If bright children do well wherever they go, why is everyone so desperate to get their children into the highest performing grammars/private schools?

[chuckb4ss]

I don't believe that if you put a child in a poorly performing comprehensive school that requires improvement, that they would come out with the exact same A level grades that they would if they had attended one of the top private/grammar schools. (Not saying that A levels are the be all and end all, that's a separate discussion).

I hear all the time that if your child is naturally bright, they will do well wherever they go. If that is the case, then why the competition to get children into the best performing schools?

Its funny just how many MNetters who privately educate their children live in areas with only shitty comprehensives though.

Way, way more than is representative of the number of special measures or needs to improve comprehensives.

My kids aren't at private school - they are in a state comprehensive that is currently in special measures.

I think they'll still do well because they've got engaged parents spending time and money filling gaps but if I could put them in private or get them in a school without some of these problems I really would.

I usually find it's people in nice area with a selcection of good state schools who don't get that's not everywhere is like that.

if private school is a waste of money for those who choose it, then why bother abolishing them? If the teaching, outcomes etc don’t put kids at an advantage then why not let people choose?

Have any if you spent much time in a comp? Disruption is a very big problem to which schools are increasingly powerless to stamp out!

Have you spent much time in a comp?

Disruption is very low in most and most achieve good results.

If private school is a waste of money for those who choose it, then why bother abolishing them? If the teaching, outcomes etc don’t put kids at an advantage then why not let people choose?

Namenic, this was the thinking under the Labour government in 1945.They considered abolishing private schools, but then decided that improving state education would mean that private schools would die out naturally - after all, why would people pay for something they could get for free? (You have to remember that at this time, many private schools offered a really poor education; they only upped their game in the 1970s, because they were worried about the number of state school students getting into university and 'taking places away' from private school students.)

BUT what the government hadn't taken into account was that parents who sent children to private schools weren't paying for education after all. They were paying for exclusivity, for contacts, for moving in the right circles, for a seamless route to the top for their children once they left school. In short, they were paying for privilege.

Nothing has changed. And, as others have commented on here, many (though certainly not all) private-school parents badmouth the state system in an attempt to justify their choice. The town where I live has five good state schools. Most children flourish in them. And yet there are plenty of parents in this town paying tens of thousands to educate all their children in one of the four private schools. I used to go (I stopped bothering eventually) to dinner parties with these parents and the first question they would ask was: which school do your children go to? When I mentioned the name of a state school they visibly have to rearrange their faces and think of an appropriate comment. Some of them even told me I was 'brave' (this in a town where no school is failing!). The conversation usually then moved on to complaints about the cost of all the school skiing trips/visits to the States their kids went on and I would sit there biting my lip and trying not to make the obvious point.

What annoyed me the most was that these parents would assume that my children were not very bright (they are) – especially when they found out that my DS had special needs – and that I was very poor (I wasn't).

*Have you spent much time in a comp?

Disruption is very low in most and most achieve good results.*
My DDs attend a very mixed comp in terms of socio economic groups and are doing very well. It's a faith school (80/20 Christian/ other faiths) and parents have made an active choice to send their DC there, perhaps that helps as most will be interested and engaged in their children's education and value it. Both DDs are thriving socially and academically and I'm happy they are in a school that isn't a middle class enclave. (Though I do acknowledge that they are in a faith bubble as all families part of faith communities). I'd choose their school over a private school any day of the week.

@notwaving - so the only reason for abolishing private schools is to prevent people from making contacts which might benefit them later in life?

I went to elite private school where I was the only student in one subject. Maybe it happens in state school too but my guess is unfortunately it becomes economically unviable. To say that much smaller class sizes do not benefit students is to me v unlikely - and you would probably have to also say that tutoring for 11+ makes no difference... I loved private school and wish everyone could have that experience but I don’t think the current cost is worth it.

smaller classes do benefit students.

But the difference between results for a student at a private/grammar and a student at an average cokprehensives is 0.3 of a GCSE grade. From an outstanding comprehensive its 0.

Disruption is very low? We sent dd to what was reputed to be the best comp around here. The lessons she shared with a particular set of boys were a nightmare as far as learning anything went - they would simply pick her up and parade her around the class (she is tiny, and they were big farm lads) with the teacher just pretending it wasn't happening. In other lessons, dd was put next to the most badly behaved pupil and told to keep her in line. It's a wonder the poor child learnt anything at all. (She's done brilliantly despite it all, though, mainly because she just worked at home (luckily for future generations, the Head has left and a new one is now in post.)

Namenic, no, the reason for abolishing private schools is not to 'prevent people from making contacts which might benefit them in later life'. It's to take away the automatic privileging of those who go to them in order to create a more level playing field.

It cannot be right that children are segregated in schools according to their parents' wealth.

