To think DD can get top grades in an 'average' comp. secondary?

[HotCaterpillar]

Dd has done well at primary, near top of class academically and is well behaved and conscientious.

I've moved area and she's due to start secondary in an averagely performing comp. in September. Aibu to think she can get top grades in that environment if she continues to apply herself to studying?

She was offered a place in a selective private school but I declined due to the fees, I could probably just about afford them but it felt very expensive when there is a free option. She's done well in state primary. I'm a single parent working FT, we have a good home life.

Redskyatnight thank you for answering my question.

Red sky the "parent's navigating the hoops" is interesting and probably doesn't just apply to parents getting DC into private.
I think any parents navigating hoops and seeking and searching out the best they can will reflect and says something about those parents doesn't it.

Whether it's private school or state school. It shows an interest?

I went to the local shitty comp and got excellent grades.

Obviously some students in comps get top grades, but imo they have to have a level of motivation and determination to do it

I agree with you here @Fairislefandango but this isn't a bad thing. And in fact it may account for why DCs from comps go on to do better at university than DCs from private schools with the same grades (on average), because they are accustomed to having to do it for themselves, which is more the style of learning required at university.

DD2, who went to a shit secondary modern, would tell you she isn't especially clever, but she is focused, motivated and very hard-working. She has a first-class MSc from a top 2 university (for her subject), all her own work, no tutoring, no parental help beyond general support, just sheer determination.

^this
My DCs went to a local comp, did reasonably well then excelled at university with 1st Class BScs and MScs (Distinction)
I went to a private school, was hideously bullied, barely scraped through O and A levels. That experience made me vow to never send my DCs to private schools.
If your child is motivated they will do well anywhere.

I agree with you here @Fairislefandango but this isn't a bad thing. And in fact it may account for why DCs from comps go on to do better at university than DCs from private schools with the same grades (on average), because they are accustomed to having to do it for themselves, which is more the style of learning required at university.

I do think it's a bad thing. I didn't mean that private school students are spoonfed - far from it. In the private schools I've worked in, the students were generally very capable of independent learning tbh.

What I meant was that students striving for top grades at comps often need a lot of determination to resist the apathy, lack of aspiration, reverse intellectual snobbery and poor behaviour which they might be surrounded by. Not to mention the lack of resources and high teacher turnover.

I have often looked at my bright pupils in comps and wondered what they could have achieved in the excellent private schools I worked in.

Of course she can. Secondary is very different from primary though and requires more holistic skills. Academic kids can find a wealth of opportunities available at a comprehensive/high school that might not be available to them in a selective environment.

Of course she can, lots of my contemporaries at Oxbridge went to regular state secondaries. Agree unless you’re made of money it’s ludicrous to fork out for school fees.

Not all state schools are equal and that's the bite for me. My school was failing, still is 20 years later. Kids did coke in the toilets. Drank vodka on water bottles. Fights. Lots of teen pregnancy. My husband doesnt recognise this as anything like his state school. Guess who got straight As and who didn't. 100% agree with previous poster who said a lot depends on pupil interest in learning, who their friends are, home life. My husband parents were very involved. Mine didn't attend parents evenings and nor did friends. Not even through a lack of interest, they were just working all hours to make ends meet.

DS got all top grades at a well below average school. He was in top set for everything, the kids were well behaved. I think if you have a child who will be in lower sets that’s where the more disruptive behaviour is.

I was put in lower sets by accident. The results given by my middle school for me were incorrect. After 2 weeks the teachers apologised and I was moved. The way the class behaved, the difference was night and day.

I got good grades at GCSE and A Level and I was focussed but I'm certain I'd have done better at private school.

I moved my son from private for year 7 onwards, everyone said how he'd be top of the class for everything in the "outstanding" comp I sent him to. Was simply not true. But he still came out with 144 UCAS points.

What made it “below average”?

well behaved and streaming doesn’t sound “below average”

It is absolutely possible. My highly academic DD3 went to a very average comp and came away with 9 x grade 9 GCSEs and 1 x grade 8.

She was then accepted to do A Levels at a top girls'grammar school, where she also got top grades (A*) and is now in her third university year at Cambridge (though she is on a year abroad for this).

How come she moved?

Might have been an 11-16 school.

