Why do parents who are moving their children to fee paying schools

[silverfork]

... so often complain that their child was 'bored' at school because they are 'clever'?

Quite a few children from dd's school have transferred to prep schools at the end of infants/beginning of juniors but these never seem to be particularly academically successful children. Nevertheless, I frequently heard them talk about boredom in relation to their own child's intelligence.

Thread this morning reminded me (sorry).

This may be the reason sometimes but is not always the case.
It could be several reasons e.g. the independent school offers extra-curricular activities that the original primary school does not offer.
Some parents prefer to have dcs at the same school so move younger siblings when the older child starts at the same school in Y7.
I went to an independent school and remember some children moving to the Junior department as this guaranteed them a place at the senior school.

What gets me is the dishonesty both state and independent. If your a super pushy but non selective little prep don't go on about how you treat each child as an individual and allow them to develop at their own pace, if your a non aspirational primary don't lie and tell parents you special classes for the gifted, if you know no more about learning disabilities than I know about quantum physics don't pretend that you are a caring school again treating children as individuals. Parents would be less disillusioned with teachers as a profession and fewer children would be endlessly moved around.

Im having a bitter day!!!

"and was told that the school had neither the time money or resources to help him and they couldn't and wouldnt justify channelling extra effort into one child"

OMG - That was EXACTLY the same response I got from our 'nice' village primary school. We left.

People change for various reasons, too bright to settle, needs a smaller class to keep up, longer school hours for working parents or just wanting something different for their child. I wouln't take it as an attack on their former school but then again I would not feel inclined to ask someone else to justify their choice of school.

Contrary to what you read on MN many I have talked to very recently are disillusioned with state ed. and Im talking about those with DC's at top performing comps/academies not sink comps. Many feel that these results obsessed exam factories schools only have time and interest for the able motivated conscientious pupil but those with learning difficulties; dyslexia etc, the super bright who are going to ask to many questions and those with behavioural difficulties are not being catered for. Interestingly the less able are also catered for with with beauty therapy courses and brick laying courses its those that don't fit the conventional box that are struggling.
I not under any illusions I don't think the independent sector is any better at dealing with learning difficulties/behavioural problems group. These groups can easily find themselves in an educational no mans land.

And I also agree exactly with Wordfactory -that early years/KS1 is often wonderful as there's so much fun going on and even academically clever children are usually nailing the basics of literacy and numeracy. But, particularly with published league tables and SATs pressure now, even in a wonderful primary school like the ones my children attended, there just isn't the breadth and the depth to fully engage some children.

Some clever children thrive because they like doing their best at everything and will always stretch themselves; some clever children choose not to bother because they can't see the point. I didn't move my children until Y7, but seeing DS2 with a full brain again, and seeing him respond to the environment ("I don't want to hand in that homework because it's not very good yet" - I never heard that in 7 years of primary) is a great relief.

But to the OP's point more specifically, I think people have to justify why they're moving their children. They can't say "I think it's a rubbish school" if your children are still there.

singers - I think your last paragraph above is true.

There is occasionally a nosey and sometimes nasty response from other parents, when people move their children (even from one state school to another, not necessarily to a fee paying school), that those parents feel they have to say something to explain it.

happygardening - do you think society is meeting the needs and expectations of people with IQs of 160+ once they leave school???... At what point do they have to accept that they are living with idiots?!

Yes, I'd say the jobs are there for those super bright people. I discovered by accident stuff my Dh had done as part of a University trial that gave his IQ as higher than that. He was a very intelligent child age 8 ;-)

What's he doing now? Well, he's a headmaster of an independent boarding school :-) He's also lovely, personable, and easy to get along with. He does get awfully frustrated at other people's lack of intell

Ooops, on phone sorry. Rest of message:

Both of us (for different reasons) had had rotten experiences at state schools prior to the age of 8. Both our parents coincidentally moved us at that age. The independent I went to was not good for me, but DH had a fabulous time. But we still like the choice available in the independent sector and we didn't seriously consider state at all apart from when I think about fees

"there just isn't the breadth and the depth to fully engage some children."
and I think you should the quality of opportunities at my DS's old primary school the recorder club was taught by the head master who couldn't play the recorder, the gym club was taught by a teacher who made Pavarotti look nimble, the "modelling" club was taught by someone with no more skill at modelling than my dog, but all were advertised on the schools website detailing the wonderful opportunities available to the children. Only the French Club was run by a native speaker and we had to pay for that as it was an outside organisation coming in.
This just does not happen in the independent sector primarily because people pay and they expect certain standards.

My son's state primary offers loads clubs, although most of them you pay for. The children can do gymnastics, dance, ukelede, karate, chess, judo, netball, football, drama, nature club, French, Latin, multi sports, tennis, christian union, Islamic club, cookery, art, choir, after school club and breakfast club.

Admitally many of these clubs are paid for.

State education has changed a lot in 30 years. Not all state schools are grossy under funded with no extra curriculuar activites.

