thinking of sending ds to a private school - advise needed please!!!!!

[jinna]

my ds is 5 and has been in a state school since reception - we are now thinking to send him to a private prep school - the reasoning being that hopefully he will be able to get into a good grammar school later on . This grammar is heavilky oversubscribed and we feel the only way he would be able to get in is if he gets a lot of support. He is doing well at the state school but with more personal attention at the prep school he should progress well.

My husband and myself went to see the prep school and were surprised and the differences in the schools - the class size was smaller and the sports facilities were great - but the atmosphere felt very disciplined and formal - is this the norm for prep schools - we want our DS to do well but don't want him to lose his personality.

Also the prep school has its own curriculum and also have their own inspection - how do you tell if they are teaching to the right standard. We have no experience of private education and independent schools - so please any advise would be great

Zoe Williams in The Guardian today

I liked that article. Someone mentioned earlier about not being able to teach because of misbehaving pupils in the class. I wondered what happened to pupils who misbehaved in private schools - can't believe there's no such thing. Do they just 'disappear'?

I liked alibubbles' post earlier as well.

amazing how this rubbish eduation still secures...

"...unfair advantages of a private education have been mapped out many times: the children of the rich get better grades; they go to better universities; and they wind up with better jobs."

i'm not an ardent advocate of private education but the logical inconsistency of this position is irritating.

and before anyone utters the obvious, another thing that irritates me is the assumption that it's all down to the old school tie, as if every private school were eton or harrow - they simply aren't.

i don't think you can have this argument both ways.

didn't know zoe williams had kids.

i'm reading a book about this at the moment which i will post more about if it's interesting

Dd's school has only every excluded one child. And that was after the girl failed to do any work for her GCSEs and was disruptive. She was allowed to do resits on the understanding that her attitude improved, but it didn't so they expelled her.

In general standards of behaviour are stricter in dds school than where I teach. There is less disruption because disruptive children are in the minority. Kids love to go with the masses. I've seen a lot of disuptive kids enter the school, but peer pressure tends to bring them round, rather than make them worse. That is not to say that they are angels or robots, they are not. But I know there are very few disrupted lessons.

I think we should be far less tolerent of bad behaviour in the state sector. It annoys me so much that good kids suffer because of the minority of trouble makes. We should have pupil referal units attached to all state schools. And trouble and we should be able to do in 'internal' exclusion. Kids need to know that thei behaviour has consequences.

alibubbles, you have far more experiene of education and G and T children (for want of a better word). Am a I misunderstanding you when you state that these gifted children are like they are because of their parents interest and care?

Surely it's got more to do with their IQ - which is not something a caring environment can affect really. Of course parental support and stimulation is important, but surely you're not saying that parents of children who are not doing so well in class for whatever reason do not try every bit as hard with their children as those who have bright children? I think many try even harder, when I read some of the threads on here. I have never had to sit with my son and help him to make sense of words or numbers or catch up with a subject. He can grasp things pretty easily. Neither do I think he is exceptionally bright and I don't think I could make him so even if I upped the stimulation and attention he receives at home. I can help a bit, but I believe he is what he is.

My ultra clever friend who won an exhibiton to Kings College had parents who didn't hold him back or massively encourage him - he was a neighbour and I grew up with him and knew his family. I went to the same school as him for a while. He excelled because he wanted to - he could do it, so he did it. It wasn't a struggle for him - achieving made him happy. He didn't rely on his parent's encouragement to perform. They gave him a stable home life, they loved him. They did nothing exceptional IMO - yet their son was an exceptionally gifted child.

tigermoth I agree with you. once you are out of the teritory of some of the parents hmb has to deal with- then it all comes down to the child themselves (although of course they will be affected by the school environment- in particular whether it is "ok" to work at their school). Certainly that seems to be the case when thinking about the people I grew up with, and also having taught potential medics doing retakes. Some children have good study skills (maybe because they enjoy it) some don't.

