School v countryside

iksbedd

Would you move your kids to a more rural, coastal area where the secondary school is slightly below average, from built up suburbia where secondary schools are just above average?

Would the freedom and clean air offset the slightly worse school setting or am I living in a dream world thinking we'd be improving their lives moving from Surrey to North Devon?

(They are 8 and 5)

oldernonethewiser

I wouldn't base any move on just the factor of a school, many more things to consider.


Cleaner air of course is important, have you measured the quality in both places?


What freedom do they currently not have?

DianneB

Your children are 8 and 5 the situation at both schools could change before they are due to start! I would check out the primary schools in the area you intend to move to, not just go on Ofsted reports, are the children there happy? does there seem to be a lot going on? displays? activities?

You could start by looking at the school websites to get a feel of the place.

I agree with oldernonethewiser that there are other things to consider.

Good luck whichever you decide.

pickledonionspaceraider

Rural / Coastal - without a shadow of a doubt.

City living has changed so much over the last 10 or 15 years - and not for the better

If I had your opportunity, with small kids, yes I would be off, like a bloomin shot

flanker6

Even if a school is graded "below average", it is still possible for children to receive a great education.
The school measures are an imperfect system and vary from region to region.
My advice would be to choose the area that your family are going to enjoy living in the most.

Savvy_Sue

We moved when the boys were 7, 9 and 12.

People kept saying "oh there are some lovely little villages around City". And I just thought WHY would I want to move 3 boys who would be teenagers before I knew it to somewhere with limited public transport? Because inevitably, lovely little villages have limited public transport.

Never even gave schools a thought ...

Disclaimer: I am a Londoner at heart / by birth ...

iksbedd

Savvy_Sue wrote: »

We moved when the boys were 7, 9 and 12.

People kept saying "oh there are some lovely little villages around City". And I just thought WHY would I want to move 3 boys who would be teenagers before I knew it to somewhere with limited public transport? Because inevitably, lovely little villages have limited public transport.

Never even gave schools a thought ...

Disclaimer: I am a Londoner at heart / by birth ...

So you moved TO suburbia, rather than to the country?

goodwithsaving

Devon (particularly in North Devon) isn't as it appears to holidaymakers, especially in the winter, and it's a long way to Barnstaple from the M5 on winter nights. Don't go into it thinking it'll be easier and better in every way, it'll just be different. Only you can decide if that's a good different or not.

Savvy_Sue

iksbedd wrote: »

So you moved TO suburbia, rather than to the country?

As a Londoner, that's what you do!

maman

Personally I'd stick with the town. DH and I fancied a lovely country cottage when our girls were just about to start secondary school. My BIL, who has a boy slightly older, said he regretted it as he was forever driving him back and forth. If he stayed at school for football the school bus was gone. Evenings or weekends he wanted to see his mates.

We bought in the town and never regretted it. The girls could get themselves to and from school and get about by public transport as they got older.

Savvy_Sue

flanker6 wrote: »

Even if a school is graded "below average", it is still possible for children to receive a great education.
The school measures are an imperfect system and vary from region to region.

definitely this: mine attended 3 primary schools in total and 2 of them were definitely not local favourites! However, they did a great job with my bright boys, stretching them where needed but also CARING for them as individuals. Whereas a friend whose children WERE at one of the local favourites always felt it lacked personal attention, so concentrated were they on SATS results.

maman wrote: »

Personally I'd stick with the town. DH and I fancied a lovely country cottage when our girls were just about to start secondary school. My BIL, who has a boy slightly older, said he regretted it as he was forever driving him back and forth. If he stayed at school for football the school bus was gone. Evenings or weekends he wanted to see his mates.

We bought in the town and never regretted it. The girls could get themselves to and from school and get about by public transport as they got older.

Yes, this was my thinking. In fact the secondary school the boys went to after we'd moved had a very wide catchment area, so a few of their friends lived in the back of beyond and lifts were required. But most of them were easy enough for the boys to get there on the 'normal' bus services.

We now live in a suburb of one our major cities. Education was a mess when we moved here: many parents either went private at secondary level or bussed their children out to surrounding counties. Things have changed radically since then: obviously there are still problems, and schools you wouldn't want your child at, but far fewer.

Just re-read the first post: we moved here from a town in Surrey. Our access to green space is just as good, if not better. I think I'd now find Surrey stifling ... too parochial.