What exactly is a 'pressurised' school?

[dignan]

DD has an offer from an independent school with a reputation for being pressurised. I'm not 100% sure i know what is meant by this phrase? Why can't a school achieve excellent results without being pressurised? Especially if they are, in theory, only accepting the creme de la creme?

My daughter will almost certainly be in the bottom 20% of the year but wouldn't and shouldn't she still receive an excellent education? Am i worrying for no reason....?

I agree with AMumInScotland. You clearly don't think your DD will be happy in this school now you know more about it. My DH tutored a boy who was regularly getting 89% in maths tests at his highly selective, expensive school. He felt like a failure and his family paid for external tutoring. I would much prefer my DC to be in an environment where they felt successful than a stressful hothouse, however prestigious.

I think this is an interesting discussion - I have heard a wide variety of schools described as hothouses and pressurised and I think the terms mean very different things to different people.

On a factual(ish) note, my children's school is switching over to doing more iGCSEs in some subjects because they have found that the endless controlled assessments eat too much into teaching time, which is then dominated by the exam syllabus, and mean the pressure on the children is relentless. I think there is pressure both ways, but certainly don't think iGCSEs are de facto part of a "more pressurised" system.

I am sure you will make the right decision for your daughter but I would find out in more detail what the context is for the information you have been given. I think plenty of academically inclined schools would, for example, expect children to get 8 out of 10 in a vocab text of ten words they have been given a week to learn and asked to resit if not - this will take about 5 minutes. If they genuinely expect everyone to get over 80% in everything then they are setting tests that are too easy as the children at the top will not be being stretched, and this is unlikely to deliver the sort of results you imply they get. I would try to speak to several parents who have children currently at the school and ask detailed questions, and it might also be worth contacting the school to ask how she did and where she would be in the cohort at least at the start. Their response may tell you something about how holistic their approach to getting those good results is. Children can be helped to be happy and confident by being pushed just the right amount with good support in a caring environment, but this may not be one.

The other group of people it's wise to ignore are those who do have children at one of these schools and are a little too smug about it: insisting on spreading the word that it's 'pressurised' is often self-flattery of a sort. Very tedious.

Dealing directly with the school and talking to the staff and perhaps taking a good hard look at whether the pupils you see when you visit seem profoundly miserable or actually quite chirpy will be a far sounder basis on which to make a decision than hearsay from potentially biased sources.

Agree about GCSE as opposed to IGCSE pressure, given the tyranny of controlled assessments. The school may very well be reducing rather than increasing the pressure by taking this line (anyhow, the distinction is about to become blurred with changes to the GCSE format).

Also agree that 'pressure' is a poor but often used synonym for perfectly appropriate expectation.

dignan obviously knows her daughter but it sounds as though she needs to explore the school rather more and form an independent judgment, particularly if she and her husband are in two different minds.

I've spoken to more parents at this very selective school and i'm told that the pupils feel they are inadequate unless they are in the top sets. Many are routinely tutored out of school in their individual subjects just so that they can be at the top. The reality is that they are all extremely clever but unless they are consistently maintaining excellent results they don't feel they are doing well. There is massive competition between the pupils themselves and some, not all, are not as happy as they could be. I ultimately won't know if she would rise to this challenge or feel deflated by it but i'm not feeling comfortable with it.
If one is influenced by league tables then there is not really much between these schools but it's the journey i am thinking very hard about. I hear about girls there who are thriving and are terrifically happy but i also hear about those who kind of envy their friends who are still highly achieving but don't seem to be as stressed or overloaded from it. I've seen posts from ex pupils of similar schools who suggest that whilst they enjoyed school and did well they would not ultimately send their own child there. The pressure wasn't really necessary.

When i applied to the school i had a very different impression of it from the prospectus but from asking people who are or have been there my impression is changing. We didn't tutor her at all, i wanted to see what she was capable of on her own merits (her junior school is brilliant) and she has obviously performed sufficiently well. From my own experience i performed well under pressure at particular points - tests, exams, finals but if the pressure had been relentless then i don't think i would have done as well.

You sound as though you're speaking only to seriously disenchanted parents then dignan. Why aren't they jumping ship? Pupils at truly good schools achieve without constant tutoring. Are you sure it's the school exerting the pressure or is it the parents themselves?

They are not necessarily disenchanted, just accepting that that's the way it is. The pressure is probably coming from parents and pupils more than the school itself but pressure is pressure...

Why would anyone knowingly put their DC into a school where extremely clever pupils routinely don't feel they are doing well? As you say, pressure is pressure and the culture of the school obviously encourages this level of anxiety. Is this not going to cause bigger problems than going to another school with equally good results? I'm surprised at how many posters seem to think it's the better option.

If this is true - about the tutoring and pressure then I would definitely avoid. But I agree "extremely clever" pupils at really good schools do not need this. Nor how a "really" good school could think everyone can be at the top. And I don't understand why anyone would carry on sending their children there. It may well be true but I would want to be sure it is not a small handful of views being bounced around and repeated back many times over - I have seen this happen with rumours about schools (in one case something very specific was involved so the rumour was recognisable as it departed further and further from the truth!). I agree it is very hard to anticipate how a ten year old will rise to challenges of being, say, 15 juggling umpteen demands, but a great school would have the support in place to help. I think you should give them a chance to show you their views on that, and if they fail, then steer clear.

