I’d say the academics are strong, but not a hot house. Bright kids are identified, stretched and challenged, and I’d confidently say that they get the best out of all the children.
The entry requirements are as rigorous as other schools we went to, and actually Rugby has more steps and assessments than others although those assessments are admittedly not only academic. I personally like that they are assessing for fit, approach, personality as much as academics but that it isn’t for everyone.
Two of my kids are very bright and I fully expect them to do very well there. The top set streaming is strong. But I would honestly expect them to do very well at any school they went to. The teaching is excellent and engaged.
My other child is more middle of the road, naturally more B than A grade, and I suspect she might actually get more from the school than the others who would do well anyway. I have full confidence she will achieve better grades here than at other schools from their approach.
They do publish results on their website if you can hunt them down and when we compared them to other schools we were looking at it was comparable or better. But we have deliberately avoided the academic hot house environment schools, who clearly they will get naturally better results as they are more selective.
It is in a school’s interest to be good grades, I wouldn’t expect any slacking, but it’s also in their interest to have happy children who thrive. To me Rugby strikes that balance but there are many other schools who would do the same and for those who are strongly motivated by academics more than other things, they might want a different approach. Success at Rugby isn’t just in academic form, which isn’t for everyone.
Hope that makes sense, I’m trying to be as balanced as I can 🙂