How do you justify seding your child to boarding school?

[sunshine75]

I've read some pretty horrific things lately about boarding schools and the damage they can cause. See this article from the Guardian.

www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/20/damage-boarding-school-sexual-abuse-children

However, I have no personal experience of one and have no close friends who went to one. Therefore, I don't want to be hasty in forming a negative opinion about them.

So, if you chose to send your child to a boarding school then I'm curious as to why you chose to? For example, why did you chose boarding over a really good day school? Is there anyone who chose a boarding school for a much younger child and was this a really hard thing to do?

[happygardening]

The one thing this thread shows is that we all bring to the table our philosophies and experiences of life and education, these will all be different. Then add individual circumstances, financial, location, work, other DC's etc and we all make different decisions. We also look at other families how so they do things, would this work for me? We listen and read others opinions, do these strike a chord with what we believe or maybe it would be right for me on this occasion. Or because the last decision I made was not the right one perhaps I need to revisit my beliefs and make changes. No one decision is right for all, we do what we believe is the best for our families at the time. No one school be it state independent day or boarding is right for all. Sometimes in different circumstances we would have done things differently. If we'd stayed living in Richmond we might have sent our DS to SPS and then I could like many on here followed my instinctive gut reaction and been against boarding. But that not how my life panned, out I saw and experiences how things could be done differently at still work for some so I don't regret moving away.
I look at my DS and I like what I see I like the fact that he's turning into a renaissance man with many many interests, I like the fact that he's well adjusted and smiling (especially this morning now the IGCSE results are finally out), that he can show empathy to others, able to talk to people but hold his own and make friends and remain very close to his family. Children from many different schools will be then same we've just all got there in a different way. I fail to see what's wrong with that.

[happygardening]

gauss as I haven't stated who did the report or what their area of expertise is you are not in a position to judge how correct my ed. Psych report is. I don't I tend yo divulge the name or how good their expertise is but I can assure you it's a very credible report no one has ever queried it's validity.
I'm delighted your DS is thriving on his school, non selective or selective, and he hope he does well in the math Olympiad. My DS is also thriving in his so we've all made the right decision for our individual children haven't we?
By the way I never said only Eton or Winchester I said I believe super selectives are the right places for the super bright (state or independent day or boarding). This us my view and my experience yours may be different.

[summerends]

HG Congratulations to your DS .

[smokepole]

I do feel that the likes of Tiffin Girls/ Henrietta Barnet/ St Olaves/ Pates and Altrincham Girls Grammar would be able to educate a 'brilliant mathematician' to the correct level.

However, I do know how important the school surroundings / ethos and expectations are to exam results . This is the reason that although DD1 has 'comfortably' got on to the degree she has wanted to do since she was 15. I wonder would she have done better than AAB if educated at a grammar/private school.

I would like to say that I believe the state should offer 'bright children' from poor economic and socially difficult backgrounds, the chance of a boarding school education. This would give children who have potential but are 'constantly' held back by their circumstances of birth, a real chance to escape their 'birthright' ,it would also show them opportunities are out there for them.

[Dapplegrey]

Happy - I enjoy your articulate posts, and agree with what you say, but please could you do more paragraphs and put in a double space sometimes, because it is hard to read in solid blocks ;)

[Dapplegrey]

Smoke - the state used to offer assisted places for bright children from less well off and disadvantaged families, but the scheme was abolished virtually hours after Labour were elected in 1997.

[teacherwith2kids]

I think it is difficult for any process designed to target "'bright children' from poor economic and socially difficult backgrounds" to avoid being hijacked by those other than they were intended for, however.

It's a bit like grammar schools. In principle, if access to these could be purely on academic merit and potential then they could provide an education suitable for that very small minority of children who cannot be efficiently educated n comprehensives - in the same way as special schools educate those chldren who have particular difficulties in leaarning.

