Big Fish Small Pond or vice versa

[ChristmasLightsAndSparkles]

I saw a message on another thread (related to schools) that

There is academic research that it is better to be a big fish in a small pond, than a small fish in a big pond.

Anyone know what this research might be?

I see being middle of a strong cohort as ideal - allowing for the child to be stretched, and to develop a strong work ethic.

People I know who grew up being 'the clever one' often show maladaptive 'fixed mindset' attitudes as adults. Ie. not expecting to have to study, since it usually just makes sense; feeling threatened by people who are more clever rather you and seeking 'safe' work/social life rather than the pleasure and challenge of peers who are at and above your level.

I was top of a mixed ability cohort at school myself, and have had to learn not to allow myself those attitudes - and also believe they actually create stress (I still have to remind myself that it's ok not to already know stuff). But I guess I don't know what it feels like to work really hard and still struggle academically. I've always got the confidence that when I 'up the gears' I can succeed. I am very hard-working, and always have been.

DD is middle of the year academically in a strong academic school, which I've always been happy with. But other parents (kids also roughly middle of the year academically) have said they worry that never being the one who 'shines' isn't good for the kids self esteem, and have considered changing school to be more of a big fish in a small pond.

What is your opinion/experience?

(This is just curiosity. DD loves her school, and I'm really happy with it. Not planning to move her)

I would rather be the small fish in a big pond.

One child is rarely the best at everything. So, even if your child was the ‘small fish’ when it came to maths; they might learn other skills and become the ‘big fish’ when it comes to football, for example.

Also, I would also consider who the child is meeting and building relationships in each ‘pond’. If they’re the biggest, brightest and best, amongst ‘inferiors,’ who are they going to learn from, or build mutually beneficial relationships with?

Being the small fish in a big pond, better reflects the wider world they’re about to emerge in. It’s quite a shock for ‘big fish in little ponds’ to learn they’re not God’s gift, after all. I think it’s a good lesson to learn - to understand that you have to continuously work hard to get where you want in life. Otherwise, you risk creating a fixed mindset where a child thinks they are ‘automatically’ better than others. There’s a lot of research on this from ‘growth mindset’ researchers - and theories of ‘mastery’.

Also, this way, your child would be one step ahead of the rest, as they will have learnt to shine and stand out from the crowd in other ways and have a far more practice at resilience.

I have seen studies where very bright children who didn’t struggle to be the ‘big fish’, and success came easily at school, peaked at school, and struggled to develop any further, as they have never learnt a growth mindset, persistence, dealing with adversity etc. Thus, often failing in their future studies or careers.

Small fish all the way!

I think it depends a lot on the individual child.

I have a one who was much happier being a small fish in a very selective secondary school than she was always being top of the class at primary school.

Other children will have different preferences.

Here is the research evidence:
ed.stanford.edu/news/stanford-education-study-provides-new-evidence-big-fish-little-pond-effect-students-globally

I don't think the idea is it's good to be an extreme outlier in your cohort but that being 'top set' helps your confidence which feeds through to academic performance.

It really does depend on the child. Some children work better being the small fish in the Big pond whilst other work better being the big fish in the small pond.

It also depends on the calibre of schools you place in the "Big pond" or "Little pond" category. For example I've had a parent tell me their child won't be applying to the North London Grammars(Henrietta Barnet in this case)as it's too academic(Big Pond) and she'd do better in a small pond environment. Later found out that supposed small pond school was Dame Alice owens. For those that don't know, DAO is very academic just not as selective as the North London Grammars.

So yh be careful when parents say less academic schools, they most times don't mean the comprehensive down the road just a slightly less selective school

The trouble with big fish in small pond, especially if parents don’t see it for what it is, is that it can produce some pretty delusional kids and parents who generally have to cope with a wider distribution of ability at some point. Where we are (not UK) there are some small public primary schools around and a lot of the parents of the “top of the class” kids are convinced that they will sail through the secondary selective school tests or be offered full scholarships to one of the high fee privates in the area. It can certainly be a confidence killer when that doesn’t happen and some kids are left feeling that they somehow let their parents down by not achieving what was probably not realistically achievable for a lot of them. My kids are average and happy 😊

I am not sure about this.
I while it depends on the child...
Learning you won't come top, make the team, get the place on the course, get the interview /job / promotion AND YET life is okay & you are okay is an important lesson.

