Page 9 | St Paul's Girls' School spgs

Inatizznow · 14/03/2015 21:47

IMO there are 3 tiers within the girls accepted. The not quite up to scratch but very wealthy approx.10- 15% , Full fee payers approx 70% and bursary. My theory based on seeing parents names on the donors list and the secretive nature of the school when organising by invitation only fundraising dinners and then finding out which parents were invited. Maybe other schools operate this way and I'm considered too poor unlikely to contribute therefore ignored.

MLP · 14/03/2015 21:47

Granola muncher, your $450k average parental income at Harvard figure does not tie to any other data I have read nor to my experience at Harvard. The Crimson survey in 2013, for example, indicated 14% of families had income over $500k and roughly half of students came from families with $125k+. At the other end 15% came from sub $40k families and a similar number from $40-80k homes. If your family income is less than something like $65k you pretty much get a free ride (as is the case for a friend from mine who comes from a poor working class family here in the UK).

Springisontheway · 14/03/2015 23:01

Just curious...who are the Mercers? They aren't fabric retailers these days, surely. There have been comments on this thread that imply they have a big pot of money to share. Do they really? Where does it come from? If they are some sort of charitable fraternity, why would they choose a very wealthy and privledged school as the object of their "charity."

granolamuncher · 14/03/2015 23:32

Thanks, MLP. My figures are from Piketty...

I guess his $450k average isn't necessarily wrong vis a vis the numbers you cite: it depends how high the incomes of the 14% over $500k go.

Anyway $65k is a very low threshold for a full bursary for Harvard's massive fees. The pain felt by those just above that threshold must be unpleasant and must put off a lot of good candidates. Is Harvard "blind" to that?

The expensive London schools similarly set very low thresholds for bursaries. The middle doesn't like being squeezed but when the schools take their DC and then come along and impose fees rises that bear no relation to salary rises, that's when it really hurts. It's unnecessary: while the heads try to raise funds elsewhere, they could look to keep costs down. But do they care?

Opopanax · 14/03/2015 23:47

That is absolute bollocks, Inatizznow. I can tell you now that the 'not quite up to scratch' would have a dreadful time at SPGS and be very unhappy indeed and quite honestly no parent would want that for their child. And I can also tell you that in my experience, that is absolutely not how children are selected. There was nobody at school with me who wasn't extremely bright. Bright enough to do anything they wanted to, even the ones who were in lower sets for the subjects that did have sets. This is the same kind of ridiculous bollocks that led the OP to start the thread! There's no mystique. They select girls who they think are really very clever indeed. It's not rocket science (haha).

The Mercers (the Worshipful Company of Mercers) are the original foundation who set the school and its brother school SPS up. No, I don't think they sell fabric these days. They are a bunch of rich blokes. Look it up on Wikipedia or something.

SPGS and SPS have been very vocal (at least to past students and prospective parents, no idea about the wider world) about wanting to move to a situation where no child is denied admission because of money. SPGS has sent me millions of letters over the past few years wanting me to contribute money towards the goal of at least 20% of intake being able to access bursaries. Sadly I am paying my crappy giant mortgage not a million miles from SPGS and can't contribute much, but from their communications it is absolutely transparent that they do want to have more bursaries and to make them more inclusive and more far-reaching. I have had these letters every single year since I've left. I have no doubt that they are reaching farther and wider than ordinary people like me!

I do not believe they are trying to limit accessibility. They are providing something that is qualitatively different from Latymer or G&L or Putney or wherever. That costs money. And my brother went to Latymer and several of my friends to G&L and Putney and Wimbledon. I cannot say for certain now but then it was a totally different class of education. It's not class sizes, btw. It's a different outlook.

granolamuncher · 15/03/2015 00:01

Springisontheway The Worshipful Company of Mercers is the self styled "premier" livery company in the City of London.

Its members are largely drawn from a small group of landed English families, some of which must have been involved in the fabric trade in medieval times. These days they are more involved in farming, looking after horses, shooting, fishing and, oh yes, running what they are proud to call a "portfolio" of schools, most of which are of the fearfully expensive type, eg SPS and Abingdon, but also including Hammersmith Academy.

The Mercers are governors of these schools and the chairmanships of the boards churn through the generations. The current Chair of Governors of SPGS is the Hon Timothy Palmer who is the brother of Ralph Palmer, Lord Lucas of Crudwell, owner and editor of the Good Schools Guide ( a connection which I don't believe is mentioned in the guide).

The company does have other charities which help to fill the time between grouse moor and dinner but, yes, it also has pots of money. Check out its website. (There's an amusing page about "membership" which kindly explains you have to be a member of a family which already has members in it.)

