Private and state school pupils’ GCSE results are now the same, study finds

Also what is happening in reality if you have a child from an equally rich family in a state school?

1. The state school is well run and not in crisis. If it was the wealthy parents would remove their child or simply not have sent them in the first place. They would send them to a private school
2. The child is coping well over all with the school and is studying well and getting into higher sets. If they were being bullied or distracted by poor behaviour or were being stressed out by rigid behaviour policies and couldn't cope then their parents would send them to a private school.
3. If there is a missing maths or physics teacher or their child is struggling in a couple of subjects then they will hire in help.

These stats make no sense because the comparison doesn't hold. Wealthy people have choices. The vast majority of wealthy people (whatever some might insist on mumsnet) will only choose state eduction if the state school their children can access is one of the ones that is doing well. They will then top up with extra help as needed.

It is and my chikdren do, but that doesn't necessarily translate into higher grades at gcse and a level in those types of subjects as the purpose of the clubs is different than teaching exam content. Your children can still get rich experiences but it is well know that state school have de-prioritised certain subjects as they aren't measured in Sats or progress 8 (or the weighting in progress 8 is away from them)

I think this study is really useful for showing how state schools should now start to prioritise the broader curriculum again.

I dont think its other finding, about socio economic status is news.

It’s area dependent. In our area, the lower performing private schools are roughly on a par with the very best state school and nearest grammar. The highest achieving private schools achieve far higher exam grades than the best state school or nearest selective grammar..

a given child would perform just as well going to the average state school as they would at the average private school

Surely it should mean more than that? Take a child out of a selective private school and put them in a poorly performing state school in a deprived area and they will do just as well, as the poorly performing school is poorly performing just due to the socio-economic circumstances of its parents.

theoretically, on averave, a given child would perform just as well going to the average state school as they would at the average private school

Theoretically, that is what this article suggests, yes. However, in the real world, no one can possibly think that the same child will achieve exactly the same grades at a school with small class sizes, high expectations and good behaviour as they would at a school where a teacher spends much of a lesson tackling poor behaviour and where lots of children have lower aspiration, bullying those who work hard.

If you’re looking at selective grammars, the difference is likely be much less than it is at a standard large comprehensive.

As the article refers to results going back 8 years, it also doesn’t mention the huge disparities between the two sectors during Covid, or the increasing problem in the state sector in recruiting specialist teachers at secondary level. Those 2 things, of course, will be affecting the chances of children. Many state schools during Covid were offering minimal, or no, work. Most privates were offering a full online timetable from day 1. Of course that will have had an impact on children. A local primary was offering 2 worksheets per week, taking around 10 minutes each. A nearby private was offering a full timetable, including in creative subjects and sport. Of course the children at the private were at an advantage.

But so do huge numbers of private school children? My dd is a tutor and loads of her pupils have been privately educated.

100% this. No real difference in my town. Local private schools are full of kids who couldn’t get on in mainstream and have a number of issues (dyslexia etc) or behavioural problems. Having looked at both I’m glad my kid is in the local school walking with friends and the school facilities are outstanding- far better than the private schools who seem to just want to believe they are better because they are private.

In my town there is a three percent difference between grammar (county over so kids can go from where I live), independant and my kids state school. Why on earth would we spend all that money for that minuscule margin.

Where is this amazing place so I can move there and save £££££ in school fees?

In my experience, absolutely not.

How much is parental choice in state school adjusted for? Either by moving into better catchments or choosing better performing schools? Or by sending private? Lots of private schools do less well than good state schools but better than local state schools.

I know children who have performed well at poor state schools but I also remember my state school and the level of disruption in some lessons which meant I was lucky to get 15 mins of teaching time per lesson.

Because they've taken into account socio-economic background. And I assume they judge the result on how it compares to the student's target grade based on prior attainment data. So presumably what the study is supposed to show is that, while independent schools will still get better results, that's because of the intelligence and socio-economic background of their students, not because of anything the school itself does. So theoretically, on averave, a given child would perform just as well going to the average state school as they would at the average private school.

I'm not entirely sure if I believe it or not. I would certainly agree based on ny own experience (having taught in schools in both sectors) that the teaching isn't better in private schools. The facilities, the behaviour and the level of aspiration among the students usually is though.

Lots of people tutor in my area (state & private) and it does impact SATs results. Our school also does a lot of intervention if needed to maintain/boost results.

@Bunnycat101 plenty of prep school dc are also tutored for grammars, selective privates.

I also think the tutoring angle totally distorts sats results at 11. I’ve realised lots of people at my state primary are tutoring in general but then heavily tutoring for 11 plus if they are sitting the exam for private entry. I think in particular it must be doing something for maths scores. I can only imagine in grammar areas it has an even bigger effect.

But these schools exist in the real world and not one where you can adjust out factors to make judgements. The experience is just going to be totally difference if you’re going to a school where you’re at 90% plus A* versus 9%. Part of the picture of wanting to pick a private school for secondary is exam results but part of it is environment, facilities, seemingly less draconian approaches to behaviour management etc.

My kids will be privileged whether they go to private or state. if we go private, they’ll benefit from smaller class sizes, better facilities, cohort. If they go state, we’ll be able to buy in tutoring support and look at other enrichment such as language schools or summer schools.

I agree with other pp that some parents don’t just select PE for academic results. There is often a better sport & creative offer though some states are closing this gap. Plus if you have the time & money you can do it externally. We decided against private as 25k plus wasn’t worth the better facilities. We probably spend 5k a yr on extracurriculars & will get a tutor if needed.

I haven't read the study but I wonder if it acknowledges the elephant in the room that is tutoring? huge numbers of the children at my childrens state schools are getting tutoring on top of their schooling.

tutoring is pretty common for private school dc too though

There are some amazing state schools and crap privates so it depends on the individual school.

2 kids do not account for 40% - not unless you’re talking about a homeschooling group! The average yearly intake in a state secondary is around 200 so the 40% is more like 80 kids.

This isn't a controversial area. The basic point is that once you adjust for nature and nurture, educational outcomes at state and private schools are broadly equivalent. Studies also find that tutoring is slightly more prevalent at grammar schools than at both state and private schools. But as PP say, you don't send your DC to private schools for exam results but other factors based around protecting parents cultural capital and better extracurricular resources. Whether that is worth the cost is a personal decision.

I think headlines like that (no matter how true) miss the point that many people who choose private schools for their kids do it for a lot of different reasons, not just exam results. I wanted my kids to achieve the best they could (none of them were particularly academic and two dyslexic), but more than that I wanted them to have a nice school experience where they were made to feel valued regardless of their abilities in an environment where bad behaviour was simply not tolerated. Of course not all private schools will give you that either but I made sure the ones I chose did.

Not round here, my DC's private school gets far better results than all state schools in the LEA apart from the 2 Grammars and they get the same as one and slighly better than the other.

We have a war refugee and at least one child with SEN in our class in PS - somehow the results are not down because of their conditions 🤷‍♀️

In our area the state schools by far out perform the local private schools