Do you think it’s true that ‘bright children do well anywhere’?

[Angelsandchanges]

I’m not sure it is. I read this a lot on here.

I think bright children may do ‘OK’, in the sense they may pass their GCSEs but I don’t think they necessarily have the optimum school experience and I don’t think they always reach their potential.

I think gifted children do, but there’s a world of difference between gifted and bright. What do others think? I’m asking because I’m wondering whether to opt for private or state.

@Coasterfan

DD is bright and at a selective private secondary, she is looking to get 8s snd 9s at GCSE as much as this can be predicted in year 9. She may well have done this at our local (dire) state school, or she may not. But she is so happy and confident and just herself and to me this is the difference between private and state, she has been encouraged and nurtured and I believe she would be a very different person if she had gone to our local state school.

DS is completely average academically and hated every minute of primary school. He’s a bit of a class clown bordering on disruptive at times and I was aware this could have got worse in secondary with encouragement from his peers. The state school he would have gone to has a lot of behaviour issues. He goes to a different private school to DD with more of a sports focus and he is absolutely thriving. Academically he is still very average but for the first time in his life he loves school and has thrown himself into all of the extra curricular activities including art and music and new sports.

So to me the private state debate is not just about academic achievement, it’s about the whole secondary school experience. We have made huge sacrifices to afford the fees, we aren’t rich but it’s something we have chosen to prioritise and I don’t regret our decision.

Really this is it no matter how much people want to snipe at each other, or have an ideological debate.

Schools - and children are so diverse. state/private aside there can be no blanket answer. Some are lucky in that they fall into the environment that’s best for them, or make it despite the odds .

The main thing is active parental involvement in a child’s education.

I don’t know whether this really wasn’t a thing in the past or just not talked about. But children of professional parents have always had books in the house, talked more about current issues etc. Equally you didn’t have to do lots of extra stuff, just be bright and kids not suited to school just left. As opposed to being made to stay.

I have to agree about private schooling focusing on good results and supporting the children in that way. Another big reason for us in going this route is the way bullying is dealt with. My dd is very bright but extremely shy and sensitive. I can absolutely see her failing her true potential in a state school. Absolutely every issue is dealt with swiftly and zero tolerance towards bullying of any kind. Maybe not all private schooling is like this, but my experience of 2 private schools have been very positive. I strongly disagree that a bright child will do well anywhere.

@Foolsrule

I was a bright kid who under achieved because of uncontrolled bullies whose favourite target were swots.

Yep, exactly the same. With hindsight, the teachers should have done way more to protect the bright kids in mixed ability groups. Unsurprisingly, I absolutely excelled in the classes that were setted, where I didn’t feel nervous about raising my hand or didn’t fear being attacked. It has made me wary about my own children and we have recently moved house due to the poor secondary options where we used to be.

Most state schools cater for the majority of middle of the road kids. The bright ones tend to get left to they own devices as they’re going to do well anyway. But - they could do so much better with teaching that is targeted to ensure they succeed.

Poverty of aspiration is a huge issue in the UK. If I go back to my home town, the bullies still work in the local supermarket. They have done nothing with their lives. One had a child with the local drug dealer. I don’t feel sympathy. They were nasty then and will always be nasty.

Yup.

Same here...

It improved a bit when we were streamed at 14...but first three years of secondary was appalling... Constant fire alarms going off/teachers off with stress /kids doing their worst

Emotionally and physically bullying ANY bright kid...

My bright pal had all her o level revision notes thrown in the river. They threw ink over my books and tied up another friend against rugby post and left him to be humiliated. A pal came back to find her uniform wanked over in the changing rooms by a group of lads...

And, nothing happened.... All the perpetrators were still there...

Yes ,.in most cases. But they need to be adaptable as well and in my own experiance, intelligence comes with a price, as in usually more prone to anxiety.

