Public schools gurus - Eton?

[carltonscroop]

This is more a fond dream than an actual plan. Yes, I've done some reading up, but wanted to ask any parents with recent(ish) first hand knowledge.

What's it really like? What sort of boy does it suit? Is it really worth the additional expense. (not the fees themselves IYSWIM but being at the high end - and on the same theme, are many things billed as extras) How hard is the scholarship exam? Has anything in particular surprised/pleased/disappointed you/your son/s?

Never heard anything about Eton's learning support. I would speak to the school directly on this point.

Here's an interesting article from the Independent a few years ago about the trend among British students to look at US universities and the US perception that the UK was underrepresented among the international university population.

It is interesting to note the Cambridge admission officer's idea that having an on-campus job (or presumably any job during term time) is a bad thing -- a really strange attitude to anyone used to the US. Work-study is part of your financial package at most US universities. To look down one's nose at a requirement to work in a cafeteria or perform lowly tasks in a campus office seems to me to be pure academic snobbery. Even the very smart can learn from a job scraping trays.

"I've heard tell that Eton's learning support department is second to none, from those in the know how would a very bright but very dyslexic boy fare at Eton? Child in question is very articulate, exceptional general knowledge, politically aware, would definitely benefitfrom debating etc But as I say very dyslexic. Does Eton take boys like that?"

On a flying visit here.

Take a look at the school's Special Education Needs section.

It is interesting to note the Cambridge admission officer's idea that having an on-campus job (or presumably any job during term time) is a bad thing

What leads you to interpret Geoff Parks' words in this way? I don't see that that is what he was saying at all.

Term-time jobs are strongly discouraged at Oxford, I imagine it's the same at Cambridge too. The terms are uniquely short and pressurized. This has long been the policy at Oxford and very sensible too. There was a discussion about this on another thread a few weeks ago with an Oxford tutor explaining why the policy needs to be as it is.

My eldest 5 DC have been scraping trays since Y9, all at the same local tearoom. The ones who are at university continue to do so in their holidays unless away or on placements but I'd be very, very against them working during term-time, as would their tutors.

The e-mail sent around to all Oxford students recently from the Oxford Students Union cited the new bursary and fee waiver arrangements as being essential in part so that no student would have the additional pressure of having to find paid work during term-time. The point seems to be accepted and endorsed university-wide.

This is solely to do with the pressure of the academic work in that particular environment and nothing whatsoever to do with Oxford students not being willing or able to dirty their hands. They just don't do it in term-time.

The funding situation as outlined in the Independent is interesting. I had heard that Harvard was making approaches to certain grammars and comps and the article confirms it, but I thought that this was still an expensive option and beyond the financial reach of most. For clever less well off students it suggests the contrary and that it's just another opportunity to embrace, small print permitting.

peteneras

I know what they say, but I don't know how that actually translates into action. Was after anyone with experience of SEN at Eton.

Regina, I've not witnessed or experienced the SAT support in WinCol, although it was my curiosity when I looked around a house there. Having said that, it is very interesting option for DS.

?Oh give it a break pete/ math.?

It is hilarious to see someone camping out here almost permanently and still think that pete/math is one and the same. That?s not to mention a dozen other perceptions the same poster takes as a given. It defies logic.

? Your post spoke of grammars in an inappropriately patronising and superior way . . .?

Well, what do you expect when you yourself have said categorically on another thread:

? In answer to your next post: yes, I did mean it.? when I asked you:

?I take it that you don?t mean it but your point about me not grasping posters? points on the relevance of spelling/grammar etc. is rather condescending.?

You keep hyping on how very common kids at grammar schools get ?straight A*s? and ?full houses? in their GCSE?s (maybe that?s your way to insinuate how highly your own kids have achieved) at Y10, while I?ve produced facts and figures that even the nation?s very top GS according to the Daily Mail, (4 out of the top 7 are in my ?backyard?, so to speak) don?t produce those kind of results. [See my post immediately following this.]

To date, you haven?t shown me a shred of evidence about the many claims you put forward here while I almost always produce evidence either by way of a link, an image, league tables etc. For a start, tell us the name of the GS that your DC attend so that we can substantiate if all the kids there get full house A*s for GCSE?s.

