Recommendations for co-ed boarding schools

There are girls in the 6th form at Shrewsbury already again don't even think it would be described as a particularly selective although I suspect new head will change that.

Kings Canterbury is mainly full boarding with a smallish contingent if day.
The problem is we can all recount stories either positive or negative like PastGraces' about every school. I'm sure there are hideous parents and arrogant children at every school (strangely they seems to go together ). What I would like to know if the OP is really looking for and in fact are describing a super selective or just a selective because I don't see Oundle/Kings/Rugby etc as super selective.

Oakham is 55% boarding, which means that almost half the school will not be there at weekends.

Shrewsbury was highly recommended to us for DS by someone at Harrow.

Shrewsbury goes co-ed from 2013 for the year 9 intake, it is currently co-ed at 6th form.

OP, it could suit your DD to be one of the pioneer girls if she is applying for 2013 entry.

Colleger, with reference your Uppingham links: since when has the Daily Mail been a useful source of infomation in deciding on schools?

In my experience schools go in pairs/clusters, and pupils from within that cluster can often spot others (even if from one of the other schools, iyswim). So I can recognise Oundelians from the way they walk (genuinely!), Uppingham pupils from the attitude (often supported by the girls' hair), Harrow from the attitude, Rugby from the attitude...

Like I say, it may not be as evident to those outside it, but for pupils within the school I think it's a skill something lots of people develop.

Have friends with children at St Edwards & Oundle & both report happy children doing well. Wouldn't say their kids are particularly academic at all - both seem to suit good all rounders well.
ohmygosh, if you are keen on the academic side of things - why not stick to single sex? Definitely my preference - although I realise it is not for everyone.

That is interesting PastGrace. But are you sure that you can spot the actual school from attitude?

I once walked in to an estate agents with DD who chatted a bit and was asked "does she go to private school", but she only goes to the local, non-selective day school

Whilst this has people's attention - any views on Shrewsbury?

Is Kings Cantebury full boarding or practically weekly boarding?

I can see the statistics on number of boarders, but ime there are sometimes unofficial or optional exeats that are bad news for the oversees kids if too many go home and there are no real activities for those that are left.

I agree MrsWT - we were on a family holiday and there was a family we kept bumping into. Within 10 minutes of chatting to them about what they had been doing on holiday my DSis and I had (correctly) predicted Harrow for the boy and Uppingham for the girl. There is an attitude you can pick up on.

But I'm sure you could say that about lots of schools, and it's just that some are more obvious than others.

Sevenoaks is very much weekly boarding. Kings Canterbury almost identical results to Oundle not sure about the riding but plenty of other sport/music/drama etc. Canterbury is a lovely city and IME experience full boarders like being in larger towns/cities.

Another vote for Oundle, although interesting that there is a big Uppingham/Oundle split in terms of votes on here - they are rival schools from a pupil's perspective as well as on paper, although in a nice way (the Oundle/Uppingham first XV rugby has pretty much a full school turn out). My parents looked at Uppingham, Rugby and Oundle for my DSis and ended up sending us both to Oundle. I had a friend who went to Rugby and enjoyed it, but it wasn't right for our family. It fell to Oundle/Uppingham and Oundle just felt much more welcoming, and more geared up for girls.

I would suggest you look round Oundle and Uppingham to see if you like either, even if it is just to give you a point of comparison when looking at other schools. I'd have no qualms sending my child to Oundle - I was far happier there than at uni.

Have to say i haven't much time for Uppingham ,grew up around there and frankly academically it was pretty poor and you could guarantee if there was an arrogant know it all around they went to Upppngham ,not anti public school I boarded at another one as did my siblings .Have to say as well that of my son's friends who went there none have achieved much academically at all,I was quite shocked ,he is though in the year that had the rebellion last year.

Know some people at Rugby ,they seem pleased ,or Oundle or i would rate Oakham very highly,know plenty of delightful all rounders who have done extremely well there .another alternative might be Haileybury or The Leys

Personally I'd only be looking at Sevenoaks and Oundle for co-ed academic rigour.

So what happened to the 41%? How has it gone up to 68%?

I also think you need to get over my comments. Nasty? Really? If the schools that great then you don't need to feel so insulted...

The parental make up of Uppingham shouldnt come as a suprise to anyone,think the peerage bit is a bit over the top but the county set etc is as you would expect,its a traditional school away from the south east,lots of established buyers,good honest chaps,lots of second and third generation buyers,not flash,a good solid school.
Would love to know why people rave about Oakham,not my geog patch,but I understood it was fairly ok,nothing special,,certainly not a patch on Uppingham or Oundle,I know theyve imported a lot of sportsmen but has it really improved that much?

Colleger, that's plain wrong and seems rather mean spirited. Fine if you don't like Uppingham but why try and do it down?

Since you ask, 19.6% of A levels were A. Since 35.6% of all GCSEs were at A and 67.9% at A*/A it really doesn't seem like it's a "foreign contingent coming in at sixth form" - what a nasty way to put it anyway. Furthermore, the pupils getting in to Oxbridge are going to study a wide range of subjects - if there's an organ scholar or two in there then so much the better.

And from what I've heard Sedbergh and Giggleswick are great schools and do very well by their pupils.

"county types/twin set and pearls/boden brigade"

Ok I know its not very representative but I know three families at Uppinghan all talk very highly of it and none have drunk/drugged up children. All are wealthy but lets face it you have to be wealthy to stump up £33 000 PA per child and two of the families have two children there so it goes with the territory I afraid. But I'm not aware of "all the families are über rich and 90% of them you'd fine in thepeerage.com!" although they are what I would call the county types/twin set and pearls/boden brigade.

really? You choose a school based on it's proportion of A/A* vs it's fees ?

Based on geography, and the OP's description of "she is quite sporty and likes to be able to run around.... Also needs to be academic, but with friendly atmosphere and good pastoral support." I would definitely be considering Sedbergh, inspite of the fact that they got no-one into Oxbridge at all last year. It is still on my long list for uber-academic DS, and it is one of the worst option for us geographically. A bright child will do well in most places TBH - unless the pastoral care is not good enough, and from what little I have seen so far I think Sedbergh's is very good. Their ISC inspection report is 6 years old though, so not much use.

It's called the foreign contingent coming in at sixth form and musicians going onto Oxbridge! I would not pay £30k for a school that only gets 41% A/A. I wonder how many we're A's!

41% at Uppingham got straight A/A* at A level and approx 8-10% to Oxbridge. How can Colleger square that with saying 'not great results'? Good grief!

I dont think press reports are a good way of judging.

First in our experience of two schools, schools vary in their approach with one begin very open when pupils are expelled so pupils and parents are aware of the no tolerance policy. The second is much quieter about the pupils it "loses". If you googled both schools and added the word drugs you would be convinced that the first is the more druggy school. I am not sure that is the case.

Second the issue is not really one of whether pupils take drugs, or drink excessively, but how pervasive that culture is. In the two schools I know, and presumably most others, there are identifiable groups who seem "too cool for school", but there is no pressure for others to join them.

For whatever reason drugs seem to be a problem in boys and mixed schools but not really in girls schools. However it is the reverse with eating disorders.