Wondering how true is this for prep schools in UK and primary schools?
Some rings very true for me, from what I know from friends with small children in Prep schools. Sunday is often 'homework' day where literally hours are spent on school work and 'improving' skills. From the state sector (which I am more familiar with) I have to say that the more involved you are with the school the more 'remembered' you child is by the staff it seems.
My son is in a UK prep school. I am sorry to say that despite the enormous fees and the fact that the school only employs teachers who have graduated with honours in a BA ed, there are many children who still struggle, approx 2/3. Parents have to get on board to get value for money - and that is incredibly difficult for families where both parents work. It is a common cry from parents that they are paying the school to educate their child whilst the parent goes to work to pay for that service. They do not expect to have to home tutor themselves or worse, pay extra for a specialist to do it.
From the teachers point of view, the fees the parents are paying serves no bearing on quality of education - in other words, the teacher doesn't go to work and consciously think about giving that child value for money. He or she has an extended workload with the expectation to take on a sports team, be available on Saturdays for school matches, available in the evenings for the functions put on by the school - information evenings etc.
At the school my son goes to, the classes are divided into specific sets in year 7. A little analysis of the class list shows that the children in the top set belong to parents whereby only one of them works, and the children in the bottom set belong to parents who both work. A generalisation certainly, but I know the kids and the parents so I know this to be true.
The parents of the children in the top set make no secret of how much they help at home, setting mini exams for their child on a regular basis and gradually gaining extensive knowledge of the very intensive curriculum. (On that note, the curriculum in private independent schools is about 3 years ahead of the state school system, so a child in year 7 is learning in chemisty the same as a year 10 at a state school.)These parents know that if they didn't do that, their child would struggle like the others. The point here is that it is not about an inherent intelligence, it is about who is getting the extra attention.
To add more fuel to the fire, many independent schools are run like commercial businesses with Headmasters behave like Prime Ministers of the micro community.Children are not rejected for admission as each child's fees are necessary to run 'the business', but certainly if a child is not meeting the standard and it appears obvious that the school will not be able to find placement for that child in a senior school, it is 'suggested' they leave before Common Entrance exams. There are always many on the waiting list to take that childs place and keep the ledger balanced.
And although children are not rejected at admission stage, the children that are favoured once in the system, are those that get involved in all the activities on offer, those who have parents who will help on the PTA, those who excel academically (because the parents are helping of course). IN other words, those that make the school look good.
It is a bit like knowing how to play the game. I might sound a little bitter and sometimes I am. My son is one in the top set and I know how much time I spend with her explaining algebra and chemical reactions. I complained once to the school about why I should need to do this and let's just say I wish I hadn't. My son's education is important to me and so I guess I will keep doing it. Pay up and shut up.
Finally though, my son absolutely loves his school and will leave for senior school with many fantastic memories and wonderful friends.