DEVON PRIVATE SCHOOLS. Shebbear, West Buckland or Kelly?

[manorhope]

If you are moving to the North or West Devon area and considering an independent education for your children, or indeed a rural boarding school, there are three interesting choices in the area, all of which we have visited and sampled.

1. West Buckland School. Good facilities and results, but we found the place quite harsh, unfriendly and bleak. The children were smart, but rather distant, looking tired and a bit low in spirits.
2. Kelly College. Majestic buildings on the edge of lovely Tavistock. A feel that the place had seen better days and maybe struggling to maintain numbers. Children looked fairly happy, but a tad untidy. Moderate results, but in all lacking in sparkle.

3.Shebbear College. Out in the sticks, but a real sense that this place is the rising star. Children looked smart, confident and very happy, showing that extra polish you tend to find in more famous establishments. Good results and lovely peaceful campus. Out of the three we thought Shebbear College emerged as comfortably the best school at the present time. We chose it and so far its been fantastic. Further afield is of course Blundell's, which we thought was great, but too far for us. Finally, there's a place in Bideford called Kingsley. Not wanting to be unpleasant, but I really wouldn't bother. Just a few experiences, which I hope may be of interest.

Scleroderabbey I bow to your knowledge of Plymouth schools. But it's probably worth remembering that Plymouth is an LEA all by itself. It isn't actually in Devon. In an educational or local government context. There are some good state schools in Devon

I thought we were then discussing where the alternatives to Kelly would be when I mentioned Plymouth? You asked about their grammar schools.I replied. Lets not confuse the issues shall we?

In fact, for those in and around Tavistock, there is only one choice other than Kelly and thats the recently out of special measures Tavistock School. That is Dire. Just because many parents are forced by lack of funds to use it does not make it a good school . ( It was once a good schoolin the 1990's but not now). But similarly some parents could come across from SE Cornwall. The schools in that area are poor too ( another not well kept secret if you know the truth of it).

Plenty of kids from state comps have got into Oxbridge and other good unis from the good comps round here.Obviously that isn't what some posters want to hear though.

Sclerderabbey - the thread seems to have been widened in its geographical reach though doesn't it. I completely agree that Shebbear and Kelly type parents will be looking more at Plymouth and Cornwall schools. Hence my surprise that someone thought making strange comments about a school so far away was relevant!

Seagulls - indeed. I know/have known kids from Devon comps, community colleges and FE colleges that have done extremely well, but some people just don't want to hear it.

Anne. Extrapolating from its website and its GCSE and A2 results, Exeter seems to have very nearly the same number of pupils as the grammar you're complaining about. So by your measure of success (and I'm not sure why you're so focussed on Oxbridge alone as that measure, it seems a bit crude), Exeter seems to do significantly less well. It's interesting that Exeter on it's bumph names the pupils taking a year off who are 'intending to apply'. That's quite needy PR . But I concede the exam results do look good. On the other hand Exeter pupils are overwhelmingly privileged in the nature of things and at a selective school, so would be expected to do very well.

I don't see that contextualization does anything but good. In university terms, an applicant with 12A from a strong state selective grammar will find his or her grades, contextualized, reduce to approximately 11. That's seriously not a killer. Equally, a pupil from a middling comp won't have his or her grades inflated by much - almost certainly not enough to properly level the field. A school has to be incredibly poorly performing for any significant difference to be made by contextualization.

I don't believe that contextualization advantages some pupils at poorly performing schools enough. I certainly don't accept that it makes such a difference to those at strong selective schools sufficiently to get a uni application rejected. I think you've fallen for a myth.

Molio - you keep flipping around, trying to make "contextualization" out to be all things to all people. That, I think, is the whole problem.

It is this muddle which means many Colyton kids do less well with uni admissions than should be the case, given its admissions base (C gives one place per three applicants and the applicant base is unlikely to be an average ability group to start with).

I am not complaining about Colyton!! If you are characterising me as such, you are not reading what I'm writing.

