Any regrets AFTER being at a super selective school?

I went to a very competitive grammar school many years ago. I was naturally bright but lazy and inclined to do the bare minimum needed to get by, so I thrived in an environment where 'the bare minimum' was actually quite a lot. But, there were a lot of kids there, of all abilities, who were inclined to work very hard and maybe were not the most resilient, and ended up making themselves quite ill. I hope it's different now as mental health is taken much more seriously, but even so I don't think those schools are right for everyone regardless of academic ability.

My DC are young now, but I would definitely consider sending them to such a secondary if they turn out to be bright enough and have the right disposition. It's just about knowing what's right for your child.

I have experience of a dd at a grammar and a ds at a super selective grammar. Both in their own ways have been the right choices for my children. But it completely depends on the actual school and the children in question. My dd, for example, probably would not have flourished at a super selective but has done well at her recently graded 'requires improvement' grammar school.

At the SS school my ds is at, there is a high percentage of pupils from private primary schools who have been tutored to the hilts prior to arriving at the school. My ds came from a very low key tiny primary school - we did get him a tutor for one hour a week in the 10 month lead up to the 11-plus but he had substantially less input than many of his classmates at his Secondary and is therefore above average in his class and doesn't have to work hard or do much homework in order to keep on top of things...but I know of other dc who are not coping and parents who call the school out for being very pressurised. We don't see this at home for now so it all depends on school and child...

SS schools aren’t really about the grades per se. Most very bright kids would ace their exams wherever they went (barring serious disruption/ very poor teaching). It’s about the whole environment, being in a fast-paced school where it’s cool to be clever, and where there is a lot of intellectual stimulation (and very little bad behaviour).

It would definitely be hard if you were over-tutored and just scraped in. In fact I don’t know why parents do this as it’s totally counter-productive. Who wants to be struggling at the bottom of the cohort?

This environment suits my son down to the ground and he is absolutely thriving. My daughter would have hated it. Horses for courses.

I keep hearing this 'spoon fed' comment regarding private schools. What does it mean? Do you mean 'taught'?

My son went to a main stream school im not rich.
But he learned just as well as any other school.
Nothing different only the price.

Which was my point, @TempleOfBloom - EDs can spring from anywhere where there are girls who are predisposed.
It's my specialist subject at the moment, sadly.

I went to one and it was nothing like that. It was almost the other extreme - very hot on pastoral, extracurricular, etc, but actually not pushy enough about things like Oxbridge, careers. It was in a fairly rural place and although the intake was fairly middle-class, I don't mean that in a Home Counties way - no parents had London jobs, we were too far from that. More like there wasn't really anyone from a council estate, that kind of middle class. So I think there was no sense of ambition and the wider world, just a happy little backwater where we were well-taught and content. I don't remember anyone getting particularly stressed... Maybe some did, but it certainly wasn't the culture.

One of my dcs move from a non-selective comp to a super-selective grammar for 6th form - biggest mistake of her life (compared to our experience with other dc of staying in the same comp 6th form). The teaching was no better and the pastoral support non-existent and the prepping for Oxbridge was way better at the comp than the grammar. Plus as my dd put it - there was way more stress and angst for no better results (and she was horrified at how many girls had taken less GCSES and given up languages because the school had made them drop them in order to avoid them pulling the school grade average down). My youngest dc has offers from two local super selectives to move for sixth form and will only move if his current comp stops running any of the subjects he wants to do for A level (and even then I would be really looking to see if he would be better off changing subjects rather than moving from the lovely, supportive comp).

I went to an (at the time) very selective private girls grammar where I was considered average at best and my grades reflected that. I'm neurotypical, but the school totally failed to unlock my intelligence and talents, thank god my uni tutors were different or I'd never have my career where I'm basically paid to think creatively, spot things other people can't and problem-solve.

Exactly this.

A lot of grammars are not 'super selective'. They are grammars in a grammar system that may take 25% of the cohort, those who achieve the pass mark. So like the top streams / sets of a comprehensive.

Super-selectives are those that do not use distance as a main criteria but take the highest achievers in the 11+ no matter where they live. And are typically not in full Grammar areas so attract the most competitive aspirational families and the top tiny% of achievers who may be very very academically focussed.

The young women I know with EDs were / are in a range of schools - comprehensives, grammar, super selective and private. All are very bright, anxiety driven perfectionists who work ridiculously hard and worry inordinately about results. Given their ability.

I do agree with this. DD and I attended the same school some decades apart and the difference in pastoral care is quite astounding.

Here is the article I read about

https://www.theguardian.com/science/sifting-the-evidence/2016/apr/28/eating-disorders-are-more-common-in-some-schools-than-others-but-why

Not a fan of grammars but I do think it's unfair to blame them for being hotbeds of Eds. My DD went to a very bog standard comp and got stellar grades and now in her mid twenties, in a great job, is 8 years into a persistent eating disorder.
Perfectionist? Check
High achiever? Check
Possibly autistic? Check.

Surely this is it - grammars happen to be full of girls like my DD. it just happens to be the demographic.

