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.

Depends on your definition of ‘bright’.
Numbers made up.
Jane : 2 hours of study for a B, 3 for an A.
Mary: 3 hours for a B, 4 for an A.

Jane is brighter than Mary but might do only the bare minimum in an environment where learning is important. Mary might be pushed more.

Also while natural brightness may be the ability to recognise patterns without good teaching - a lot of not bright kids can achieve with a good teacher. Especially in things like mathematics where strong fundamentals are important ss

I don't think that's necessarily true, no. But I don't think it's as simple as state vs private. I have a top set DC in a large comp and she is thriving. She is good at sport, academically strong but quite shy. What's working for her is being top of the pile - it gets her noticed by teachers and gets her respect from many of the students.

But the clincher has been that she has sought out a friendship group who are like her in many ways and that helps cushion her from some of the other social pressures that exist in that environment. If she were more easily led, or more attracted to the children who think it's cool to skip lessons etc then we'd have a problem. But those children exist in the independent sector too! In fact I moved equally bright DS from an independent school for exactly that reason!

If she were in a selective environment where everyone was academically as strong as her and she had to rely on the strength of her social interaction it would be a lot harder.

Similarly, if she were at a single-sex school she would struggle. Many of her friends are boys and she is happier because of this.

The private options close to us are either selective, single-sex or non-selective but very small and cliquey - the worst of all worlds for an independent IMO.

It's easier I think if you're not an academic or sports superstar to fall between the cracks in a big environment, so then you're reliant on making the right friends and being self-sufficient enough to identify when you need extra help and academic support, but that depends on the child and the family support structure.

I think that it makes the world of difference.
In DDs first school she really struggled academically, she wasn't given much support.
We moved 5 years ago, ended up in a new school, which was a little different in their approach, by the end of primary she was doing really well.
Her upper school is even better (infact is very similar to the private schools in the area) she is now what is considered to be "gifted" its all been in the support and opportunities given to her within the school setting.
I didn't achieve much academically, and didn't think she would be too different but she is doing really, really well.
If we hadn't have moved, I suspect she would still be struggling academically.

I scraped some mediocre GCSE at my state secondary mainly because I was lazy and besides no one else in the class seemed to care much either, so I kind of went with the flow.

But somehow I managed to get into a selective state sixth form surrounded by some very bright fellow pupils and where my first impression was "holy crap I am going to have to work my butt off here just to stay average".

In the end I got very strong grades by working my butt off for two years solid either out of fear of being looked down upon as the class thicko in a very competitive environment or my clever classmates took their foot off the pedal once they had "succeeded " by getting into the selective sixth form or maybe a combination of the two.

Either way I know it was fear, the comparison and the competition that motivated me.

I was a bright student but very lazy. I could do the bare minimum and still end up in the top half of the class , this is not good. Teaching styles in those days was very different to now so I got away with it . Even gcses and a levels , no revision just winging it on the day. I passed , but not brilliantly.
My brother on the other hand , not as bright, but worked really , really hard . He's earning 6 figures now and having the last laugh !
It's not so much the brightness of the child but the work ethic and maybe teachers inspiring the lazier ones like me.

@arethereanyleftatall

The thing is is that 95% of parents (made up figure but I have anecdotally heard of very very few parents who don't) would describe their child as bright. Mine are for example 😜

So true 😂

But tbf, predicted grades would be more indicative of reality than what a parent says

My DC has GCSE predicted grades all 8’s and I would say they’re bright because you couldn’t get grades like that if you’re not bright.

Though some kids could be given 3/4 grades but that not a true reflection of their actual ability

Well they do, but they do even better if they have outstanding teachers.

@user1745 I had that very experience in my first year at Oxford. Had always been top with basically no effort, and had never learned how to learn or to push myself. University was a shock to the system and, although I did adapt, it made me really quite depressed in my first year. So actually, my sub-par schooling had a knock- on effect on my university experience too.

I think they can do well anywhere. With the right home support of course. I went to a standard comprehensive, then a selective (grammar style) state school for gcse and above. I did well, went to a good university and got a good degree. No private schools within travelling distance as we lived remotely, and my parents were against private education anyway, as am I tbh.

