Send average/above average child to very academic school ?

[Gunznroses]

Or to just academic school. I come from a culture where its the norm to send your dc to a school as academically possible with he belief that "iron sharpens iron", it worked very well for me and my siblings.

But in U.K it seems quite normal to send an average child or in some cases very academic child to a not so academic school in order that they may "shine" and grow in confidence.

My worry with this is, fine it may boost a child's confidence whilst at school but what happens once they leave this environment and enter the real world and then realise they're not as wonderful as they thought ? Does confidence not take a huge knock ? On the other hand if an average child sent to an academically challenging school spent their time feeling mediocre, when they leave isnt it a boost to suddenly realise they are quite capable ? I really dont know which one is better at this point.

Im hoping people will come along and share their own experiences and what happened once dc left their environments, did your very popular prize winning child leave their secondar only to realise they couldnt compete as well outside ? Did your mediocre child leave their highly academic/ selective school and realise "Im quite something afterall" ?

@Yellow I was actually quite concerned that when she rocked up at the beginning of Y7 it would become quickly apparent that DD1 was the 120th person to get in and she would be bottom at everything (this is nothing to do with her - well, it is perhaps a bit to do with her SEN issues - it's essentially though to do with me being an olympic standard pessimist). Luckily she is bottom at nothing not even PE (although that's just cos the teachers give her a B for turning up and showing willing). So while she may indeed have been the bottom person to get into the school on the first pass through (she wasn't border zone, she was a clear 'you have the mark required' when the letter came out) she isn't the bottom person now. So that's OK. I'm actually pretty sure that even the bottom person will leave the school with a fabulous set of results.

Seeing your comment about 3 categories - what are they - hooray, worth a punt and sorry? I am so dreading next year.

We have friends at a well know London independent a completely over subscribed super selective they tutored their DS like mad to get him in (his brothers is there) and are now tutoring like mad to keep him there worrying about every set of exam marks: "will he be politely asked to leave? will he be allowed to stay on for A levels?" he's completely bewildered by the whole thing!

Wow. Reading this kind of thread really makes me anxious that we have destroyed any chance our DC may have for an optimum educational experience purely by choosing not to live in the SE.
Are the academic children who live in the North and simply have no access to the superior selectivity of the SE doomed?

Still wondering what "academic" means!

If you look at the top state selective schools you will see that many of them are not located in the SE.

I would dearly, but dearly, like to know the geographic origins of pupils at Oxbridge/Russell group universities. Because I betcha my house that the SE is over-represented and the North under-represented.

Plenty of Northeners at Cambridge when I was there. I suspect it won't be any different today.

Seeker I think academic does not mean the same as super clever/intellectual. My SIL would say my nephew is academic but not a genius by any stretch of the imagination. He is just unbelievably hard working and conscientious this is reflected in his exam marks/Oxbridge entry but its limited to those subjects he's worked his nut off studying.
Im sure plenty will disagree just thought I'd throw this in!

A quick look at the BBC education website here www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-16729387

shows that the top 10 state selective schools on GCSE results last year were located in (in order)

1. Warwickshire
2. Bromley
3. Essex
4. Devon
5. North Yorkshire
6. Medway
7. Kirklees
8. Southend
9. Birmingham

10. Trafford

So that's 4 SE, 6 not

For A levels www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-16730014

the top 10 state selective schools are located in:

1. Essex
2. Trafford
3. Kent
4. Essex
5. Birmingham
6. Devon
7. Kingston upon Thames
8. Birmingham
9. Lancashire

10. Gloucestershire

So, that's 4 SE and 6 not. But in most cases these aren't the same schools. Weirdly.

Ooh, I think I know the answer to the Kirklees one - if it's Heckmondwike Grammar School . It's only allowed to be a grammar school from 11-16. From 16-18 it has to take all-comers. With predictable results.

In any event, the SE is over-represented in terms of population.

Xenia will be along soon to explain that people in the SE have higher IQs (I am NOT joking) to explain why the SE is over-represented.

It is. I was actually not 100% sure where Kirklees was but I knew there was a monastery (or Abbey?) there and I knew I'd never been dragged round it therefore by process of elimination it was unlikely to be within striking distance of London.... I should have looked at the actual name of the school though which is a dead giveaway.

Interesting discussion about academic as opposed to intellectual.

I often describe ds1 as an intellectual rather than an academic,he loves learning has a real intellectual curiosity for ideas and concepts ,rarely talks about things which don't interest him.He has always found school a slightly constraining place to be ,he regards syllabi as restricting and gets frustrated by the self limiting nature of exams ,often loses marks for not stating the obvious because he can't believe they want something so simple.He can be lazy if something does not interest him and has never ever seen the point of impressing teachers "I know I know it; why do they need to know that I know it".He has had to learn the hard way that sometimes you have to stick to a mark scheme(however anodyne )to get the result to let you get to the next stage .I hope university will be the making of him but he worries me .