Well, I?m just glad that it has finally taken this morning for you to finally admit:

?There are many different types of grammar, the ones at the bottom of the table unrecognisable from the ones at the top.?

minikin, If you really must know, personally I don?t give a monkey?s and neither does Eton about league tables. Of course, you?re absolutely right; the first 200 schools on the FT list, let alone the first 20 (out of the nation?s 4000 (?) secondary schools) are doing fabulously, tremendously and incredibly well! I congratulate all of them. I?m just sorry you don?t see my sarcasm behind my posts.

Contrary to what you said, it?s the insecurity of some GS parents who keep wanting to demonstrate how very academic the GS are and it?s for free, etc. You get comments like:

?all I would say is that it's not the most academic?

?Well that must be worth £30K pa.?

?I just save the fees and forge the thank you's instead.?

Clearly, these folks have a log on their shoulders, never mind a chip. Don?t get me wrong, there are some highly successful grammar schools around, I know. At the risk of repeating myself, my daughter attended one of these. The first GS mentioned in the FT League Table, Queen Elizabeth Boys, Barnet, is a school I am very familiar with since the 1980?s. All the clever boys in my neighbourhood attend this school. I have tutored some of them. I know what kind of grades they get. The school achieves an average of 9 to 10 As plus a few A?s. Yes, a handful gets even better than that. This is not the same as saying everybody gets ?straight As? as though it is second nature.

Just a simple demonstration here, take one core subject, English, which everyone has to take. Now take a quick look how many actually get an A. It?s a mere 22%. So, it is not unreasonable to say straight away appx. 80% of the nation?s very top GS do not get straight As, come hell or high water.

Fluke or no fluke it's up to you to decide. Two GS ranked above Eton:
08, 22, 05, 19, 11 - QE Boys
12, 49, 45, 20, 27 - King Edward VI GS
13, 09, 10, 03, 05 - Eton

Like I said before, one swallow does not make a summer.

pete and math, if you prefer.

If I'm camping out permanently then I don't know how I've managed to achieve so many RL tasks in the same time frame too.

There's no point trying to reply to partial quotes / misquotes/ out of context quotes anymore. The device is absurd.

I've already said that my comment re. the academic standing of Eton was in comparison to Westminster and Winchester and why not? This is a discussion about the relative merits of the major public schools, not grammars. Your introduction of grammars is a total red herring.

It's outrageous to say that I've called children 'common'. I have never done so and would never do so in a million years. What a seriously bizarre imputation.

It would be simpler for you, rather than arguing the toss, to phone up the headteachers of the well known grammars and ask them how many pupils get straight runs, if it matters to you so much. I know the figures at our school and no doubt minikin probably also knows the sort of numbers at CRGS, which will be considerable. I don't get why you're so frenzied: it's just kids doing well.

pete to clarify what I actually said, here's the link:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/secondary/1214918-How-important-is-maths-for-the-most-competitive-university-subjects

As you can see, towards the end of the thread I said that it's not uncommon at the top grammars to get rows of 10 or 11 A*'s. What I didn't say was that all students do. Of course they don't - but plenty do. For some reason you took the greatest possible exception to that. Not sure why.

The obsession with straight-As at GCSE is odd. I've been involved in admissions at a few places including both Oxford and Cambridge and although it's always impressive of course to have 12 As it's never a prerequisite, and really doesn't make that much difference, because very high GCSE grades are a reasonable indication of intelligence and efficient teaching, but not of interest, originality or analytical ability simply because they are not that difficult. I'd expect an Oxbridge/Russell Group/Ivy League candidate from a good school with a strong university admissions record to have mostly As and A*s at GCSE but beyond that it is fairly irrelevant. May make more difference for subjects/institutions that don't interview.

It may have changed but it certainly used to be the case that the schools that did very best at A-level (e.g. Westminster) were relatively unimpressive at GCSE (good, but not at the very top). That always seemed quite healthy to me - I would rather a school spent time cultivating higher-level, sixth-form directed skills and a wide range of interests in the 14-16 age bracket and didn't worry too much about how many A*s their students got. The problem now is that A level results are, as GCSEs became some time ago, increasingly also not very useful for distinguishing the very best students.