Not my experience at all. Bright DD went to a small primary who always told us she was very gifted academically. We were considering moving her to a bigger school so that she could have more extra-curricular opportunities as the small school didn't offer any competitive sports, opportunities to perform in school plays etc.
When the pandemic hit and we suddenly switched to homeschooling it became apparent that she also had huge gaps in her knowledge. School said she was bright yet she was performing below-average. She made lots of progress during lockdown and then we moved her to a different school when they reopened and she's made great progress since then too.
We are now applying for a scholarship to a private secondary but still feel that we are battling against so much missed learning in those early days. The school just wasn't big enough to cater for all of the needs, so they invariably focused on the less able. It wasn't that DD couldn't do the more advanced stuff, she was just never taught it.

We were all gifted kids and we all did well but the two children who went to a non fee paying grammar school did the best in terms of exam results and getting into the most competitive courses at uni. It's not just about the exam results the ethos of the school, parental involvement other kids influence all pays a part at secondary school. My dad wished he had known about the school when I was secondary age but he didn't and I went to a rough as inner city comp. I still did well but maybe didn't achieve my full potential. It's not something I lose sleep over but if I could pay to send my gifted child to a school that will nurture them as a whole person I would.

State schools aren't allowed to exclude too many kids, though. Get ofsted to change the criteria.

That's interesting. What is the limit, as a percentage? How does that function, if a school has reached the allowable amount of exclusions and then a student, for example, seriously assaults somebody? I can't understand how there could be an "allowed amount" of exclusions?

I also thought heads set their own behaviour policies etc as these vary between schools? So if the rules and consequences are clear and they simply follow their process, how would Ofsted intervene and stop them?

@TheCatsKilledTheGonks it's not that there's a hard limit in terms of numbers, it's that the hoops schools have to jump through to permanently exclude someone are so numerous, and the paperwork involved so extensive (gathering of evidence over a period of time) that they often don't have the resources to build a case to exclude someone.

And ofsted really don't like it. Especially if kids are sen etc. Headteachers, ultimately, have to please ofsted. We're always having briefings about how to try and keep our exclusions down.

I think average children do well everywhere. They could do better if supported, but they’ll be ok in most schools. Gifted or bright children can do well or very poorly - depending on school. My cousin (on the gifted spectrum) was bored senseless, with the predictable consequences.

[quote itssquidstella]@TheCatsKilledTheGonks it's not that there's a hard limit in terms of numbers, it's that the hoops schools have to jump through to permanently exclude someone are so numerous, and the paperwork involved so extensive (gathering of evidence over a period of time) that they often don't have the resources to build a case to exclude someone.[/quote]
Sounds like a false economy to me. The resources required to mitigate the effect of disruptive pupils in the classroom so that they don't trash everybody else's chances as well must be much higher. 🤷🏻‍♀️

My very bright and career driven ds says that a less good school did not hold him back academically, or in terms of the difficult to get into course he did, but that it did affect his level and depth of general knowledge. He says people he mixed with at uni who went to excellent schools, both in the uk and elsewhere, knew more 'content' that he did. He is mid twenties now, and did very well at uni, but that's his view.

Kid in my family was in one of the worst performing secondaries in the country. Did well at GCSEs and was on track for good A levels and Russell group uni.
Things in the home front went south. Was expelled for poor attendance despite the fact they this was due to her being a carer for a relative. School were abysmal.
Family member found out what was going on, put her through private 6th form, she did well at A levels and went on to get a first at LSE.
In a different school first time round she’d almost certainly have gone straight to Oxbridge.
So family helps, but school helps too..
. 🤷🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️

I have a DC with SEN and live in a part of the country with a shortage of school places and a bewildering range of options. We are educating her privately as it seems to be the only way to ensure a reasonable educational experience. She is certainly "bright" by some measures but masks in school so needs teachers who really get her and have time to help her.

DH and I were both state educated and I have taught in state and private schools. The two state schools were both rated Outstanding but behind the scenes, simply couldn't cope with the huge numbers and there certainly wasn't much support for anyone struggling - not because no-one cared, but because the staff to student ratio was so low, only the most extreme cases could get support.

So no a bright child with SEN definitely won't do well anywhere.

