The Glass Ceiling - part 3

[WoodHeaven]

This is a continuation of the first two threads.
Please free to join us as we discussed challenges faced by our dcs (and how to kake the best of the giftiness)

Previous thread The glass celining - part 2

Good question tough some of the young women I teach put themselves under far too much pressure ( it does not come from me).

But I think they might be like that anywhere?

First I would like to thank all the people who have children at a private school/grammar/supper selective to have given their pov, what is working, what isn't and why they made that choice.

It is very enlightening. And I appreciate it can be uncomfortable to do so. So again thanks :)

disqui while your conclusions may be correct from the evidence, you can't possibly be party to the full evidence. I'll hazard a guess you don't meet enough of the highly able from bad comprehensives to establish which has the most negative impact on mental health between them and ss state. Because many will have been lost before you even get chance to meet them. You're only able to compare the ones that were lucky enough to get the best of the state provision. I'm confident if you compared the mental impact of state ss to bad comprehensive state ss would win everytime.

( by bad comprehensive I mean any with bad able provision, not ofsted bad or considered bad because of the social demographic of the cohort)

Listening to you all though, I sometimes have dreams of moving away from our little patch to go 'down South@ just for the chance of having more choice!

Here we have 3 state primary, my dcs have been to two of them. One of them was so dire we moved them. The other is good but doesn't do that much differenciation. The last one isn't better (but more 'sought after', local snobbery). We have one SS. The other close by in oversubscribed due to cathment area (and the fact that siblings have priority).
No grammar school.
One private near by plus another two not too far away. Two of them are relatively selective.

Someone mentioned before that sometimes schools in very MC area can be worse as there is little variation. That would fit the bill here.

I suspect this is the bottom line. Choice can be limited depending on where you are. And the environment can also influence what sort of provision is available.

It's not a competition for which is worse, but in any case I didn't comment at all on "bad comprehensives" or compare such schools with state ss. Nor did I condone the inhomogeneous provision of comprehensives. My point was simply that there can be downsides to superselectives, as well as the positives highlighted earlier on this thread. And that there is often little difference for high ability students between grammars and selective through postcode "good" comprehensives.

And for the record I actually do spend time working with able students from "bad comprehensives" (I lead various initiatives targeting such pupils) and I wouldn't say that the mental impact on these students is always worse than that in state ss.

Wood I too am up north. Ofsted has just criticised not one school but the entire city council for poor results & low aspiration. No state grammar or super selectives in sight.

I think you're right, WoodHeaven. We're in London and the number of schools is quite something and with the Academies/ Free Schools/ Community schools it's a wide range and each is v.different. It's all a bit mind blowing. Though it has to be said that the 'choice' bit is v.random. Catchments for good schools are often just a few hundred metres. Also by us, two of the schools now select by lottery rather than distance so you genuinely can't tell if you'll be luck or not. It's v.stressful wherever you live!

Or are the children that go to superselectives naturally more likely to suffer anxiety anyway? Is it nature? Or nurture from the family that would push for SS?

There does seem to be a strong correlation between giftedness and perfectionism, although whether that is nature or nurture from not encountering much failure is probably impossible to tease out. So I think some of it does come down to the way that schools deal with it.

But lurked may also be right in that some from the comprehensives are bored and drop out, so a kind of selection process happens and only the most mentally resilient and driven arrive at a university, or possibly those with the more involved parents.

I can see lots of replies on here, and several references to me. I just want to assure everyone who has written on this thread - Bertrand included - that I am grateful for every response and every perspective.

Also, especially since I wasn't even the OP, I don't want these threads to be about me, or only one type of education. I've personally got a lot out of the threads, I've learned a lot about highly able children in general - and yes, the state sector, in particular. However, I'd really hope that other parents would feel free to post here, irrespective of their of their views about what education should be and what type of school their child attends. IMHO It is lovely to have enough money to choose, but then its irrelevant. The only relevant thing is what your child is experiencing (and I write that as someone who is now poor but wasn't always!)

And other stakeholders in education too (to coin a cringe-making phrase!)

But I forgot to add that I have to work now. I've only stopped for a couple of mins to write this. So I won't be back to read through and reply for several hours.