However, where highly selective schools exist, the very schools that could be used to give very bright children from poor backgrounds a very different educational experience have an 'opt in by aware parents' entrance procedure, for which there is a huge coaching industry and where private primaries pride themselves in 7 years of teaching to the test.

If superselective schools are to be 'income blind' and genuinely select on the basis of academic potential alone, then what is needed is a universal process through which all children, in all schools and from all families, are screened for academic potential using a test that cannot be tutored for and which does not depend on previous educational experience.

[smokepole]

I Know. It was almost the first thing Blair 'Education Education Education' did .
Totally disgraceful and anti 'equality ' I thought the Labour party stood for giving equal opportunities to people from socially deprived areas.

[teacherwith2kids]

Equally, I am not sure that the assisted places scheme actually reached thiose in most need of it - perhaps those like my parents (church mice poor but well educated and basically MC) rather than those who were genuinely from socially difficult backgrounds. I also wonder whether those helped in that way benefitted, or felt 'displaced' by a process that fundamentally separated them from their community asd well as from their family?

[smokepole]

So I meant ABB not AAB.

[merlehaggard]

My daughter's uni friend had a sister who went to boarding school and she chose a different day school cos she didn't want to board. She ended up boarding (even though the school they chose was close (Stowe) because she found that she was missing out by going home every night. On that basis, it can't be that bad!

[Hakluyt]

I would be very interested to see the outcomes of the kids who took up assisted places. It just feels like such a bad idea to me........

[goinggetstough]

Hak you only have to google outcomes assisted places....
www.suttontrust.com/news/publications/lasting-benefits-the-long-term-legacy-of-the-assisted-places/assistedplacesreport0310.pdf

[smokepole]

Where the children who got assisted places in 1995/96 allowed to continue to A levels at their 'private school'.

Hakluyt. I think the Sutton Trust published some statistics about children who had assisted places in the 1980s. The results showed that many of these pupils had gone to 'prestigious ' universities and into valued professions, It showed their salaries were mostly in the top 5% of the population.

[smokepole]

Were the children who got assisted places in 95/96 allowed to continue with them until their A levels.

[Dapplegrey]

Hakluyt - I can describe one such outcome: my stepson went to a public school in SW England on an assisted place (he was in the last year of them), got a first in maths at a leading university, then did a phd, and he is now a well adjusted academic who loves his work.

[Dapplegrey]

Hakluyt - sorry, I meant to ask in my last post, why does it feel like such a bad idea to you?

[smokepole]

Thanks Dapplegrey you have just answered my question. I am glad pupils who were on the assisted places scheme did not have their places scrapped immediately by the Labour Government in 1997.

I have just read the report , it makes interesting reading and as stated by me the 77 people reported on have largely been very successful .

[teacherwith2kids]

Can I be really lazy, and ask smokepole (because you have read the report) the backgrounds of the people who benefitted. Were they 'the intended recipients' - ie high ability children from genuinely deprived areas / backgrounds, from families with a history of low educational attainment? Or were they from families with low income at that point, but without the other markers of deprivation?

[As I was growing up, my grammar-and-Oxbridge educated parents were poor as church mice - materially much less well off than many living in our local council estates. However, bright children from those estates would have been much better recipients of Direct Grant places, because they didn't have the family background that would have supported them educationally.]

[gauss]

Most of the children on assisted places at my school were neither from very deprived areas and backgrounds, nor from highly educated families with low income. Many came from families with no history of sixth form or university education but their parents had steady jobs, reasonable steady income, technical or vocational qualifications.

Most of the children on assisted places in my year have gone on to be very successful: solicitors, doctors etc. I think all of them got places at top universities.

I agree that the assisted places did not target those from socially deprived backgrounds. My father also used to complain that self-employed parents could fiddle their incomes to make themselves eligible.

However, assisted places, bursaries and scholarships were very good for meeting the needs of highly intelligent children, of the type happygardening is describing. My family had no history of university education but would not have been called deprived - they earned above the threshold for assisted places since my mother worked. Both I and my brother went to well-known private schools on large/full scholarships and then went to Oxbridge, became academics. We could not have followed the paths we did (given the then failing local schools in our rural area) without these scholarships.

