to not get the whole "children from comprehensives work harder to get the grades"

[Ohjustshootmenow]

An exam is an exam, right?

StillSquiffy hit the nail on the head with her post.

It seems odd to argue that you send your child to a private school because it gives them an advantage and then argue that they do not have an advantage at all.

Perhaps the only fair thing to do is to use IQ and aptitude tests before allocating university places.

IQ tests are biased. IMO Interviews are pretty good.

I aspire to a 3 bed semi!

Having gone to state and private and have children in the family at both state and private (mine are currently at state primary but wouldnt rule out private later if cash allowed) I do think that GENERALLY the expectations are higher at private schools - both of the school and the parents. Not necessarily in a pushy way but certainly in a way that actively encouraged and supported - and often from a personal knowledge (from staff) of what is possible. In the private schools I have experienced that support is part of the ethos of the school (despite a couple of shite teachers) more strongly than in the comprehensives where it is more down to luck of getting motivated individual teachers. But I have been in some comps - very deprived, inner city etc where just keeping the kids in the building was an achievement.

SWC, the question wasn't 'why did you send your kid to private school and are you sure it was the right thing for him?' though, was it?

By personal knowledge I mean I have had lots of Oxbridge educated teachers in private schools. Many with no degree other thatn teaching qualification at all at comprehensive. Nothing wrong with that but those who come to teaching having done other things first, often bring more to the job. Like politicians.

I went to a split Comp / Grammar on the strength of my 11+ results and no, I wasn't tutored. At all. We did two mock tests at primary.

My sister, who has learning difficulties was granted a place at said school but in the comp stream because I was already attending.

I did her homework for her under duress for five years because she would kick off massively and tantrum. My parents didn't lift a finger to help other than to swat me if I refused.

So when I was supposed to be studying for O-Levels, I was doing her third year work in addition to that. And when I was doing A-levels I was doing her GCSE coursework. It didn't even end there. When I was at a local Poly I had to write her NVQ essays.

Is that an example of state-school pupils having to work harder?

SMC your child does have an "advantage" it was not an insult. If it was not a better place for him you would not send him there, no ?

You do make an excellent point there smc. I meant to say that before posting my pity-party

My son is autistic and I belong to the National Autistic Society.

I get the quarterly magazine with the school adverts and I swoon at the provision he could receive if only I could manage it.

Good luck to you both

*SWC

I also have a child with ASD actually. Sending him to a school that suits him is an advantage there is no need to get into a rage.

So the school doesn't give him any advantages?

Then why are you sending him?

Or does it?

I'm very confused.

REally OP? Smaller classes, longer days, finely tuned streaming.....

I disagree with any form of 'positive discrimination', but...

I went to a private high school for three years before transferring to a comprehensive when my dad lost his job.

At the private school we had far more resources, tiny class sizes, extra support if needed (the school needed good grades to get more money in) and it was just easier to learn.

At the comp I was in a maths class of 43 children and the resources (textbooks etc) were continually in short supply. We had to get an extended deadline on our A-Level film studies coursework (I know, I so shouldn't have taken that subject) simply because we ran out of ink to print out the required full-colour graphics element of our work.

It prepared me far better for the adult work as you needed to be far more self-motivated to learn and work.

That said, I reiterate that I think 'positive discrimination' is completely the wrong way to handle things and that grades and individual merit should decide on your acceptance or rejection.

This is a complex issue and to make the sweeping generalization that ALL kids from private schools have more support that ALL kids from comps is dangerous. There are some excellent comprehensives out there, especially in some of the more affluent parts of the country and those children are well supported by parents and have excellent teaching....contrast this with some of the inner city comps in london and there is no comparison. So the danger is, you are actually just assisting those kids with the unfair advantage of living in a good area, with a good support system..... On the flip side of this, there are some private schools that are so highly selective (i.e. its not a case of pay and you get in...its a case of compete with hundreds of kids to get in) that all those kids would probably have done really well at the local comprehensive school too - is it fair to penalise them because their achievements look mediocre compared to their brainbox classmates..... This is further complicated by the fact that the current exam system is so broadbrush at the moment...so many kids get A's and A stars compared to 20 years ago, that it is really difficult to distinguish the good from the excellent. If we were to introduce something like the IB Diploma where children are marked on a bell shaped curve then you would get a truer perception of how they compare to one another....then introducing some sort of "handicap" system to the poorer performing schools would be much more objective and the true "stars" from deprived backgrounds would be easier to spot.

Also SWC if your son does ever want to go to University ASD will be taken into consideration, as are all SN. But what do I know, I am stunningly stupid and have to get back to my marking.

Its not just the grades though, its all the other help private schools (and grammars) give during the application process.
I went to an awful comp ( guinea pig year ie first year not to take 11+) which was totally ``anti-elitist`. Consequently no help from them applying to Cambridge. I got in inspite of the school. When I went for my interview ( which involved two bus journeys and two train rides), I was stunned to find 6 applicants had arrived in a mini bus all from the same school and accompanied by a teacher. It was a private school. A similar thing happened on a day visit to look around once accepted and that group were from a Grammar.They had allhad considerable help with choosing the right collge etc

Several years ago, I think it was Bath or Bristol uni, did research into this matter, and decided as result to favour comp-based grades above private schools.

They did this based on hard evidence that, on the whole, the comp students got better degrees than the privately educated, and altered entry requirements.

I vividly remember the hoo-ha from the private ed sector and parents, presumably because the advantage they sought to purchase was a false one. Sorry I can't find a link for this.

Here in Oz, privately educated students have a higher uni drop-out rate.

So perhaps the issue here should be rather than bring Private and Grammar schools DOWN in standards and devalue the work these pupils do perhaps we need to pull the comps up to their level, get them competing on a par with them perhaps?

I do love the assumptions too that only pupils at comprehensives suffer due to broken homes, disabled siblings, come from sink estates etc etc. Perhaps there is more inverse snobbery in society than people care to admit to?

Found some research.

The Sutton Trust and some Business organisation commissioned research by the NFER in 2003.

I work in a comprehensive.
My daughter is at an independent school.

I would take a student from the comprehensive who gained 11A at GCSE's over a student from the independent school who got 11A any day of the week.

You have to work harder at the comprehensive because every class at least 2 or 3 children trying to disrupt the learning - it's as simple as that.