What is the real value of highly selective independents/grammars now?

i can’t tell you the product of going to a private competitive independent but I can tell you what I’m seeking for my child.

Performing 2 years ahead of his peers made my son feel different and affected his mental health. He was beginning to refuse to go in to school because he couldn’t see the point and it was too boring. It made him anxious and depressed. Once we did the tours and applied for a handful of selective schools his mood lifted almost immediately. The tests and interviews energised him. And now that he got into his first choice he’s much happier and more confident.

He’s looking forward to learning at last and being normal. That’s already a win.

Im hoping he’s challenged and actually has to work to keep up rather than simply coasting.

(His primary teachers did what they could to challenge him but were limited by time and resources. It was his teachers who recommended he try for the selective schools)

My son is in a selective grammar and for me it's the quality of the other students who are like minded and want to learn. The expectations are high, behaviour is good and overall it's just massively increased his expectations of himself. It's expected to try hard and do your best.

Someone upthread mentioned that they were educated in a bubble of privilege and they didn't want that for their kids. I just wanted to add to that.

We have gone for private senior school from state primary school. I think there are a couple of areas where the 'value add' isn't there (or it's a 'value loss'!) between private and a good state senior school option (which we did have).

The academics and the extracurriculars are super. But I went to an 'ordinary' non-London private school and the cohort in my children's schools is so, so different. There is so much wealth and with hindsight I wish I had thought more about the oddness, and potential impact, of my kids growing up with a social circle consisting exclusively of incredibly privileged kids (I do realise that for some people this is actually a key aim of choosing private!).

The other thing (overlapping really) is that in their London state primary they were part of a little local community. My own private school was to some extent part of the local community of the town I grew up in too. I know that the more elite privates (including the London ones) do each create their own kind of 'community' - but that feeling of your senior school embedding you in a local/geographic community - which was definitely a 'value add' I benefited from - is not there with these schools.

To be clear, I only think about both these things because there was a very strong state option close to us - I do sympathize with the posters who have been in difficult positions in the absence of good local state schools.

My children went to state grammar schools and thrived . Genuinely believe these schools are better than the local private secondary schools.

Mine went to a selective independent.

We chose it because we were not happy with either of the state options locally. Both were 11-16 co-ed comprehensives. One had a reputation for poor behaviour and bullying. The other was very large (because so many people were avoiding the first one) and seemed impersonal. Both seemed focused on the 5 x A*-C performance measure and didn’t seem to have any interest in stretching the most able students.

There were no other state schools that they would have been able to get into, and no grammars (which would probably have been our first choice) but there were lots of independents to choose from.

Our specific reasons for choosing the school we did were:

1. We preferred a single sex school (girls). That gave us 6 options locally.

2. We wanted a selective school where intellectual curiosity and a love of learning were the norm not an exception, and where our very bright elder daughter would feel at home rather than being made to feel that she was a swot/geek. She was very shy and was desperate to fit in with her classmates and be average, whereas at primary school she stuck out a bit. I was much less clever as a teenager, but I definitely dumbed myself down a bit at my local comprehensive in the 1970s trying to fit in with the cool kids and didn’t want her to do the same. 3 of the 6 girls’ schools were selective.

3. We wanted a day school rather than boarding. We didn’t want - and in any event couldn’t afford - boarding and I have always had the impression that day pupils missed out a bit at boarding schools. I also had the impression that the average boarding school parent was much wealthier than the average day school parent, and thought the girls would feel more like “poor relations” in a boarding school. 2 of the 3 selective schools were day schools and we applied to both.

4. We wanted a school with good extra-curricular provision, especially in music. Both remaining schools had good music provision but it was excellent in our first choice school.

5. We wanted a school the girls could travel to school independently on public transport. Both remaining schools were manageable, but our first choice school was closer to the station.

6. We wanted a school with good pastoral care. Both remaining schools had good reputations for that, but our children’s experience of open days and entrance exam days, and what we read about induction etc, suggested that our first choice school had thought more about how to make the process as stress-free as possible, especially for girls like ours who were the only applicants from their primary school and did not have a ready-made group of friends from prep school.

My children are now in their mid and late twenties and I don’t know whether I would make the same choice again. Both local state schools now have a much better reputation than they did, especially the one that was worse. One also now has a 6th form.

@MeetMeOnTheCorner , Imperial and UCL have a lot of overseas students educated in private schools but it doesn’t count as private school numbers but in the overseas student data. So if you add those student numbers as well as UK residents numbers the percentage from private schools would be even higher.

DS was only offered a place at a failing state comprehensive, which even Ofsted said wasn't safe. There is no grammar option in our area.

Faced with that, I suggested a small, academically rigorous but unfashionable school to DS. He loved it.

The value was small class sizes, quality of teaching, continuity of teaching staff, lack of disruption, good facilities. He stayed for A'levels and is forecast AAA. He is happy & confident. It has been worth every penny despite taking a huge proportion of my income.

