To choose the local state comp over the high achieving private boys school?

[Seaofcake]

We have narrowed down our secondary school choices to two options and DH and I disagree about which one is best. DH is willing to pay for private and although it wouldn’t by any means be a drop in the ocean, we could do it.

We’ve gone round in circles with this decision. My pros and cons are below. Any advice would really be welcome.

State comp

Pros

• Mixed sex
• 10 minute drive in rush hour. He could walk or catch the bus eventually.
• Ofsted report is outstanding in all areas
• Enrichment programme
• Strict on behaviour
• 1.5 mile catchment, local kids
• Get to stay in area and younger DC can go to primary when ready.

Cons

• Less chance for trips and opportunities, will need to fight for them
• Some kids look rough when we’ve hung around during end of school day (but there is a good number of polite, decent kids too; it’s just very varied)
• Only 20% scored above 7 in English and Maths
• Strict but some rules are over the top

Private school

Pros

• Excellent GCSE and A level scores
• Excellent extra-curriculars
• Excellent and varied trips
• Well behaved, polite boys

Cons

• Boys school so limited social opportunities with girls. No contact with girls till 16
• It’s a city school with little greenery
• School finishes at 16:00 but coach gets back at 17:15 and that’s without after-school clubs
• Have to get the coach in the morning too and it leaves at 07:40 so it makes for a very long day
• If he does clubs, they finish at 17:30 but coach gets back at 18:40
• Forced to move?
• Can afford an extended semi in the city centre but it doesn’t have the greenery of our current location and we will lose the catchment of our local primary for younger DC who are due to join in a few years time

What would you do?

I'll get shot down in flames for this, but I'm a tough old bird and don't mind going against the flow.

I think the concerns about single-sex education are misplaced. From my personal experience and observation as a pupil, parent and teacher over the years I'd pick single sex every time - until say, sixth-form, when youngsters are hopefully more mature.

It depends what you want for your children. If social life is the most important thing, I suppose there's a slight argument for mixed sex schools, but I had a great social life at my all-girls grammar back when dinosaurs roamed the earth.

I remember friends whose children went to mixed schools moaning about the ridiculous pressure on them, even from Y7, to be attractive to the opposite sex. Girls and boys would make themselves late for school by spending time grooming themselves and arranging their hair, make-up, dress in order not to be picked on.

In single sex schools this pressure is largely removed - they can save all that for the weekend!

I just think that kids focus more on their school work and activities when in single-sex settings. The idea that, in this day and age, they somehow become incapable of dealing with the opposite sex is a bit outmoded. They can join clubs and hobby groups and meet boyfriends/girlfriends if that's important to them at that age - it wasn't for me. I was happy to wait until sixth-form for all that.

The 1 hour of homework with 90% scoring 9-7 sounds like they rely on you getting extra tutoring to prop up their results. Can you afford this since you say your child is middle of the road?

DS friend is at a school where > 90% score 9-7 and they have 3 hours a day of homework from Year 7 to get these results. No extra tutoring required.

@roses2 My DDs boarded and had 1 hour of prep in y7. It obviously increases as dc work up to y11. The longer school days do cram more in. At academic schools, and certainly state grammars too, the pace is often faster.

I hate this idea that you should tutor throughout secondary school. It limits dc in other ways. It makes them think they are bright but others, who don’t need the tutoring, are brighter. It often shows in the end with jobs. At any decent state school, if dc is in a tip set, tutoring isn’t needed.

Someone said it wax easy to get all 9s in a private school. Obviously it’s not. In the OP’s case. I would have to factor in travel time though. It’s making the day longer than it should be. However if this school is wanted for DC2, it makes sense to move. Primary schools are decent everywhere or use a prep.

We chose the state comp for dd and have no regrets. Didn't think the private options were worth the investment personally.

You can supplement with tutoring if needed - we never felt that it was necessary. I prefer for extracurricular activities to be done outside of school anyway, as it's beneficial to mix with different groups of kids imo. If you have money, it's easy enough to ensure that kids have access to plenty of enrichment opportunities. Plus I personally think there are distinct advantages to mixing with a range of kids from diverse socio-economic backgrounds but that's a personal opinion.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves Do they mix? Or just stay with “people like us”? My DN never made a single friend in her 6th form because they were all “stuck up and rich”. In a comp! In Sheffield! Obviously this could not be but the idea that dc really mix with all sorts if they are available is a fallacy. They like their own kind and are happy to stay with their crowd. No doubt the better off in comps don’t really want to be mates with the nearly excluded dc with absent parents. They only want the people like them but with a bit less cash is ok. Do the DC with drug addict parents make good friends? How about the ones in care or parent in prison? Or the lewd boys?