TBH I have met gifted children from all sorts of backgrounds. The very gifted often arrive 'out of the blue', and just as often to families with no experience of higher education.

For want of a better word, 'educated' parents often have kids who are good at working in school. These may be able children, but are not exceptional. They come from families who have the spare capacity and cash to encourage them. Therefore a disproportionate number of kids in the top sets may come from 'middle class' backgrounds.

But the truly gifted come from anywhere. And some of these kids need more help from schools because some parents cannot extend the kids in the way that they need. I am thinking of one boy I teach. He is an exceptional child, and comes from a highly disfunctional family. His great ability may well wither if he doesn't get encouragement in school, because his parents cannot give it at home.

One thing I do know. The gifted child is a very different animal to the bright child. I have taught a lot of bright kids. When you see gifted, you see a big difference. It isn't that they have been coached, or encouraged or read to more often or whatever. They have something that cannot be put into them. And in that respect things don't even out with time. If anything the differences can become even more marked. And these kids don't have an easy time....even the best adjusted find it hard to cope in a society where being a 'boff' is a term of abuse. Unlike the natural athletes, or the unusualy beautiful these children are not the source of envy, but often are derided.

Spot on hmb - what an excellent post.

tigermoth - have you found any answers to your questions re the 11+ yet, as we in the same position here in wilthsire. ds attends the local village school (one of the best in the area) but they haven't got any boys in the grammar school for 3 years. The 'in thing' seems to pay for primary and do loads of past papers at those schools so that they can all take the 11+ places - we could (in theory!) afford to send our children to one of the many prep schools in this area but I just don't like them - they make me feel uncomfortable - that's just my personal insecurities I guess - however the village school will not offer any assistance at all to those taking the 11+ - I find that simply awful - in such a competitive environment surely they should be doing the very best for their pupils then the grammars might have a much broader cross section of pupils - which should be the point of selective education. I think its the worst of both worlds in our area - lots of private prep schools taking the grammar school places - the serious question is whetehr you try and buck the system or just join in.

I follow what you say tigermoth and agree with a lot of what you say. I feel that the title G &T is bandied about too freely, it seems that today more and more kids are being classed as G&T, when I think that they are just normal intelligent children. Most of my daughter's class would have been considered G&T, which I feel makes a mockery of it all.

Dare I make a sweeping statement and say how people are in awe of children who come from working class backgrounds with no support. but end up being the brightest in the class, they say, he's done so well considering..... etc. Some children will always be bright regardless of environment , support, input etc, and they deserve every success.

That's why I feel grammar schools were a good thing, (until they became more selective by area) because lots of the kids from my village went who came from very humble backgrounds and made a fantastic success of their education.

In the USA everyones' child is in a gifted and talented or very able class of some sort, parents even have car bumper stickers syaing"my child is in the G&T class at such and such school" or my child is on the honour roll. My cousin is as thick as two short planks but he is in a 'program' in the states, he is miles behind DD academically but two years older!

Sorry, it's late and I haven't collected my thoughts properly, so I'll stop rambling!

Well said alibubbles i was wondering if anyone was going to make a comment as to how many kids are being labled and given the 'opportunities' of G & T. Correct me if i am wrong but the whole thing is a government initiative that has gone silly.

Just because schools are given a quota to select. Bright kids are being labled G & T and are left let down and demoralised when they dont come up to scratch in the real world, just because they were the brightest in their schools not because they are truly gifted or talented.

Anybody care to add to this line of the discussion?

Absolutely - when I was at primary school I came top of the year every year with lowest scores of 94% in end of year testing. The Head swore I was truly gifted (dad worked at Lucas, mum was ex-nurse and SAHM). We had no money, and to make matters worse I was the youngest (along with my twin sister of course) in the year. Everything just came naturally to me and school was a breeze...... until I went to secondary school and there were actually children there who knew more than me!!!!!!!! I don't think I ever got over it. So basically, yes I was "gifted" for my school probably but no more than the average kid.