It's notable in this thread that there is a cognitive dissonance between those who think of the benefits for society as a whole and those who think of the benefits for individual children (their own).

Even if you got rid of private schools - there's already selection by house price in many areas.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-39327149

A study by the Department for Education (DfE) has found prices are 8% higher near the best-performing primary schools and 6.8% higher near the best secondary schools.
...
It said "selection by house price" was restricting access to the best schools.

Recent analysis by Teach First found 43% of pupils at England's outstanding secondary schools were from the wealthiest 20% of families, while a separate study by the Sutton Trust suggested poorer children were much less likely to get places at the schools with the best GCSE results.

Though I do agree most state comprehensive schools are good and many outstanding.

I have however lived in two areas with school children where that wasn't the case.

In last location most concerned about education tried for the faith school or specialist schools or grammars with long journeys to and from or moved to better state school catchment areas in different towns rather than paid for private. I suspect that contributed to that secondary not being able to really improve. There seems to be much less of that in current area.

Other positives in paying private school fees is to gain the access to the best/top universities. Factor in the peer contacts that are being made by both pupils and parents, aka ''networking'. Finally that old cherry 'It's not what you know, it's who you know'. If these positives didn't happen people wouldn't pay.

We are perhaps unusual in that we took our children out of private education into the state sector. DH was independently educated and just assumed it was better. I had a horrid time socially,though excelled academically, in a very rough comprehensive and was anxious that my children had a different school experience. There was nothing actually wrong with the independent school we chose but with time I realised that I was spending a great deal of money and not really getting anything significantly more than the local state schools offered. Both had similar class sizes for the primary age group and I think very small numbers at secondary can actually be disadvantageous.
So when we sat down and objectively considered what we wanted, the private school had marginal advantages, primarily the music provision. But with the money we would save we could very easily make up for that with private music tuition. The independent school was a good school but in comparison with the good local state schools it simply didn't represent value for money in our opinion. We haven't regretted our decision to move, and, more importantly, nor have the children.
Our local state school ticks pretty much all the boxes for us. Academic standards are high, behaviour is well managed and there is a huge range of extracurricular activities available. A wider range of subjects is offered than at any of the independents within travelling distance, especially at A level and facilities are generally excellent.
Obviously I am not naive enough to believe that our school is representative of all state schools, and it is not without its problems either. The funding cuts are biting, though fortunately the local community has rallied round to help minimise the impact. It isn't a perfect school but it is pretty damned good, as are several others in our area. In fact the independent sector is struggling here - I'm not the only one to realise that I was wasting my money!
The sweeping generalisations that always appear on threads like this are ridiculous. Neither the state nor independent sector is homogenous. Obviously the worst of the state sector and the best independents are absolutely worlds apart, but there are an awful lot of shades of grey in between. I would always caution against making assumptions and advise parents to look very carefully at the provision in their area. Even the oft quoted "class sizes are smaller in private schools" is neither always true, nor always beneficial. Children can thrive in many different environments, and personally, I suspect that parental attitude and the home environment have at least as much impact as the school.

People keep saying that the Scottish system, where everyone just goes to their catchment school, creates a level (or more level) playing field. But that hasn’t been my experience here. It merely creates selection by house price (as per @2020 above). Due to circumstances we ended up in a council house in a pretty deprived area. The schools close to us are pretty dire, high levels of violence and disruption, low grades, poor outcomes post 16. If I bought a house in the middle class area a couple of miles away, my kids could access a better education. I actually ended up home educating for a while, but I realise that’s not an option open to everyone.

I absolutely agree with you. Both my husband and I are perfect examples of bright kids who could have done better if we had had more guidance/hadn't been so lazy . Ended up with good GCSEs but mediocre A Levels and average degrees. We have both excelled professionally since leaving education but initially it was an uphill battle. Both my children (who appear to be bright) will be privately educated to ensure that the don't just "do well" but meet their full potential

I live in a city that has grammar schools - it is the cause of untold angst amongst parents and children. There is a massive lucrative tutoring industry here & a number of top prep schools.

I had a poor education in the '80s in an inner city comp with all the usual deprivation markers. I couldn't wait to leave and never thought further or higher ed was for me.

My DD sat for the state grammars & also 1 girls selective independent. We had a choice of a not bad Catholic High School or a failing High school.

My DD was offered a grammar place and also a 100% bursary at the Independent, I let her make the choice and she chose the Independent. She's only in yr7 but so far she's having a good experience.

I don't believe the teaching is better or teachers more dedicated in the school she's at, but it's social as well as academically selective, so context is all.

No interference from DofE, OFSTED, supportive parents and the funds to do a job how teachers want. It grieves me to hear of teachers at breaking point - and Heads having to decide between staff cuts or course cuts.