I do not believe the bulk of C's kids are given a fair crack by the system of uni admissions, and my evidence is simply the admission stats and destination outcomes, plain and simple. Everything you say seems to make this point for me.

Your direction now is to start digging into another school, an Exeter private day school this time, and getting very chippy about privilege etc.

I know kids currently at Exeter, the Maynard, Blundells and West Buckland, amongst others. First, I don't see that those at Exeter are "overwhelmingly privileged" at all. Some are on entirely fee scholarships and rub along perfectly well with those from much wealthier backgrounds. Undeniably, the Exeter kids are not more privileged that those I know at the other Devon privates; and yet Exeter, together with the Maynard, produces exam results in an entirely different league to those achieved at Blundells, West Buck, Shebbear, Kelly etc.

My personal impression is that the kids I know at Exeter are more booky and competitive than, say, Blundells or West Buck. This corresponds with what several other posters have said. There seems to be a range of choice for parents if they can afford the fees or access a rare free place. Me: I think that's a good thing.

I think it's a disgrace that the state system in much of Devon just stumbles along, denying real choice to parents and opportunity to kids. As other posters have said, this is why so many MNers are driven to look at the private sector. Many families make huge sacrifices in order to give their kids a better chance. It sickens me, frankly, to hear their kids labelled as "overwhelmingly privileged". What the Maynard and Exeter kids seem to have in common with those at C is the privilege of having educationally supportive parents.

But you also seem to be saying that Exeter, too, does less well in uni admissions than one might expect given its selective nature (it's hard to know how selective such schools can ever be, though) and its exem results. Which way is it?

What I think you are doing, Molio, is showing everyone who reads this thread that there is thick a layer so-called 'progressive' fiddling which stands between many DCs at good schools and their chosen uni places.

Your sneering about Exeter is as unpleasant as it is unfair.

Grammars-aside, if the state schools in Plymouth, Barnstaple, Tiverton etc were any good, then parents and kids at state schools there wouldn't need to rely on the system being stacked against the likes of Colyton in order that they can go to uni.

Oh for goodness sake Devon is a huuuuuuge county.Those 3 places are a tiny part of it.The vast maj of kids are state educated and do well.

Any kid in a school where fees are more than a salary are hugely privileged.

You were complaining about 'the system' in relation to the grammar Anne. I don't think one can read it any other way. I'm merely saying that you appear to misunderstand 'the system' quite badly.

You also misread the 'overwhelmingly privileged' comment in relation to Exeter. I think there's little doubt that the overwhelming majority of students at the school come from privileged backgrounds. Not, of course, that each individual student comes from a background of overwhelming privilege. So if you read the comment properly you probably wouldn't need to feel sick, since it's obviously true. And apart from finding it funny that the school is putting up on its website that so-and-so is applying to Oxford or Cambridge (which is somewhat jumping the gun :)), I've not 'sneered' in the least: as I said, the results are very good. My understanding is that a couple of years ago Exeter only had one Oxbridge offer, so this year's success rate must be welcome.

There is no 'fiddling' within the system, it would be absurd to characterize contextualization like that. It's a very, very small nod in the direction that not all schools are equally good. Colyton certainly won't suffer disproportionately, in the same way that no average comp will be advantaged disproportionately. The system has contextualized for years in any event - and there have been several years in the past six or seven when Colyton has had nearly 20 Oxbridge successes. That said, each cohort at a school will be different and the fashions and trends in applications at different schools will vary.

It's puzzling, as Rabbit says, that you've got such a bee in your bonnet about a school, or type of school, that your kids don't attend and which wasn't really in the remit of the thread. But since what you're saying is wrong, it seemed worth correcting. I'm also surprised that since you do outreach work for Oxford or Cambridge, you don't quite get how that whole system works. Many tutors positively welcome state grammar school students, many others regard where a child is sent to school by its parents as not the child's fault and of marginal consequence and the few tutors who might dislike grammars on principle are probably unlikely to be able to veto an applicant on the basis of that alone, because of the complex way in which admissions at both universities work.

