"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.

My DS (9) is a good example of why I don't think this is true. At an apparently top state private school in our area, very bright but with potential dyslexia which hasn't been identified at school simply because he's in a class full of kids who misbehave so he's off the radar completely. He regularly comes home upset because he's unable to focus in a disruptive environment. HT is results driven with no interest in kids who aren't top achievers so from what I hear, class teachers are left to it when it comes to discipline, DS's teacher has just resigned. He's moving to private school after the summer and it can't come soon enough.

@Heatherbell1978 what is a “ top state private school in our area”?

is it state or private?

I'd say no- I don't agree. If the support from teachers and peers isn't there- then I don't believe they will. I believe the ethos and attitude of other kids will affect the ability to learn- u less you choose to have no friends.

Typo, he's at a state school. Best in the area results and reputation wise. But no school is immune to a few kids behaving and disrupting the whole class.

My parents got me into a grammar on appeal, and I really, really, really wish they hadn't. It was seven years of aggressive, competitive hell that left me traumatised.

Sorry to hear that. And it’s what is heard a lot.

Our experience however could not have been more different. DD has absolutely thrived and is really happy. Again it’s not a onesizefitsall, there’s more nuance.

Grammar schools are only really suited to a small subset of even the kids that get into them. Sure, some people really thrived at my school, but they were nothing like me. They generally had a lot of sporting or music talent, of which I have none, and were far more confident and outgoing than I was.

i think years ago it was basically true. now with the high disruption levels and poor behaviour in the classroom that many schools suffer with it’s not.

I think there is nuance in the term “grammar school” here.

Our area is a grammar county, so 25% of DC go to one. This creates a wholly different school to a superselective one that perhaps is for the top 1-5%.

And FWIW my DC is talented at neither sports or music. And neither are the majority of their friends. My DC is also not outgoing, nor bookish. But has a big circle of friends.

Personally I think grammars are outdated, ineffective and grossly unfair, especially to the poorer kids they were originally supposed to help, and it's high time we got rid of them.

Absolutely agreed. Sadly there is no money to change it. As with everything this shitty government hasn’t spent any money on.

One of my friends had a child that was been bullied in national school. The bullies were going to the local rough secondary school. My friend decided to apply for an accedemic school in the nearest big town.

The school is popular as it has good teachers, good pastoral care, has a wide range of subjects and extra curricular activities.
Her child needed some resource help as well. She also has younger kids who are bright.
Since her child went to this school she told me that their exam results are getting better.
They have friends. She said as well that her child is mixing with kids whose parents are working in good jobs and want their kids to do well in school so homework and doing your best in exams is important.
She told me that she was glad to get them away from from the bullies and they are doing far better now both socially and exam wise.

Agree.

Totally disagree, you take a bright ND child and put them in the wrong school for them and good chance they will burnout and leave.

For some smart children being in a highly pressurised academic environment is utterly soul destroying and they think they are “thick” because they aren’t in the top set - this in turn impacts grades.

You take a neurotypical child, socially aware, sporty, average IQ, they probably will do well in most schools (save for ones with extreme behaviour problems).

I agree with you OP. It’s like saying to an adult “if you’re bright, you’ll make a lot of money in any career”. Maybe true for some, but it’s a hell of a lot easier and more enjoyable along the way if you choose a career that actually pays well, offers training, opportunities for progression etc etc.

I agree with you OP. In my primary school there were 5 of us in the 'top table' (this was in the late 90s so everyone was pretty aware of what table was which 😂) in a small, friendly village primary. As far as I remember we were all pretty bright - at one point we did a pre-mensa assessment (can't remember why) 1 boy scored very highly and another 2 of us got a high enough score to have been accepted had it been the real thing. We all got straight 5s in our SATs etc.

We all went to the nearest comp - again at that time and place that was just what you did, this was an area of the UK where there weren't any grammar schools nor private schools in this or the neighbouring counties so no other alternative. Comp was ok but not 'good' let alone excellent - there were 37/38 pupils in most of my classes, even up to A level, other than maths, english science none of the subjects were 'set' so an absolute mix, many of whom just did not want to be there and made fun of anyone who did want to work.

