Private school pupils more likely than state school to get extra time in exams

[LattePatty]

https://www.tes.com/magazine/news/general/lofqual-students-extra-time-exams-2024-25

Context: I have a GCSE age child in a state school who doesn’t need extra time and a younger child with SEN who probably will.

I heard this yesterday - 1 in 6 pupils get extra time in exams (which is more than I would have realised) and the proportion is HIGHER in private schools than state schools.

How can this be? I know there are some private special schools but the majority of private schools I know are academically selective. Are there really higher levels of SEN needing extra time in private schools vs state?

So what’s going on: Are private schools gaming the system? Are private school parents more able to pay for assessments privately? Something else?

We all know that private schools fees give the advantage of smaller class sizes and better facilities and maybe better teaching (moot point I think). But I certainly didn’t realise another benefit might be extra time in exams.

Accessing services and provisions for SEN students often requires parental advocacy. Parents who choose private schools are more likely to also be strong advocates for their child’s education.

this is the same reason that children of wealthy and well educated parents are more likely to get things like extra time at state schools. No one is gaming the system. SEN children are born to all kinds of families. Families with education are more likely to know the law. They have the skills necessary to navigate the bureaucracy. They have the quiet threat of hiring solicitors in the background.

parents without means care just as much about their SEN children, but they are less likely to be in a position to fight the school.

Sort of. But also you have to factor in that most parents paying for their kids education are heavily invested in it. State schools are a mix of everything from the very very engaged parents to the absolute dregs who should never have had children. So there will naturally be more parents with children in private schools who would investigate issues rather than just ignore or not even notice it.

Sharper elbows basically. It’s not just private schools, more affluent students at state schools get more extra time because their parents pushed for assessments (either via state or paying privately) I fully admit both my dc got extra time and other modifications, completely legal but I’m sure it did help

Bloody hell... 🤦‍♀️ And those were the teachers 🙈
My DS has IQ in the top 5% of the population so is presumably "bright" whatever it means but his autism and severe dyspraxia do mean he has "slow processing", and it is confirmed by a qualified clinical psychologist on the NHS.

The scandal is the ignorance of educational professionals who spread bullshit on top of ignorance.

I think you’re being naive to assume that parents who have the means won’t try to get as much as possible for their children.

There’s no need to be rude about my mum. She wasn’t alone amongst the staff in having to manage parents who felt their geese were swans and were willing to bend the rules to load the dice even more in their favour. I’ll reserve my sympathy for bright, poor kids whose parents lack the sharp elbows of their privately educated contemporaries.

I think you’re naive to think that all the cases mirror that of your child, or that parents with means won’t expend them to secure advantages for their children.

There’s no need to be rude about my mum. She wasn’t alone in her views, and it’s a tough job dealing with parents who think their geese are swans and are willing to bend rules to secure even more advantages for them. I’ll reserve my sympathy for poor, bright kids who don’t have parents with such deep pockets and sharp elbows.

Of course because 1 school is reflective of a whole sector 🙄

On pt2 - differential diagnosis can be v very tricky to do, especially in MH. It requires a broad expertise and it's not how healthcare professionals have been trained in decades, I think. Early and narrow specialisation is not conducive to proper diagnostics but this is the reality we live in.

FYI getting a diagnosis of anything does not guarantee AA. I manage that process. Your mum may not understand AA

I think it’s naive to think that parents with means won’t expend them trying to secure further advantages for their children.

We’re talking about 7% of the school population, or around that, who already have advantages through smaller classes etc, and we now find are also over represented in allocated extra time in exams. I find that pretty compelling.

Maybe not, but it significantly increases the likelihood, especially when combined with other diagnoses.

ETA I’m also speaking about cases where the AA did lead to additional time.

In your opinion. I respectfully disagree.

Of course you do because it's clear you have an agenda and prejudices. It has been explained why and none of it is about gaming the odds.

This petty mindedness about independent schools is appalling. Anything you can hold against them you will, they are the source of all evil obviously 🙄

FYI there are plenty of wealthy parents in state schools who do exactly the same.

Stop what exactly? The assessments have always been standardised, you cannot give a clinical diagnosis using whatever tool you fancy, there are standardised tests you must use.

I don't get your point about y9 and y10 🤷‍♀️ Do you believe disabled children in primary are simply left to rot? 🤔

There’s no need for name calling at all. We’re strangers on the internet, having a discussion. No need to be anything other than civil and respectful.

People seem to pay for private education to give their children the best start in life, and to secure advantages for them through smaller classes and better facilities. I don’t think that’s a controversial statement. The figures seem to show they are also more likely to secure diagnoses for their children, in many cases securing additional time in exams. For me, it’s not much of a stretch to see this is another way of securing an advantage for some parents.

Around here if wealthy parents have a bright and able child they go to the local (very good ) state school. If their child is struggling academically they are much more likely to send them private. That is going to skew the statistics for starters. Most of the parents I know who have opted for private school it's because their child has dyslexia, or ADHD or autism

Quite.

Extra time really isn't that much of an advantage anyway. The exams are designed to be able to be done in the time given. If you don't need the extra time it's far nicer to be done in a sensible time frame and out to enjoy your day/recover for the next exam.

I hate the perception people pay for a diagnosis to get some perceived perk like extra time.
We sought diagnosis to ensure our children (one dyslexia, one with autism ) could be better understood and supported in and out of school. I am not someone creating exam machines. I just want my children to feel supported getting their education.

Dds diagnosis meant her ignorant teacher stopped going on about how she was "lazy" for getting spellings wrong. The harm that lady in particular did to her confidence was immense. It meant we could understand and then articulate the particular support that would help her most.

All cases are different but not knowing that people can be bright AND have slow processing is utterly ignorant. It's such a common knowledge that teachers should really know these basic facts or at least try to educate themselves. It's not like your DM was an overwhelmed and underpaid state school teacher either so there is absolutely no excuse.

"Geese are swans" ffs 🤦‍♀️ I hope it's not your mother's words. Every child is a swan in something, and it would be a shameful attitude for a teacher.

Please stop being rude about my mum, just because you don’t like what she said. It’s just not needed. I’m sure you can get your point across without resorting to insults.

I agree, all children are individuals. But not all children are going to secure top grades, no matter what their parents may desire.

I’m not sure I understand this. If it’s not an advantage, or desirable in some way, why go to the trouble of seeking it?

It's not about me liking or disliking her words, don't you see? It's about simple facts and the harm done to children. In real life, not on the internet.

Because it levels the playing field

Are you accusing my mum of causing harm to children?

That’s a pretty bold statement (!)

You could say it’s their parents doing the real damage by putting such pressure on their kids.