Headmistress attacks parents in national press

[UpsetofWestLondon]

Done first ever name change for this as don't want to be identifiable!

I am really, really pissed off. The High Mistress of St Paul's Girls' School, where I am a parent, has been widely quoted in the national press this weekend criticising parents at SPGS. I fully realise she may have been quoted out of context, but the quotes seem to apply to all parents at her school and the one that cuts to the quick is where she accuses parents of "affluent neglect" by not paying enough attention to their daughters in the evening.

I should say my DD is very happy at the school, does lots of things well and lots of things not very well but enjoys them so that's great. I adore spending time with her and the only reason I don't spend as much as I would like in the evenings is because of the extraordinary volume of homework she gets set by the school (and obviously the time she needs to spend on Facebook etc!).

I am glad Ms Farr is pro-children, and this is not the first time she has criticised the parent body, but at some point, if you continuously publicly criticise your paying customers surely you have to understand you will upset them? I feel personally attacked and concerned I will be judged by others negatively for being part if this vile parent body she describes. I am cross.

I almost want to post this in AIBU...but am I?

I've read the articles in various newspapers and don't see how the OP has managed to conclude that Ms Farr was criticising ALL parents. To be entirely honest, that just seems a bit paranoid to me. If you don't want to be accused of frenetic anxiety, then don't get so anxious, particularly since being overly concerned about what others think of you is one of Ms Farr's criticisms of some parents at the school. Basically, if you are happy with your school choice and your relationship with your child, then I don't understand why the article is getting to you.

I would just respond to it by suggesting to Ms Farr that you think your dd is being given a bit too much homework and it is interfering with your quality time with her, and see how she reacts!

Good advice I think Rabbitstew

Yes, good advice, rabbitstew. Let's hope Ms Farr can find the time for that conversation.

Blimey, some people are a bit snippy.

I'll leave you to talk amongst yourselves.

Rabbitstew

Granola I most definitely do not think that Heads know best, you only have to look across the river at St Paul's Boys' School to know they are capable of making some very bad decisions indeed. Ironically when a few more whistle blowers might have shed more light on the arrogance that led to processes that should have been implemented not being (and I know people who could but dare not) the parent body seem to have largely come together to support the school to try and minimise the damage, I just hope that won't result in complacency and lessons not learnt.

I also take the view that whilst the Head of a school and her staff have hundreds of pupils and far more experience than I of their lives, they do not have more experience of my own DDs, and if I feel they are being adversely affected psychologically by what happens at school I have every reason to take it up with Heads of Year and even the Head. It works both ways. So the Heads of their schools have generally come to know me very well indeed, but that is another story........ OP s considers her daughter happy and willing to throw herself into school life regardless of being best so there isn't a problem, apart perhaps as rabbit says the level of homework.

However on this issue Mrs Farr is in no way out of line with all the other Head's in feeling they face this problem, or in the way she addresses it, and from personal experience it is a serious problem that needs addressing by the leaders of these communities. She just got outed in the interests of a different press agenda. But for those bleating that these are wealthy london problems, well the problems facing state schools are first world problems. Why don't we all just weep for those school communities now facing Ebola or all the many greater problems faced by children around the world but if I see a child whose mental health and self esteem has been undermined by parental behaviour whatever the home background then I think those in a position to address the underlying problem should do it, and I do have a tear to spare (whilst urging people to give generously to charities that are tackling the Ebola crisis)

My DDs are both now at RG unis and I like the fact that they are now thrown into communities where their West London private school background means diddly squat and they are discovering there are lots of bright young people out there with shared values from all sorts of backgrounds. In fact their knowledge of Chinese culture is a great deal more useful. But then like many West London parents we weren't in it for the status, we aren't especially affluent, it was just the only way to get a good school place for our DDs.

Poisonwoodlife All very sensible and what you say about SPS is interesting too. Might parents at that school have felt intimidated about speaking out, as you appear to indicate? That's really OP's question here too and my answer is she shouldn't be frightened about raising her concerns.

Self esteem is essential for all young people, wherever they are and whatever their background, I completely agree with you. That's why I find Clarissa Farr's reported comments very odd indeed (and, btw, out of line with what other heads say): "Snowplough parents is a great description...self-esteem valued above all other attributes, anything that might threaten self-esteem must be moved to the side". Did she misspeak?