Any kid at a good school can be labelled as being privileged. Many parents will see the kids at Colyton as being privileged, for example.

Once you attach that label, then our educationalists start stacking things against those kids and those schools.

Ironically, raising the bar seems to make many grammar and private schools try harder and help the kids do even better; which just widens the results gap versus inadequate state provision.

I know what a big, rubbish, state secondary feels like. I also know that most kids, parents and teachers at my comprehensive would much rather have blamed dismal performance on the privilege of others than taken a hard look closer to home.

The socio economic background of a whole cohort at a state grammar is very different, even given the current issues surrounding tutoring, to any cohort at an independent fee-paying school. That makes a very significant difference to outcome, for all sorts of reasons

Could you explain who the comment about 'dismal performance' is aimed at Anne? .

The 'dismal performance' comment was part of my response to the quip from SeagullsAndSand. Do you need me to list some Devon state schools with dismal performance? And no, I don't think anyone could ever put C on that list, except for the occasional netball match perhaps.

Molio, to respond to your two other posts:

I first raised Colyton in order to make the point that kids at good schools have to work very hard indeed and that the system of uni admissions, which includes but is not limited to your contextualisation, seems to deliver their schools fewer places at good unis than one might expect; especially if the schools are academically selective and they have staff and pupils work that work very hard.

I did not expect "the Spanish Inquisition", although it has been fascinating to see the reactionary Colyton lobby swing into action. As far as I know, I've simply responded, and responded, to comments about this first reference to Colyton.

I'm happy to concede that I have a bee in my bonnet about the issue of real fairness in university selection. I must not over-blow my role in helping my old college - it's really just been to facilitate contact with some local schools. As you say, Molio, the admissions process at both those unis is complex. It is also highly competitive and over-subscribed, and as a result, equivocation (for whatever reason) from an admissions tutor is never a helpful thing for an applicant.

You did sneer about Exeter, by the way, and you did so again in the subsequent post. Much of this thread has been about the relative strengths and characteristics of the Devon boarding schools. I think it a good thing that the private schools feel the need to put so much information about themselves into the public domain, because, once you get past the gloss, it helps people make informed choices and, in turn it shapes the way the schools develop. All good.

In that context, and on the basis of some really good A-levels, why on earth shouldn't a school say that a pupil is applying to Oxbridge? The school seems (justifiably) proud of what the pupil achieved and is informing an audience which includes current and potential future fee-paying parents about an individual's future plans.

To the extent that this is "marketing the school", then you and I come from very different places if you feel this to be either unnecessary or inappropriate. Transparency and competition, within and between schools, almost universally leads to better performance and better outcomes. It sounds like you are associated with an over-subscribed, selective and very successful state-sector school (); if so, then you might find life in the private sector of schooling a bit of a shock.

I'm rather confused that people continue to take the line that the destinations list from Colyton is disappointing. It looks pretty good to me.

I know many current and former pupils at Exeter and the Maynard, and several teachers at both schools, and not one of them would deny that the pupils at those schools are privileged. The full bursary ones are, like colyton pupils, privileged by dint of being at a great school when so many people in the world (not just Devon!) aren't. The fee paying ones...well, that's a whole different realm of privilege and, to be honest, is tied up with all sorts of other issues. I would say that all the kids I know who are or have been Exeter school pupils are just lovely. Really great kids.

There are private schools with dismal performance and state schools with Good and Outstanding.

Seagulls - exactly. The fact is many people turn their noses up at Exeter college for example but kids from there have done amazingly well over the years - it's clear that in some areas (and maths will now be one of them) it provides a top rate education for top rate kids. I guess for some people the problem is they are attending a college which operates at other levels too. For me, the problem will be the possibility of seeing one of my DC's hanging around on Queen Street in a lunch hour with scruffy looking mates looking scruffy. I'm not looking forward to that when the time comes.

I've restricted my comments to an area I know something about Anne, which is university admissions. I happen to think you're wrong with regard to this idea that grammars are unfairly discriminated against, because I just don't see it happening on the ground. If you consider just how high a proportion of the state school students at Oxford and Cambridge are grammar school students, and yet how few grammar schools there are, then quite clearly your suggestion falls down. Flat.

