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.

This is a really interesting question.
My own experience is that I was academically very ‘able’ and had an IQ in the 140’s as a teen. However a combination of a really crap FE college (it transpired we had missed huge chunks of the exam curriculum) and adverse home life meant I tanked my a levels. Luckily for me I did end up going to uni to do a vocational training several years later which has served me well and up until last few years been a happy career with lots of opportunities for furtherment.
My own two kids- we can afford private sector (due to DH success- hasn’t even got an A level!!) however opted to send to local outstanding state schools. Results on a par with local independent sector so fingers crossed they will be able to achieve their potential there!

No I don’t. Not state v private issue but some schools are just dire.
A family friends child was bright, went to a failing secondary school. It was shiny and new. Most teachers left. No one wanted to go there - falling numbers. Lots of behaviour issues - police attending etc. It closed after only being open a few years. Only 6 students left his year with gcses grades to do A levels and that was with college being lenient on entry requirements if they came from that school.

That sounds like my SIL who sent her DC to private schools from the age of 2. She was obsessed with with exam results, exam boards, modules, retakes and then Russell group unis.
When my first DC achieved slightly higher GCSE results then hers I think she thought it was flukey luck. Then the pattern continued with A levels, then GCSE results for my other DC. She can’t get her head around how I didn’t have to have to nag them to do homework or know what exam board their such and such GCSE was with. She used to use lots of negative words such as lazy and threaten them with taking them out of their private school and putting them in the local comp. I don’t think this attitude could be healthy for the DC.

No, they don’t. Mine both very bright but needed encouragement and monitoring due to ADD. So wish they’d fone to another school :(

I think the style of the question shows that there's an automatic assumption that just because you pay for something you are getting something better. That's just not necessarily true.

Independent schools are run as a business. They have learned to perfect their sales pitches in a way that state schools don't need to. So academically selective indies will show you their amazing results, when in fact they are selecting able children who will give those amazing results - but many will still need to be tutored outside of school to do so and many will worry about the impending cull after GCSE of those who don't make the grade. Many will be pushed to do GCSEs that they don't want to do by a school mindful of needing to show value for money.

Equally, the small non-selective independent will need to show value in other ways - by providing interesting extra curricular activities. Some children will benefit from that. Others will feel hugely claustrophobic and will spend their time wondering why they don't fit in and what's wrong with them, when in fact all they really needed to not feel that way is a bigger pool of selection for friends.

The independent schools will tell you what the educational problem is and how they solve it. That is how you sell something - by creating a problem and showing how you can solve it. Sometimes it's true, sometimes it's not. Sometimes it's true for some children but not others.

Many many parents spend their years telling you what an amazing choice they've made. They have to - they are spending lots of money and it would be embarrassing to tell you that they feel it's money wasted. Some may, years later, tell you about all of the years they spent chasing the school for more value for money, feeling short-changed that the money they are spending is not, in fact, providing the expected nirvana for their child.

Sometimes good enough is good enough. But you know your child and once you know the options you're best placed to decide what that is.

Depends on the state school TBH as there are loads of really good state secondaries.

We're currently watching our DC secondary give up almost - the lack of ambition for the kids is almost insulting - happnened with previous head going and down turn in everything has been rapid.

We're trying to ensure all the syllabus is covered or rushed thought at break neck speed ( they have DS down to finish two GCSE early and we apparently don't get a say) and deal with exam techniques not being taught/covered or revision - the better teachers are leaving or have left and our two remaining kids complain about behavior even in top sets.

We've also found sucession of supply teahcers and frerqunetly re-orgainsations do mean things get missed off being taught - and it down to the kids and us to realise as we don't see books or have much commuinication with teachers. I think it can also be hard on them to do all the extra work especially as their friends aren't doing it even when they do understand why it's needed.

I think they'll end up doing good/okay and will do better with A-levels at another place - well DD1 seem to be on track to do that.

I do find people say it a lot but usually it's not their kids at poor schools.

I think private school- though it depend son the school - is often more about more opportunties with extras and small class sizes.

Many people here are writing about their own experiences decades ago. Schools are a very different place today so I don’t think historical perspectives apply today. Funding for state schools is the lowest ever per pupil, the challenges the state system has to overcome are more difficult than ever. Teachers are more overworked than ever. Education is a different environment today

Also this may not be a popular opinion but a well run state school with low teacher turnover which caters to push academically able children as well as the middle cohort might be ok for white pupils.

