"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.

A motivated child will do well in any school, nothing to do with smarts.

All 3 of my boys are scary smart, very science & maths. Eldest went into secondary as a 'gold star' gifted - they ignored all his assessments & primary notes on coping mechanisms & he was virtually expelled before his GCSEs (allowed in the exams but not otherwise in school) for relentless low level stuff. He went to the 'better' school, further away, cos they were supposed to be supportive of extra needs...ha..wankers. They broke him (he's okay now!!) but we had to get through drugs, alcohol, two hospital trips for ODs - I really mean they broke him, it was dire.

Middle is crazy smart but a coaster - just very chill, not highly motivated. A teacher who could push him would make the world of difference. Doing 4 A-levels in science & maths. He's very emotionally intelligent, funny af & the most NT person you could meet to the point of being rare. He's now realising how much he coasted & that you can't do that at A-level.

Youngest...about to go thru autism assessments for him but likely no smarter than the other two, same school as middle child & to say he's excelling would be an understatement. He's phenomenally driven (one of the reasons for getting him assessed) & that's the difference. The literal golden boy at school (polar opposite at home - again, assessment), IT teacher wanted him to do his GCSE early & he's doing his further maths in his own time.

It's all about motivation (even though youngest is via definite ND & I suspect aspergers among other things). These are ordinary state schools, youngest's school just had some of the worst results for the entire county. But he's unhealthily driven.

Ultimately it comes down to the individual, ND or NT, & their motivation to work at their best.

2 different things, on one hand you're asking about a 'smart' child doing well in any school on the other hand it's about 'feeling comfortable'. A well adjusted child is likely to be resilient enough to cope in any environment and an academically able yet fragile child is likely not to have the resilience to handle any environment.

The child has to be bright, confident, self-motivated - and be in a school which sets by academic ability.

And a bright enough child might well do much better than a very academic but anxious child. I would prefer confidence and resilience and decent grades to a whole set of 9s and mental health concerns.

I haven't read the entire thread but how can this be measured anyway?

Yes a bright kid may do "well" in any school but not as well as they may have done if in a "better" school.

I went to 5 different secondary schools (due to moving around a lot and between parents / other people), I missed 5 out of 6 GSCE school terms and because of that was only put forward for 5 GCSEs. I got decent grades and have done very well despite everything. However, I am sure I did not do as well as I would have being in one good school.

When you talk about a 'failing school' do you mean a school where teaching and management is ineffectual, or do you mean a school full of kids from serious disadvantage, which may be well managed, and have great teachers?

Because I wasn't talking about 'failing schools'. I was talking about socially polarised schools.

I think the grain of truth.. is that a bright child will likely be out the the top sets where behaviour is better and teachers may be more engaged.

I was mostly top sets in a rough comp. But only middle set for French. So I saw a little of both.

The top sets were almost like a different school. Largely middle class kids, high expectations, sympathetic and encouraging teachers.

Middle set had a palpable feeling of "cant-be arsedness" from both teachers and students.
I took to ignoring the lesson and openly working on my art coursework. No-one even cared until another kid decided to nick my charcoal sharpening knife and ran up and down the corridor with it.

@YukoandHiro Sorry, just catching up! My smart, idle dickhead is now 19 - having dropped out of his grammar school without taking his A levels. He repeated Y12 as he had buggered about throughout the first go - and then got to the end of his second attempt, turned 18 and dropped out, deciding he 'couldn't be arsed' to do another year and was way behind as he wasn't doing any work.

He's currently doing a zero hours contract, minimum wage job for about 2 days a week. We keep suggesting apprenticeships but he's not very interested. He seems to think because he is intelligent (which he is) that someone is suddenly going to offer him an easy job starting at about £30,000 a year, despite the fact that he only has his GCSEs.

We're just leaving him to it. You can't argue with some people. He'll pull himself together at some point, hopefully.