If anyone is cross with me please email me, i will explain myself, would do it now but don't really want a public showdown, i respect you all

Kids in the US do start school later than in the UK tho, so that does have to be taken into account when comparing attainment in school.

I would like to think that we would find that all kids are gifted and talented at something. Doesn't everyone have something that they can excell at? I think that they do. What we need to do is recognise and encourage all of that, for all children. And that encludes intelelectual brilliance as well. As a society we have such a twisted attitude to it. In some respects giving it too much importance and in others despising the people who have it...as did that woman with that dreadful comment.

To be honest, I haven't heard the phrase 'gifted and talented' bandied about at my son's school. He certainly hasn't been called it, though teachers often say he is 'bright' or 'able'.

So I wonder how many schools pass this label onto parents? I am quite intrigued as to how parents know their child is considered G and T. Is is something you get told when your child is at secondary school?

Obviously some children are so bright it's evident they are exceptional, but wasn't someone here saying they teach a class with 10 G and T children in it? If it is a question of measurng the top 20% say of a primary class, then quite possibly my son would be in that group.

If so I agree with Alibubbles - the term is meaningless when applied to so many children. Also, what about late developers? I was one of them. I didn't read till quite late, didn't shine at primary school, but made some academic leaps as I moved through secondary school. Failed my 11+, passed my 13+.

If it ever arose, I would hate my son to know he was called 'gifted and talented'. For him this label would do no good at all. He has a lazy streak and this news would make him sit on his laurels. Getting him to try hard in homework would be a nightmare

agree hmb, If the term G and T exists, all kids should know they are 'G and T' at something.

I think that all kids have something to offer. I find it strage that we are more than happy as a society to trumpet the abilitiy of some children, but not all. It is OK to say that yur kids is a great athlete, or singer, but we seem to find something shameful about kids being academicaly good.

In the school I am in the school teams are idiolised by the rest of the kids. And the bright kids learn to hide how good they are so that they don't get bullied!

Everyone has something, everyone should extend themselves to whatever level we can, and we should sing the praises of all kids.

I also agree that G & T is over used. But we cannot pretend that all kids will 'even out' by 8 or 11 or whatever. It doesn't happen in sport and it doesn't happen in academic subjects either.

I'd never heard the term until we went to Parents Evening last month & the English teacher said they have to recommend 3 kids from each class. I wouldn't have considered DS3 either gifted or talented but apparently his test scores in class show he is the 2nd from top for English of what is allegedly (according to the teachers) the top form of the year group. He struggles with maths though. My other 2 sons struggle with English but are natural mathematicians.

northernlass1, no I haven't yet found any answers to the 11+ question. I haven't yet phoned the grammar schools, to ask about the percentage of intake from private schools, if that's what you mean.

I have heard so much conflicting advice about the 11+ that I don't know who to believe. We live on the edge of our borough. There are no grammar schools here, so no 11+. Our local non selective secondary schools are all rated below average, but I haven't visited them so can't comment from first hand knowledge. Chances are my son will go to one.

However, the neighbouring borough has grammar schools, so children in our area can sit that
borough's 11+.

My son's school offers little help to 11+ entrants, though I believe they sit a few test papers the week before. Also, the teachers officially do not adivise parents, since the borough frowns on 11+ selection. They don't tell cetain parents to put their child in for the 11+. They will not recommend a particular tutor or do any specific 11+ ability assessment at school.

Unofficially the teachers will give a little more help - advising on what test papers to buy, that sort of thing. Children at my son's school do enter the 11+ and pass, but they do this outside the system. IME parents advise and support each other, but most of us are in the dark, too. I have no idea, for instance, if my son's weekly 1 hour 11+ coaching is doing any good. It might be going over ground covered at school. The tutor could be rubbish for all I know.

When I contrast this with the a statement made earlier on this thread about a private school getting nearly 100% of its children into the grammars, it makes me worried. Yes, I know that passing the test calls for natural ability and no amount of teaching can make a child pass, but what about all the inbetween children who might pass, given some support - and might pass well and opposed to just scraping through if they have some good pre test support? The situation is not so black and white then.

