway)

Exactly. Transitional protection was introduced 2018 and ends next year. Not sure how often you will have to renew from next year but the current picture is not representative of the reality at all. Lots of kids that desperately need FSM aren't able to get them.
Universal FSM for kids with parents in UC starts next year which will skew the stats even more as most families on UC have both adults in full time employment unless the child is under 5. I do wonder what will happen to the HAF programme once that's rolled out. It'll be impossible for parents to get spaces.

@ElizabethTaylor17 , free school meals is a crude measure, as explained by @Foxesandsquirrels , but there will be differences between a school with 5% and one with 50% FSM.

I forget the exact number, but I think the London stats are something like:

• 25% on FSM
• ca. 25% primary school kids do not reach the expected level at the end of primary (Y6 KS2 SATs)
• 25-30% of the kids do not get a 4 in GCSE English and Maths

There are good schools with statistics in line with the above.

You are between Merton and Wandsworth. As I said in a recent post

in the area the best state schools tend to be partially selective, in that they allocate some places based on music tests, language tests, art tests, technology tests, or the Wandsworth test, which is a kind of 11+. Ashcroft, Chestnut Grove, St Cecilia, Graveney, Harris Wimbledon all do this.
This contributes to a situation where you have a mix of hugely oversubscribed schools, and many undersubscribed ones. There are 6 undersubscribed state secondaries in Wandsworth, and maybe even more in neighbouring Lambeth, I forget exactly. But then a school like Graveney has a maximum admission distance of 600ish metres, which is less than many primaries.

So the partially selective schools attract a mix of wealthier families who tutor their kids heavily, and families who maybe can't afford much tutoring but still value education and will still try to support their kids as well as they can. This means that the kids whose families tend to value education less are disproportionately represented in the remaining undersubscribed schools. And this is what can create problems with behaviour.

@ElizabethTaylor17 Ashcroft is a Marmite school. People either love it or hate it. Be sure it works for your child. And beware of selection bias: the families who hate that type of school will either not send their kids there, or will move them after the first year.

FWIW My impression was that Hurlingham Academy in Fulham and Harris Wimbledon are schools which achieve good results, despite a more diverse intake (and higher FSM) than Chestnut Graveney etc, but without being as extreme as Ashcroft. Of course other people will disagree. Do your due diligence and try to compare as many views as possible.

Also compare behaviour policies and mobile phone policies. St John Bosco is the only school in the area, AFAIK, which forces kids to put mobiles in pouch (a policy I love). Ashcroft does not allow mobiles at all, which many find too harsh.

And look at subjects offered and whether / when the school divides kids into sets. You can have a school where the average results are not great but the top students are still well catered for.

@BlueMoonIceCream I wouldn't say that FSM means absolutely nothing. It is a very imperfect and crude measure, but the intake at undersubscribed schools in the borough (Ark Putney, St John Bosco College, Southfields Academy, Harris Battersea), where the % of FSM is around 50%, is very different from Graveney, Chestnut, etc.

You mention the hypothetical case of a high earning single parent who loses her job then finds it again after 5 months. I suppose a lot depends on your definition of high earner. Don't they also look at your assets? I think you must have < £16k in savings to qualify. Many high earners in London easily have way more than that in savings.

Thank you @RandomNameGenerator123 I appreciate your input. I think our top choices will likely be Ricards Lodge and St Cecilias, but I will check whether I’m too far from the schools you mention.

I personally like the harsher mobile policies! But as you say these are all factors to consider and indicate why people may make different choices.

I am saying that without taking into consideration other demographic it means nothing. Higher earner is twice the national average salary per person. About assets- we are not talking about criteria to receive benefits. It has no relevancy. We are talking about if people whose child received Free meal is really from very poor uneducated family without focus on education. In today's job market people stay on average 2 years in one role, many are made redundant and that has nothing to do with their education, aspiration and capabilities. A sad state of affairs in this world.

@BlueMoonIceCream Higher earner is twice the national average salary per person

This classification would be most questionable in London, where the average salary is a good 50ish % higher (I forget the exact stats, and the median would probably be more relevant)

About assets- we are not talking about criteria to receive benefits

I am not familiar with all the details. So you can get free school meals even if you have, say, £50,000 in savings?

We are talking about if people whose child received Free meal is really from very poor uneducated family without focus on education

It's not a direct relationship but, combined with the partially selective state schools in the area, it helps paint a picture. Maybe it would be different if there were no partially selective schools in the area. But there are. And this means that the kids from families who care about education are over-represented in partially selective schools, and those from families who don't care and on FSM are over-represented in the undersubscribed schools.

£47,455 is the median salary in London and £37,450 UK wide @RandomNameGenerator123

Yes, once on FSM a child stays until the end of that stage of education e.g. the end of secondary education. And btw there is a certain logic behind why it has been decided this way.

There are many factors to take into consideration when deciding upon school. Academic performance is only one of the many and demographics matters a lot as well as pastoral care etc. And all of that has to relate to a specific child. E.g. if a child is an achiever then perhaps better choice would be to send him her to a school with good results yet if a child has EHCP related to education then maybe a school pushing on results is not a good choice. For a child with psychological issues a TLC relaxed school with a good pastoral care would be better whereas for my son a strict Catholic school is good :) A demographics play the role: is he and she will be isolated as the only child representing that ethnical minority in the classroom? And so on and on. Every child is different and not every parent has ideal choices.

Yes I’ve been looking into this for secondary schools. I’ve noticed schools like the excellent grey coats have a higher number of PP compared to others I’m looking at . They have excellent results .

looking at other church schools, they seem to have a much lower number and the results are very slightly behind.

i wwas also wondering what it really meant …

@Nkmama15 Results can depend on many things. PP funding should be spent directly on the fsm child to improve their attainment. At some schools, these dc are already doing well and are not behind. Therefore the money is like a big bonus. Other schools have significantly more needy fsm dc but could have fewer of them. If low attaining, it’s impossible to get these dc to be high attainers. So the starting position of the dc, as well as fsm eligibility, makes a difference to exam results. As does attendance at school and parental backing. Just because a child is on fsm, (parent opting to work part time but highly educated) doesn’t mean all these dc are low achievers. Far from it. Some might be forces dc too.

All primary school children in London currently get free school meals anyway (Mayor of London initiative); therefore not every eligible family claims them (although claiming enables schools to get additional funding through pupil premium). This may explain the difference between primary and secondary claim rates.

Schools still need parents to apply for fsm if eligible though - schools need the pp money.

Isn't it quite common numbers?

It's sounds high for the area, what's the LA average?

Yes, but needing them to apply vs getting them to actually do it (especially if there are additional barriers for the parents such as limited English or learning difficulties) is another matter. I have enough trouble getting consent e-forms for school trips done, and they are literally a single tick box...

I think I am surprised because the houses in this area are £1m+, as they are everywhere in inner London

Loads of dc in those houses won't be going to that school. What school is it?