I'm just really puzzled that you feel able to make any claims about a school you take pains to say you are unconnected with. Unless possibly you're marketing manager at Exeter - which would explain a lot . Anyhow, there's a certain lack of lightness of touch.

It is sad but true that Devon and Cornwall schools receive much smaller per capita payments than almost anywhere else in the UK, by as much as £1000 per head. I could find the figures but CBA right now.

DS attended Exeter briefly until defeated by distance; he is now at one of the rather ordinary comprehensives on the Devon-Cornwall border where there are about 270 per year group. There's a mixed intake, skewed down academically because the Plymouth grammar schools skim some of the most able.

Exeter and Maynard (which acknowledge that their junior schools lose some top pupils to Colyton at 11+) still knock spots off any other schools in the West Country. Fee-paying, they are -- but not at the same level of some less-stellar private schools in Devon (Exeter was just over £11k pa in our time, compared to about £19K at one other I looked at).

In a region where average earnings are lower than most, any child whose parents can afford to pay fees is privileged. It remains a scandal that so many are short changed by capitation allowances, and all the more credit to the students who do well regardless. Try as one may, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that students with ambition, ability and encouraging parents will do well in virtually any environment, and it is naive to believe that schools can compensate for a deficit in any of these, even if there were limitless money and teacher energy to attempt to do so.

Molio, there's something quite reminiscent of Margaret Thatcher about your last post. I recall her talking about doing interviews when she said, words to the effect of, if you don't want to answer the question you're asked, then just answer one you do instead.

In this vein, my observation was about the destinations of the 'bottom' 80% at (the likes of) Colyton and specifically not about the elite Oxbridge/ medic set at such schools.

No I am not connected with Exeter School either (also too far); but rather than continually (badly) trying to characterise me as being in some way biased, why not 'fess up yourself?

You are directly connected with Colyton's university admissions, yes?

You have a vested interest in presenting the admissions picture in a way that makes the school, and you, seem to be achieving the great destination outcomes that the talented and hard-working pupils there have earned, yes?

Regardless of how fair or unfair the uni admissions system is?

The idea that an average Colyton pupil (who would fall outside the top 20%) might do worse, in terms of a uni place, than one who failed your entrance exam and went to a reasonable, non-selective comprehensive down the road, is anathema to you, your school, and every parent associated with C, yes?

But do you think it's true? From what I've been able to research, it appears to be true, but you seem to be the insider here and, despite the shenanigans, I really would like your honest opinion.

cressetmama I agree 100%.

I went to secondary school in an LEA that at the time had the highest per-pupil spending of the (then) 95 LEAs, and the second-lowest exam results per-pupil. It's really not just about resources. I feel my parents made all the difference in helping me to survive that experience, and to go on through to university despite both having had to leave school themselves at 15. I don't think the importance of parental support has changed at all since then.

Having looked again at the destinations I still don't think that the 'bottom 80%' into which my DCs both most certainly will fall are doing badly. It seems to me that the kids get the university places their results merit. There is no doubt that there are some (not many) kids who do not pass the entrance exam, go to another school and then go on to get better exam results and a 'better' university place than some of the kids who did pass the entrance exam. I suspect the parents of kids like that might feel very bitter. And might claim to have legitimate concerns about the 'bottom 80%' - made up of kids they don't know, at a school they know little or nothing about. But it looks like the pursuit of a vendetta to me. Speaking as a parent of kids who will be in that bottom 80% in due course (neither of them want to be medics or have any interest in science). And also speaking as someone who knows a very bitter parent of a child who didn't get in who takes every opportunity to criticise and bad mouth a school that she adored right up until the moment her child didn't get in, and to criticise and badmouth my DCs for their perceived (by her) unholy combination of inferiority and outrageous fortune.

No and no to your first two questions, categorically in each case. I am however involved in university admissions more generally.