Selection to grammar schools in my area is not just about passing the 11+. That is just the first hurdle. About 2,500 children pass the 11+ but there are only 900 grammar school places. They go to the children with the highest marks. I might be paranoid here, but I wonder how many state school pupils pass the 11+ but don't get quite high enough marks to get to the grammars? how does this compare with pupils who have been extensivley coached at school? So yes, you can have statistics showing that many state school pupils 'pass the 11+' but when you look at those who actually get offered grammar places, the percentage drops off. I might be way off here - this is just me rambling.

I cannot see why the 11+ covers areas not taught to children who do the national curriculum. Why is this? My son will be tested on long division in this October's 11+. He will get taught this in year 6 but not in time for the test. What would happen if we didn't send him for coaching or couldn't teach him this ourselves? he would not be able to answer the questions, hence he would lose marks. And with the competition for entry to grammar schools here, marks count.

I know that much of the 11+ tests ability, but not all of it. And, having looked at the test papers, IMO they would be very daunting to children who were not familiar with the test process. So some coaching is needed. The sixty million dollar question is how much? If I believe the advice from 11+ borough's education department, all I need to do is go through a few test papers with my son. If I believe other parents he needs months of extra tuition and homework. If I beleive the school, I can do it all myself with him at home. If I believe the tutor centre, their many years' background knowledge of the tests will give my son the edge.

I am not saying that I believe all private primaries hothouse their children - I am absolutely sure they don't. I am not saying that it is wrong to send a child to a private primary - each to their own. I am just higlighting the differences as I see them in my area.

re bad behaviour at a private school, there is a much lower tolerance. My DD went with the school on a day trip to France. When we arrived to collect her, the bus turned up but no-one got off. We all hung around for ages & still no-one got off. Eventually the teachers got off & marched the pupils straight into the school. No-one was smiling & no-one said anything. They kept them there for an hour (& this was in the evening).

Turns out that someone had thrown crisps on the floor of the Le Shuttle carriage. The staff had complained to the teachers & none of the kids would own up. They'd all had to pick up the crisps, then been kept back until someone owned up & apologised.

DD said the boy who owned up hadn't actually done it, but thought it was time they all went home.

Can you see Mr & Mrs "my-kid's-done-nuffink" hanging around outside school for 1.5 hours without creating a scene?

I thought it was overkill for the offence, but by clamping down on the minor stuff, they avoided the bigger problems. There were a few boys expelled from the 6th form for drugs offences but on the whole the school didn't get the discipline problems the state schools get, because it just wasn't tolerated.

Agree with the difference in discipline - I went to both a state school and later a private school - in the state school you could smoke in the science lab in the private school if you were caught smoking in school grounds or on the route home wearing the school uniform you were expelled!! There was definitely zero tolerance of bad behaviour and I must say it worked - I was quite, erm, mouthy at the state school and wasn't in the least bit scared of the teachers but my god, I wouldn't have dreamt of putting foot wrong at the private school.

It makes me so cross that ordinary children are not being given the opportunities to prepare for the 11+ within state primary schools. It just seems so unfair. It's not relevant to us here, as we have no grammars.

But there is a scheme highly advertised here (area of high unemployment/deprivation) giving yr 12 students the opportunity (free) to spend a week of the summer holidays at a top university. Priority is given to students in one or more of the following categories:
Whose parents did not attend uni
Who have non-professional parents
Whose come from schools and colleges which do not send many students to Oxbridge
who come from schools and colleges with a low overall point score
who have achieved A* or A grades at GCSE
who are taking relevant subjects for the course studied

This is funded by a charity (no surprises there). But surely there should be similar state initiatives for university entry, but also for grammar entry too? To enable all students to apply from a level playing field irrespective of their background.

Quite a few Universities do this sort of thing. I know that St Andrews has an extensive 'outreach' programme. Oxbridge also do this, I've got one of my students applying this year. If they don't take her they are mad!