Areas where state schools are better than private?

[Narrie]

Does anyone live in an area where the state schools are really better than the private ones? I picked this up elsewhere but am afraid to comment there.

I have lived and worked in the Midlands where there are few private schools to choose but the state schools are not very good. I have lived in Nottingham, where again I felt the state schools were poor.

Even in London there were some awful schools and private was best.

I currently live in Cornwall having got here working in Exeter, Plymouth and Barnstaple. None of the state schools were good there.

Just wondered where the good state provision is. Is it just odd schools within a mass of poor provision or are there really whole areas where state schools are better?

Thanks.

(PS I have my own DC in a boarding school partly because of the state schooling and partly because we move around so much)

Ah, so Xenia, you're describing "top university" as original Sutton Trust 13? Per the report you linked to? (Sutton Trust is now 30 universities).

Original 13 were: Birmingham, Bristol, Cambridge, Durham, Edinburgh, Imperial College,London School of Economics, Nottingham, Oxford, St Andrews, University College London, Warwick and York.

If you go on those 13 as "top universities", then only 51% of the Habs girls went there.

This does not support an assertion that nearly all pupils at "top selective" schools go on to attend "top universities".

Oh and the richest family at my kids school with very clever kids are the kids of the local hairdresser with several salons now and a super business brain. He went to the same deprived inner city primary as me. Have you need been to a school reunion and found that all the high achieving kids had melt down in early 20s or 40s?

Benenden and Roedean much higher than I'd imagine - 61.7 and 58.2% to Sutton Trust universities (as I said) and then look at some of the statistics for the well known grammars!:

Henrietta Barnett 54.7%
Pates 46.2%
Challoners, Amersham 44.4% to a Sutton Group university
Watford Grammar 39.9% ""
Colyton Grammar 36.1%
Nonsuch High 33.5%

These are good results but the results for the independents, even the less selective ones, make these statistics look very poor indeed.

Some of those figures you've just put up aren't correct Hamish.

At the end of the day what does it matter if the overall statistics not as good if the bright kids in an inner city comp who deserve to go to a good university do and the statistics do not actually prove that this is not happening only that there may be brighter schools at the top supers elective privates.

IMO if a child from a top super selective private did not get to a top uni I would be asking why not but I would also be asking a child who is in the top stream of a mixed ability comp and is able to get a string if ten As or A*s which 15% of the kids at my son's comp got why they do not also get to a good university and surprise surprise they do although statistics look nowhere near as good. They are the same level.

Losingtrust - not all of the independents with the high hit rates to ST universities are super selective on the list. They are selective but not that selective. Grammars will generally be more selective and yet - if we believe the lists- they don't do as well on this front in many cases.

Yellowtip - which are incorrect - looked at the list (will check in case looked at list which looked for other criteria than ST admissions by mistake - lots of lists there).

Yellowtip - just checked they may not be correct but they are correct in terms of what's listed in this document.

I was quite shocked by the grammar school levels actually as they don't seem much better than comps which by definition should be 80% lower so there is an issue there.

I would expect the grammars to be much higher. I don't know how kind Edwards in Birmingham does that that only takes 2% so should have about a min 80% take up at top universities.

I have certainly been happy with my children's schools. As I've said elsewhere my daughter was in the 5th of 5 sets of maths and still got an A at GCSE, Although these very selective private schools with 4 or 5 applicants a place tend to have children with say 120 IQ in them - old grammar school and university level, tol 15 - 20% of children you still get a broad range because you also get the absolutely genius types too and the hard workers and some lazy so and sos etc.

Not understanding dregs conclusion. The serious point is that in some ares (not many and not most) where parents have a wealth of choice (in our area there is even a hindu primary) and out of area grammars and loads of selective schools there will inevitably be one or two schools where only those whio haven['t given their child's educatnio a second thought or who could not get in anywhere else go. That is not the case in much of the country which only has comps, where probably only 2% can afford privates and everyone goes to the local comprehensive. The fact I might live in an unusual area does not mean anyone ele'se child elsewhere in the country is one of those who couldn't get in anywhere else and might be one who was not creamed off.

54% fantastic considering the level of selection and compared to comps where kids would also be doing vocational qualifications so in my book either state comp or a good private school if you can afford it bearing in mind some private schools have bed results for the cohort as well

Why should a comprehensive 6th form do significantly worse than a grammar school 6th form?

Owner of two "dregs" here. neither is bright enough for grammar (in fact one is near bottom set), nor are we rich enough (or willing, even if we were) to pay for private.

I like to think they will become useful, happy members of society in their time. Perhaps I am completely misguided??

There's more to university admissions than academic ability. Children from poorer families -even forgetting for the moment about tuition fees - are less likely to be able to choose a university where the living costs are higher. The support of family is also important ... some kids don't have a parent able to ferry them around to look at universities and attend interviews, or afford train fares to the other end of the country.

Anyhow...to go back to the OP...the area I live in doesn't really have many particularly good private schools (one in the sutton lists - not the top 100 overall) but does have a couple of good grammars (a pair in the lists); most of the county is grammar-less so there are true comps. If you look at the stats on intake versus results, the nearest decent private doesn't really do any better than the local comp, let alone the grammars. (there are also poor comps further into the city, where the faith schools do the 'creaming'. )

Xenia- I live in a grammar school area. My ds did not get into grammar school. By your definition, he is therefore "dregs", and "intellectually challenged."

What I am trying to do is point out to you that when you say awful things about groups of people, there are individuals reading your words who could be very upset by them. And unless you think such people do not have the finer feelings of the elite, presumably you do not want to upset people. So why not stop doing it?

I went to a comp. I am clearly the dregs. :(

Grimma I am sure you're right - there should be facilities/funding in place to help students get to interviews etc and good advice given re: universities. Is this not really available in Grammar schools?

I think there's reasonable advice in GS but (AFAIK) not logistical support.

The good private hereabouts gets somewhat lower A level results than the GSs but somewhat better university admissions. When my DD is somewhere into her GCSEs I expect DH will pull the stats apart for these and the 6th form colleges and work out the factors behind them.

There are so many other factors in what constitutes a 'better' school for your child. If you've got a techie girl, then a state school which encourages them to do electronics and computer science may be 'better' than a private school which doesn't even offer those choices.

Certainly is in the grammar schools I know about. But I suspect that grammar schools give kids a broader outlook than most independents. My dd's school encourages the 6th formers to think carefully about the next phase of their lives and make positive choices, rather than just ride the tradition train to university.

A comprehensive sixth form will also offer vocational qualifications that does not lead on to uni necessarily whereas grammar less likely to. Therefore would still expect grammar to have higher proportion at top universities and they restrict more on intake.

Why don't Tiffin get more than than 51.4% into Sutton Trust universities? So many applicants per place, such fierce competition etc? 12% to Oxbridge compared to 49% to Oxbridge at St Paul's Girls, 30% North London Collegiate or a school like Radley which isn't that academically selective (although it has brilliant value added) - 16.7%.

Perhaps 'only' that many of them wanted to go to those particular institutions? I wonder whether oxbridge was necessarily the best choice for nearly half of the St Pauls girls.... depending on what career you want to do, they may not be the best option. Sounds a bit of an oxbridge sausage machne . The sutton list didn't seem to include all of the medical schools and misses a couple of the few places offering vetinary training (which is one of the hardest courses to get onto).

Good points, Grimma. Still, all things considered including wanting to go straight to work, apprenticeships, going to vet college etc only approximately half the Tiffin cohort go to the best universities. Are the Sutton Trust group not highly regarded by employers? Surely they must be selling themselves short to a degree?