It seems to me that by taking the position that grammars are not hugely disadvantaged by the university admissions system in general or indeed by Oxbridge admissions in particular I'm actually doing the exact opposite of what you suggest.

Whereas you, by insisting that grammars, with Colyton as the example, are disadvantaged and that discrimination is rife are doing what you say I'm doing (saying how great the destinations are in the circumstances of rabid discrimination etc). It's exactly what I'd expect someone recruiting for a private school competitor in a grammar school area to do to be honest. Incidentally why did you mention the Exeter cricketing boy? . That seemed odd.

Unfortunately your hypothesis of a middling grammar school child doing better in terms of destination at a comp doesn't win in the university stakes either, because admissions are nothing like as crude as that. I would merely repeat that that idea is based on the false premise that there is anti grammar prejudice which there is no evidence for and that contextualizing grades makes a significant difference, which it doesn't.

I mentioned the Exeter cricketing boy because I looked at the news release on their website after you referred to it. It was lovely to see the pride that that school seems to have in its pupils and you get a palpable sense that they're individuals, not just stats.

FWIW, I suspect the privates get similar treatment to the grammars, possibly a bit worse at some more progressive unis, but I didn't want to go there given the entirely fair points about privilege other posters have made. Nationwide I think 6-7% of kids go to private school, yet they still land 35-40% of the places at Oxbridge.

No grammar schools in the part of Devon where I live. Just dismal rural comps. Your guessing isn't any better than mine.

Anne, this is becoming almost comical, especially for someone with a declared interest in 'outreach'.

Given the similar disproportion of grammar school students on the top universities' books, it's not in any way possible to sustain an argument that there is 'discrimination'.

Incidentally, the comment about individuals not stats is cute :)

Of course there's an argument. Quite simple, really:

The grammars academically select the brightest and best from the 94% of kids who go to state school. The grammar schools are generally excellent, the kids work extremely hard and they get outstanding exam results.

However, given the schools' ability to be so selective (I doubt there are more than a couple of private schools nationwide with this kind of over-subscription from academically gifted applicants), then there is still an awful lot of room for the 'bottom' 80% in schools like Colyton to get better destination outcomes - MUCH better than not-really-academically-selective private schools.

And if you accept that it's not the kids, or the parents, or the schools, then what is it? In my view, it's a stacked uni recruitment system. In yours, well, everything's fine is it?

I hope you really did like what Exeter wrote about Ben Green. There are some great schools in Devon, worthy of applause, and it's a bit sad when cynicism takes root. One of the (few) things I feel I learnt at university is that scepticism is a critical tool but cynicism is just self-imposed blindness. Are you using a braille keyboard?

In my view the process isn't bad. And I simply don't accept that it's 'stacked'.

I don't believe there is really an argument because from all you've said it seems that you may lack a proper understanding of both grammar schools and university admissions, so there are a lot of false premises flying about.

Any grammar operating in a rural area will not actually be especially selective. It will have a markedly different intake from Henrietta Barnett say, or Tiffin. The remaining grammars are very, very different from each other - there's an extremely wide range. On the selectivity front, a rural grammar will be amongst the least selective in fact.

I'm afraid I wasn't sufficiently interested to read. I went on the website to look at the stats and was distracted by trying to count how many kids had actually got into Oxbridge as opposed to those who were merely applying. So unfortunately the sporting success got lost in the noise.

RabbitOfNegativeEuphoria I just saw your earlier post. As discussed, my DCs didn't apply to Colyton. If we'd lived nearby I suspect they would have, because it seems to be a fantastic school. As it is they are academic scholars in the private sector because we had no even half-decent local state option. I understand, and have seen elsewhere on MN, the sort of bile that comes Colyton's way from apparently embittered parents of rejected kids. People really ought to move on, but IME seldom do. As I wrote in another post, it seems to be much easier to blame somebody else, especially when you can start using loaded words like 'privilege'.

I hope they thrive there, and enjoy it! Unlike the private sector, you and they know it's something they've earned and something to be proud of.