Dean Colet handed SPS over to the Mercers back in the C16th because he thought they would look after it well. I guess he wasn't wrong as far as the first 400 or so years are concerned ( though there was a Royal Commission in the C19th which wasn't too impressed and gave them a fright). However, the Colet Court scandal which emerged last year and the growing disquiet about the levels of fees at the company's schools are beginning to raise questions about their fitness to continue to govern them. My suggestion above that it might be time for the St Paul's schools to be handed back to the Church was only half in jest.

granolamuncher · 15/03/2015 00:22

Opapanax It is precisely because I am an admirer of SPGS's "outlook" and of what the school has done for women's education that I find myself disappointed by the rocketing fees and the rush to luxury under its current leadership.

"Outlook" needn't cost this much. The extracts from the accounts speak for themselves: the teacher/pupil ratio is growing. That's expensive and it's unnecessary for SPGS where, as you say, the pupils are super bright. They could easily cope with slightly larger class sizes.

To move to "needs blind" admission, it's not sufficient to raise money for bursaries. You need to keep fees down at the same time. Otherwise, your funds are never going to meet the growing needs and you squeeze out the middle. This is what is happening and this is why some on this thread are not too happy and why I get cross with the Mercers, who ought to know better.

Inatizznow · 15/03/2015 08:53

Opoponax- sorry you think it's bollocks and maybe it wasnt like that during your time at the school . Dc currently attending and I'm certainly not unique in my thinking.
The school is a great fit for our DC so I'm not knocking it at all academically - it is a fantastic school , but there are aspects that leave me uncomfortable- especially the idea that it will accept any girls bright enough to benefit.
You say it yourself over the years the school has sent you letters to achieve 20% bursary awards. The point is with the cash at hand they can afford this- could have achieved this last year or the previous year but they chose not to. Just over 10% are receiving assistance despite 40% applying from state schools in 2014 - ( foundation report statement) . Looking at the student acceptance from state schools ( source 2014 intake list ) it's incredibly marginal.
Wealth screening definitely happens - how else do you explain those chosen to attend the exclusive fund raisers.

Inatizznow · 15/03/2015 09:12

Sorry posted before rant over- meant to add and the implausibility of over 90% not meeting the academic standard from the state sector.

Inatizznow · 15/03/2015 09:32

Granolermuncher
Whilst I will not be removing my DC from spgs I do agree with your sentiments. We chose the school for its strong ethos regarding women's education and are dismayed by the limited social reach.

Lynharvey · 15/03/2015 10:07

I think unfortunately SPGS does give the impression that it is paying lip service to extending its social reach. While for example it asks local state primary schools to send a couple of their best Year 5 girl pupils to a morning at SPGS somewhat shockingly this exercise is termed 'Enrichment Day' as though the poor urchins will be better off having been allowed to spend a morning with their superiors. And then the two stage exam process tends to discrimate against those from the state sector who don't do much tutoring.

granolamuncher · 15/03/2015 10:14

Thanks, Inatizznow. The impression I have had is that the school's current management asks what the super rich want and then gives it to them, appealing to them and Old Paulinas to help them find the cash. This is miles away from the principles on which the school was founded and run for generations.

The dinners you speak of are no doubt occasions when the super rich get to tell the High Mistress what they'd like next, eg a cafe for the 6th form, a new sports pavillion (the "Farr Pavilion"? ).

I'm not surprised you get angry about the direction in which the school is going.

Inatizznow · 15/03/2015 22:18

Lynharvey- Yes odd choice calling it an enrichment day. According to the 2014 foundation report 4% of girls attending the day were finally offered places.
Granolamuncher - farr pavilions , hilarious!

runner6 · 27/11/2015 20:46

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

notamumoops · 07/05/2017 23:53

Just want to say I go to SPGS and I think the pressure of the school is completely blown out of proportion. I think it's the parents that put the pressure on their children not the school. Also while there are some people at the school who are full of it, that's just teenagers. There's always going to be girls who think they're above everyone else. All you mamas have so much hate just chill!

pkim123 · 21/02/2022 20:34

@Oceanicflight815

I'm getting really tired of reading the negative comments about SPGS on here. I have a dd there and we think the school is fantastic. When we were faced with making choices after the 11+, I was so worried about all the hearsay that I seriously considered not accepting the offer. How was my normal, sporty dd going to cope with robotic, hot-housed, ultra-competitive, over-tutored, super-indulged, bitchy girls who wear obscenely short shorts? I'm so happy now that we gave it a chance.

"Well I never wanted my dd to go there", is a comment that offer holders will hear many times from people whose dd has missed the cut, even though you know that prior to the 11+, they would have sold their soul for a place. Naive people like me eventually work out that the negative comments are just the bitter taste of sour grapes.

My dd went to a school that prepared the children for the 11+ but there was no tutoring except for some who were struggling. As a poster has recently written, the school watches your child from the first day they walk in the door. They have test scores stretching for years. They know exactly what is going on and there is no way the Head will jeapordise their relationship with any of the secondary schools by recommending a child they feel is not right for that school. If it helps you to believe that my child spent all her young years being tutored, fine, but you are wrong with her and also for the huge majority of SPGS girls. They are genuinely clever girls. I understand the need to tutor if you are not coming from a private school. However, if you are at a prep school and are tutoring in the hope getting a place, you are making a serious mistake. Your dd will be happier at a different school. There are girls who make it through thanks to a tutor and they do struggle. Equally, you can dismiss the idea that prep schools over prepare the kids. If that was the case, they'd all be at spgs but they are not.