@Therightschoolco Imperial and UCL have high numbers of overseas students and they are nearly all privately educated. So you would expect their privately educated student numbers to be high. As you would LSE and a few others. School 6th forms in private schools generality take more than 6.5% too. Used to be over 15% but that might be dropping.

Most private schools can teach bright dc. They just might not have a huge critical mass of very bright dc. The uber selective grammars are full of them. My DDs went to less selective private schools but quite a few achieved very well and they didn’t suffer undue pressure. They did lots of extra activities and had excellent drama and music so it suited them! Sport was first class too. No tutoring but they boarded so learn time management and independence. Stood them in great stead for being adults. I’d choose this every time over a highly selective school. One of mine was 1 mark off the top pass mark in the Bucks grammar test but we wanted a smaller school.

@Bubblesbobbles i do think its the peers you have. At our independent, its also mixed ability, small class sizes, and over half the class have SEN. There's a dedicated SEN teacher too. Parents all focus on education as best as can. The 'lazier' kids tend to be from wealthier parents who have spoilt them, but the majority of kids have got parents who are invested.

A family member got into a local indie but was refused a bursary and they went state. Grades went downhill as they got involved in the wrong crowds. The parents really regret not trying to find the funds to get them into private initially. I went to state and did pretty well but my peers were like me, all striving for more.

Well yes, all schools are different and state comps vary enormously between schools and between areas. Parents need to do what's right for them and their children based on the local options available. If people are within catchment of an outstanding comp, they'd be usually idiots to pay for private, but not if their local comps are in special measures of otherwise very lowly ranked where going private is often the only guarantee of a half decent education for their child.

If you do pick a state school, go for one where both teachers and pupils are encouraged to take pride in academic achievement.

Pupil numbers are falling and funding is based on head counts so schools should be actively trying to achieve academically etc to attract numbers.

I think it depends entirely on where you are and what options you have. Had we stayed living where we were when my DC1 was born I have absolutely zero doubt that I would have been engaged in frenzied 11+ prep and if unsuccessful it would have been independent, come what may. But where we live now is a whole different ball game and a lot of the things that people here are citing as advantages of their DC's private education don't sound that different to what was offered at my DC's state schools. Certainly comparing to our local independents there is very little difference. I'm sure there are other schools elsewhere that offer far better facilities than any of the schools near us, but as they weren't an option that comparison is fairly meaningless. Here, neither the independents nor the state grammars within a half reasonable distance offered any appreciable advantage over our local very good comprehensive. In another place though that could be completely different,

We have all of this at our local state achool. There aren’t absolutes.

Privae, granmars, selected schools aren’t better. They are sometimes better for specific children

The main advantage for my DC of a selective independent has been consistent, expert, specialist teachers who have a genuine interest in their subject well beyond the curriculum. It’s most obvious in KS3 (where they don’t have to follow the national curriculum) and A level, where it makes for really wide ranging class discussions.

Plus what others have said about behaviour, facilities, wide range of subject choices, pastoral care etc. It makes a difference that teachers know them as individuals, and have time set aside to do pastoral care, run clubs, support DC with SEND etc.

I think the journey is more important than the destination. If their school makes them slightly less attractive to Oxbridge (and I’m not at all convinced that it does) then that’s a price I’m happy to pay, in return for seven happy, well-supported years of secondary education.

I have one at a very selective grammar and one at a very good comp.

No difference in class size, particularly in y7-9, in fact the grammar has slightly bigger classes, but there is a difference in the offerings. The grammar does trips abroad for language exchanges and outward bound style trips. All kids do a language for GCSE and do triple science. There's very little disruptive behaviour.

The comp has different opportunities and a slightly wider curriculum for GCSE, but definitely has more behavioural issues. It remains to be seen how well each child will do as eldest is just doing GCSEs. The school only sets for maths and doesn't require any specific GCSEs.

It sounds like you live near me @Bubblesbobbles. I wonder how many people from Woodbridge actually end up at Imperial given they generally want 4 A*.

Based on purely anecdotal evidence from friends, a lot of the middle class kids in our area seem to end up at RG unis but I'm not sure what the outcomes are for the less privileged kids.

@fairyring25 I guess I am very lucky but I don’t know any different as a Londoner.

Both my school & dcs school have teachers that have stayed for decades and put their own dc through the schools. And I guess many Catholic schools benefit from invested parents (in that you need to have attended mass regularly for years)

Depends where you live.
We live in a comprensives area. No grammars but the local schools are excellent and local 6th form college has very high Oxbridge rates. My DS and all his friends have been through the local non selective comp. They are all sitting on offers for top uni places including Oxbridge, medicine, Engineering and Russell group. It would have literally been a waste of money for the parents of these kids to have gone private.
Peer group does matter so yes middle class professional parents do help ensure expectations are high But you get that anyway around the good schools due to house prices.