My two also went to state comprehensive. By the time youngest finished it was in special measures. Eldest is bright, did well and got into her first choice university to do a vocational degree. She has a good job now and is happy. Youngest is gifted. He struggled with mental health in early secondary years, partly related to struggling to find the right friendship group. Being bright and not sporty didn’t help. But he still did extremely well in gcse and flew in 6th form, found his people and got 2A* and 2A. Applied for Oxbridge but didn’t get in ( I don’t think he would have been as happy there as where he went). This is the only point private might have helped as he would have had coaching for the entrance exam.

He went to a top RG university and got a first in maths, now has a job abroad earning 6 figures at 27.

I have other friends whose bright children went private and were horribly bullied/got into drugs etc, so no one plan suits all. And we didn’t spend a fortune on education so more money to help with house purchases etc.

@CrimbleCrumble1 I had the drive and I did well (got a first from Oxford). But as a PP also said, my self-confidence was absolutely shot by my school experience and it took me until my late 20s to get over it - actually, I’m now 36 and still have self-esteem issues which stem from the crap time I had at school.

[quote itssquidstella]@user1745 I had that very experience in my first year at Oxford. Had always been top with basically no effort, and had never learned how to learn or to push myself. University was a shock to the system and, although I did adapt, it made me really quite depressed in my first year. So actually, my sub-par schooling had a knock- on effect on my university experience too.[/quote]
Yes, it's very common! Happened to me and my brother, and it's something I hear people who were identified as "bright" children discuss a lot.

Another thing is that children who are used to being one of the brightest in their school, take on "bright" as part of their identity (not necessarily in an arrogant way, but subconsciously) and then when they reach university where everyone is bright, it's a shock. Suddenly they don't stand out anymore. It's going from being a big fish in a little pond to being an ordinary fish in a big pond.

[quote itssquidstella]@user1745 I had that very experience in my first year at Oxford. Had always been top with basically no effort, and had never learned how to learn or to push myself. University was a shock to the system and, although I did adapt, it made me really quite depressed in my first year. So actually, my sub-par schooling had a knock- on effect on my university experience too.[/quote]
I had a similar experience: I found school pretty easy and did a very cushy degree. Was constantly surrounded by people who told me I was bright and got a bit lazy.

Did a post-graduate qualification (MA status but for a specific job) where suddenly I was surrounded by equally or brighter kids but who were really driven and worked much harder than I did. It was a real wake-up call and it took a while for my self-esteem to recover.

I think my parents should have pushed me a lot harder a lot younger.

I think a lot more depends on culture at home. I think people hold schools responsible for a hell of a lot. People's motivation varies too. I had to do well in school, because I didn't want to live like my parents. I wanted a bigger house, holidays and clothes that weren't home made.

I now worry that my kids won't have that drive, because life is better for them already.

But ultimately, high grades don't always equate to better paid jobs. Grades are a means to an end. I'll be making sure my kids have better access to careers advice than I did, so that they chose a job more wisely than I did.

I think the point about suddenly realising that other people are as bright can apply in any environment.

My eldest DC went from a highly selective indie to university and I remember him saying that it was a shock to him to find out that children from the state school sector were just as bright. He's learned a lot since then, bless his sheltered cotton socks...

Equally I've noticed that I can often (not always) identify which of the trainees my firm takes on come from the private sector just by the way they ready themselves for their exams. They tend to expect a lot more handholding, a lot more guidance on how to study, which books to use, how to use them etc. I see from my own DC that that is the result of years and years of spoonfeeding style teaching in the indie sector. That just doesn't happen in the state sector. Those trainees from the state sector tend to be a lot more self-sufficient and a lot better able to handle the requirements for independent study, having had to do so for most of their secondary years.

So I'd agree with the posters who say there's no one route that works for all children. It depends on so many factors.

I think it’s bollocks actually. I was that bright child in a crappy school that on paper did well. But, my experience was poor, there was little aspiration or stretch and many of my peers who should have done better were let down. I’d say I did well inspite of my schooling and not because of it.

If I can afford it, I will absolutely be doing private for secondary as I’d prefer my children not to put up with the crap I did.

@TheMoth

I think a lot more depends on culture at home. I think people hold schools responsible for a hell of a lot. People's motivation varies too. I had to do well in school, because I didn't want to live like my parents. I wanted a bigger house, holidays and clothes that weren't home made.

I now worry that my kids won't have that drive, because life is better for them already.

But ultimately, high grades don't always equate to better paid jobs. Grades are a means to an end. I'll be making sure my kids have better access to careers advice than I did, so that they chose a job more wisely than I did.