The "Ethos" page on her school's website didn't help me understand what she really thinks or suggest to me that she was "inspiring" in any way, hence my earlier facetious comments.

If I was a parent at SPGS, I expect I would be rather unimpressed. I sympathise with OP's wish to raise her concerns.

I suspect CF is not alone in feeling that the landscape has changed in West London private schools. Odd snippets from a friend who used to be a Deputy Head, from someone who knows a recently retired Head, plus obviously parents, who are concerned about the educational arms race and the impact on our own children. There are advantages in raising children in London, but disadvantages as well.

However in CF's case I feel there is an irony. When she started a few years back, there were complaints that she was changing the character of the school, focussing on recruiting absolute academic top performers at 11+ rather than continue a slightly broader approach. (Someone up-post suggests previously there was an interest in daughters of "interesting families", certainly they now seem to take a smaller proportion from state primaries than neighbouring schools. )

I am not a SPGS parent, though have met quite a few over recent years. From the outside it seems that this has created a few problems:

1. It is difficult to separate out the very bright from the heavily coached aged 10. You will also be picking up all-rounders, when future star performers might have noticeable strengths and weaknesses.

1. It is the go-to school for sections of the very affluent ex-pat community. Part is the security of a brand name, when faced London's confusing array of selection and choice. Additionally in the case of SPGS, parents seem to be very involved in quite a lot of aspects of school life, in a way that seems more American than British. This then provides a important social dimension meaning parents seem to know each other better and spend more time in each other's company than at other schools.

1. Again from the outside, pupils seem to believe they are part of an elite, and indeed some seem to assume that by being at the school they are brighter and better than others. This provides a pressure in that failing (less than an A* in many cases) suggests they are not worthy of their place or have let the school down. Indeed I have heard girls, and in one instance a mother, come out with things like "she's not very bright, I don't know how she got into the school".The external impression is of a competitive environment, which suits the majority but leaves a minority quite unhappy. DD knows/knows of at least three in her year group who have left as a result.

CF will not set direction on her own. The Governors will presumably want to see the school remain at the top of League tables. The trouble is that from the top the only way is down, and some relaxation to bring in a more interesting group of students might reduce the pressure cooker atmosphere, but might impact on results. (Bright or not, and most are bright, the majority of SPGS pupils seem to work incredibly hard, and hence earn the impressive results.)

She will want to maintain the bursary programme and this requires fundraising. Again I assume I am not the only one to have witnessed boasting from a SPGS mother delighted her banker husband was deemed sufficiently well off to meet the criteria to be invited to a CF fundraising dinner.

The demands of American college entry are such that girls have to exhibit leadership, music, sports and other accomplishments as well as first rate academics. This take some organising.

Very few of the SPGS mothers we have met work, in part because they don't need to. Almost all are very highly educated. I accept that there will be others at the school who have been to state primaries or are on bursaries. However the impression we have is of a parent body where aspirations are sky high, and mothers have the time and resources to support their daughter's education. Of a school which demands top academic standards, and is also looking for the parents to support the school both with time and the occasional large cheque. At the same time entry to top UK and US colleges is getting more and more competitive, indeed I think Ivy League applications have more than doubled in the past five years, and these girls are not allowed to fail.

Its not quite the same in other schools, but the elements are there. Snowplough parenting is a good word. Whilst at the same time there are parents like us who check diaries to make sure there is someone at home as we work to ensure we can afford the fees. DD says she preferred our slightly neglectful approach, but her results may have been better if I had had the time to helicopter. Who knows, she might even have got into SPGS!

Granola that's an interesting idea about why there is so much coverage - and all from a somewhat negative slant. You may well be right.

Thanks for the sympathy about homework - I was slightly using it to shorthand my response to the comments she is reported to have made: it's not my only concern about the school. I've seen my DD turn into a wraith at points where the nightly 2 1/2-3 hours homework, after a school day that usually extends to 5pm or 6pm, coincides with a concert, a play and an all day Saturday sports commitment - plus three pieces of GCSE coursework scheduled for the same day in the middle of the same week as all the above. Over the last fortnight I have barely seen her to talk to for more than 5 minutes at the beginning and end of the day, and over a rushed supper the few days she has made it home to eat rather than grabbing supper at school with her friends. I have seen her perform in all of those so I have been there for her, but I like talking to her and hugging her best!! But if I were to suggest any changes I'd be guilty of snowploughing wouldn't I?! Aaagh!! And she does love it all and though she gets very stressed during those sorts of times she gets through it and recovers.

