To find people say X public School is OK because

[NoComet]

It gets DCs into Oxbridge and RG universities, a daft justification for choosing a school that costs £15,000 plus a year.

We have a local secondary (not even a true comp as there is some creaming off of bright DC by Grammar schools) that is in Special Measures that has just got two pupils in to Oxbridge.

And this is hardly news, bog standard state secondaries and sixform collages all over the country send DCs to Oxbridge and RG Universities every year.

My very ordinary Welsh Comp sent someone in the year above me to study medicine at Oxford, there were others at prestigious med schools and, now, RG uni's me included.

Yes, private schools are very nice, yes DC avoid some DCs with a bad attitude to education, Yes DC get good sports facilities and yes DC may study a wider range of subjects, esp. MFL.

But in the end your DC will, quite likely end up at exactly the same uni, doing the same course, just with poorer parents!

[Talkinpeace]

handcream
Ah, SecMod - OK different situation. I wish sec mods could be abolished tomorrow. Along with ALL state selective schools of all hues as they put parents in horrible situations. Let alone kids.

I'd like all state schools to be dragged UP to the standards that are achieved by the best comps. Sadly with the Academy system and fragmentation of networks, the opposite is likely in some areas.

[handcream]

Surely if we just had comps they would end up being selective anyway ie. in the nicer areas the schools would be better. You would effectively buy your way into a nice catchment area. Around here we have the 11+ and a great bun fight it is too. Parents do pay over the top for houses in certain catchments. Why wouldnt they?

Although my DS's go to well known boarding schools I think you would be surprised who else goes too and whether they get help with the fees. The boys dont really know and tbh - dont care. They just want to know that you are a good egg, ready for a game of football or to go swimming.

I am absolutely no one special or rich to our eyeballs. My DH and I had children in our mid 30's. No previous relationships and children. Both in full time jobs. Do I think its an accident or unfair we can afford schools fees. No - I dont. We have made some good decisions over the years and have had a bit of luck but I agree with the poster who says - these private schools pupils dont get automatically given A's just because they go to a certain school.

Neither do I think we should start looking at pupils circumstances and giving them more marks because for example they came from a single parent family with little money to go around or they lived in a rough area. It would never end.

I also wanted my boys to go to uni. Obviously I cannot force them so I surrounded them by people who do.

[LadyEdith]

Mummy's car is nothing to do with it, in fact often it's not even about money - just background, attitudes, values.

I know several kids from humble backgrounds whose parents left school at 16 and aspire for their kids 'to do well at school' but don't think about it really any further than that. Parents listened to them read etc etc and at primary school, these kids did really well and got L5s at age 11. There is a choice of 2 secondary schools where I live, one much more middle-class than the other, and funnily enough much better results. These parents choose the lower achieving one without even being aware that it is lower achieving, because the HT is a lovely bloke and because they don't think their dc will fit in at the 'better' school. Then their kids become teenagers and get gobby and rebellious and get into trouble at school and and their achievement starts to slip. By Y9 they are no longer in top sets. Then they are allowed to choose bollocks options at GCSE. They then get a few Bs Cs and Ds but the parents are thrilled because they themselves got no qualifications at all.

In the meantime the m/c kids with the graduate sharp elbowed parents who only got L4s at age 11 have gone to the better school, parents descend like a ton of bricks on the kid at the first detention let alone exclusion, they bang on about EBacc and know what an RG university is, by Y9 kids are in top sets and doing triple science, history geography French etc and they get a string of As, decent A levels and guess what go to an RG university.

[Talkinpeace]

handcream
You are absolutely right that leafy comps are not the same as tower block comps and the house buying is already going on
BUT
if all state funded kids went to their local schools, and the pupil premium is used to support schools that are less leafy
AND
schools have to explain why their top set are not all at good Unis,
it will change.

Much as I loathe Gove, the Ebacc has already done a huge amount of good at forcing all schools to put all non SEN kids in for proper grounding exams.
That and the wide publication of the RG subject list has made 6th forms more aware of keeping doors open for their pupils.

The next thing is to get rid of a lot of the stupid degrees (see other thread) and encourage more apprenticeships for the non academic.

[Arnie123]

To be honest I am not in the slightest bit fussed how my son does academically. I am more interested in him developing a high social iq

[motherinferior]

Oh god not leafy comps again...you do know that plenty of us send our kids to schools of stunning unleafiness, don't you?

[Arnie123]

All of you who think a string of a grades will translate into success should read a few Daniel Goldman books

[Talkinpeace]

motherinferior
Yup. And I send mine to a leafy one so their results are on a plate, not due to hard work ... on another thread I posted links to the data on a selection of local comps that show the incredible disparity, even over short distances.

[handcream]

LadyEdith - thats me you describe!

However I never expected my DS to get A*'s in everything, late August birthday and all that. I do know what a RG uni. I know what are considered soft subjects because I read up on the subject. And I agree with Talking, get rid of the rubbish degrees, make apprenticeships as important as degrees and allow people to choose. I wouldnt be calling the CEO of Lloyds when there is water pouring through my ceiling. I would call a fab plumber who would sort it out (and it has happened and yes - I did kiss him and give him a bottle of champagne) When that water stops it is the biggest relief in history!

The worst thing the Labour gov did was get rid of grammar schools and state they wanted 50% of pupils to go to university. This meant offering stupid degrees and letting all instititions become uni's. Of course by just doing a little research you find that not all uni's are equal.

Arnie - are you saying NO qualifications should be the aim then?