Our DC are very clever, grown up now. Our local selective grammars were Tiffin, we'd have had to tutor to get them through the Tiffin test, because you do. They would probably have got in had we applied. However, both DC were natural linguists and that wasn't a particular strength at Tiffin. Therefore, and because we could afford it, they went to highly selective independents and on to Oxford and Cambridge respectively. No regrets whatsoever.

In the context of value added, no disruption, high expectations across the board, excellent sport and musoc facilities, excellent curriculum which as standard included a choice of MFL and classical languages.

We went state primary, private secondary. Although the state primary was in a lovely genteel leafy area, the difference between the two schools was staggering. The pastoral care at secondary was priceless. It didn't exist at the primary. That won't be true of all selective independents but the other things we valued probably are:

They are in a class of peers who value hard work, who admire and respect good results. I was astounded when DS told me people wanted to be his friend because he came top. At my comp, you'd get bullied and isolated for being a swot. Even if the pupils aren't naturally the brightest and continue to need support, the point is that they share a work ethic - that it's worth working hard to get what you want. That if you fail, you try again, you don't give up. Both my DC learned a resilience which has really helped them.

OP, I think you are right that some pupils are better suited to mixed ability classes. They may develop more slowly or flourish under less pressure. I do know that DS2 felt like he wasn't very bright because he wasn't destined to get 10 A* GCSEs. But we reassurred him that this isn't necessary and when he got to a very good uni, he soon realised he was one of the most academic and hardworking students and easily got a First. In his case, I think he needed to be around bright pupils so the bar was automatically raised. But for some children, they will flourish better if the bar is easier to jump iyswim.

I got into a brilliant uni from a rubbish comp. I had support from my parents, my boyfriend and a private tutor in 6th form. But no support from my peer group or any teachers at my school. That was lonely and confusing. If you do pick a state school, go for one where both teachers and pupils are encouraged to take pride in academic achievement.

DD was born with a physical issue where kids are at documented higher risk of bullying and poorer academic outcomes (despite the condition meaning there should be no reason for this).

For us, getting her to adult life with her self esteem and confidence intact is the priority. For her, that is easier in a school surrounded by well-behaved kids who are bright, like her. No one makes her life difficult for reading Shakespeare or getting 100 per cent on a test. With teachers who are able to spot pastoral issues developing and are empowered to deal with them.

She could get good grades anywhere, especially with tutoring we could easily afford, but I want her to be confident and happy which is far from guaranteed and then be able to maintain that into adult life.

It is absolutely the case that some children will do better being at the top of a mixed cohort than being in the middle of an academic one. The key is knowing your own child.

@footbeds
You are very lucky to be near a comprehensive with hardly any disruption in lessons. I think the London comprehensives do significantly better than ones in other parts of the country.
The comprehensives near me are average in the UK in terms of results. There is lots of disruption in lessons even at the better ones. The area has a growing population and most schools are struggling to recruit and keep teachers.
I agree that 1st/2nd generation immigrant parents are often very keen for their kids to well and so if your child is around these kids it helps in terms of peer group expectations of working hard.

Thanks @fairyring25 , I didn't know this stat and wouldn't have guessed it. Reflects my own ignorance - and I guess shows, @Bubblesbobbles, quite how unusual it is to have a 'strong comp/grammar' available (we are in London and, as @footbeds says, there are quite a few of both).

Absolutely this @user149799568 . DD is currently doing A levels at a large comprehensive. It's a faith school and has a city wide catchment and parents have to actively choose the school which I think makes a difference. She's been in top sets to GCSE and did well in them. She's predicted AAB in her A levels. The school is very mixed in the socio economic sense and her friends there have been bright and hard working pupils and most of them from families who really struggle financially from what I can tell - house moves forced on them by landlords putting up the rent or landlords evicting them etc. - but these kids are really expected to work hard. Lots of the friends have parents who were not born in the UK and they really want their kids to do well. I went to a grammar school and I did not want this for DD,, and that would have been an option as she'd probably have got a place over the county border. But then neither did I want the small more local comprehensive that's had a big turn over of headteachers and has poor results and pupils banned from the supermarket near to it. Peer group does count at secondary school.

We sweated over this decision, but in the end DS went to state. He would have got top grades wherever he went.
I went private, and was spoon fed my education in a bubble of privilege. I didn’t want that for DS.

I think the main benefit, as others have said, is being surrounded by others who value education, and have parents that do too.

Independent vs state Grammar is trickier and depends on the schools.

Our local area has excellent state grammars, and the private schools are for those that don’t pass the 11+. I’m sure my DC wouldn’t have gained anything extra at an independent school.

The other plus is the pace. My understanding is that at comprehensive schools they DC are in sets for eg maths, English and languages, but nothing else. So in other classes the pace needs to be slower. That can be frustrating for the quicker pupils, having to wait for others to get it.