As someone working in HE, including admissions, my impression is that Eton has upped its game academically in the last few years: that it's not only the scholars who are now very bright. It still admits a wider range of ability than, e.g., Winchester, Westminster or St Paul's, but does very well by most of them I think. It seems to be big enough to suit lots of different kinds of boys, provided they and the family can handle the boarding. Although I boarded myself it's that that would put me off.

OP - if it's the boarding/facilities/complete package element that attracts you, I'd look also at other large scale boarding schools, perhaps including some that take girls too (e.g. Marlborough) for comparison; if it's more the tiptop academics that appeals, I'd compare with Winchester and with the best London day schools. (Obviously Westminster takes boarders too, but it's very much weekly boarding with few of the usual boarding school additional facilities.)

Oddest of all is the rabid denial that a good number of grammar school kids regularly get straight runs.

Completely take the point about analysis, originality and so on arionater, but apparently a straight run of A*s at GCSE is the best single indicator of future distictions and firsts.

Doesn't guarantee a place anywhere in particular though. The dons must take the very sensible view that there's more to life than firsts.

That's interesting Yellowstone, where did you read that? I imagine that the cohort getting all As and A*s ten years ago or more - so long enough ago to have data on their distinctions/first - was a lot smaller than it is now. It will be interesting to see if the correlation holds up.

It certainly does tell you that a given student was well motivated, organised and so on, as well as intelligent and well-taught. And all those things - including having been well-taught at school and having learnt to organise your time - will be advantages at university.

I agree that the attitude towards both grammar schools and public schools often seems to be influenced by a lot of unspoken strong feelings. I can see why parents who can afford it may choose a public school over even the best grammar school - because the facilities and extra-curricular activities are generally (as you'd expect for the money) in a different league. But it's very clear that judged on results the best grammar schools and the upper end of public schools are closely comparable.

If I had a very academic child I would be as interested in the profile of the staff and the kind of teaching as in the raw results - I see plenty of students who've been drilled to strings of As but not taught to think clearly or write well, for instance, which limits them. I would also consider the IB seriously, as overall I think it is now a better, more stimulating and more interesting program than A-levels unless you are very fortunate indeed with your A level teachers and cohort. There used to be quite a big difference in the depth/level of upper-level IB subjects and A-level, but that has been somewhat reduced so is less of a problem.

arionater I first heard it from the head of admissions for history at Oxford in 2009 so I shouldn't think it came from Wiki or from dodgy research. I hadn't previously thought of grade inflation and whether the correlation will hold up.

While I can understand that some state school parents might wish they had the money to send their DC to a school such as Westminster, Winchester or Eton for the facilities, small group teaching and ec's, I find it hard to understand why any parent with that choice should want to launch a sustained and multi-thread attack on grammars, simply because some are producing the same sort of results as, or better than, Eton.

I noticed in Saturday's Times that someone used the phrase 'middle-class educational arms race' to describe the fierce and mounting competitiveness of a certain type of parent, so I assume it's just a symptom of that. I've always opted for the non-nuclear option. Cheaper and less tense.

Completely agree about teachers and teaching. They're the critical factor in any school and mercifully there are plenty in the state system doing a brilliant job. The results achieved by schools with stretched funds are a tribute to these teachers more than anything else - and by results I mean the passing on of a desire to learn and a real intellectual curiosity, not just exams.

mathanxiety - I've worked in UK universities for several years, but I also spent time at a major US Ivy League university and visit another regularly, so I know what you're talking about. Like you I think the Parks quote is a bit unfair - not only for the reasons you point out (these are not really 'scholarships', or at least only in part) but also because it's not comparing like with like. Good British students do tend to do well if they visit even a very elite American university as an undergraduate or transfer over there for graduate work, but that's unsurprising given that the UK education system specialises so much earlier on. The kind of specialism that a student acquires in the last couple of years of an undergraduate degree at the best universities here belongs to the beginning of graduate work over there, because university-level education in the US is much broader (and indeed as you point out because school-level education also specialises much less than our sixth-formers can). If, as I did, you go from the end of a (in my case) four-year highly specialised UK undergraduate degree to the first year of graduate school in the States, you will know a lot more about that specific subject than your peers. (But I gave up maths and modern languages at 14, and everything else aside from my A level subjects, including all sciences, at 15, which is pretty silly.) In general, I think our system specialises too early, but the system in the States a little late (or at least, that many students waste time in high school over there) - in that respect, the way it works in France or Germany is probably a good compromise.