Finally, in the 10 years I have been teaching A-level I am seeing more and more DC who shouldn't be doing A-level, never mind a degree. There need to be more practical alternatives.

@Thickasmincepie

And ofsted really don't like it. Especially if kids are sen etc. Headteachers, ultimately, have to please ofsted. We're always having briefings about how to try and keep our exclusions down.

You'd think Ofsted would be pleased headteachers take a hard line on unacceptable and disruptive behaviour, given it would be the most effective way to raise standards and make school more pleasant for those who actually want to learn.

It completely depends on the child. I was bright but sensitive. At middle school I wasn't stretched academically but was reasonably happy. High school was spent in a state of miserable anxiety and I had MH issues and barely attended. In hindsight, I think it was a good life lesson for me to not be at the top of the class, even though I found that upsetting at first because I wasn't used to it. I don't think the hyper-competitive atmosphere or constantly being told that not getting top grades was failure did me any good, though. Quite the opposite. It might have turned out differently had I been at a school with less pressure and more nurture.

And yet some young people thrive in a competitive atmosphere. It's all down to the individual. Some might do well anywhere. Some might do well at schools that others wouldn't.

Absolutely. I was once told 'you get out what you put in' and I've believed it ever since.
I'm naturally academic and went to awful schools. I come from a working class background where completing high school was an achievement. However, I since completed my level 3 education, then graduated from uni with my bachelor's degree, and am almost finished my master's degree. I didn't need a private school to do any of that.

Exam results are in many ways a narrow way of looking at a school, but it's what they indirectly tell you that's important as well.

A school with good results is likely a school where lessons aren't interrupted every 3 minutes by some 'shining wit' declaring 'Miss, miss, I haven't got a pen', 'Sir, i don't understand, you're not a very good teacher are you sir?', 'Miss, I've got to put my coat on, it's freezing in here'... or by kids walking out of the classroom or taking phonecalls or generally doing whatever they feel like to wind up the teacher. It's likely a school where no one regularly has to break up fights between kids, and so on.

DS is bright but has trouble doing well in tradition subjects because of ADHD - at a 'rough' school I have little doubt he'd end up in trouble, in with a bad lot and failing despite our best efforts, as teenage years are all abour peers over parents. Fortunately he should be going next year to same school as his older sibling, a small, mixed-intake but excellent state school where I think he'll be understood and supported.

TheCatsKilledTheGonks

If our lessons were engaging enough, there wouldn't be any bad behaviour.

Funny though, I remember a couple of great teachers back in the day, but many lessons were boring (how many fucking times did i draw the cross section of an eye?). I behaved because I'd been brought up to behave. That was it. You don't answer back, you don't question. You do as your told and you might get a job at the end of it. Granted, that's not quite how I'm bringing my kids up, but the basics are the same: don't be a twat just because you aren't into it.

But doing well isn't all about the few years at school and bright children will see opportunities all their life. It might be after leaving school and using post education or it might be working in organisation or for themselves. School isn't for everyone and definitely shouldn't define your future.

Expectations are so much lower. I was a 'bright kid' but the school still only advised us to go to the local crap college and scrape three A levels, then on to work or a degree at the ex-poly. There was never any belief we'd do anything better than minimum wage office work. Certainly no talk of to Universities or careers in medicine or law.

You grow up then and look at your shit minimum wage life and wonder why everyone just shrugged and thought well, you're from shit town in shit city, you'll never be anything.

@randomsabreuse Bright resilient and self motivated children will do fine anywhere. Bright, competitive but lazy children need people to compete with. Bright sensitive children might well struggle if there's a lot of disruption and they're bullied for being swots.

This. It totally depends on the child. There certainly are some kids who will thrive anywhere but there are plenty who wouldn't.

But a school being private isn't a guarantee of quality.

Depends on the child. DD1 achieved 13 GCSES mostly 7 to 9s in local comp. Now likely to achieve 3A* and 1A at A Level.
DD2 totally crashed out iof same school due to Undiagnosed Autism and anxiety. Now likely to pass the basic English, Maths and science with tutors.