Why would anyone consider going to Rugby school better than the mixed local comp?

[Charis2]

I read this article in the standard earleir, and just thought what is this headmaster on? Why is this scholarship presented as such a huge honour for the boy, when in fact it is a way of the school paying to improve its results by taking in some of the best sixth form students without fees.

What "lifechanging" opportunities does he expect he can offer, which Hassenbrook acadamy can't?

www.standard.co.uk/news/london/needs-pic-teenage-footballer-wins-70000-scholarship-to-boarding-school-that-invented-rugby-a2953791.html

Headmaster Peter Green said he hoped Michael and other Arnold Foundation scholars would have a “ripple effect” on their communities when they return home.

He said: “We might be able to be transformative and transform their lives. Then when they go to university, and after, they can start to transform their own local communities. It’s not about parachuting someone out of that. We want to keep their association with where they are from.”

What a snob. Does he think the staff at Hassenbrook only teach poor peoples maths and physics, and the maths at Rugby is somehow a better class of maths? perhaps he thinks the laws of physics perform better there too?

I hope this lad has fun, but I don't think for a moment his life is going to be in any way better because he spent two years mixing with rich snobs rather than normal people.

I think Shegot, that many comps would offer good educations for bright children. I don't know of any comprehensive where people don't get A*s at GCSE or , if offered, at A level.

I would say that actually yes, most children are averagely bright, parents tend to be a little bit biased or in many cases way way over ambitious for a childs abililty. Some of the stories I could tell you...

parents tend to be a little bit biased or in many cases way way over ambitious for a childs abililty

I think many parents of very bright children face this attitude. Often it's a failure of the teacher's imagination. And you certainly won't get any sympathy from other parents who cannot believe that your child might need more challenge than theirs. In the end, I think most parents are not deluded. They spend more time with their children than anyone else and they do know. Faced with this social situation, I think those that can, quietly make other arrangements, often in the private sector, that are more suitable rather than being mocked and treated like a problem in the state sector.

I visit a lot of comps and am often disappointed with what is on offer for the highly able. Obviously some students still gain good grades but that, TBH, is the least of my aspirations for my DC.

For me, it's about their day to day experience, which involves far more than academics.

As for being biased/ deluded about DC's abilities, well I don't think so.

I always assumed they were pretty average but it's their teachers who have said otherwise. Then certain results pointed in that direction.

HM - Then when they go to university, and after, they can start to transform their own local communities. It’s not about parachuting someone out of that.We want to keep their association with where they are from.

This is odd ; he has no influence on what they do after school and university.

Again, it may have been clumsily edited for a short Standard article.

long, I don't think I've said all chidlren at private schools are bright. Plenty of them specialise in the less bright. Every urban area has its list of those where very few will pass to get in and those where they take just about anyone who will pay. It was same 40 years ago when I was at private school.

(It is easier to get into Harrow than Eton and I only said int he past it was Eton if you're bright and Harrow if you aren't but even today there is still a distinction).

I am not sure all private schools alway shave smaller classes at secondary level. if everyone is bright and working at the same leve,. if the class is too small you don't get enough ideas bouncing off people. Only 2 of us did German A level and I suspect we'd have been better with a few more in the class. Difficult balance to get right.

And yes on the twins point above -I agree. It really does show the differences between genes and the other stuff particularly if they are non identicals although I was relieved mine got pretty similar GCSE results.

HeighHo, your comments on lack of teacher imagination are quite frankly insulting. And yes many parents are way over ambitious for their child's ability. The number of times I've talked to parents who have top 5 uni ambitions, or medicine ambitions for perfectly nice, fairly bright students who work hard and are well guided and provided for by the school but simpy just not of that standard is ridiculous.

Parents do spend more time with their children, but their objectivity is often blurred.

When are children who are bright "mocked and treated like a problem" in the state sector, I've never come across this in my long (oh god too many years to count) career. I've always really loved teaching students who are of higher ability, its a pleasure to push them, to get them to read further, to think about other issues. Its one of the reasons that as I am in charge of HAPS in the 6th form in my school that we run EPQ, debate societies and competitions with other schools, book groups (with challenging reading but stuff that interests them) as well as classes on critical thinking.

Again, maybe I'm just defensive, but I really find these attitudes towards the state sector repulsive. As previously stated, private school offers more opportunities but its just down to the money per capita that they get, it isnt down to the ability of the child. There are plenty of lovely but decidedly average students in private schools, even the high performing ones.

