The best Independent schools generally take the highest qualified teachers?

[Hamishbear]

It might be obvious to many that the most academic schools insist that their teachers have an outstanding degree from one of the best universities but it wasn't to me.

For example if you want a job in Maths at Guildford High school allegedly you need a first in Maths from a well regarded university. You obviously need to be an outstanding teacher in the fullest sense too.

So do the elite schools usually have the best teachers? I suppose it stands to reason that there is more competition for jobs at schools that have a fantastic reputation?

Well, I'm exceptionally verbal. What I do for a living is write and talk. Similarly with my professional peers in my field. We had to be mathsy to get into the profession to start with, though. And the English ones - we are all poo at languages. My German boss, he is multi lingual and very verbal but his Maths is normal for Germany, nothing special. Similarly with my other overseas professional peers. It probably is to do with the education but the people I'm particularly thinking of we're, like me, people who wouldn't accept poor marks at school. High achieves, grafters. And yet we still all only got acceptable to us language grades by doing far more work than for any other subject and we all happily abandoned languages at the first opportunity.

Perhaps like tends to like. It wouldn't surprise me.

Were not we're. Blooming iPad.

"Hamish According to Sutton trust only 8 schools in the country (all independant) get over 30% to oxbridge. The average for independant schools is about 5%. Poosh is talking rubbish to suggest such a school isn't near the top"

DS's school is near the top nationally speaking but it is NOT near the top as far as the Top 10 list I was referring to is concerned.

I must admit that this is the first time I've been flamed for being modest about something. I'm more used to being flamed for supposedly stealth boasting. One just can't win eh? :)

Metabilis - I strongly suspect that the issue is one of lack of opportunity and exposure rather than one of lack of innate talent. I actually do not believe (based on lots of experience and lots of reading) that it is possible to be innately "bad at languages" if you are highly verbal in your MT and have a high intellect.

The crux of the matter is that learning languages requires a massive amount of opportunity and exposure over many, many years. Mastery of a first foreign language (when all sorts of language-learning skills are acquired) is key.

I have a hard copy version of the list here Poosh. Almost no school regularly sends 30%. A handful. gelatinous is correct.

Just like to say that Oxbridge is not the goal for everyone. Lots of exceptionally bright students choose not to go there because the style of teaching doesn't suit, or there is a better course elsewhere. Also, lots of people I met there were a bit eccentric and, although incredibly academic, they had the common sense and social skills of a paper bag. They are now doing brilliantly in their academic fields, but I wouldn't want them teaching any kids !

DS's school is not near the top of the Top 10 list that I am referring to as opposed to it not being near the top nationally.

So if you and gelatinous want to start slinging buns because you can't see the subtle difference then you go for it.

That aside, its kind of funny watching you two take issue with me for not boasting that DS's school is near the top of the list of schools that send the most kids to Oxbridge :o

@mums - I accept that Oxbridge is not the goal for everyone. DD says she likes to do engineering just like DP. If she sticks to this (highly unlikely :) ) then we would consider other places, perhaps MIT in the US.

But for the moment it is a case of - if I win the Lottery I will buy a Ferrari. If/when that day ever comes I will most likely buy a gadget laden people carrier. But for the time being, that is the dream. Same with Oxbridge.

No, no, I fully concede that you're having a modest day Poosh, but I think you seem to have a propensity to talk crap even in this sudden access of modesty.

If it sends 30% to Oxford and Cambridge regularly each year, as you claim, it will be in about joint third or fourth place.

You really crack me up Yellowtip. Are you that desperate to pick a bun fight with me that you pick some thing as lame as this :o :o

I mean, you are criticising me for underselling DS's school as opposed to over selling it????
.

I can see it's incredibly unimportant Poosh, I suppose my knee jerk reaction was simply to correct the point that there aren't dozens of 'ordinary' independents sending 30% of their pupils to those universities each year. It's not great for the aspirational state schoolers out there. But yes, probably too quibbly.

I was recently hammered for saying that my nephew 'only' got mostly Cs and one or two Bs and a D for his GCSEs. The same point was made i.e. its not great for parents with kids that tried really hard to hear someone dismiss those grades as "not great".

I accept the criticism but I refuse to dumb down my conversation just on the off chance that someone I am not directing my comments at might read my post and might take offence.

A short while ago some a mum was discussing going back to work and how she was out of touch with the job market and whether £x was a reasonable salary. One mum was flamed because she said that it was on the low side of the market rate. How dare she say it was a low salary, flamed one mum on benefits. Another was outraged because she worked long hours for money that was less than the one dismissed as being on the low side. And so on and so on.

MN would become a very boring place if we start not discussing stuff because others might not want to hear it. No more talking about foreign school trips. If your kid passed the 11+ then keep it to yourself. If you are happy at having lost 6 pounds the keep that to yourself. After all, we don't want to make the woman who can't shift any weight feel bad about herself, do we?

