Non-Hothouse-y Girls' Boarding Schools

Yes, thanks for your thoughts. It seems that girls' schools are referred to in this way, yet not boys' or co-ed - as if the results gained by Westminster or St Paul's boys are gained somehow by "effortless superiority" whereas girls need to be, or are "hot-housed", which seems to be a pejorative term as it appears frequently to go hand in hand with reports of undesirable behaviour on the part of the girls and/or school management. Would you agree? Why does this affect girls' schools and not boys'/co-ed, or am I mistaken?

A hot house pressurises for results. Some unpleasant things can go on, such as removing children unlikely to achieve - then taking in bright girls nearer the exams. Hence those shiny set of exam results. However, some girls respond well to pressure and do bloom in such a greenhouse. Whereas some just wither in the corner and are tossed on the compost.

interesting question, regina. Personally, I would regard 'hot-house' as a school which pursues academic excellence at all costs - so there would be DC who find achieving that easy, who probably do also do lots of sport and other activities, and others who are doing little else than academic work in order to keep up. Overall, though, I think it is about attitudes. I went to a (day) school which I would categorise as a hot house for a year, and then (because my parents moved) moved to a far more laid back and more rural school. When I met up with some of my classmates from the first school at university (and these were the group that had met the school expectations and got the places they wanted) they all hated each other - because they had been pitched against each other and encouraged to compete all the way through school. Coming from my second school, where it was very much 'us against the world' with no sense of internal competition, I was shocked and saddened, and very glad I had escaped.

Waffly, I know, but does that go some way to answer the question?

What exactly are we talking about when we describe a school as "non-hothouse" please? Would people mind sharing what they mean?

Does it mean schools which are not at all selective and which might decide that it is best for their pupils to develop other achievements, or is it schools which are selective but which do not push pupils to gain a full set of A* grades if they would prefer to be doing drama or sport?

I am curious as I wonder what girls who board and are therefore in school a lot do in a "hot-house". is the supposition that they work day and evening and do few extra activities and have little down-time? Or that they do a lot of activities and have free time in a "non hot-house" but rather less academic work? It seems to me that the terms are used to describe schools which are essentially selective and non-selective but I wonder if I am correct?

Yes, my OH boarded and grew up independent and a man who can iron. What's not to like. He had a loving mother who still adores him - but she had to work. He thrived at boarding school....

I agree that Queenswood, St Mary's Calne and Tudor Hall sound great - we send girls to all 3 from the Prep school where I work and they seem very happy there.

Another to consider could be Thornton College in Buckinghamshire. It's not famous and I think there are far more day girls than boarders but it is a boarding school and specialises in the 'delicate flower' type girls. It only goes to 16 though.

I would avoid Roedean and Wycombe Abbey, they seem like the most hot housey places.

Agree with byah a quiet girl would thrive at a local school with friends and family close to hand and a community support.

Here we go again .... all this complicated talk and denial of the best way to send your child away to live in an institution..."Meant to stop at two" asks for the best place for "a quieter girl to thrive". It is called HOME ... that is where she can receive love and real care not living without her family in a school where, even if the care is good, and not as described by "saidthe spiderwithahorridsmile" (and that is not the only school with staff like that) it is still the deprivation of living away from home.

Heathfield is good, def consider!

How about Heathfield, Ascot? Taught there for 6 six years and it's a lovely place. Full boarding only so lots on at weekends.

In response to the question about Queenswood:

I don't want to say too much or out myself

but my experience as a member of staff there meant that I would not let my children within 200 yards of the place

The youngest girls were treated quite brutally with regard to their homesickness - very impersonal, not allowed to call home for first two weeks, trailing from lesson to lesson in floods of tears with nobody looking after them

the "pastoral care" aspect of the boarding is done by completely unqualified and inexperienced casual staff (one year contract, gap year type of job) who are regarded as servants most of the time - they do the hoovering and change the tea towels and empty the bins - but they are in sole charge of the girls for periods like bedtimes and overnight, which is a disaster waiting to happen. I knew of one who used to sneak her boyfriend in overnight when she was supposed to be on call for homesick new 11yos.

Another member of staff (in charge of the pastoral care boarding assistants) had a background in geriatric residential care and told me once with great glee about an old man with dementia who had sworn at her, so she took his dirty socks off and stuffed them in his mouth. Is that someone you want taking care of your child?

There are more and more things, but I will leave it there I think.

Just don't.

St Mary's Calne? i know it is academic, but it is truly amazing, very all rounder...

My parents are agressive assertive atheists and sent DB to Leighton Park very happily - Quaker schools are more than fine for those of any (or no) religious affiliation.

If I felt any need for organised religion, I would definitely tend towards the Quakers, purely because (IME) they are unique in their lack of need to ram their beliefs down other people's throats. If you are not religious, I would definitely favour a Quaker school over a CofE one.

Second St Leonards Mayfield.

Are you wanting full boarding or weekly as it makes a great difference to people's recommendations.
eg. we looked at Queenswood but there weren't many full boarders

Queenswood is great in my opinion, my sisters went there, always wished I did. My niece is starting next year!

Queenswood is a hellhole

Or at least it was when I worked there ten years ago

please don't send your dd to those people

Tudor Hall sounds great! Heard lovely things about it.

Mayfield? It is essentially Catholic but has plenty of non-denoms too. I have nieces there, who are delightful girls, achieving well and are very happy. Although one of my DDs chose a "hot house" for herself instead!

The Quaker element is not 'religious' in the sense that you probably consider. There is a collect service which means silence for a period of time. No preaching, no rites. Amazing to see a huge hall of teenagers just thinking, but it works beautifully to make a calm and happy atmosphere. That really is the ethos - there is very little talk about God. Some Quakers, like me, don't even believe in God! It is a welcoming and open society - that's why it is called a Society of Friends, rather than a religion.

Where the Quaker element comes in is very important: they value fairness, kindness and as someone said earlier, respect every child as an individual rather than a exam-passing number on a page. Lots of extracurricular actiivities and my daughter can stay there until 9 every evening. She does prep, sees her friends and can join clubs.

I think it's worth a look. Grounds of lovely and they have a new young Headmaster with enormous vision and intellect.

Quaker schools tend not to be religious, per se. Woldingham is very definitely Catholic so not likely to be your thing.

Why not consider Woldingham - lovely. For co-ed try St Edward's, Oundle, so many to choose from!