I genuinely think her performance anxiety at those points is self-generated, not from us. She wants to do her best, whatever that is. And she gets disappointed when say a music exam doesnt give her the grade she wants, but actually accepts that disappointment quite phlegmatically and gets on with the next thing.

To follow on from and support Opopanax's comments about stress at the school I know my DD's views. She doesn't feel over-stressed and finds SPGS a happy, supportive, friendly school with amazing teachers, but she certainly knows girls who are hyper-anxious about reports and exams to an extent which she thinks is absurd, particularly as they are often the highest achievers, and I would think is worrying. Having said that, it is only fair to say that in a school where more than half of girls got 11 A*s in their GCSEs last summer, I know she would be very disappointed not to do the same. I think it's important that I am honest about that stress on this thread - clearly we will tell her not to worry but I know it will be in her mind. There will actually be two sorts of stress - that of the driven high-achievers who only want to achieve the very highest results, and that of the girls who can't reach such dizzy heights and will feel a failure when in fact their results will still be outstanding. Such is the problem of highly selective schools and we need to manage it as parents with a healthy dose of realism.

Am I hyper-sensitive that Ms Farr is criticising all parents? It's hard as only quotes are given, and in some comments she clearly refers to 'some' or 'the extreme' but this particular comment made me feel it was a broader attack as it seemed to cover all parents, even the delightful ones!

She said: Parents have very high aspirations they have a kind of ticking, frenetic anxiety even the ones who are delightful to deal with are on edge because they havent really got enough time to have the conversation theyre trying to have with you.

Anything that might result in success not happening for their son or daughter, in however small an arena, theyre very frightened of.

Regardless, some of those parents she is directly criticising will of course be the parents sending her the girls who have the highest achievements which she is happy to laud, celebrate and take credit for the school for. And that brings me back to my sense of it's just rude to do this in this way.

I think am going to write - I am not going to enter into a conversation at a cultural or social event about this. But probably I shall write to the Chairman of Governors rather than Ms Farr. I have found this discussion highly useful in helping me sort out my thoughts so thank you - I have gone from white fury on Saturday to a more measured sense now. I might manage not to get my DD expelled with my letter now .

Now, she can hardly accuse you of being a snowplough parent if you tell her you think the school sets too much homework, can she? Snowplough parents clear the way for their children to steam ahead on an open road, they don't clear the way so as to enable their children to pootle about and build a little snowman on the side of the road before they carry on with their journey.

Ms Farr couldn't possibly complain about your parenting, OP. I too was surprised by what she said about "delightful" parents and wondered if there might be "time issues" on her side as well. As mentioned in my last post, I was also surprised by her objections to prioritising "self esteem". If she wants to "attack" parents, as The Times would have it, she should be a bit more careful. I am sure you will write a thoughtful letter.

OP The LEH Head generated similar headlines when she ran a failure week at Wimbledon High in 2013. The parents were collateral casualties then too.

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/10277505/Helicopter-parents-creating-a-generation-incapable-of-accepting-failure.html

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/11000257/Schools-tackle-perfectionism-in-pupils.html

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-22280941

From the LEH Head's latest blog titled Perfection a few days agowww.lehs.org.uk/perfection/361774.html

^Knowing when something is ‘good enough’, keeping a sense of perspective, these are essential life skills and, as such, we want to learn them when we are young. School is the ideal place to practise and so I urged the girls, in assembly this morning, to start by checking whether they are over-doing some activities and perhaps under-doing others; spending too much time trying to perfect one thing at the expense of other, equally (or even more) important things.

Developing a strong sense of self-knowledge, understanding and trusting yourself, knowing how to spend your time wisely, knowing that perfection is only occasionally a worthwhile aim, all build self-esteem. Through self-esteem we hope will come the wisdom to understand that the beauty of one’s character is more important than the beauty of one’s face or body.^

Self esteem is an interesting one.

There are parents who view any failure/hurt/disappointment as damaging to their DC's self esteem.

But these types of parents tend to avoid competition/selection for their DC like the plague.