Yet such scholarships no longer exist at most private schools (most are token accounts) and even bursaries are very limited. A child who (like my brother and me) is years ahead, multiply grade skipped, very high intelligence, does not fit in well in most non-selective state schools but in most areas selective state schools don't exist and most families won't qualify for substantial bursaries at selective private schools. (Indeed you can have a good income of 100k+ and yet struggle to pay day school fees for 2 children given the high cost of living in the SE.)

[mollyb101]

I went to an independent prep school until I was 11 and would on occasion board. I used to love it and really enjoyed the fact that I had friends to play with (I am an only child) it gave me structure (set homework time each night) and I didnt really miss my family while I was away.

I developed into an 11 year who was confident, had friends, was good at sports and proud to be reasonably intelligent as it was the norm for us all to want to be top of the class.

I then went to a local comprehensive and lost the structure, got teased for being "a Boffin" and didnt take part in most sports clubs as I wasnt confident in the environment.

I was going to go back to the school for GCSEs and feel I would have been far more successful had I done so, however at the age of 14 you understand more about money and felt I would be a burden to the family finances.

Obviously it isnt for everyone and if there is a good school locally which your children can go to then great but from my experience its very difficult to see a comprehensive school properly. Independent schools tend to give you far more information and insight into the school life than a comprehensive schools open evening where you see the good students who volunteer their time rather than the average class.

Child abuse can happen anywhere and I dont think its fair to tarnish Boarding schools across the country.

[smokepole]

Teacher. The report showed that many of 77 children's backgrounds were either Technical Middle class/ or affluent workers. These are the types of families who are likely to have benefited from 'right to buy' and increased property values . These families are also likely to be now mostly in the 'established middle class/ Elite categories'. Many of these families have experienced great social mobility, education being one of the reasons allowing their families social mobility.

The report advocates what they call 'open access' ,this scheme was used very successfully by the Belvedere School in Liverpool between 2000-2007. The system worked by using a sliding scale of fees based on the families income. Nobody who passed the Entrance Exam was denied a place. The report also states that up to 50 Independent Schools, would work with an open access scheme ( one suspects these are the old Direct Grant schools).

DD1 would 'possibly' have benefited from either 'open access or an assisted place' after some how failing her 11+ and the sudden drop in my income meant I was unable to rectify her potential school. Instead I was forced to send her to her 'father' 25 miles away because of the only palatable 'Modern school' available.

[cungryhatterpillar]

It's interesting to read about the children who have been certified as maths geniuses and need a specialist education as a result.

Being a mathematician myself, I noticed that after a term at Oxford it was pretty much a level playing field betters kids who'd gone to public schools and those from the state sector who hadn't even done further maths a level.

And again at Cambridge, doing part III of the mathematical tripos (a one year taught masters that acts as a selection test for students want to do a PhD at Cambridge) there was no difference between the UK-based students in terms of those with an elite education and those without.

Part III is gruelling and hardcore (probably the maths equivalent of marine commando training if you're trying to get a distinction so that you can do a Cambridge phd.) It's at this point you can really identity the super able mathematicians, not generally via an ed psych talking to a teenager.

Despite my scepticism that able mathematicians need to be sent away to board I do agree with others that boarding schools offer good education and it's up to the parents and child - no one should have to justify it.

[gauss]

But even part III is not enough to identify super able mathematicians: often those who found part III easy go on to PhDs don't do as well as expected or far surpass what was expected. Ditto those hired at postdoc and faculty level.

I agree about students quickly levelling out, although ime there is only a completely level playing field from the second year onwards.

[summerends]

IME there is a difference between a very able mathematician ie those that instinctively pick up concepts and solve problems using a variety of methods to those at the next level (PhD and beyond) who can do novel original work without a lot of guidance. Similarly in the sciences.