Super-selective or all-round?

Also worth being a bit about levels of selectivity at some independents. It's a vital part of the marketing: more emphasis on the 'your child is very special but at the same time privileged to be here

Agree wholeheartedly with this ecxept that 'some' should be replaced with 'most'

Many if the super selective e.g. St Paul's and Winchester also offer generous bursaries to those who meet their admission criteria so the ability to pay is not the key criteria

This applies to a small minority doesn't it and rarely -if ever - covers all fees? And in any case, the notion, nice as it is, completely ignores the fact that the parents need the cultural capital and the social and intellectual confidence to be thinking forward from when a child is pretty young to approach a well-known school, register, sit the pre-test and so on. Many middle class families, let alone working class would take a while to get their heads around all that, including dealing with the social aspect of sending a child to a famous school while their friends stay locally.

And the Eton website:
"Eton has substantial financial provision designed to widen access by enabling boys to come to the school at the normal entry age of 13, who could not otherwise do so,"
"No parents with a talented boy should feel that Eton is necessarily beyond their means."

An extract from the St Paul's website:
"St Paul?s takes pride in giving the best possible education to talented boys, irrespective of their family?s financial circumstances. Each year there are funds available for free and subsidised places. The school benefits from the diversity which our pupils bring."
And the Win Coll website:
"We offer generous bursaries to help boys who would like to study with us."

Many if the super selective e.g. St Paul's and Winchester also offer generous bursaries to those who meet their admission criteria so the ability to pay is not the key criteria.

@happy of course they do. The ability to pay is the key criteria. Everything else is subordinate to that.

Of course you're right to be about how selective many selective schools are particularly in this time of an economic down turn. In many cases bums on seats/ ability to pay is the selection criteria and I know of a least two children who didn't make the "grade" but still got accepted into well known selective boarding schools. But I suspect that the often enormously over subscribed super selectives do not need to do this.

Also worth being a bit about levels of selectivity at some independents. It's a vital part of the marketing: more emphasis on the 'your child is very special but at the same time privileged to be here' and less on the 'thanks for the £33k'.

Yes my DS boards but I tried to explain previously I was describing the all pervading culture that will exist at a super selective whether it be day or boarding. I'm sure if you go to St Paul's it's the same. By its nature this all pervading culture cannot exist in a non selective school. I know that the very bright are likely to do well anywhere and have the same out comes in terms of universities etc but the atmosphere cannot be the same. The $64 000 000 is does it matter or in this case does matter enough to justify a long commute. I genuinely don't know the answer but I suspect not.

Blu - You mean schools can't really guarantee 10 A*? Those lying bastards! Thanks for enlightening me Blu (where is that damned emoticon for sarcasm?)

My income level is such that paying £15k pa just so that DS can mix with the 'right kind of people' is not an option.

But I accept that some parents would rather shop at Selfridges for a white T- Shirt than at Tescos because of the ambience, coffee shop and the absence of mums in sweat pants and Ugg boots.

Can paying £15k a year guarantee A*s in any child, then?
I didn't think the statistics worked like that, you know - the school turns out a very impressive pass rate therefore every child who goes there will achieve the same pass rate. Whereas if you send a highly able child to a school with a mediocre pass average that child will achieve a mediocre pass average....Is that the way you think it works, Pusheed?

@happy your DS's experiences are essentially irrelevant though since he boards. The OP is looking at optimising a set of potential circumstances which include long travel times for 'academic' selectivity. Obviously no fee paying school is truly academically selective since the academic criteria are subordinate to the financial.

Yellotip this is not a point scoring excerise I was describing the life my DS experiences in a very selective school some may want this others dont. It is for the individual to decide. Having experienced it first hand I can see that being in a super selective has many advantages but you have look at the individual child.

My DD1 (13) has an hour and 15 commute each way to and from school. When she got in this afternoon she didn't collapse! She did a bit of recreational fighting with her sibs went out and sang in a music festival, cam back, watched an episode of studio 60 on the sunset strip en famille and wandered off to bed at about 9:30. She loves her bus journey. It gives her quality time with her iPod. When I was at school, because of the way the buses were, I either had a journey home by bus that took about 1.5 hours or a walk home that took half an hour BUT wasn't possibly a bit dodgy in dusk (through woods, along a train track ). I did walk quite often though. I was perfectly happy with the bus though.

Non-selective schools really value their bright pupils

So there is some additional benefit from being one of the bright students that the school is keen to attract? That is interesting....

3 hours is a long commute if unless the journey is part of the fun.

I actually liked it. An hour in the morning and two hours in the afternoon. It was fine. We all liked it.

3 hours is ridiculous and no school is worth that!

It depends on the proficiency of the teaching Colleger.

3 hours is just fine/ too long depending on the child and the circumstances of the commute.

3 hours is too long. Stick with your gut, you can always enrich if need be. Non-selective schools really value their bright pupils so they won't let him slide.

Incidentally OP, I had a two hour commute back from my London day school each day and it was one of the best parts of my day (there was quite a group of us travelling together).

No school in England guarantees a string of 10 A*s.

happy if there's an Oxbridge culture from the moment new boys walk in the door of your very selective very expensive school in Y9, why do you suppose that two thirds don't get in?

I wasn't making the case for a long commute. I was making the case for not choosing a non academic fee paying school. In the OP's scenario I would rather send my DCs to a state school and use the money saved on extra curricular stuff and holidays.

At first my friend didn't particularly care about the non academic aspect. His DD got to mix with 'his kind of people' and that was worth £15k pa to him. But now that he sees what his DD's predicted grades are he won't stop complaining about the school. I can't say that I have much sympathy for the guy.

My DS is at a very selective school here it's cool to be clever all the lessons move at a very fast pace and there is an A/ Oxbridge culture from the moment they walk in the door in yr 9. All non sporty extra curricular activities are exceedingly intellectually stimulating and are well attended. Everything is geared up for and aimed at the very bright. It's not everyone's cup of tea I accept that and I suspect some find it a little serious and feel under pressure. Somehow you have to work out what will suit your DS. Don't listen to those other parents what do they know about your son and what is best for him and your corcumstances go on your* gut instincts.

I think the choice is a no-brainer too.

You'd have to have no brain to put your DS through that long commute.

If he's bright he'll get 10 As at the non-selective AND have a full/enjoyable social life and not suffer from stress/exhaustion.

My DD (13) has a long commute to get to her grammar school (complicated but we live abroad, and it's her only option for going to an English-language school), nearly 1 hour each way (so a good deal less than your DS would have) and she's really suffering physically from it. She went to bed at 5pm this afternoon because she was so tired after the school week and will probably sleep through to tomorrow morning. I would love her to have a shorter journey time, but she likes the school and doesn't want to change.

Our babysitter achieved 10 As / A*s at our local comp, and she was in a year where only 45% got 5 A to Cs (up from 28% last year!). I'm sure your DS will be absolutely fine in his all-rounder school.

That commute sounds grim.