He started off in a conventional grammar type in environment but was stifled and miserable because he really couldn't see the point.We moved him to a broader based independent,still selective but not so narrowly on academia and he flourished,they have indulged some of his academic journeys whilst stressing that he has to "play the game,to change the game"IYSWIM.He is still appalled that the only person in his English set to get an Oxford offer has appalling general knowledge ,no idea who Nietze is or the Chancellor of the Exchequer but has a perfect set of A*s at A level!

Ds3 more what i would call an academic,enjoys directed learning,wants to master the syllabus and do well in the exam .Keen to do well,but happy to stick,if necessary, to the mark scheme if thats what he is told will get him there .He loves school and the academic environment .Very competitive at everything he does including schoolwork .

Equal but different

= You're in. You might or might not be in. Sorry.

That was for Metabilis.

But they can't actually say you're in before you have even filled in a form, right surely it will have to be at most 'one of the top 120 scores'? And don't children with statements and looked after children trump that?

Apologies for being a bit niche here but yes, kids sit test in early October, results come out within a week, last date for LA caf is due two weeks later. They're able to say if the child has passed all three component parts of the test (in), less than that (may be in), or not passed the first hurdle (out).

This would presumably apply to all selective state schools so perhaps not so niche - but to clarify, do they mean passed as in top 120 marks or passed as in 'achieved a qualifying mark' (which might actually mean >120 kids. For years I suspected that they always set the pass mark at about 118 so that all passes got in but then one year some who were to,d they qualified didn't get in- cue horror all round).

The new thing of testing before application isn't niche. But tests differ. In our case English has to be passed for anyone to get a place. No pass for English, no place. Then the cumulative Maths and VR scores create a rank order. It's estimated that 120 won't achieve a pass mark on all three papers but those who do will be told they're in Category A. So are bound to get a place. Then those who passed one or other of Maths and VR, but are close to the pass mark in the second paper, are assigned to Category B. And those remaining are told in effect that they'd be wasting a choice if they named the school on the caf.

I agree that Seeker's definition of academic is really that of intellectual.

I was an academic child at school. I was bright, but not off the chart so in terms of IQ (I was tested to be in the 130s). I was in the top 5 of my class simply because I worked very hard - if I did not, I would not have achieved what I did. I think that an appropriate synonym to academic would be studious.

I knew a boy growing up who was an intellectual. He was off the chart bright - I knew this not because I knew his IQ score, but just the ease he could grasp very complex ideas. If he was interested in the subject, he would delved into independent study and master it to an astonishingly high level (university/graduate level whilst being a teenager). In subjects which did not capture his imagination, he achieved very paltry grades. We joked that he was always either an A+ student or a C student, nothing in-between. In terms of class standing, I was ahead of him and I certainly had a better work ethic, but there was no doubt who was the academic one and who was the intellectual one.

I disagree but, sadly I haven't got time to expand my argument or even properly think it through right now. My disagreement stems from the fact that academia is about discovery and innovation and originality - a key point of academia being the conduct of original research. The term 'academic child' may have had its meaning subtly changeover the years but to me it most certainly doesn't mean hard working but essentially a bit dull. It encompasses originality of thought, making connections, quickness to grasp stuff (and a desire to move ever on rather than just consolidate and review). Being academic is not boring, people who seek to mock academic types have possibly succeeded in changing the perception of what the word really means, though, I'll grant you that.

To me it seems there's been a sort of "grade escalation" here. People now say "academic" when they would have said "bright" or "intelligent" or "top set material" or something like that. I know lots of clever children- there is one thwtni might possibly describe as "academic", but it's hard to tell yet. he know s a lot, and appears to apply his knowledge in interesting, thoughtful ways, but he could just be noticeably advanced for 11. We'll see.

For me an "academic " person enjoys academia ,they enjoy the process of learning in a structured way .Of course lots of academic people are also intellectual but I do think that our current rather exam orientated education system favours the so called "academic" child over the intellectual.

I don't think the term academic means that someone is necessarily clever either,surely it just means that you like schoolwork.Plenty of children are bright but not academic or intellectual but not academic.

I think the term academic as applied to DC on MN is certainly used very freely, even if one knocks out the suggestion that it incorporates neat.

Let's hope that well behaved, orderly kids who hand in homework on time and don't play truant aren't now deemed intellectuals on here.

For me, academic simply implies someone who favours classical studies over technical/vocational ones. And they do so within the academic community.

It implies bias rather than ability. Interest rather than raw intelligence.

Thus many many clever people can have no interest in academia and not be in the least academic.

Children who are academic will be the ones performing at the top of the school game. This doesn't necessarily mean they are the cleverest (though it might).