I can only comment on my dd's experience, but yes, she did mix. Not initially- she went to a very middle class state primary school and it was a real shock to the system for her when she first started secondary. She was very judgemental in Year 7 and gave kids from the rougher estates a fairly wide berth, but she did gradually get to know a wider range of people over time and her attitudes definitely started to change as her understanding increased. She became much less judgemental as time went on, and much more aware of her own privilege. She's doing medicine now, and will encounter all sorts of people throughout her career, so from my perspective, it was really good for her to have that experience. I appreciate that not everyone will agree.

I would add that my own journey through school was very similar. Middle class family and middle class primary school followed by a much more diverse cohort at secondary school. It was eye opening for me, and definitely had an impact on how I thought about the world.

Jesus, I’ve never heard such offensive stereotyping! You’re basically saying that “naice” middle class Mumsnet kids couldn’t possibly want to socialise with kids with single parents, or in care, or living in difficult situations through no fault of their own? And you’re presuming that the “nearly excluded” kids are the ones with the absent parents?

I assure you, from my time working in state secondary schools, that yes, all these kids do mix, and thankfully the parents are not as judgemental as you!

Proves the point that the main reason people pick private schools is they don’t want their precious DC socialising with the riff-raff.

Why assume the child needs tutoring? You do know that many state pupils achieve highly without any tutoring? Most actually in most schools. My two, at a school far less appealing than OP described, got a full suite of A stars at GCSE and A level. And to be honest didn't exactly sweat. Had jobs and a social life too.
And they weren't alone. The brainy one (from all backgrounds) seemed to stick together and just crack on.

In your situation I would go state. Use the money for tutoring, extra curriculars and uni costs.

If they were assessed using a CAT/MidYis at the start of year 7 then they could have scored high enough to suggest G&T. A grade 7 at GCSE at a run down comp in a deprived area, where the child hasn’t got anywhere near the level of support, would be equivalent of a grade 8/9. Some universities take this in to consideration, which is why some parents feel hard done by.

Your DH can insist all he likes, but all the insisting in the world won't cure travel sickness. Two hours a day on a coach is a big ask, and aside from that, where will all his schoolfriends live? How will he be able to meet up with them after school or at the weekends and in school holidays?

We had a bog-standard average state school less than five minutes' walk from our house, and that benefit far outweighed anything other schools could have offered.

By way of (un)balance, most of the private school students I met at university really struggled with the change of pace and independent learning, as they had been considerably more spoon fed than state peers. That is not to say state school kids had been left to their own devices by any means.

I totally disagree with this one. My DC attended state grammar school and has gone to a private sixth form. It has really made her realise that her education to this point has been about memorising information. She has not been taught how to critically analyse or debate a topic. I can't fault her old school - they are working to a results based system. At her new school she is being challenged in a way she never was at state. The small class sizes mean they have the time look at things in a different way and she is really enjoying it.

Hmm, I honestly think at the heart of it they’re trying to impress the same sex more, anything else is a bonus. I suspect the same pressure does exist at single sex schools and I feel that (in particular) groups of teenage girls can be vicious to one another.

Is this perhaps more to do with the different demands of A levels and GCSEs?

OliveFatball
Not really. She's got lots of friends who stayed on at her old school and knows what and how they are being taught. At private she has double the amount of lessons for each subject with a very small class sizes (maths is biggest with 10 people). She has said it means that they are taking the content a lot slower as they have more time to go into depth.

Leavealighton sorry to break it to you but you’ve just explained the difference between GCSEs and A levels - that’s not school specific.

Reminds me of our wide eyed first tIme parent neighbours describing the awesome ground breaking things her pfb did at his private school - like a project on Egyptians and a nativity play. What did she think they were doing at the local perfectly decent state primary all our kids had been to ?!

I live in a town with a good state, private & public schools (mine go state) & have friends who send theirs to private / public or have worked in them.

The one thing I’d say is that just because you pay you don’t automatically receive a better standard of learning per se for your child, although the classes are smaller. The teachers aren’t any better. Kids are kids, some will want to learn, some will dick about. What you are paying for are superb sports & music facilities & social access - the old school tie network is alive & kicking - and if that’s important to you then fine.

But my youngest, who somehow has been identified as super-talented at maths has been asked to take part in a national programme so the state system does provide. Equally, a friend took her son out of the local private as she was unhappy, sent him to the local state & they found he had learning issues which had been missed at the private school completely. All I’m saying is that private doesn’t equal best.

Private is most definitely not always best. Some private schools are terrible. They have teachers who wouldn't get jobs in the state sector. Private schools can be money for old rope - often are.

But again, OP is not talking about the independent sector in general. She is talking about a SPECIFIC super-selective that achieves 90% 7-9 at GCSE, versus a non-selective where that figure is 20%.

That is a HUGE difference, whichever way you look at it.