They might be the parents who know from first hand experience that these accusations are frequently groundless.

You might very well be talking to the wrong parents dignan.

That post was to Foxton

The other type of pressure that many overlook and underestimate is pressure to conform. We've friends with children who were at a Steiner school although there was no academic pressure they wanted children who conformed to their view on child behaviour development those that didn't/couldn't/wouldn't were miserable. In a very academic school there may be pressure from peers teachers parents to a certain type of behaviour; it might be competitive, or swotty studious, or intellectual. Many children find it difficult not to bow to this pressure.

Foxton, no-one I know would, and I doubt anyone posting here would either. I think what people are suggesting is that this may not be the true situation. There are lots of smoke and mirrors here and it is very, very hard to discern the true situation.

Fair enough - not trying to cause a row, just surprised, but it seems I was reading it wrong!

The negative points seem to be coming either from parents who DON'T have kids at highly selective school but have heard xyz from Mrs so and so.

I got two very happy kids at selective schools. I know that it is an over used word but they are thriving.

Same here 3kids at or just left "super selective" schools and happy and rounded as well as academically successful as are most of their peers - the ones who I don't see as that are either "hot housed" to within every minute of every day in order to keep up, because really it isn't the right school for them BUT it's where parents want them, or from backgrounds where non academic pursuits aren't valued (eldests mate wan't allowed to do music, drama or sport as they would cut into study time- however boyfriends were allowed, therefore she had "boyfriends" from the age of 11, constantly- interestingly in year 13 i think she realised that she could be happily single too and so far no uni boyf?) .

I think it's a credit to the schools that kids who appear in the school magazines winning external prizes for academia are also those who appear in school plays/play in the orchestra or sports teams.

Same here. 7 kids at a super selective and very far from 'pressured' indeed.

Well, at or just left.

I know a number of people who have DC in more than one selective Indie, and there are big differences. DS is at a school where A is the norm, and so there is a risk that a child dropping to an A in one subject might feel they had failed. Not surprisingly we have been very careful not to convey any expectations of our own, partly because I'm not sure if we care whether he gets all As, but also because peer pressure is enough. DD's school has nothing like those expectations. If she gets all A*s it will be because she has decided that is what she wants to do. Some will, but it will be a much smaller proportion.

It is not unusual for people with DC in different types of schools to say that each school is the right school for that child. There is also confirmation of homework loads on the lines described by OP, and that homework can dominate. In our case not a problem because DS seems to get on with it, probably slightly too quickly, and find time for sports, Skype etc, but he says others can get ground down. He also suspects that one or two have tutors to help them keep up.

I would not necessarily dismiss a hot house. However it needs to be the school that your daughter really wants to go to, because she will have to do the work. If she finds the academic atmosphere exciting then it is a great opportunity. She also needs to be the sort of girl who is not bothered if she is towards the bottom of the class - few will excel in everything.

I would not worry too much about whether she is bright enough. These schools dont often make mistakes, and when they do it is often because candidates are over-prepared and so appear more academic than they actually are. Summer term/holiday children are almost a year younger that the September kids and will continue catching up through Yrs 7 & 8.

A private theory - sorry those who actually know about education - but being good at maths seems to become more important in secondary. Bright girls at primary seem to be the ones who read and write well at an early stage. The mathematicians get their revenge at secondary when a logical approach helps in physics and chemistry, Latin and German. Even history, RE and English comprehension become more analytical.

Perfectly possible then for a child to realise half way through year 7 that they really are quite clever after all, even if they had spent primary mid way down the year group.

Assuming that your other choice has a good cohort who will do well, the question is really where your daughter sees herself, and where you think she will thrive most.

@yellowtip yes, pressurised is certainly not the word I'd use for DD1's school experience up till now. She's not bored, though, which she was at primary school

Okay, not my personal experience, but a friend. She has 3 daughter's, she initially sent all 3 to a local very selective girls school, which has a reputation of being "pressurised". Two of her daughter's have thrived, the middle one didn't, she was "good enough" for the school but not good enough to feel happy there. My friend moved her to a slightly less "pressurised" school, and says within weeks she had her happy smiley daughter back. She still thinks the first school is a "good" school it just didn't suit her middle daughter (she also wouldn't move the other two).
So basically just make your decision on which school is the best fit for your DD, and don't let pressure sway you. Prospectuses are also often what the school would like to be, or a reflection of the theories the Head approves of, not necessarily what the school is like (which is why schools change character slowly after a change of Head).

I was backed into a corner had an interesting chat with a mother who hadn't sent her DD to my DDs school as she had heard heard it was too pressurised. She was now concerned that her DD was under too much pressure at current school. It transpired that she was doing 3 instruments, with ensembles and orchestras, and 4/5 hours HW each weekend day.

I suspect that DD would be a neurotic over working wreck wherever she was schooled.

My DD is an A rather than A* pupil but she does very little work. I don't know what would happen were she in a less pressurised environment.