Big fish small pond can create delusional/ entitled kids OR kids that struggle with resilience/ life adversity as adults.

I think people are misinterpreting the research a bit.

What the data are saying is, if you are very able, being in a school that makes you feel very able will increase your academic performance / confidence compared to being in a highly selective school and being middle or bottom of the pack. Seeing your ability for what it is within a normal distribution rather than feeling mediocre in a distribution that skews towards only the very able is what they are contrasting.

The reason for this is even if you are very able, if you are in a setting of only very able children your self-perception becomes that you are average (at best) which lowers your confidence and academic performance like for like.

From a personal perspective I grew up thinking I was cleverer/more able than I was because I attended a low achieving primary and secondary school.
College (and university) were a big shock and I found I was fairly mediocre.
I think I would have achieved more at a higher achieving secondary.
It wasn't even a particularly poor area, but there was a definite lack of aspiration.

Small fish in a big pond every time. Makes you more grounded and ready for the real world. I work in a private secondary and see many kids join us where they have been big fish in small pond, and then they (and their parents) find out that they are no longer the most intelligent/most popular/teachers favourite. It can be a painful wake up call.

Surprised by the consensous so far. I think being at the bottom all the time can be very demotivating. Whereas success and praise are great motivators. I went to a very selective academic school and always felt like I was at the bottom (didn't help that I was summer born). I also struggled socially and was painfully shy. Looking back, I was also bit depressed, and I didn't do very well in my A levels.

Then I went to a fairly middle of the road uni where I was towards the top end of class, and it gave me a lot of confidence. It motivated me to get on with writing essays etc early, because suddenly I realised I was capable (whereas before I'd procrastinate, as if you feel like what you do isn't any good, then what's the point?)

@ArialAnna this was my experience too. Maybe the answer isn’t big or small pond, but ensuring kids have a growth mindset. Letting them know that they CAN improve.
My kid was previously big fish, small pond and it left him bored and unstretched, tho he enjoyed school and was always top of the class, having a good time etc.
He is now being stretched (y7, ss school). The transition came as a bit of a shock. But I think it may be the making of him. He’s now learning effort, work, that he isn’t top of everything (in fact not top of anything!).

He wasn’t happy at first, but says he is now. Rather have the shock now than at 18, or in the workplace. A chance to learn resilience, improvement, also failure - and that it isn’t the end of the world but can be turned into success next time! (His test scores are improving!)

Absolutely big fish. We have always taken that decision. Not the biggest fish but absolutely top 1/3 of an academic cohort rather than bottom of a very highly selective cohort. Nothing can convince me otherwise. I wouldn't want them in a school where they were head and shoulders above the year but equally no way on this earth would I put them anywhere I thought they might hover closer to the bottom. I was in this position and it's soul destroying and you have no realistic understanding of a) that you actually are really quite clever and b) a complete lack of appreciation that academics are not the be all and end all .

DD was a big fish in a very small pond throughout primary school. While she did obviously feel clever and I was at pains to try to make sure she knew that she still needed to try her best etc I don't think it was good for her at all in a number of ways.

She is now a smaller fish in a much bigger pond and it has been genuinely inspirational for her. For instance, her test scores have now become something that is meaningful and she needs to strive for instead of something where she knows she will come top because the test is trivially easy. She doesn't have to sit through endless revision of things she knows really well because the pace is super fast and she finds that a lot more enjoyable.

She likes not being an outlier. She is really enjoying not sticking out all the time. She loves that there are other children who know more than her about their areas of interest.

I don't believe that she sees herself as average because we talk about this and I point out that the real world was her primary school which had a very wide distribution of ability and quite a lot of children with additional needs and difficult circumstances in her class. Her current school is absolutely an ivory tower and she knows it is. I think this stuff might be harder to understand for children who have been in the private system all their lives.

For top 10% children, I'd absolutely advocate big fish small pond and the confidence that can bring.

For top 1% or 2% or 3% children, find your kids a bigger pond. It will ultimately benefit them.

I think all children need stretch and challenge. That’s a different debate to big fish / small fish.

I think the point of the research is, if you have a child that’s top 1 percent they’ll still be a big fish in almost all academically selective schools and probably thrive. Being an extreme outlier isn’t great, particularly without adequate differentiation.