I don't set out to offend (honest guv'na) but if people are that insecure that a comment made by someone they don't know and wasn't directed at them personally and on an anonymous forum offends them or make them sad then maybe they should stick to the Baby Names forum

Same as yellowtip, it's a total non issue as far as the thread goes, but Hamish specifically asked if 30% was a huge amount and you gave an answer that implied it was nothing special - we had no way of knowing you were comparing a list ranking schools in terms of (I'm guessing) absolute numbers rather than percentages. I therefore wanted to clarify what the average was and that 30%+ is actually very rare.

@gelatinous

Below is what I posted in response to hamish earlier.

"DS's school is near the top nationally speaking but it is NOT near the top as far as the Top 10 list I was referring to is concerned "

So, yes you did have a way of knowing that I was comparing DS's school against a list of Top 10 schools.

Poosh I promise you that I find your posts quite dumb enough as it is:)

This one is a gross over reaction and includes a misunderstanding. It's got nothing to do with anyone 'taking offence'. It's certainly not got to do with effort in the absence of ability on the part of state schoolers . I merely made the point that there are only the tiniest number of schools in the country who get the numbers into those two universities that you claim, and so your claim that your DS's school is an 'ordinary' indie probably shouldn't stand. It's the same where I see posters claiming that only heavily and expensively tutored children will get into superselectives etc. No need for misinformation, that's all.

"Poosh I promise you that I find your posts quite dumb enough as it is"

... says the woman who is flaming me for not boasting about DS's school. :o

"your claim that your DS's school is an 'ordinary' indie probably shouldn't stand"

So now you are flaming me for saying that my DS's school isn't as great as some of the indies that are sending 40 to 44% to Oxbridge ??? Please remind me how 'dumb' my posts are.

Is it Contrary Day and I didn't know it. If it is Contrary Day then that would explain why Yellowtip is flaming me for saying that my school doesn't get as many people into Oxbridge as some of the major indies in the country.

You are obviously too far gone to realise how lame your bun throwing is. Please continue. :o

Incidentally, I described my school as 'ordinary' because it is not full of Blue Bloods or foreign princes or sons of Russian billionaires.

Can someone let me know when Contrary Day is over? I want to know how long I got to stealth boast before it becomes things switch over and it becomes a bad thing again.

*Poosh, contrary to what you seem to think, I'm not intentionally picking a fight. Can we please call a close to this?

@gelat

If we can get away from the Poosh/Gel/Yel bun-lobbing trip (cheaper than acid but just as wild), it's worth following up on Metabilis language comments.

In this country we see MFL as a part of academic life, on a par with History or Geograohy, below Maths & Science, but above Tech & Music (just). In the rest of Europe (except France), NFL is seen as a part real life and is learnt in society / family as much as school. Examples I have come across (albeit from a bourgeoise perspective) include:

 Every Dutch person is fluent in English, French, German & Dutch; of these, they use Dutch only to communicate with shop assistants, non-English speaking immigrants etc. I believe, with slightly less confidence, that this also applies to the Nordic countries.

 Listen to a conversation between Dutch friends: they will often use 2 or 3 different languages in a single sentence, using whichever one enables them to best express what they want to say.

 German doctors study medicine in English: this is because all of the maintext books, journals etc are published in English (American), and it would be prohibitively expensive to translate them all.  (The french only study medicine in French because they are arrogant cock-sukkers, and their government is prepared to spend millions on translating all those text books & journals)

 Up till about the age of 8, the human brain is hard-wired to learn language; after that, it becomes a more complex & formal process.  This explains why the offspring of aspirational Polish parents are more employable than the offspring of monosyllabic English ones.

wendy I'm not sure what acid you yourself have been on, it might not have been worth the outlay. Especially since I declined Poosh's strange entreaties.

Speaking as one, I'm not sure why you say the children of aspirational Polish parents are more employable then the children of monosyllabic English ones. Are you saying that the early absorption of several languages makes the brain itself more dextrous?

To return to topic, Xena, the list of teachers at NLCS and their unis you posted is pretty much equivalent to my dd's at WG. No better or worse. Certainly glad I save £10K or £15k a year or whatever ridiculous figure the fees are at now! Given the two schools are virtually next door, no idea why anyone would waste the money...

I have a 2.1 in English Literature and Theatre Studies from Warwick. I teach Drama and Performing Arts in a state school. I can categorically state that nothing I covered in my degree has had any relevence to what I now teach. In my final year, I covered four modules (all theoretical - no practical drama for joint honours students) - Staging Shakespeare since 1960 (doesn't come up in KS3 Drama), Shakespeare, Marlowe & Webster (too specific for Secondary School), Musical Theatre (theoretical, historical - very interesting, but again, not something I've had to teach) and English Poetry II (from about 1650-1800) So despite my qualifications, my degree was largely irrelevent.

The obsession with teachers' qualifications is, IMO, held by a small amount of people who don't really get it.

I have considered an outstanding teacher (I have a certificate and everything) but I don't honestly think my degree has anything to do with it. I stayed at Warwick to do a PGCE, and that is where I learned to be a teacher.

I've always found it bizarre that Independent schools don't require a teaching qualification from their staff, yet the assumption is that teachers in Private Schools are better.

I am considered, not I have considered

In fact, I think this thread title should be "Independent schools generally take UNqualified teachers"