I think some people don't realise how competitive it is to get into that type of school - whether it's a super-selective grammar, independent or academy.

The teachers are no better. There are good and bad teachers in any school. But the pace is totally different. Someone working at a 7 in a super-selective will be seen as 'struggling.' In the lowest Maths sets, they will be getting 8s.

When teachers can just walk into a classroom and everyone is in the top probably 2% of ability, they aren't worrying that anybody isn't keeping up. They finish the GCSE curriculum in Year 9 or 10 and the rest of the time is just consolidating.

There are super-selectives (private and state) in inner London where 15 children sit for every place - eg. There is a school near me where over 1,500 sit exams over maybe 2 days for 100 places at 11 plus. Even after that, there are interviews. It's a stressful process and many are sitting for 5,6,7 schools. Children at the very top of their primaries will often not get in. There are no guarantees for even the brightest child. Numbers-wise, it's more competitive entry than Oxbridge., No wonder, of those who do get in, nearly everyone comes out with 8s and 9s.

This school OP is considering sounds like it's outer London (because she mentions coaches), so maybe it's Hampton, Dulwich College or Merchant Taylor's, something like that? They bus them in from wide catchments. These schools are also very competitive entry. There will be waiting lists of people phoning the schools every day to see if any places have been turned down.

@catstaff47 I don’t disagree with you but as I posted earlier in the thread, since OP’s son got into this super selective school, he is also going to be in the top 20% at the state school, and so will come out with the same results.

Does it matter whether he is 1 of 20% or 1 of 90%? He can only be in a class with a small proportion of the year, so assuming the comp is streamed, the bottom 80% will be irrelevant to him.

Absolutely - our state comp is wonderful. My DD's recent GCSE's were stellar. It's a big school so loads of extra curricular options too.

When I worked in the City years ago the general view was that state educated kids were hoodie wearing knife wielders who had never done a sport in their lives and people would actually say as much assuming they were “amongst friends”. I usually kept quiet but was sometimes it was amusing to admit to the true horror of my origins! Shades of that in this thread! Hopefully things have changed!

LifeD1lemma

All being well, thst could well happen, sure. But I'm currently watching my niece, who also passed exams to a top girls school that gets 95% 7-9 at GCSE. She was also in catchment for an outstanding state that gets 33% 7-9 at GCSE (so excellent for a mixed cohort and well above national average). They chose the outstanding non-selective state option.

She started off very well. Top set for maths. Nothing else was streamed, but every report / parents evening teachers were saying she was 'gifted' at English - consistently top of the school in this and also History. Definitely on a trajectory for all 8s and 9s.

Year 10 came. The classes were mixed up. She fell in with a group of girls who were not academically-inclined at all. My niece completely changed in a matter of weeks. Stopped doing homework. Missing lessons to hang out in the loos making TikToks. She went from being predicted 8/9s to being predicted 4:5s. Her mum didn't know ehst to do. She tried her best with tutors etc, but no avail.

In the end, and to cut a long story short, my niece dropped 3 subjects and only took 6 GCSE's. 5s and 6s in everything. I am certain that if she'd gone to the selective school she would have had a totally different peer group and she would almost certainly have come out with the full set of 8s and 9s she is undoubtedly capable of. It really showed me how, for teens, peer group is everything.

OPs DS may well do brilliantly at the state. But it all depends on who his friends happen to be. This is unpredictable. I've seen very able kids become 'mediocre' way too many times. Because if your friends are all aiming for 3/4s at a push, a teenager will likely will think a 6 or 7 is amazing, even though she/he could be easily getting 9s they could experience others doing the same in their peer group. Kids tend to gravitate to the 'norm' - they measure themselves and are measured against the 'bell curve' in their school environment. This is their benchmark and it takes a strong-minded teen or one with exceptionally-involved parents to push them beyond the relative norm of their school context.

I have to say that 8/9 are only really relevant in the subjects the child wants to continue to A level. As you need those kind of grades to reach the top grades at A level. The rest of the subjects are simply nice to haves above a pass. Getting all 9s involves knuckling down big time in Year 11. There is so much to remember now especially in Sciences/History and there are past papers to go through to get used to getting the top mark answers correct. A very bright but lazy distracted child is not going to get all 8/9s. However, I don’t think they should need to. A child having a great time with friends but still doing well in there key subjects vs a kid who worked and burned themselves out - I am not so sure which one is preferable.

One of the kids in the wider family got top grades in Maths, Physics and Computer Science and a First in Astrophysics at a top uni, however, he got some 5/6 at GCSE and a 4 in RS. Late summer birthday and simply was not interested in the other subjects especially things like English and the language that was compulsory at their comp.
I think as long as they find their passion and work hard at those and pass the rest it can be absolutely fine in the long run.

No way I would send a child to a single sex school. It's messed up.