For ethnic minorities, privilege gained from a private school cannot be underestimated, no matter how good the state school is

Former bright kid here who was petrified of a lot of stuff. Now acknowledge undiagnosed neurodiversity, and a lack of support with some of that stuff too. Currently homeschooling a bright kid who could not deal with school. Bright is such a vague term... I always think of Elizabeth Wurtzel and the way she talked about being stamped as "full of potential" and the way she never managed to fulfil it because of so much other stuff (the diagnoses changed over the years). For the record I found some solace in my academic ability but the moment I hit uni I freaked out and had a breakdown - the lack of structure left me in freefall. I could talk all day about the limits of the current academic system, but I have no answers - I'm no evangelist for homeschooling either. So... no. It's more complicated than that, I say.

No, of course it's not true. Any child's achievement will be influenced by how good their school and teachers are. Bright kids aren't immune to problems in schools.

.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.

That is definitely true. How is a child going to have an optimum school experience in a badly run school with poorly controlled problem behaviour, poor teacher retention etc? Plenty of bright children don't reach their full potential for a huge number of reasons. A child capable of top grades coming out with 'ok' or 'quite good' grades does not constitute them doing well.

Just want to add, state school both times. I jumped in with my own experience and posted off the cuff.

Bright resilient and self motivated children will do fine anywhere.

I disagree, this statement doesn't take into account any needs for extra support, self-esteem issues, bullying, environmental stress (eg rowdy classroom), and guidance.

@Fretfulmum

Also this may not be a popular opinion but a well run state school with low teacher turnover which caters to push academically able children as well as the middle cohort might be ok for white pupils.

For ethnic minorities, privilege gained from a private school cannot be underestimated, no matter how good the state school is

This is an interesting point and I don't necessarily disagree, but wonder what kind of privilege you think is gained from a private school.

It's a difficult conversation to have though because we're comparing apples and pears. Are we talking about a mid-level, mid-priced independent school that offers in most respects not a great deal more than a leafy comp in a "naice" area other than perhaps small classes and a few interesting clubs or are we talking about Gordonstoun-style institutions? Are we talking about a scary comp in a scary area with a certain demographic? I have experience of both types of indies and even at the top end it's not necessarily as life changing as you think it might be.

@Tessellation I went to a top performing indie, one that often appears on the eduction threads. And I am a WOC. The confidence an education like this gives an ethnic minority, access to networks, people in “top” corporate jobs, insights into that life and into careers that I may not have even known existed, cannot be underestimated for ethnic minorities. It also helped me to communicate well and form solid friendships with white people who are typically at the top of hierarchies in corporate circles. I was seen as “being like them” which helped me propel up the ladder quickly. There are many barriers that ethnic minorities face which you can read about on other threads. Even very bright and determined ones with strong parental support can face significant barriers. My indie removed those for me (I still faced barriers don’t get me wrong but my journey has been far easier than others I know who didn’t have my education). You are right that not all indies would offer this. That’s why you can’t compare indie and state but it’s more about the schools in question.

I was very bright and I was bullied for it. The comprehensive schools I went to valued mediocrity and it was a shameful thing to want to learn. I didn't do very well in the exams because I was so traumatised by the constant harassment and threats.

Ds1 was gifted and managed well due to his personality, but ds2 was bright and was bullied as well.

If the child is confident and outgoing I'd say they have a better chance of doing well, but anything less might be a problem.

The comprehensive schools I went to valued mediocrity and it was a shameful thing to want to learn.

That's the part of it that really scares me and that's the thing that I agonise over with respect to my own daughter's schooling.

I really don't want her to go through the private sector because I hated private school. But the thing that scares me more than anything is the prospect of her ending up in a school where ambition and intelligence mark you out as being "weird".

I don't think private school guarantees you a better education, it certainly doesn't protect you from bullying or poor esteem and the weird competitive dynamic there can be pretty toxic. But I do think you have a much greater chance in the indie system of avoiding the tendency you get in large swathes of the population to want to bring down people who are ambitious and like thinking.

I don’t think they can. I was bright, not a genius but cruised through high school and GCSEs. My DF (who had gone to a grammar in the late 1950s/early ‘60s) could never understand how we just had to learn a couple of pages of text for history, for example, do a ten-question test and not ‘read around’ a subject.