However, a child that’s top 20 percent in a selective school hovering at the bottom will develop an image of themselves that they aren’t very clever. If they were in a mixed ability environment where they could still be stretched their self perception and confidence would be better which would help their academic performance.

Interesting question! I think the ideal would be if the child is broadly in the middle of their cohort, but have one or two things at which they excel.

I was at a very academic school and left feeling I wasn’t that clever because I didn’t go to Oxbridge and had to work to achieve perfectly good (70-80%) exam results when others (a minority, in hindsight) would get 80-90%+. I would have preferred to have been somewhere less academic to feel less of a low achiever!

Different perspectives, which have made me think!

DD is in top sets for English and Maths, but not high in those sets, doesn't 'get' stuff instantly, and spelling isn't great. I'm realising - thinking about some things she's said - that this is making her feel that she isn't that strong academically. Even though she really is!

We've always told her that it's fine not to be top etc and kept pressure off, believing that primary should be relaxed and she can ramp up in secondary. But in retrospect that might actually make her feel that we don't believe in her. (I've suddenly remembered feeling that way when my parents tried not to pressure me to be like my very clever older brother.)

Argh. Right, I think the way forward is actually for me to work with her on things like spellings so that she does better within the class. Not because I think it's really necessary at this age, but to give her confidence. I definitely want to keep her at this school - I think it's really right for her - but actually I think she'll be happier if I push her a bit to do as well as she can. A year or so ago we had a big push on times tables, and that did help her confidence. Thanks all, that's really helpful. I do find it tricky to know the best thing to do sometimes!

I was average at school and then went to university and was top 5%. What I hadn't realised at my selective private school was the cohort was already above average. Even the bottom set was above average.
I'm a hard worker and accept not being the best but university gave me the opportunity to shine.
A friend of mine was a genius at her rural school and sank like a stone at university..

We’re about to find out!

My DS has been top 1-2% his whole primary school years and it’s definitely bred a laziness and nonchalance that needs working out of him. Although he achieves top marks, he doesn’t have the skills his peers are gaining through applying themselves, working to a challenge and the rewards and sense of achievement that brings. He just expects it - everyone expects it of him - and it comes as a shock/embarrassment on the occasions when he doesn’t get first place.

He’s due to join a selective secondary in Sept and I’m told will likely make the top 1/3 but definitely not the top. I’ve really agonised over making the switch but feel it’s absolutely what he needs right now to avoid resting on his laurels and I’m gearing myself up to offer full support/discipline at home to ensure he isn’t broken by it but help him get his fire going to apply himself more.

@TooWeirdToLiveTooRareToDie

That sounds ideal. All children benefit from appropriate levels of challenge and differentiation. However, he'll still be in the top of his cohort. It sounds like the problems come in when children lose confidence being the bottom of a selective cohort as they start to lose academic confidence.

Have a look at Carol Dwecks growth mindset stuff. Really important to encourage.

I definitely found being right at the top of a comprehensive school to medical school difficult, even when I knew it would be that way. Would have been helpful to have some similar folks in terms of academics around me at gcse/sixth form to make it more interesting as well.

For less confident child I think being in a smaller pond can be helpful to build confidence.

My dc are at a small school (1 form entry, total 170ish) the transition to any secondary will be quite a shock. They are both benefiting a lot from the school they are in though - nothing is perfect.

@MrPickles73 - What effect do you think your experiences had on you?

How confident do you feel about your abilities now as an adult? You say you shone at Uni: was that enough to reset the way you see yourself? Do you feel able (as you clearly are) and know that you are equal to any challenge that comes your way?

This is a great thread! I am 100% in favour of the big fish, small pond approach.

In this day and age in which children face immense pressure to be perfect and so many parents/teachers foster competition among peers, (particularly in the London independent sector), I am more in favour than ever for the happy/healthy approach to a well balanced education. I like my children to feel celebrated when they achieve something good and I also want them to feel that failing is not the end of the world but an occasion to stand up stronger and just carry on.

It is not fair for teenagers to carry the baggage of their parents ambitions. After all, it is the adults who judge what a 'big pond' or a 'small pond' is. As a mum, and as a woman (immigrant) who has overcome many obstacles and succeeded in life, I believe it is self-confidence and healthy relationships that have brought joy (and yes, success) to my life. This is all I want for my kids: to be able to form healthy and meaningful friendships and to be able to be proud of who they are, with all their virtues and all their flaws.