London's disadvantaged pupils outperform those elsewhere in England

by Guest Mon Jun 23, 2014 7:09 am

Schoolchildren from disadvantaged backgrounds in London are getting better academic results than pupils in the rest of England, according to a new study published on Monday.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) research – in the report Lessons from London Schools for Attainment Gaps and Social Mobility – attributes this to the differences in the mix of pupils attending London's schools compared with other areas of the country and the improved results the children received when they were in primary school.
The study was ordered by the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission, with support from the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) through the Centre for the Microeconomic Analysis of Public Policy at IFS.
The research found that, on the back of rapid improvements in pupil performance in London's primary schools in the late 1990s and early 2000s, disadvantaged pupils had made great progress, especially youngsters from inner London.
Disadvantaged pupils in London achieved substantially better exam results than those elsewhere in England in 2012. 54% of inner London pupils eligible for free school meals achieved five or more GCSEs at A*-C including English and maths, compared with 47% in outer London, 40% in the West Midlands and 30-35% in other regions outside of London who gained similar results.
Disadvantaged pupils in inner London were also more likely to achieve high results, with 13% getting eight or more A*-Bs, including English and maths, compared with 3-6% outside London. The study found that this could be linked to higher levels of participation in post-compulsory education.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jun/23/london-disadvantages-school-pupils-best-uk-ifs

by Guest Mon Jun 23, 2014 8:20 am

I've been discussing this report about poor white kids under-achieving. I believe this has been spun out of context by the media. I looked up the actual report (I'll dig it out later) and what it showed was great differences in areas - the city kids didn't do much worse than non-whites; the areas with the biggest differences were rural, particularly East Anglia, Peterborough I think I remember - and those are areas with a larger proportion of Eastern European kids.

So - when people read "poor white kids" they automatically think "poor white English kids", when in fact a lot of this probably has to do with many East Euuropean kids struggling with several languages, who would of course be at a disadvantage!

by Raggamuffin Mon Jun 23, 2014 8:53 am

I've always said that being "poor" isn't an excuse for doing badly at school, so it's nice that someone agrees with me.

by Guest Mon Jun 23, 2014 3:20 pm

Tesstacious wrote:I've been discussing this report about poor white kids under-achieving. I believe this has been spun out of context by the media. I looked up the actual report (I'll dig it out later) and what it showed was great differences in areas - the city kids didn't do much worse than non-whites; the areas with the biggest differences were rural, particularly East Anglia, Peterborough I think I remember - and those are areas with a larger proportion of Eastern European kids.

So - when people read "poor white kids" they automatically think "poor white English kids", when in fact a lot of this probably has to do with many East Euuropean kids struggling with several languages, who would of course be at a disadvantage!

Has it?

Why do you not present the findings Tess?
I think you are very much speculating

by Guest Mon Jun 23, 2014 3:44 pm

Didge wrote:
Tesstacious wrote:I've been discussing this report about poor white kids under-achieving. I believe this has been spun out of context by the media. I looked up the actual report (I'll dig it out later) and what it showed was great differences in areas - the city kids didn't do much worse than non-whites; the areas with the biggest differences were rural, particularly East Anglia, Peterborough I think I remember - and those are areas with a larger proportion of Eastern European kids.

So - when people read "poor white kids" they automatically think "poor white English kids", when in fact a lot of this probably has to do with many East Euuropean kids struggling with several languages, who would of course be at a disadvantage!

Has it?

Why do you not present the findings Tess?
I think you are very much speculating

Sorry Didge - wrong story! I thought you were talking about the report the other day about poor whites under-achieving.

by veya_victaous Mon Jun 23, 2014 10:55 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:I've always said that being "poor" isn't an excuse for doing badly at school, so it's nice that someone agrees with me.

That really depends on the system... and it still has an effect

while in places like the UK and Australia there are is adequate routes to higher education for the disadvantaged the USA not so much unless your lucky enough to get a scholarship

by Ben Reilly Tue Jun 24, 2014 5:11 am

There's also something to be said for the positives in not being raised privileged. I see so many people who were raised without ever worrying about the basics of survival, and I am charitably ambivalent on how much good it actually did them ... I think it's healthy for people to at least go through a bit of true insecurity in their lives; it lends perspective.

by Guest Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:54 am

In what way are they disadvantaged, when they are given priority over everything, handed every advantage, handed any money they need to get by at school, the councils and schools divert funds from other accounts to pay for teachers who speak their language etc etc. ??

by Tommy Monk Tue Jun 24, 2014 2:00 pm

Maybe because these London schools for years now have been having more money and resources provided to them than elsewhere.... because they are full of The foreigners.....

by Sponsored content

London's disadvantaged pupils outperform those elsewhere in England

London's disadvantaged pupils outperform those elsewhere in England

Re: London's disadvantaged pupils outperform those elsewhere in England

Re: London's disadvantaged pupils outperform those elsewhere in England

Re: London's disadvantaged pupils outperform those elsewhere in England

Re: London's disadvantaged pupils outperform those elsewhere in England

Re: London's disadvantaged pupils outperform those elsewhere in England

Re: London's disadvantaged pupils outperform those elsewhere in England

Re: London's disadvantaged pupils outperform those elsewhere in England

Re: London's disadvantaged pupils outperform those elsewhere in England

Re: London's disadvantaged pupils outperform those elsewhere in England