I remember there was a research study about eating disorders are more common in some schools than others. The study found that schools with more female students and more highly educated parents had higher rates of eating disorders among young women. The researchers suggested that these schools may create a more competitive and stressful atmosphere, where academic achievement and appearance are highly valued and compared.
This may lead to more pressure and dissatisfaction among the students, and increase the risk of eating disorders.

Both DC went to SS grammar schools. Both had a great time, came out with good grades, have made lifelong friends and are on the path to the career they want. Yes it was pressurised at times but school were supportive. Most importantly, it was the right school for them. We had a choice of grammar schools, each one has a very different ethos, we did not put them all down on the school preference list.

As for a PP mentioning anorexia, I suspect that's incidental. There is a high rate of autism amongst highly academic people. Anorexia is sadly common in autistic girls - that's where the correlation with anorexia and perfectionist girls comes from.

You are spot on @Skinhorse. It’s not that selective girl’s schools cause eating disorders*, it’s that the cohort are much, much more vulnerable in the first place.

*Although we cannot underestimate the power of social contagion.

My kids are at a super selective school. It really suits them, teaching is brilliant and they are all naturally academic. They seem pretty well rounded and not particularly competitive, though I do wonder how they would feel if they were among the kids who struggle with the pace a bit more, if that makes sense.

One thing I do see among their peers - and I try to manage this tendency with my own kids - is the feeling that one must EXCEL at everything they do, which I think stems from being in a school like this, and is a bit of a negative.

Children need to know that they can do things for fun and pleasure, even if they aren't brilliant at it - you don't have to get to grade 8 violin or play for Arsenal under 12s or whatever....

I went to one of the most selective grammar, did OK and got good grade, went to good university and ending up good jobs. I won't say I enjoyed it, it is eye opener when you go outside the selective bubble to university and society, there are so many things you should care beyond just grades.

This all depends on the school and the individual child. I went to great all girl grammar, one of the best in the country. I enjoyed it, did pretty well, it was small and supportive, but also a hot house for grades. But some of my friends hated it and it just didn't suit them. Couple got pregnant as teens, didn't go to uni etc. But most followed the path, went to great Unis, had pretty good careers. Eating disorders were pretty rare but this was back before social media.

My eldest went to a private primary and I ended up moving her into state secondary as it was killing her confidence being middle/lower middle of the pack. She was the type to back away from the competitive aspect and would rather not try than fail. She has flourished now in a middle of the pack state school where she is near the top and is on track for top grades. My youngest will also be going. However my youngest is the type that probably would cope well in a high achieving school as she likes the competition. But she will do well anywhere!

DD came out with excellent grades and relatively good MH.
I suspect the things she struggled with would have been worse at our local (good) comprehensive.
Don't expect poor behaviour and issues such as drugs and bullying not to exist simply because a school succeeds academically. If anything drugs probably are more prevalent where there is also a degree of affluence. I still think overall it was the right choice but we're both glad her time there is over.

It depends on the child and how robust the are. One of my kids (the least academic as it goes) is at a super selective and doing far better that they would at a comp - they need the, ahem - kick up the arse. Yes, there are downsides but this is a robust kid who likes to appeal to peer pressure regardless of whether it's positive or negative. The super selective does give a degree of protection from the negative in that the kids are largely grade focused.

My other child would be less challenged academically but wouldn't enjoy the environment.

As for a PP mentioning anorexia, I suspect that's incidental. There is a high rate of autism amongst highly academic people. Anorexia is sadly common in autistic girls - that's where the correlation with anorexia and perfectionist girls comes from. Sadly generations of autistic girls have been 'missed'. Now we're starting to understand more, hopefully much suffering can be averted.

Both of my DC (24 and 20) went to single sex Grammar Schools and thrived. Definitely no regrets.

It depends on the child though.

Both DC are very bright and thrived on the fast pace. A bit of pressure suited both, having to wait for others to catch up in a mixed ability class would have been frustrating. DS was occasionally frustrated at the waste of time in top set maths.

These were local Grammars not SS though, so friends were a max 20 minute drive away. Both have a great group of friends, much more diverse ethnically than our local area. They are still close years later.

I think it would be a mistake to assume that schools are the same as they were 20 or 30 years ago - selective or comprehensive.

Most former hot houses have very good pastoral care and have learned to take the foot off the gas with discipline and homework. Most non-selective state schools on the other hand seem to have a one track mind for academic success, pile on the homework, have ridiculous draconian rules, very few resources and are terrible at dealing with ASD and ADHD, trying to emulate an imaginary selective school in their minds. It's not education, it's crowd control.

So I would be very slow to judge that a selective school would be more pressurising, particularly a single sex girls school. In fact I often found being around class clowns (bright boys but disruptive and dominating the class) quite pressurising in itself and would certainly find most comprehensives anxiety-making these days.

Went to a very selective girls grammar. Made great friends but had a horrible time. Unless you were an all rounder they weren't interested. Pastoral care? What pastoral care? Eating disorders and mental health issues abounded. Friend was sexually assaulted by a male teacher and senior management were crap. I left at 16 and went to a sixth form college which I loved and went on and got a good degree and career. I hated that school