As for the working issue, it's true that Oxbridge can seem precious about it, but it is for a good reason. I have worked and studied in both places, and Oxbridge terms are substantially shorter and more intense, for everyone involved (students and staff) than semesters in the States (or indeed terms at other UK universities). I don't think that's a good thing - I think almost everyone in Oxford and Cambridge would be saner and happier if they ditched the 8 week thing, though staff might regret the lost research/recovery time. I now work at a (UK Russell Group) university with 10 week + a reading week terms - almost all my students work part-time and manage well but it really is a quite different (and overall much healthier) sort of experience from that in Oxford or Cambridge and even at Harvard or Princeton the pace of the US term is more like that at my current institution.

I'd much prefer the terms were longer than eight weeks and less intense too but I don't see it happening. The policy about no work during term time makes absolute sense as things stand. Nothing precious about it while the tems are so short and sharp, it's just not the same as anywhere else, sorry math.

Why does it matter anyhow, provided students can make their way financially, if necessary by scraping trays in the vacs?

Also, aren't we now over The Pond from Eton, in another (weakish) attempt to vilify Oxford and Cambridge?

Not an attempt to vilify by any means. I enclosed my post in< > as it was a tangent, and explained it was just wrt the US angle. Since the question of Etonians and other public school boys and girls heading to the US for third level had come up I thought it salutary to warn that mathematics are necessary for students in selective US universities. I should add in that vein that besides maths, languages other than English, lab sciences and humanities subjects will form part of the first two years of the American college experience.

Oh what I wouldn't have given to have been able to drop maths at 14, but alas, that is not possible in Ireland.

.
carltonscroop, Eton gurus don?t come any bigger than this. Have a look at this 25-minute [[http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b012148f/On_The_Road_With..._The_Head_Master_Of_Eton/
BBC interview with the Eton Head Master]] [iPlayer] to gain a better insight into the school. It may help bring your ?fond dream? a step closer to reality.

Colleger: ?I'll never forget that 150th CCF anniversary parade with the Apache air assault. It made the Edinburgh Tattoo look like a prep school play!?

A picture slideshow here of the to rekindle memories of that tremendous display, Colleger.

"They have ambassadors, very famous actors, famous sportsmen, top lawyers, prime ministers, ,CEO's, Heads of NACE and even Johnny Prescott"

Just a small correction, Colleger, re invited guests to the School?s society meets, Johnny Prescott was never invited. Rather, he tried to invite himself to visit the school a couple or so years ago but was turned down. It?s ironic that someone who spent a lifetime trying to destroy an elite British institution should now want to be part of it. Eton obviously saw through all that humbug.

On the other hand, Ken Livingstone was made welcome not so long ago. Another guest who was more than welcome by the boys to get themselves in a sweat (and perhaps some Masters too) was a certain CEO of a naughty company.

In addition to the interview, an article tries to appeal eton's endeavour toward aristocracy of intelligence that I believe it's partly true.

And the school is certainly drawing attention from every <a class="break-all" href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&q=www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/8578710/Eton-and-The-Ritz-on-al-Qaeda-hit-list.html&ct=ga&cad=CAEQARgAIAAoATAAOABA9brm7wRIAVAAWABiBWVuLVVT&cd=CTgy_YJkWoU&usg=AFQjCNElBRmdDrFOH24vejScau3rba04XA" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">corner of the world.

I really don't get why they would want to bomb Eton or the Ritz. It would cause little impact to Britain and quite frankly, the vast majority of the British public would not care. There are always a large number of rich muslims staying at the Ritz.