He told me that they would be set essays and would gain extra marks for adding additional facts/figures/knowledge. I told him, we wouldn’t be marked down but it wouldn’t add anything either. Teachers also told us that examiners would only mark what was on the syllabus; if we added anything extra that wasn’t asked we were wasting our time.

I coasted through high school with very minimal effort and barely any homework for 5 years. Spent my study leave playing on my DB’s SNES. Still passed what I needed to, just had to resit maths at sixth form.

A Levels were a HUGE shock! I’d gone from doing nothing from the ages of 5-16 to be expected to do independent study and reading. I didn’t know how to. Unsurprisingly, I was a catastrophic failure at them. I think if I’d gone to a better school, where disruption (even on top sets) wasn’t rife, I wasn’t frightened to go to the loo (major bullying hangout) and you weren’t bullied for being a ‘swot’, I’d have done better.

@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.

If a school has a solid 30+ children getting multiple As on average I think most bright children would be likely to succeed, if they're struggling to get 30 through 5 A-C a child that will easily achieve that might well find results suffer as they should easily breach the target...

I agree with this. My older daughter was in the third category. Our local state school had problems with poor behaviour management and bullying and had worse results than you would expect from the intake. I didn't think she would be happy there or be able to achieve her potential.

We were lucky that we had an option and she got a scholarship at an excellent independent and from there went to Oxford.

I think it depends on the child. If you are easily influenced, you could get in with 'the wrong crowd' and then not do so well. Depends on the circumstances I guess

@Bunnycat101 100% agree with everything in your post!

It depends what you mean by successful. I was always top in my average state school and then also at university. I haven't necessarily "done well" in my career due to family circumstances. But I don't think that's the most important thing. I'm enjoying life and my kids are turning out to be clever as I can help them with reading, music etc.

If you're talking about career success, I think most jobs require a range of skills - not just academic. They need to have confidence, resilience, people skills, hard-work, creativity (depending on the role). There are such a wide range of factors that can affect those. Private schools might help some to be more confident as they get more opportunities to try out lots of different activities eg. drama, public speaking, music etc.

@Angelsandchanges

That’s interesting *@HardbackWriter* and my answer is yes and no.

To send your child to private school you have to be earning a pretty decent amount.

To be earning a pretty decent amount, you possibly are well educated and intelligent yourself, and those traits are passed on.

But those stats are still pretty stark.

Those stats are pretty stark indeed. Neither DH nor I have a degree (we both come from countries where you didn’t/couldn’t go to university unless you had rich parents. Neither of us did), and nor did either of us go to private school. We have one DD who goes to private school. It’s extremely tough financially - we’ve basically given up holidays, pudding, and ever owning new clothes. Despite the financial constraints, the reason we chose private school was much more for social reasons than educational reasons. DD did not grow up in the UK (nor did I, despite both of us being British), so when we moved here this year, I had no idea how to work out whether the local comp would be a reasonable fit, or rife with drugs and bullies. As so many posters have said, the wrong school can be a life changing nightmare.

Hugs to all those on this thread (especially User1497207191) who were treated so badly at school. Congratulations on making something of your lives despite very difficult starts

The comprehensive schools I went to valued mediocrity and it was a shameful thing to want to learn.
That is the problem with some comps, the teachers are only interested in getting children to a C, or at the current equivalent of a C, bright kids are effectively ignored and often bullied by the not so bright kids.

I was very bright and I was bullied for it.
My brother went to a comp (he deliberately failed his 11+ because he wanted to go to the same school as his friends) and was relentlessly bullied for being the brightest child in almost every class he was in (and in most cases brighter than the teachers). He still has self esteem issues because of this now and he is in his late thirties.

It seems that so many people are anti-academic, that being smart is not seen as a good thing and that filters down into children, they can end up feeling guilty for being intelligent, get bullied for it, or hide it for fear of being bullied.

@chrissyplumber your post about coasting vs independence really reaonated with me! I went from an awful primary to a brilliant one in my last year before secondary and, though secondary was often overwhelming for me in non academic ways, that one year saw me flourish in multiple ways and really set me in good stead. Crap school was fairly big and good one a tiny 100 pupil village one too, so I don't necessarily think the size of the school matters as much as people think, either. The demographic of children in each of those primary schools probably played a big part too, I ended up in a tutor and classes with children from middle class families instead of those from the first school, some of whom were living in poverty and had home lives I couldn't have comprehended as a kid.

Wrong tag there sorry