We went to all the open evenings at both comprehensives, the children were lovely & engaged, but I was shocked at the stress on rules, sanctions etc in the Heads speech. Like children from poorer backgrounds need to be coralled. Some of the measures seemed purely punitive.

The ward we live in is one of the poorest in the city and scores highly on the ACORN index of deprivation. I live in social housing, single parent on a NMW job. My dd shouldn't really be at the schools she's at. What saddens me is I know she's not some massive braniac wunderkid outlier.

My friend who lives on the other side of the city is hemmed in between to great comps - she didn't bother with the grammar test for her children. If I could have moved to avoid it, I would have!

No I don't think 'bright kids do as well no matter where they go to school' its so much more complex than that.

I have had a few heated discussions with friends as to why send her to the Independent instead of the grammar, me having to point out that the grammars here are hardly pits of poverty, absolutely crammed with children who have been at prep school, and that unlike them, I can't advise my dd about Uni courses, A level choices. I have no contacts in the professions.

I just wanted her to have choices. If she decides she'd didn't want to go to Uni, that's OK - but at least she'd be making an informed choice.

It's a shit show - I'm left leaning but my child can't eat my principles. Until you've been poor & badly educated with no choices, you cannot start to imagine how it impacts every part of your life. I don't want my life for any child - but I could only change material reality for my own. And that feels rubbish

GirlsinGreen, as my posts make clear, I’m very much opposed to private schools but nevertheless I understand why you made the choices you did. There are times when you need to take context into account. I knew someone who had a terrible experience at a bad school, in a deprived area. She came from a financially tough, single-parent background. At sixth form she won a scholarship to a private school and took it despite being very left wing. She felt really guilty but I told her that if anyone deserved an escape route, she did.

If there is any case at all for private schools, it should be that they are reserved for children from deprived backgrounds. Sadly, the opposite applies.

Ohwhatbliss - so you haven't reached your full potential? Despite excelling professionally? What would you be doing now if you'd been privately educated?

I'm also surprised by the number of people who can afford to pay for private school but find themselves living in an area with terrible state schools!

I live in a fully selective area but no superselectives. It's meant to be around 25% that go but apparently it's often closer to a 3rd. The local high school has 25% of students getting a 5 in English and Maths, the grammars have around 90%. I think most people try for the grammars if they think their kids are at least in the top 50%. I imagine I will too. The grammars also teach Latin, Greek, Classics, have numerous orchestra's and music groups and LAMDA. One even has a pool which surely isn't common in the state sector?

Quite a few of the (not great) state secondary schools in my area have a pool.

Move to Cornwall (substitute any other rural/coastal area to suit) if you want to see areas where incoming people (from London often) can afford private schools and want to avoid the very mediocre state schools that are available. Our local schools per capita payments are derisory in comparison with any inner city area, but the deprivation and lack of access to museums and art galleries is enormous, so opportunities to top up/support educational provision is limited. Locally, an NHS career is as well paid as you are likely to get, so there are no pots of gold. A rather clever friend of my DS was moved out into an unheated caravan at 16 to make space in the house for his younger siblings, and because he had chosen to go to the local FE college rather than get working, his family effectively removed all support. There's not much public transport here, so he eventually caved in, and went to work filling the fruit and veg counter at Tesco. Father a deaf, illiterate agricultural labourer -- and useful with his fists. It was a tragedy.

None of the state schools within 15 miles has a pool.

I've never seen anyone on these threads, with actual tough past experience in a comp, declare that it did them good and they wanted the same struggle and loneliness for their dc.

Quite, Sally. I wish I could wave a magic wand over our local school to boost its aspirations for the pupils, but the reality is that it would take years. And nobody goes to secondary for more than seven years. The clever ones go away to uni, and don't come back. The rest think it's normal life.

HRTWT but flicked through it yesterday morning and then had an experience yesterday afternoon that really made me think.
We have 2 DC, started at state but moved to
private fairly early in primary school years. We have lived in 2 paces in the UK, both ‘nice’ places, one has grammars. I am of the opinion that if we were to send DC to any of the local secondaries they would probably do as well academically as they will at their private school; we can afford extra tutoring if they need it and they are obviously getting support and encouragement at home. We are paying for experiences and a broader curriculum.
One DC is particularly talented at an extra curricular activity. This was picked up within weeks at the private school where she is supported and encouraged to develop this talent. I absolutely know that there are not the resources of either time or money to do this at most ?all state schools
Yesterday we happened to be in a town that we’ve never been in before. It’s in a beautiful part of the country, but it was pretty obvious that it was not economically prosperous. I watched families going about their Saturdays; parents, children, teenagers. It was pretty obvious to me that our DC wouldn’t get anything like the same grades if they went to the comprehensive in that town. The level of expectation and ambition of most of the inhabitants is just a million miles from the leafy middle class places I’m used to. It made me sad.