I absolutely hated it, went through a phase of school avoidance and stealing etc. At least 1 of the others was really badly bullied. Within a few years 1 of the boys was expelled for high drug use, another girl had been suspended and was also having sex with the PE teacher.

From at facebook/friends/the last time we saw each other, the expelled guy has never really worked. The others are working as a ski instructor, managing a golf club, 1 is a pharmacist and I'm mid level civil service - in our mid 30s. So all decent enough jobs but not setting the world alight - I'm positive that had we gone to a naice grammar or private school or even a leafy comp several of us would have been potential Oxbridge candidates, and gone on to high level careers - just because of the increased expectations and encouragement. Also suspect most of us would have had much happier teenage years.

Obviously it's not the be all and end all and as I say everyone seems happy enough now but for most of us it was definitely a case of scraped through despite the school rather than did well as a result of it.

The will do well anywhere child was me, I was bright from a supportive background. But I was lazy. I went to a comprehensive school, but a “good” one with an intake that was largely from the same background as me. I did do well - As and Astars at GCSE AAAB at A level (no A star at A level in my day). This was on the bare minimum and included chatting at the back of the class with the naughty boys when I could get away with it. But generally time in lessons was productive- we had good teachers in a generally well controlled environment (particularly because I was in top set for Maths and sciences, which was the only subjects they set for). I could definitely have done better in a selective environment, because I’m competitive so would have pulled my finger out, rather than coast. However, ultimately, given it was a good school, this didn’t matter for me and I did well enough. But I’m a sink school? I suspect I would have done significantly worse. Probably more like Bs and Cs if the lesson time (which was invaluable to me because I did not independent study except for a lot of reading for pleasure) was not productive. And with those grades I would have been cut off from my eventual career which is highly competitive.

So in short, I think the old trope that bright kids will do well anywhere is bollocks. (That’s before you even get me started on bright kids with SEN…)

No. I said that for years but I was wrong - brightness on its own is not enough. I think there can be a sweetspot where a child is bright, neurotypical, not too much of a 'nerd' (or able to hide it) and has one or two other things to help them 'fit in', say being interested in tiktok/sex/drinking/partying or something else that makes them 'cool'.
It's very very tough being bright, neurodiverse and nerdy.

I think when people say this they're focusing on teaching quality rather than the influence of other pupils.

The school I went to until the start of year 9 (moved abroad after) was very big, I think 6 classes in my year, and had a bad rep. We had a tutor group and then were in sets for everything else. I was in top set for all subjects so was mainly with relatively well behaved, studious kids and did thrive.

My tutor group was another story. I remember one boy lighting up a spliff in class at age 13, another turned up drunk around the same age and it was all kids shouting, throwing things, ignoring the teacher etc. I know that one of the lower sets (with several kids from my tutor group) bullied a pregnant teacher so badly she had a breakdown and had to go off sick for the last three months of her pregnancy.

God knows how I'd have done if I was in my tutor group the whole time.

It’s too simplistic. My bright, gregarious, slim, musical daughter would do well anywhere. My bright, introverted, anxious and possibly ND son would not.

Agree. There was another recent thread about the 11 plus where the OP was told if her kid didn’t get a private tutor or spend months revising independently then he would have no chance of getting in as he wouldn’t know the material.

Oh, yeah. Tutoring was always rife - my parents spent a fortune on it trying to get me through the exams, and that was in 1985!

There's something fundamentally wrong with state funding of something that is now so elitist and exclusionary. If you want to send your kid to an elite school, go private and cut the hypocrisy.

I think it’s bollocks. To a certain extent I did meet this (bright kid that got the string of A*s from a not great but not totally shit comp). However, I have no doubt a number of my friends underperformed and would have done infinitely better at a grammar or private school. I also think I’d have come out a more confident person from a better school- I spent more time hiding my ability than really shining.

And even at primary the cohort matters. My eldest is in a lovely school but has a difficult class. They undoubtedly don’t get through as much as they should because of disruption so the bright ones aren’t being pushed as much as they otherwise would in an easier class group. Some of the kids in her year will be very challenging indeed when they’re older. Her sister’s class by contrast is a dream.