to think that if you went from a state comp to oxbridge you were probably teased mercilessly for being a 'geek'?

[thedollyridesout]

Up to A level at least .

There are quite a lot of 'oxbridge from state' folk on here and I'd be interested to hear if you were teased or not for being clever.

Is it something to consider when choosing a school for one's offspring - whether or not they will be in the clever minority?

dh went to an ordinary state school followed by Cambridge, he wasn't teased but then he was/is good looking and sporty. Some people just don't know they're born.

Interesting.
I went to private school on a scholarship aged 11 from a state primary and was bullied/teased mercilessly for being poor and a geek.
After a few years of that I lost my scholarship (punching the head bully is not a good idea when they are the head's niece) and went to a local state comp.
Then I got bullied even more for being 'posh' and 'above myself' and thining I was cleverer than everyone else. (Luckily that school's anti-bullying policy worked)

Then I went to Uni in Liverpool and it was never commented that i was clever, or stupid, I was just the same as everyone else. I lvoed it.

So I don't think it is where you are going/where you ahve been, I think if you are 'different' enough someone will try and bully you, simple as that.

I went to private schools all the way, but remember that the adjustment from cleverest by miles at primary, to one of the crowd at my massively selectively girls' secondary was quite hard (academically not socially). It took a couple of years to get back into my stride. I could imagine that being a problem at the transfer from A-level to university too.

More than 70 of the 120 girls in my A-level year went to Oxford or Cambridge. I remember University as far less cliquey than school. My friends were certainly from all sorts of places and types of schools, and I'm still friends with most of them 15 years later. But tbh everybody knew where everyone had been to school if it was a famous school.

I went to a grammar school so the atmosphere was a bit different as far as university goes (it was assumed that everyone would apply and about 10% go to Oxbridge). selective you're right about the mild underachieving thing, one girl was an actress on't telly at 16 and the headmistress was very disparaging about the 'waste' of her brains

I did find the 'being different' started earlier - at primary school I got teased a lot for being the one the teachers put forward for curriculum extension weekends etc* and for reading the books of the top class kids when I was 7.

*absolutely loved these though, and to heck with the teasing I guess that means I was/am a geek after all!

Thinking about this overnight, dolly, I think what you really need to guard against is that your children learn to dumb down to fit in.
I know I had to do that, in order not to get my head kciked in too often, and I see now that my neice, who is very clever, is already doing it at 10. She tells me it's not 'cool' to put your hand up in class, and it's 'gay' to enter comps and stuff.
Similarly in the schiool where I volunteer, the children already say school is boring by year four. Everyone says they hate it, though I can't believe they do - it's juts the thing to say iyswim.

This is in such contrast to my own kids it makes me very sad.

They go regularly from my DSs comprehensive-it is in the local paper and celebrated. They are not teased-they are often the 'coolest' kids anyway. Even if they are not, they have the confidence to be themselves. I can't think of it being a problem-they are going to have the brightest DCs as friends anyway. There are a lot of really bright ones-they are not 'creamed off'.

I went to pretty average Comp then Cambridge and was never teased.

Up to A Level I didn't do any work as I was able to get good grades without really trying. So not geek status then. I did swot for the few weeks before me GCSE exams and I guess I didn't tell many people how hard I was working just in case they smirked.

By A-levels it was reasonably "cool" to work. Everyone was lovely when I got my place and we had a huge party to celebrate.

"I now work at Oxford, in the Student Union (I'm a student advisor), and the kids who have the biggest problems are those whose self esteem derives entirely from their brains."

I think that is a very interesting insight. Definitely worth bearing in mind when pushing bringing up one's children .

I was shocked to find out that our local (well thought of)13-18 comp only set by ability for maths and science. I can't help thinking it would be difficult for the more able child to enjoy english and french lessons to the full. Maybe I'm wrong.

My DSS1 (14) definitely enjoys his English lessons (French state comprehensive collège) because they are the only lessons for which the most able children in that subject are in a separate set.

My brother went to Oxford from one of the worst comps in the country he was a local hero. I think it depends where you are.

"On another point... I now work at Oxford, in the Student Union (I'm a student advisor), and the kids who have the biggest problems are those whose self esteem derives entirely from their brains. "

So true Liska, I was very unhappy at Oxford for exactly that reason! I used to compound the problem by going out with boys because they were clever rather than because they were nice .

Not especially at secondary school, but I wasn't that geeky though, just bright. I still had a good group of mates, and there were plenty of clever kids at my school who did well at A level.