I think you are picking over her selectively quoted words far too much, tbh - something you should never do if you haven't read all the text. It seems to me that she thinks that some parents' attempts to "boost self-esteem" do the exact opposite and just set their daughters up to be unable to cope with failure, which would not happen to a person with genuinely high self-esteem, rather than someone terrified of failing because they've been led to believe this would be harmful to them... In other words, I think she was saying that what some parents think is boosting self esteem just isn't.

You could well be right, rabbitstew. All the more reason for OP to seek clarification. And all the more reason for Ms Farr to take time to communicate with parents.

Rabbitstew, I love the idea of little snowmen. DD has built a fair few over the years.

I suspect SPGS generates a level of insecurity in others. I found it hard to hear about these all-singing all dancing Renaissance children who shine at extra curricular as well as securing 11A*s. The homework load seemed immense, and I liked the dad who suggested he would prefer his daughter to have less homework and more time to explore music and sport. Mine in contrast barely brought any home in the years leading up to GCSE. DD has since described the competitive and judgemental atmosphere, as in you can't be as good or as bright because you are not at SPGS, as toxic. I certainly found some of the competitive parents very difficult.

Thank goodness we are almost at the end of West London schooling. Looking back a more relaxed approach, a chance to fail, and time to find her own way has suited DD. She has more in the tank and it will be up to her whether she uses it to secure a place on the competitive university course she wants, or whether she takes a more comfortable path. Some of the very drilled children she knew will land their top University courses and continue into their high powered, high paying jobs. Some of these will be the genuine article, others will remain dull with an exaggerated sense of self-importance. Others may lose their way at a point when parents cease to steer, or simply not be able to continue to compensate for lack of real ability by slogging.

One consistent but depressing theme though was "my child first". There is a minority that is not allowed to fail. Any small slight and the parents roll in ready to argue for the top mark, the place on the sports team or the prize. It did not always work, but we know enough instances of preference given because a teacher could not be bothered to argue to know it could be effective.

Poison is right. The problem wont be confined to SPGS, but as the most sought after academic school in West London they probably see more than most. Rather than criticise the attempts at "perfection" perhaps the focus needs to be on building resilience. You don't need to be the best, but you do need to pick yourself up and carry on when things don't work out.

nightly 2 1/2-3 hours homework

I would be really concerned about this and having a word with someone. Don't they do the Time Taken thing any more? In my day, we were set no more than 2 pieces of homework per day (obviously it relied on children spacing prep throughout the week rather than doing it all at the weekend or whatever) and each was meant to take 20 minutes or less. We had to write how long it had taken at the bottom. If a child was consistently taking too long to complete homework extra help was offered.

Needmoresleep

I'm slightly confused. I thought you said you weren't an SPGS parent?

"DD has since described the competitive and judgemental atmosphere, as in you can't be as good or as bright because you are not at SPGS, as toxic. I certainly found some of the competitive parents very difficult."

Do you mean your DD was/is at another nearby school (e.g. G&L or LU) and this was her impression of not being at SPGS, i.e. she felt a sense of failure because she wasn't at SPGS herself?

UpsetofWestLondon

"There will actually be two sorts of stress - that of the driven high-achievers who only want to achieve the very highest results, and that of the girls who can't reach such dizzy heights and will feel a failure when in fact their results will still be outstanding. Such is the problem of highly selective schools and we need to manage it as parents with a healthy dose of realism."

As an SPGS parent, what does or can the school do to help with the "dose of realism"?

It makes sense for CF to ask parents to adopt a "dose of realism", but does she and the school?

For example, what happens when students fall behind their projected/expected levels in topics?

PS - to all non-London, non-private school parents on the thread - I think this is an examination of a hyper-selective, highly academic school which may only be useful to a handful of other parents at similar schools around the country. "Mileage may differ"

My impression, from talking to parents/DC at private schools in Paris, London and New York and other major cities where DC are aiming for top-ranked global universities, is that the homework burden in competitive schools from Y7 onwards is wildly out of proportion with anything that happened in my generation, or that happens in normal state schools today.

The education arms race that is preparing DC for entrance to top global universities seems to get hotter and hotter and more and more out of sync with the ROW.

I should also add that I remain to be convinced that huge amounts of homework in Y7/8/9 are useful based on our own experience of having DCs in normal state schools at that point in time. They hadn't exhausted themselves before they really needed to put their foot on it, IYSWIM.

