"A smart child will do well in any school" - not true?

[TBNT]

Inspired to ask this due to another thread.

But it's something that's been said to me countless times over the years when looking at the (pretty awful) schools in our local area.

I have always politely nodded while thinking in my head "I'm pretty sure my very academic, yet nerdy and socially anxious child wouldn't do very well in that school"

And until reading on here today hadn't seen that opinion expressed elsewhere and just felt like I was being unreasonable in my own head.

So just that really - I've heard of kids coming out of rough comps with loads of 9s. But I genuinely feel that a child like my eldest DD would not achieve what she's capable of in a place she felt uncomfortable.

"I assume, like at her primary school, that she'd be sniffed out like an easy target and be picked on for sport."

Yeah but @TBNT that's literally every school. Even (especially?) the posh private school ones.

What matters is if they find their gang. Likeminded people to protect from external buffeting. I was very lucky in my deeply average school in the sense and made lifelong close friends.

The problem is you can't tell how that's going to go for a couple of years. Go for the school you want, make sure you've got a backup that you'll actually get into, and hope for the best.

I wouldn't hesitate to move schools for social reasons, even if they were excelling academically

Not true, however, I do believe that home environment, having interested parents, a space to work, the tools to work, etc. does help a lot.
My DS is bright and coasting in his comp - if he was at the grammar, he might be working harder and doing better (or he might be deflated and struggling, we'll never know)

At my daughter's school a girl thinks she's a dog and barks at pupils. She apparently calls herself a furry? I don't quite understand it. So not quite hissing 😕

100%

Equally I'd rather kids didn't learn (for example) languages at all if it meant that time could be spent working on social skills for all.

(And I love languages! But feel like most schools aren't able to devote the time to their emotional wellbeing when trying to fit all the curriculum in)

Not true at all. Put a smart kid in a class full of feral ones, what kind of education will they get? Unless they can telepathically extract information out a teacher’s head.

The problem is always other freak kids and their feckless parents.

It’s true statistically based on the evidence, apparently. The rest is all anecdotal.

Not true.
But it is also not true to say that a smart child will do well in a good school.

What are parents for? Should schools teach your kids how to wipe their arse too?

I went to the worst school in the borough because I switched the first and last school preference around on my application. 10 year old me was desperate to stay with my best friend, who was going to the school closest to her house.

It was hell. I was bullied for various things and although my friend and I stayed close she made new friends and I kind of didn't really. I was lovely and lessons were disruptive. My mental health was wrecked, I was self harming, and when I admitted to my mum what I'd done with the application she was furious but didn't move me because I'd made my bed, as it were.

I was very motivated to do well and go to college and uni and escape and that kind of kept me going. So technically yes I did well despite everything, but Jesus Christ at what price?

My DH is a very intelligent man and has/is doing well in his career and earning well.
He'd be doing alot better if he hadn't gone to one of the roughest schools in the country where he didn't feel safe to wear his glasses.
So he struggled through secondary school days barely able to make out the board and getting in trouble for missing things because of this. All preferable to being beaten up.

Absolutely not true for a whole raft of reasons.

Most teens will adapt their behaviour to the kids around them partially just from peer pressure but also teens can really bully others very badly.

In a bad school this means not sticking out, not being too keen, and not working too hard.

In a good school this means doing your homework, taking part in extra curriculars and working hard in lessons.

It makes a massive massive difference.

I think some children can do well, even in a poor school. But, it would depend on family support and a host of other things.🙂

I agree, or they could even self-teach if bright and motivated with a hunger to learn. After my awful years at a crap comp, I vowed to take our son out of school and home school him at the first sign of bullying or disruption at his school - luckily it worked well for him because the school was red hot on discipline and had zero tolerance of disruption, bullying, etc., so he did ok. But I really would have removed him in a heartbeat after what I suffered.

I've never agreed with that stupid expression.

I was a bright child who could have done well at school had it not been turned into a comprehensive. I needed to keep off the radar of the bullies so did nothing to bring attention to myself. My brother was bright but extremely lazy and did the bare minimum. School responded by just putting him into lower and lower sets.

My eldest was bright but very easily led. Once at a high-performing school she pushed herself to keep up with her friends and try to beat the best in class.

My second, autistic and not at all influenced by popular trends BUT looked out for by friends from primary thrived at a school that would have totally failed his sister. He was single minded enough to tread his own path and take no notice of anyone else.

Both did really well, but neither would have done as well in a different school.