Culture at home means nothing if the child is suffering from bullying at school. I couldn't have had a better home culture, but the daily bullying (physical and verbal) completely ruined my teenage years. The good thing about my home culture was that as soon as I left the hell hole of a comp, I could get a good education elsewhere (college and home/personal study), leading to a professional/masters qualification. So ultimately, I did OK, but I could have done a lot better, and had happier teenage years had my comp not been so crap.

@user1497207191 I'm really sorry you had to go through that. Bullying is miserable and I agree has lasting consequences. I'm sorry that happened to you.

I would just caution however that children are no kinder just because they're in the independent sector. And definitely no kinder just because they're academically more able. And definitely no kinder just because their parents have money. All of those situations bring their own problems. So my point again would be that the answer isn't necessarily state vs private.

Culture at home means nothing if the child is suffering from bullying at school. I couldn't have had a better home culture, but the daily bullying (physical and verbal) completely ruined my teenage years. The good thing about my home culture was that as soon as I left the hell hole of a comp, I could get a good education elsewhere (college and home/personal study), leading to a professional/masters qualification. So ultimately, I did OK, but I could have done a lot better, and had happier teenage years had my comp not been so crap.

This is 100% my experience. Fantastic homelife, house full of books etc. Still had a shit time at school where everyone thought I was posh and weird and foreign.

I’m not saying all state schools are like that at all though. DS goes to a lovely state school where he’s surrounded by nice kids who’s parents aren’t racist thugs who hate learning like the majority of parents at my comp.

Yes BUT there's a difference between doing well and doing the best that they can. A bright kid will likely do well in any environment, but in the right environment they will excell.

No
It depends very much on the school not state vs private.
We pulled my bright daughter out of grammar school and put in private.
But if she had of gone to her twin brother's grammar school she would have been fine to have stayed at a state school. In fact we are likely moving her back to his grammar school for 6th form.

@user1497207191

You are aware you can get bullied at any type of school?

Another friend of mine and one of my siblings were both bullied at their private schools. My friend's is a public school.

Another person I know was bullied at a grammar school.

Another person I know was bullied at a selective school.

I also am related to and know other people who were the "nerds" at rough comps who didn't get bullied. In fact a couple said they were protected for various reasons.

The schools culture and their approach to bullying regardless of the type of school is important. Loads of schools fall down on how they deal with bullying regardless of the sector.

I would also say that academic results are a narrow measure. Entry to professions would be an interesting marker. Eg extent to which school is preparing for best universities and for competitive careers.

'My eldest DC went from a highly selective indie to university and I remember him saying that it was a shock to him to find out that children from the state school sector were just as bright. He's learned a lot since then, bless his sheltered cotton socks...' @Tessellation

I see this all the time whilst I'm at University. I get higher marks than some on my course and they can't understand how someone who came from a state school and a deprived background can get higher marks than them.

But, I never had the support they've had throughout their schooling - through parents or teachers or even have the material resources until attending University.

@Angelsandchanges 💯. I grew up in a single parent council housed environment in central London. I attend state school on free school meals etc. Add to that I'm black and female - every stat would say the cycle would be repeated.

I attended a red brick university studying a sciences degree. Because of my grades and interview technique obtained a year long international placement in big Pharma (everything paid for- only 3 people offered each year), graduated with a 1st class (hons) before joining a finance graduate scheme- I'm now a chartered accountant.
Bought my own home (in London) without the help of "bank of mum and dad". My brother followed a similar path and is now a IT management consultant. We both earn great money, are well travelled etc.

If you are smart and have parents committed to your success you don't need private school. Most of my uni friends attended private and international schools- we achieved the same grades (or I did better) and now have similar earnings. The only one who earns more than me works in marketing for a big bank (we'd be on the same salary had I not moved industry for better maternity benefits).

My husband went to one of the best private schools in the country and he's a civil servant on considerably less than me.

I’m inclined to agree. I’m quite bright - I really wish I’d gone to a much better school, my comp in the early 2000s was pretty dire.

Another comp would’ve been fine- it just needed to be a good one!

My DH got to Oxbridge from a deprived state school in north Wales, but he is truly gifted.

We’ve moved to live in catchment for excellent state schools. Just remember: private doesn’t always mean better, there’s lots of mediocrity in the independent sector. Unless you’re willing to shell out for Eton or Winchester I’d just aim for the best grammar or other state school you can, then get tutors if needed and support lots of curiosity, reading and extra curricular activities.