Reallytired Im only talking 7 years ago! I dont know what size primary your DC's attend but this was a small primary with only 80 children and many came on a bus I doubt there would be enough uptake to run more than a handful of clubs.
The uptake of the French Club was only 4 children because you had to pay many believed that clubs especially at primary should be free (we're talking middleclass parents here).

Ds' school has approximately 500 children. It is a lower middle class/ working class area. The majority of parents work, but they could never afford private school. The clubs are popular as they provide very affordable childcare. Some of the clubs are free, but other clubs are provided at cost.

I suppose that many parents would bulk at the thought of their children attending a large primary. There is no doult that large schools do offer ecomony of scale which allows more money to be spent on resources and activities.

Pastrol care is good at my son's school, inspite of being so large. A large primary does require an exceptionally good head and such people are in limited supply.

I've nothing against large primaries before moving to a prep he attended two small primaries one only had 40 children in both his academic needs were not addressed.

I can relate to happygardening's experience and it's that, among other issues, that makes me want to go private as soon as I can find a place in a decent prep.

An example...a couple of years ago ds was something of an outlier in one subject (a few others seem to caught up now). His teacher suggested sending ds to the year above for that subject, agreed it with the teacher in the year above and went away to check with the head. Then nothing happened for a term. Eventually the teacher told me that the head refused to let ds go to the year above because 'then other parents would be knocking on my door asking for the same.' it wasn't about what was right for ds but what would cause her the least hassle (she seems a bit socially awkward and scared of parents).

Ds is still down as g and t in that subject and the school announced well over a year ago that there was going to be a g and t programme. Nothing has ever happened.

My advice to parents of bright kids would be to go for a bigger school where pupils are streamed or set in year 3 up. Teaching 30 kids of hugely mixed ability is something it seems doesn't work in our smaller school that doesn't seem very well run.

I agree, it's MUCH easier for bigger schools to do something about the outliers.

1001 we has this as well just forgot all about it!
"Eventually the teacher told me that the head refused to let ds go to the year above because 'then other parents would be knocking on my door asking for the same."
I've heard so many excuses over the years!
In my profession we are expected to read a childs notes/file sorry slip of the key board treat each child as an individual in fact failure to do this is consider very poor practice and would results in at the very least "a disciplinary" and we're talking similar numbers as primary teachers. But many teachers in my extensive experience especially in the state sector although not all independent scgools are any better do not seem to be under the same expectation.
Sorry still got the feeling bitter hat on this morning better take it off. Better go off to work to pay the schools fees!

The reason I started the thread is that I've heard these comments at my own dd's school. It surprised me because it's my dd that's G & T and is never bored. She's always interested and engaged with the topic and people around her. So I sometimes do find it hard to believe.

I do agree that parents shouldn't need to justify their decisions about their children's education, I certainly don't, and I don't ask parents why they're moving their children. They tell me in any case.

I have recently moved my children to independent schools.

My son (9) has an IQ that puts him in the top 0.1%. At the end of last year he honestly felt he had learned nothing in the entire year. However this was not the reason I moved him. I have no wish for him to be classed as super bright - I have seldom seen a happy outcome for such people. I moved him because he could not maintain a relationship with his peers and they were fairly cruel to him. I also moved him in the hope that he might develop a better work ethic. I cannot tell the parents of other children that I moved him because of the cruelty of their children. They think I moved him so he can be "streched" more. It is kinder to let them believe this.

I also moved dd (8). She is hard working and quiet and bobs about the middle in terms of attainment. However, it turns out that she is so under confident that she does not engage with most tasks and was too shy to ask the teacher for help. The class was too big (34) for the teacher to give her much support. She is now in a class of 13. I do not want to tell the parents of friends about her lack of confidence because I am ashamed of this and she would regard it as a breach of her privacy. I tell them I moved her because she said it was unfair that ds got an opportunity which she did not. This is true on both levels, but not my main reason.

So maybe you hear this a lot from parents because it is simply an easy reason to give without saying anything either personal or hurtful.

OP you seem to have decided that these parents are not telling the truth.

That their DC are not really clever and bored. That your DD is in fact more able and not bored ergo....

I was at a state primary until 8 and bored witless. My parents moved me to a private school and I was much, much happier. Schools are different, some can't provide stimulation for the brighter kids, others can.

OP, I do see where you are coming from.

Some children are genuinely bored and need more.

However, I remember a child in my son's year being moved to a pushy prep school in Y1 because they had "spent all their time making sock puppets but still can't read". I just thought to myself "well, DS2 managed to do both... I suspect it's not the fault of the school."

(DS is bright but wasn't bored at the primary.)

Undoubtedly we will have different experiences there will be those in the independent sector who are probably insufficiently stretched and challenged. But in my personal experience good super selective independent schools offer a broad range of opportunities unavailable at even the best state schools so that the very able can channel their intelligence into a variety of areas.