Agree, but you are swinging the odds in their favour. A bright child is more likely to do better when they are surrounded by other people like them, who are motivated to learn and who behave and respect the teachers, and whose parents are encouraging and supportive.

There’s more to life than school and exam results. I am academically bright and went to a lower than average school. Didn’t get (any) top grades at GCSE (I imagine we weren’t taught the higher end of the syllabus) though in top 3 for the school, better at A Level (well top of my school, 300 points, probably due to the smaller classes), 2.1 at university, onto a prestigious graduate scheme and I’m succeeding now after having kids. High school and GCSEs are a platform but it doesn’t end there, and yes a bright child who wants to succeed will be able to get enough of a platform to do so at any school, I think, though it may limit the opportunities available it won’t stop them.

Social needs are something different though I think. To succeed in life you’ll need to be resilient to this sort of thing anyway I think so going to a school where it’s easier isn’t necessarily a positive and might not prepare you best for reality!

Not true.

Whilst I didn't get amazing results I benefited from going to a school across town, where in the class I was in my peers actually did their homework and worked hard. I passed all GCSE's, though I could have done better. My parents expected me to revise/do homework but didnt actually check or make sure I did it.

I was bright but lazy/not self motivated as a teenager.

Other children that lived nearby went to the local school - I probably would have not attended school regularly, and I doubt I would have passed many exams.

Yeah, I certainly didn't. I went to a school that people are absolutely desperate to get their kids into, and the place was an absolutely brutal over-competitive hellhole with sadistic thugs for teachers.

A bright kid will probably do OK in most schools, but, my (geeky, young for his age) boy would be eaten alive at some of the schools I went to, so I chose carefully.

Also, opportunities are different - for example, at the comp I did my GCSEs at, I could only do double award science, there was very little choice in other subjects, let alone something exotic, or any way to do something like Maths early and move onto something more advanced - same for A-levels. vs one of the other schools I went to where they had the interest and facilities for separate sciences, every child did a General Studies A-level (which, yes, I know isn't much, but coming out with 4 A-levels rather than 3 is nice), there were multiple options when it came to further maths etc.

Of course it's not true. No child would do well in any school. They need to be at the right school.

Some children will fit well in many schools. Lots won't, especially the smart children are also neurodiverse – they certainly don't thrive in any school.

Bright children who are lonely and isolated or bullied aren't thriving and may fail to do well in adulthood, in the work place and socially - however good their exams results might be. Bright children at schools where it is uncool to be curious, to use critical thinking, to be keen on hard work, may fall in with the crowd just to be socially accepted. That's not thriving.

I often think that phrase is trotted out by people whose children did fine at the local school and so assume all children would. On here, I've noticed it's often used by people who disapprove of private schools.

Smart has to mean enormous work ethic, self-motivated, spends hours watching YouTube videos on how to approach different question types. Not many kids are like this.

It's true if you look at averages. On average, children with high IQs do better even if not at selective schools.

This really doesn't mean a bright child will do well (never mind as well as they could) anywhere.

Ds came out with straight As in his poor performing schoolv(only 3-4 pupils got all A each year out of 250+).

But he had good friends in the early years. they unfortunately went of the rails a bit in exams years (drinking, police etc) so he switched close friendship groups to avoid the drama, but stayed friendly with all.

yes, a child can get the grades but they need to have confidence, be resilient, self motivated and want to avoid trouble which is rife in their school.

they do still miss out though, teachers are so busy dealing with behaviour issues or supporting those who really need it, so those that are doing ok are generally left to get on with it and not stretched or given other opportunities. more than one teacher said as much at parents evenings.

ds’s school sent out letters a couple of times saying some pupils were identified as doing very well and it was planned they would get various opportunities - mentoring, clubs etc, not one thing materialised.

@Alcyoneus TBNT
100%

Equally I'd rather kids didn't learn (for example) languages at all if it meant that time could be spent working on social skills for all.

(And I love languages! But feel like most schools aren't able to devote the time to their emotional wellbeing when trying to fit all the curriculum in)

"What are parents for? Should schools teach your kids how to wipe their arse too?"

Well my point exactly - some parents aren't raising kids who are kind, tolerant, or socially mature. So I'd sooner schools bloody did.

I was on track to leave with no qualifications, as soon as legally possible. Had been written off as stupid. School was alternately terrifyingly bullying and boring. Thankfully we moved to a small town, school was very different, ended up with A levels and a place at a really good uni.