I can't remember anyone being teased for being clever at my ordinary run of the mill comprehensive.

Frankly there are a whole range of reasons and non-reasons for kids to be teased at school, and suggesting that being clever enough for Oxbridge at a comprehensive must be so rare that it's bound to be a cause for teasing is pretty insulting to the vast majority of children in this county who go to comprehensives.

I went to Oxford from a state grammar. Even there, at a selective school, there was a bit of "geek" teasing (although I don't think the word had been invented - "square" was the most common insult). But a lot of people worked "on the quiet".

The ironic thing was that I often didn't do as much work as some of those who were teasing. I was quite lazy in sixth-form - I worked hard for the Oxbridge exam but coasted once I had the place. But because I didn't go out drinking and to parties, etc. I was seen as boring and "worky".

Bonsoir that does not make me feel any better.

Kathy - would you say that grammar schools have a part to play in the whole self esteem being tied up with brains thing?

Dolly - the setting thing is definitely worth watching.
Here on MN you'll be told all comps set rigourously, so mixed ability education is not a problem.

But if you look for the threads on this you'll see armies of MNers saying 'well they don't set much at DC's school.'

My view is that setting is imperative.

I agree wholeheartedly with questions2008. I wasn't really bullied at school as I had a nice set of clever friends, and I did loads of different stuff and met lots of great people at Cambridge. It was only in certain activities (the Union, drinking societies) that school/background came up - most of the time it wasn't an issue at all. However, I found it extremely difficult going from being one of the cleverest in school to being just average at uni - everyone else seemed completely remarkable. It totally shattered my confidence with regard to jobs - when I graduated I worked as a shop assistant and then a secretary. But I have always had issues with self esteem so different school or uni probably wouldn't have helped.

The "finding out you are average" thing is a big culture-shock. If you have been used to coming top or nearly top throughout your school career it can really throw you.

In our preliminary exams in first year there was a mark out of 10 for each paper - 3 was the pass, 7 was a distinction. Quite a narrow range. So getting a translation back on which you had got 4/10 when you thought it was pretty good was a bit ...

Thedolly - my school was a grammar school and it valued academic achievement way above everything else, so on top of having parents that did the same, that was definitely a factor for me. But I know people from different kinds of schools who had the same problem/similar schools who didn't, so there's clearly more to it than that.
I suspect parental attitude is the most important factor - dh is very bright but his parents always said things to him like 'You don't have to go to university you know, you could do an apprenticeship if you want' and his friends were those with whom he shared hobbies rather than other maths geeks, so he was never at risk of seeing brains as everything in the way I did.

I went to Oxford from a state grammar school. Even though it was a selective school it was seen as really uncool to try to do well or to work hard. I spent my whole time there feeling embarrassed by my exam results, making excuses and acting really surprised that I had done well. I hated it.

Oxford was a great relief. Even though as Unquiet Dad says you suddenly had to get used to being average.

I also went (briefly) to a grammar school, and I know what other posters mean about the emphasis on academic achievement above all else. At the time I was too young to analyse my feelings, but with hindsight I can see that I found the grammar school very dull in comparison to my private prep school and, in particular, the school I subsequently attended which, despite dire facilities, was fun and expanded my horizons hugely versus provincial state grammar.

I went to a state school then Cambridge. I didn't get bullied for being a geek. But then I was always in trouble for not doing my homework or bunking off school, so I didn't fit the usual profile.

Funnily enough I never had that "average" feeling - I just saw a division of Wordsworth's idle genius and hardworking dullards. Guess which category I felt I fell into? Oh yes, I was a twat in those days.

I think if you've got to the stage of the Upper Sixth (or Yr 13) and have got all the necessary A*s etc at GCSE and then done well enough at AS, to be even thinking of applying to Oxbridge, then it won't be a problem.

It's getting to that point which could be the problem, if you are outside the 'norm', as far as being picked on or whatever for 'geekiness'

The only advantage of a highly selective school is that most children there are a) pretty clever to start with and b) it isn't seen as particularly geeky to want to go to a top university. Most of them just assume they will, mainly I would imagine because their parents did, or they have very high aspirations and have actively chosen (or been chosen, more like) to go to a highly academic school.

That isn't to say you don't get children like that in comprehensives (obviously you get plenty), but by the fact that they have a mixed ability intake, then they might be seen as more 'geeky' as it were in the context of the whole school.