30 years ago, it was in a 'run down area'. I keep reading on this site that most of the parents who are spending a fortune on their properties to be 10 yards from the school and tutoring their kids don't want to take a 'risk' on a school that isn't outstanding. They aren't the same parents that were around when the school was awarded an outstanding status but instead bought into the hype at a hugely inflated price.

Spot on scientist!

I really don't know what the fuss is about. by no means can this be a bad article. yes, i'm sure the above poster is right but let's see it for what it is - one of our local state schools has been featured in a magazine that is read by millions. It can't be a bad thing. And that's great for the area, the community, for the teachers at honeywell who do a great job, for the parents, for the kids.

yes i am a honeywell parent so of course i'm biased and i do think obviously we live in a very wealthy and fortunate part of london so i'm sure that's why they featured it but i really don't think any of this is meant to be taken seriously.

rant over!!

Spot on ^ above. Exactly as I see it too.

If you plonked Honeywell School lock, stock and barrel into a rundown area of London surrounded by social housing and lacking the trappings of wealth typical of its current affluent location, would it still make the Tatler list ? I doubt it, partly because Tatler wouldn't tend to feature locations in which it has no obvious readership.

Parents in the know appreciate that it is in large part the local community, the children's relatively aspirational and comfortable backgrounds and their parents' wish to send many on to selective secondary schools which help drive the results and ethos of Honeywell. The majority of children in years 4 upwards have private tutoring, which is the only way that most of them could catch up with their peers in the private sector and be able to impress the selection panels of the selective schools their parents are aiming for at the next stage. It is also the case that Honeywell parents raise huge amounts of money through endless PTFA organised events, which in turn feeds into the school budget for enhancements, repairs, new equipment etc. All of these benefits would not be evident in such quantity were the school in a deprived area.

In conclusion, it is very hard to judge Honeywell purely on the basis of its teachers and governors, so one would have to guess that the parents play a very large part in its desirability.

Not sure how much more gentrified that area could get. Houses start at £1.5million on Honeywell Rd...[/quote]

same size houses are 2m+ in Barnes or Fulham.

I always understood it as describing when wealthier people move into a more run-down area, do up the houses and price those on lower incomes out of the market. Reckon they are well past that round Honeywell way...

Does access to enough money to buy in the area equal gentry these days? In the days when we had village gentry it is true that the children of the gentry would have gone away to school, probably. However, during their holidays they returned to a mixed community in which their parents played a full (if patronising in the real sense) part. Gentrification now seems to mean making sure an area only serves a narrow social class. I'm glad I live in a mixed community.

excitera wrote: I can see the positives - more gentrification for the local area...

Not sure how much more gentrified that area could get. Houses start at £1.5million on Honeywell Rd...

Well said wasateacher.

It is unfortunate that education really suffers because of ill informed judgements about schools, such as the Tatler list. No-one so far has produced any evidence that the schools on the list are good schools - many are at least partially selective.

It has nothing to do with the quality of the teaching or the learning in schools and everything to do with, effectively, narrow minded prejudice.

If you really want to know which schools are the best look up the intake, then look at the progress made by pupils (value added score). If you want your children to grow up in a socially selective bubble, then rent a house near one of the over subscribed "popular" schools but bear in mind that the success your child makes in school has more to do with the family s/he is born into that the school s/he attends.

One of the comments was sensible: visit schools and find out which one your child feels comfortable in.

It's not like for like is it? It's a particulary random list based Nationally. So if they produced a parallel list for tennis and said say Telford Park was No.1 and say Foxhills was No. 2 and didn't mention me, then no I wouldn't feel affected by that.

If however if was comparing like for like on a local basis using criteria from the National Governing Body, then it would be completely different.

Julian - if tattler or similar magazine produced a list of good tennis coaches for families, intermediates, beginners , social tennis etc would you want to be on it - or if you are deemed excellent near the top ? Or would u prefer that other local tennis coaches were praised and you were ignored? If u made the list would your customers be proud of you? Would clapham common be proud of you?
Additionally would it help people decide their choice of tennis coach?

I've previously answered that local people and Ofsted would be a far better judge of the or any school. Not a aspirational lifestyle magazine which openly admits it normally wouldn't consider state schools. Why do you think that it? The premise is fatuous.

Why is it NOT great?
Why so negative? This is such an odd response to something positive. Positive for the kids, the kitchen team, the teaching staff, the SENCO team, the heads & anyone associated with the school. Tatler obviously have a criteria of some sort.
Let's start the new year being positive!
I think it's great & I know a lot of people who do too.