I completely agree that these super talented children don’t need extra help. They are fine. All power to them. But.

If you’re not amazing - if you’re a bit above average but (if we’re honest) nothing special, how do you think you’ll get on in a poorly achieving secondary school?

Is it just about hard work? What if there is no work set, because the teacher spent all lesson trying to give instructions and couldn’t? What if the work set is assuming all you’re capable of is a 4? What if the work set is never marked because this is the fifth supply teacher you’ve had?

I was talking to DH about this yesterday. I still don’t know what I’ll do for my own children (preschool) but even in my own department this year we’ve had staffing turbulence, meaning year 7s have had supply so that y11 didn’t. Totally understandable except now y7 have spent a year without work marked, in noisy, chaotic, messy classrooms and just have a poor impression of the subject generally.

I was a big reader - probably wouldn’t have massively impacted me. A reasonably bright but unremarkable kid will regress in that environment. How can they not?

Don't underestimate the influence of friendship groups

This. Most teens are hugely influenced by their mates and so will do better in a school where listening in class, doing your work and getting good marks are seen as normal rather than weird.

So the question is whether this is the culture in your local comp, or not.

How come she moved?

quite.

I have often looked at my bright pupils in comps and wondered what they could have achieved in the excellent private schools I worked in

In the case of DD2 she probably could have got better A level grades at private school, but she couldn't have got a better grade than she did in her Masters and that's in a hard-core STEM subject from a university ranked above Cambridge – and every other RG university bar Oxford.

The resilience, self-motivation and focus she required to do well at her secondary modern has clearly stood her in good stead.

But it is a bad thing, because while some flourish anyway, how many don’t? How many with the potential to do well actually end up sinking because of a poor environment?

Education shouldn’t be trial by fire where the ‘victors’ are considered worthy of success by battling through shit circumstances.

The study I have found most interesting is the one where they discovered that success at uni is directly inversely proportional to how much was spent on your school fees…in other words, once your bright, comprehensively educated kid gets to uni, then statistically they are likely to do much better than their counterparts educated at great cost. Make of that what you will…

Yes agree. To give another specific example, this is why faith schools often have better results than non-faith schools. Simply working out sufficiently in advance that you need to attend church at least twice a month for the year before applying, actually organising your life to do this and getting a letter from the vicar (generalised example of faith school criteria) automatically makes you a more involved parent that the average, which means you are more likely to take an interest and support your child's education which are important factors to improve outcomes. The jumping through hoops also means that children from slightly more dysfunctional familes who tend to have worse outcomes are much less likely to get in, which will drive the overall school results up as those children are "missing".

There used to be a poster called seeker who used to explain an example of juggling to explain why the fact that a school is selective (on anything) would drive up results .
IIRC it was something like this:

Imagine you have 2 schools next door to each other:
To get into School 1, you just need to fill in the CAF (common application form).
To get into School 2, you also have to practice for, complete and pass an assessment of juggling 3 balls.

All other things being equal, School 2 would tend to get better results even though no one would claim there was any sort of direct link between parental ability to juggle and child educational outcomes.

Yes, taught plenty of children who have!

Absolutely this. The danger is mixing with peers who aren't particularly motivated or who have downright negative attitudes to school/learning. Pp said consider moving to private at Y9, but if she has already picked up that attitude at a standard high school then that's probably not going to make much difference.

What I would say though, is that she's just as likely to mix with kids with that attitude at either "free" or £££ school.

It's about her attitude and willingness to apply herself. She'll increase odds of better grades at a school with lower class sizes, more resources...but ultimately it's on her.

Thirty years ago I had a mixed group of friends on my course at university. We all had similar A'level grades.

I got the idea that some of the people from Private schools had to do more work to get decent marks and a few (that seemed a bit slower) ended up with Thirds or 2:iis.

The people who came out with First's - all but one came from Private schools. The people from state schools were more 2:is and 2:iis.

That was my general impression from a small group of friends studying my subject thirty odd years ago. Private schools help less able students get better grades by getting them to work harder and longer. They also were more likely to talk to the lecturers afterwards and ask for more help in practicals.

Because she got the grades needed to get into the grammar school for sixth form and wanted to go there. Why not? Great opportunity for her and she took it.