'Only 2 of us did German A level'

What books did you study?

Der Besuch der alten Dame?

grazia I was also relieved that there wasn't a huge discrepancy between my twins!

'Bright'- this word is sounding more off putting, the more I see it.
Disability is relevant to this thread, because this thread is about how we educate children and what we value.
Like scholarships, volunteering is absolutely not the same as being in alongside.

From my experience Grazia, the class sizes are much smaller at secondary level, but its not just the class sizes, its the number of classes a teacher is expected to teach. In both my experience of the private sector and that of others there are few teachers teaching up to the maximum of what is allowed. It just gives you more time.

twisted there is nothing wrong with being bright. And nothing wrong with having SEN.

Many people will experience both.

Children learning how to get top grades at exams does not necessarily equate in my mind with good education.
We have created these exam results as the way to judge this and the private schools know that these results are what draw parents in. So they get their kids working a good few years above what many in the national curriculum will be doing and then they are more likely to get the top grades. It means very little in terms of actual development or imo learning.

lurker at AS level my DC have class sizes from 6 to 18 depending on subject.

They have quite a lot of contact hours too.

The main difference between state is no free periods. They are taken up with sport, community work and other school stuff. Independent study has to be done at home.

Derailing massively, a long, long time ago I did German A level and we did

Die neuen Leiden des jungen W.
Im Tal der donnernden Hufe

Der Besuch der alten Dame didn't feature

(I'll get my coat)

I was however, quite surprised when DS (who did not do MFL A level) told me how little literature there is at that level. But another point. And not relevant to the Rugby debate.

No of course there isn't. I just think 'bright' is being used as a rather generic word to mean different things for different people.

And worryingly 'bright' seems to be becoming equated with the restrictive measure of exam results.

But you just don't get these kinds of arguments about 'average' children. Why?

6-18 is small, my AS classes are over 20, mostly 25. Sadly in my school if an AS had 6 students in it, it just wouldn't run cause its not financially viable to use teacher time for so few when money is so short.

twisted I think you are very wrong.

Most parents of bright DC ( shorthand for those who have an aptitude for academic study ) care about far more than exam scores.

Part of the reason for choosing certain schools is the work done beyond the curriculum. An A* is only part of it. We want our DC to receive a really broad and rich education.

longtimelurker - I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend or insult with my 'sinking' comment. I know the vast majority of comprehensive schools put in a huge amount of effort into keeping all students on target. But, for a variety of reasons that are not the fault of the school, many children of average and below average ability do leave without reaching their potential. I'm sure the same is true in private schools. But I think that private schools are more geared up to stop that from happening - due to some or all of these factors: numbers, money, boarding, variety of subject, one to one SEN support for even mild SEN etc. NOT due to more effort or ability on the part of the teaching staff or the children.

I don't believe that all, or even much, state education is below par. I went to a below average comprehensive. I have 4 As at A Level and went to a top university. I couldn't have asked for more academically. I had no sense of having missed out on anything until I ended up teaching in independent and now I wish I'd had the access to the drama, dance and music facilities that my school lacked. But a) some state schools have these too and b) that didn't affect my education. I just did it out of school instead.

So I don't think state schools are letting the majority of our children down at all. But, if I'm being honest, I do think that most private schools are able to offer a better overall school experience.

'Derailing massively, a long, long time ago I did German A level and we did

Die neuen Leiden des jungen W.
Im Tal der donnernden Hufe

Der Besuch der alten Dame didn't feature'

I don't know those ones. Der Besuch was great at the time, I really liked it.

Most parents of bright DC ( shorthand for those who have an aptitude for academic study ) care about far more than exam scores.

Part of the reason for choosing certain schools is the work done beyond the curriculum. An A* is only part of it. We want our DC to receive a really broad and rich education.

Very well put. Agree completely.

longtime I find your comments about parents being deluded insulting myself. I also do think you are defensive. This is not about judging the state sector teachers unfairly. It's about judging what is best for a particular child and acting upon that judgement where possible.

But all of those who talk about the benefits of overall experience at private- what do you think about the fact your children are segregated? Do you not think they could learn anything of value from being next to the refugee child, the child in care or the poor and very able child? Or any of the above and not academically able child?
And again, SEN are not the same (necessarily) as learning disabilities.

I still find it.........frustrating, I suppose is the word........that the kids who most need the extra "stuff" that private schools can offer are the kids who haven't got a hope in hell of getting that "stuff". Privilege attracts privilege. And nothing ever changes.