[Arnie123]

No I never said no qualifications is to aim for and that is an utterly ludicrous statement. What is a far more important predictor of success is social intelligence. That is not just my personal opinion that is fact as there is a far higher correlation between social IQ and future earnings. It is far better to be street smart than book smart. I despair at the complete naively of people who feel that a public school or a September birth will result in a wealthy future. Scientific trials have proved time and time again this is not the case. Look at Lord Sugar's twitter feed. If it was a GCSE English project he would get an F as his spelling and grammar is dreadful.

[RawCoconutMacaroon]

Spelling has nothing to do with IQ! Lord Sugar is very smart. Like a lot of self made people, probably dyslexic and failed at school (I mean the school failed them).

[merrymouse]

I don't think going to Eton, for instance, is a social hindrance for most of their pupils.

[Arnie123]

Raw that exactly the point I am trying to make! Sugar has SOCIAL IQ not academic IQ which I have said is a far greater predictor of success. I could send my son to public school but I want him at a basic comprehensive where he will have far more chance to develop socially

[TeacakeEater]

I had read that prison inmates score highly on emotional intelligence.

My observation of the bit I've seen of Alan Sugar via the media is that he is very astute. That's intelligent but without the qualifications, I reckon!

[HorryIsUpduffed]

I don't see why a basic comprehensive gives more opportunity to develop socially. Could you expand?

[revealall]

I noticed that a lot of the low/middle achievers at my crap comprehensive have done well because of the complete non expectation academically. They have all gone on to work their way up and most run their own businesses.
Conversely those with the "pressure" at a pretty shit comprehensive went through the motions and got no where.

Scarily most of the latter were female. I see a definite line between the ones who went to Uni and then got married and do a run of the mill job compared to those who got jobs did their own thing (successfully) and then are married later. Maybe just me but I have noticed the trend where I live.

[RawCoconutMacaroon]

No, Alan sugar has a high iq as well as a high social iq - the two are not mutually exclusive.
Many people are failed by the education system for one reason or another, but the fact that you've left school at 15 or 16 with no qualifications doesn't change your innate iq. I am one of those left school at 15 with no qualifications, I did them years later to gain uni place, diagnosed dyslexic in my first year at uni, iq tested as part of that, as off the scale iq. I was told the test graded up to 150 but I had scored considerably over that banding.

My intelligence didn't suddenly change, I was just as clever (whatever that even means) at school, but at that point, education was failing me, and I think that's where social iq comes in to the equation - many kids with dyslexia and other barriers to learning develop superior social skills to cover up the educational problems they are having (I've seen this in my own DC too). The class clown, the cool kid, the over chatty kid who charms the teacher but never gets things down on paper...
The other poster commenting on the superior eq/social skills in many prisoners makes an interesting point (and the rate of dyslexia and similar barriers to learning is shockingly high, >25%), lots of people failed by our education system end up using those superior social skills in ways deemed not acceptable by society...

I fought (and still am fighting), my DC's corners pretty hard to make sure they got access to the academic education and special provision they needed (state school btw) to avoid them going down the same "school failure" route as me. We succeeded with that.

I'm not even sure what I'm trying to say here! I guess that I maybe don't think it's great that some successful people, who've overcome a crappy educational experience a school maybe because they were bright enough or talented enough to start a business doesn't excuse the ruined life chances of the many many other capable young people who are written off at school for one reason or another, and who don't manage to recover from that. Schools should be BETTER than this. But I'm rambling now. Too much Fri night alcohol !

[Arnie123]

The comprehensive theory about expanding more socially is not scientific fact that is merely my own opinion. I think mixing with people from a diverse background and not being spoon fed academic information is far more important. When I got into Cambridge I did it because I taught myself a levels. I actually used to skip school to stay at home and study as it was a far more efficient use of my time than going to classes eg with an alcoholic physics teacher who turned up drunk half the time. I complained about him but no one did anything however I understand he quit shortly after due to a nervous breakdown. This meant I had to rely on myself and learn how to teach myself stuff. This was massively useful at Cambridge as I beat the other students in exams. I am lucky to have had the opportunity to mix with all different type of people from different backgrounds. I taught as a college supervisor at Cambridge for about 8 years. Although I am not denying there were some exceptionally bright public school students I found a lot of them were somewhat socially inept and struggled to learn unless the information was handed to them on a plate. They seemed to lack the ability to think for themselves. I just think state schools give people a more well rounded upbringing

[Arnie123]

Raw coconut well said. Richard Branson is a good example of someone who failed academically due to in his case sever dyslexia. Interestingly his dyslexia has probably helped him in business as dyslexics have a different method of thought processing and tend to be very unique and lateral thinkers

[Arnie123]

Howeve I should point out there are also examples of people who struggle badly with social interaction who have gone on to great success. A scientific study estimated that 40% of Silicon Valley employees have Asperger's syndrome and Bill Gates is widely rumoured to have it. However when it comes to certain areas like computing and physics Asperger's is actually an advantage as sufferers have superior logic and mathematical skills.

[BoffinMum]

Bollocks Arnie, sorry. There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that dyslexia does this. Dyslexics also are massively over represented in our prison population. Branson was in the right place at the right time, with sufficient working capital and a good idea. Like all successful entrepreneurs, ultimately.

[BoffinMum]

I agree with the stuff about spoonfed Cambridge students though. About 10% of them struggle because if being taught too well at school and never having suffered any adversity at all.

[Arnie123]

The bit about dyslexia and thought processing is not my opinion it is scientific fact. My hobby is reading about psychology (it was also part of my degree). This is based upon what leading educational psychologists believe I can even reference you scientific articles and books on the subject if you wish. However you are correct that a lot of dyslexics do go down a bad route too.

[BoffinMum]

Well my job is actually working in the field

[HorryIsUpduffed]

Thanks for clarifying. I can see why you would hold that position but because my experience of state schools and private schools are very different from yours (I went to both) I don't agree with you