Bonsoir Comparing the experience of DDs peers the less selective the private school, the more homework, certainly in Years 7, 8 and 9. However there is a bit of an arms race going on amongst schools that previously might have differentiated themselves on pastoral care / an emphasis on music and the arts and have now decided that what parents want is schools that are further up the tables and are trying to get there with less selective cohorts. I can't answer for SPGS but at a similar school the policy was that homework in Years 7,8 and 9 was never set if it could be done in class and, in the previous Heads tenure it could and was checked to make sure it was challenging, interesting and worthwhile (often more challenging than GCSE level certainly in subjects like English and History where skills of source analysis and literary criticism required were of GCSE level pretty much from Year 7). Parents were very much encouraged to get in touch if it was exceeding the allotted time, it varied day to day but never more than three subjects of 20 - 30 minutes. .

Opopanax OPs daughter is doing GCSE. My impression was that once they were faced with the syllabus requirements of 10 GCSEs and coursework, homework does increase but certainly as far as my DDs school was concerned whilst the quantity increased the quality and level of challenge decreased. It isn't particularly stressful or demanding of itself, at these schools work at GCSE level in the years before which means that GCSEs are just a matter of consolidation and securely nailing the best grade they are capable of in coursework and on the day. Of course there is a ridiculous arms race amongst state schools where it isn't uncommon for bright pupils to be doing 15 or more GCSEs, most private schools don't allow more than ten precisely so that pupils can have a life continue with other activities.

Having said all that how much time was spent with nose to the grindstone and how much on Social media and catch up TV is open to speculation.

MN64 All these pupils mix outside school, at parties, outside extra curricular etc. My DDs have said similar of SPGS and Tiffin (superselective state grammar) Being set up as having beaten all the rest to a place by parents for whom it was the sine qua non can foster that sort of arrogance / illusions of superiority.

Try going on threads on here to say your DD turned down a place at SPGS / Tiffin though plenty do.....

One of the very wise things that wordfactory once said is the importance of learning to be pragmatic rather than succumbing to the spiral of perfectionism which can be incredibly time consuming and often a hindrance to being effective.
Girls seem to have more of a problem with perfectionism, perhaps explaining why at SPGS and the like they drive themselves hard and their homework takes more than 2 hours. I also wonder how many of these maligned 'snow plough' highly educated mothers who don't work are also driven perfectionists who without the outlay of work are forming their daughters in their own image.

I don't think that there was any mention of snowplough parenting being confined to non-working mothers and, IME, families where a conscious decision has been made not to pursue two very timing consuming career paths are families that are conscious of the stressors on family members and manage plenty of down time.

Interesting to put yourself in CFs shoes

On the one hand she is leading a school at the top of the tables, unashamedly intellectually elitist, and long the destination school especially for the elite intelligentsia. It is ahead by quite a margin of any other girls' school in terms of Oxbridge places. They can be highly selective of girls who are not just able (and there are parts of the entrance exam like the Science comprehension, that certainly will identify the most able) but have been tutored to a point ahead of what is required by other schools (though they do seem to make exceptions eg for pupils coming from overseas and, maybe even from the right families.....?) The girls that come to them can be relied on to preserve that atmosphere of working hard, seeking intellectual challenge and achieving excellence academically, musically and to some extent in drama and sport. That much is a strategy that thus far has worked.

However perhaps she recognises that the intellectual elite are rather being replaced by the moneyed elite, and that their daughters are being subjected to the sorts of stresses nomoresleep describes. Even the "delightful" parents are a bit stressed. Is this a threat to that special intellectual elitism of SPGS?

Meanwhile the other private school heads, the competitive environment, are beginning to worry about the stresses on their pupils, as a result of the exam system, modern life (social media etc) and changes in parenting. They are laying on parenting classes, giving their pupils lectures on "failure" and "happiness". Seeking to advise parents on how they can reduce the impact of these stresses. Heads of this new breed are being appointed as Heads of prestigious schools, rather than the old fashioned "race you up the tables" type .

Then you are going to meet with them all at a conference, where the agenda is all about highlighting these stresses and strains and how you best support pupils through them.

Whether or not she is really interested in changing the ethos of SPGS I can't help thinking "Hey Presto" !