Hello again, sorry haven't posted for a while but have been busy for once

I would just like to add wrt pressure and anxiety, just from my experience at dd school.
There are lots of pressures both subject matter, time, organisation etc and many children learn how to cope with this.
I think it may be more than at a state school but would also factor in the boarding and performance element.
Most are fine but occasionally we do hear it was too much for a certain child, when dd tells us somebody has left.
There is also the problem that some children decide the subject isn't for them anymore as it is intense.
A lot of the children, in fact most live for the subject and as discussed before even during their free time they are actively seeking more.
If a child wasn't that into the subject they would struggle with peers the same as G&T children may struggle with peers in state school.
I think for the child that does fit the mould and can cope with the pressure it is a brilliant education.
Of course there are the children who put themselves under pressure too, who never want any down time and these are dealt with accordingly.
In dd case she was caught in a practice room long after she should have been and was in real trouble as they had been working harder than usual anyway.

low aspiration .... That THE one thing that is really really causing me problem.

In some ways it might actually be what is actually at the root of everything here. If aspirations are low and no one thinks it's 'normal' but rather very pretentious (thinking above yourself, 'only' for those at private etc...) to want to go to Oxbridge and the likes, then it will influence the teachers too. Why would you want to do triple science, get A* on all your subjects/whatever else it can be, if you know that a B or a science or double science will be enough to go to the Uni down the road (the ones where 90% of the students are going)?

WoodHeaven - the issue that I have come up against most often that causes me to boil with frustration is when I have a clear vision of where I want to take the DC academically (or otherwise) and their school or teacher has a much more limited perspective and basically says no can do. Yet I know what I want is easy to achieve and I have the roadmap. Grrrrr.

did the teacher give you any idea of the sort of thing she was thinking about? I always think that it must be particularly difficult to provide differentiated work for outliers in English when they are so young

Bert, no she didn't. She freely admitted that she doesn't know what the best thing to do is. But she is consulting with a chap at her previous university, the LA bods and also other local schools (primary and secondary) in order to find a solution. She's not sure yet whether that will take the form of DD getting to do something or whether the teacher herself will be given more help on what to do with a child like this.

I went to a v selective private school often described on MN as a pressured hothouse etc. All I can say it that it didn't feel like that from the inside.

Ambroxide

That's what is said about dd school, amongst other things. (In the news again today, sadly)
One person's hothouse, pressure and anxiety is another person's idea of utopia.

Ambroxide Your DD's school sounds fantastic, especially the teacher. It's really good to hear positive stuff like that!

Newlife, how did you find out your dd has talent in music? Is that expected(like musical background) or it just happened? Sorry being nosy, I am from completely no musical background and really fascinated by the idea of having a talent in music. It must be wonderful.

"Interestingly we don't seem to see quite as many mental heath issues amongst those from superselective privates"

Perhaps more of them know that they have a safety-net?

A child psychiatrist friend of mine once remarked that almost the entire anorexia ward in her workplace was filled with pupils or ex-pupils from her local superselective private girls' school.

It significantly influenced her choice of school for her own children.

I don't think it is possible to generailise on a sector basis, perhaps more at an individual school level.

"I don't think it is possible to generailise on a sector basis"

I'm not claiming anything is ubiquitous. That aside do you think @disquisitiones is wrong about the bias re. mental health issues or that I'm wrong to suggest that family SES may be one of the factors?

I think many of the superselective private schools are well aware of the pitfalls associated with clever perfectionist children and actively strive for a culture where being perfect isn't expected. Certainly at my school it was all about being the best you personally can be but also being a rounded person who had a life outside academia, rather than competing with others to be top (which is obviously problematic for those who cannot win, and also problematic for those who always win).

DD's school is not perfect. But I can honestly say they have always treated DD as an individual with individual needs and (since the initial year or two of 'she can't possibly be doing that') they have been very fair about making sure she is challenged. Which is kind of good enough as far as I am concerned.

"it was all about being the best you personally can be but also being a rounded person who had a life outside academia, rather than competing with others to be top"

That's a fair summary of my DD's nature, so from my narrow perspective it suggests they might be selecting for that kind of child more than making them.

Irvine.

Don't want to ramble too much, in all honesty it's a mix of everything.

I was quite good at music as a child/ loved performing.
Dh is quite a famous Jazz musician. (In his own lunch time)

We encouraged all 3 dc but didn't push. The older dc both ds, were into sport and only slightly interested and gave up. They do have good taste in a wide range of music though, obviously nurture. They are much older than dd, not sure if this makes any difference

Dd told us she was going to be a famous opera singer one day when she was about 3.5, but hadn't started speaking until 3 and had been referred to SALT.
She is driven, motivated, dedicated the whole lot.
We have no idea why. She plays a few instruments as well, so maybe she might chose one or a combination to specialise, I don't know but she'll probably end up in music.
Audiences say she gives them goosebumps and shivers and I'm awful and offer them a cardi. It's the embarrassment, I'm not rude.

Thank you Newlife!