We live in West London and so we know classmates and friends' children at virtually every school here. There is absolutely no difference in the amount of homework my dd brings home compared to any of them. Content yes, amount no. Hot-housing clearly not. You need to let go of that myth too. There is plenty of time for clubs, after school activities, meeting friends, or just lying around watching television.

I find it insulting that my lovely dd is branded as robotic. She is a wonderful girl and I can't see anything in her personality that you would describe as robotic. I know all the girls in her tutor group and they are all really lovely girls that you be very proud to call your own. There was a bitchy super competive girl at her prep and that girl was not offered a place at spgs even though academically she would have been fine. I suspect that these sort of girls are being weeded out at interview. The girls at spgs seem to be confident in their own abilities. They are content within themselves. They know that they all got into the school for a reason and there is no need to prove their superiority to anyone. They are just friends.

Pushy parents, sure. No doubt I'm one. Unfortunately, you have to be in a West London. I do want what is best for my children. I want them to reach their potential. And I know the parents at my prep were the same as me and their children went to a whole range of schools so you've got the same parents at every school.

As for short shorts, that's just an additional ridiculous argument against the school. yes, there are a few. I see the girls are nearby schools rolling their skirts up. They are all teenagers. A poster suggested you stand outside the school gates and see the skimpy outfits worn by spgs girl. instead, you will see jeans, hoodies, and leggings. Half of them are in their sports kit. And they do have a really nice (but expensive) sports kit.

Yes of course there will be issues but they are the same issues as all schools around here face. If you are stressed and over anxious, it would not have mattered if you went to spgs, g&l, Lu, leh, fh, nh, clsh, nlc etc. All these schools and many more are great schools who are aiming at good results. Sex, drugs, fingers crossed yet to go there, but any story told to you third hand about spgs will apply to any school. I've got a ds elsewhere and all I can say about pastoral care is that it is far superior at spgs, as is their communication with parents and opportunities for parental involvement.

So good luck to you with your upcoming offers. Accept spgs if you feel it is right for your dd. Accept leh if that is, especially if you live near it. Keep the commute in mind, it is really important. They are all great schools around here. Ignore all the sour grapes, not just about spgs but about whichever school you choose. And if you were desperate for an offer from school but miss out, be happy for those that got in. It's ok to be disappointed. Feel sad and then make the best of what is offered. Congratulate your child, they did a great job in a very tough and stressful situation. I wish them nothing but the very best.

Very well said. OP, thanks for posting.

SpGOx · 09/06/2023 02:15

Poisonwoodlife · 29/01/2015 15:46

I was actually one of the people who commented on the thread that rattled OPs cage that OP refers to. I think the overwhelming gist was exactly what she says in her last para. OP has picked on a few comments amongst many that were more balanced.

The only comment I made that was consistent with OPs reaction was highlighting the fact that SPGS was the only West London school to my knowledge that responded to GCSE deflation by making girls who did not get A retake. As a parent I would have been annoyed by that piling on of pressure / distraction just as they were moving on to focus on the greater challenge and interest of AS. Intellectually questionable as well. I would be interested in OP*s perspective?

Of course these schools are not a homogenous mass, but they do have a particular ethos and culture that DDs will know if they are comfortable with or not (providing that parents value and respect their judgement rather than valuing the school's name and place in the league tables). Even the most negative comments though did reflect some aspects of the SPGS ethos and culture, not the experience for all the pupils but some. Quite right that all the schools share a catchment of teenage South West London DDs who manifest a range of issues, from short shorts to mental illness, often rooted in parenting rather than school. My own DDs had entirely different experiences at the same school because of the prevalence of those, originating in the home with some truly heart breaking scandalous backstories, issues in the cohort in one year. I am sure that like Trip Advisor most parents will read all these comments with an appreciation of that fact (though I suspect that most parents of those lovely 11 year olds have no idea of what is to come or some of the extreme aspects of teenage culture) and the writer's subjectivity.

I would say though that these schools, by virtue of being top of league tables, are a target for those who indulge in competitive parenting, and whose DDs do have these issues to a greater extent. Self esteem issues are common for Girls who feel, rightly or wrongly, that parental love is conditional upon achieving, in entry to these schools, academic results, Oxbridge, being "popular", narrow targets for success. There is definitely a correlation between DDs having been targeted at certain schools and the extent to which some girls at those schools, lacking in self esteem, indulge in exclusive attention seeking cliquey behaviour, and worse manifest mental health problems. Anecdotes of eating disorders, wild behaviour, exclusive behaviour etc obviously do not reflect the whole school body but they do reflect an aspect of the culture (and I speak as a parent whose DDs are, of course, delightful and contemptuous of such behaviour).

When my DD moved to a less selective school she was amazed to find peers who respected difference and each other and celebrated each other's success. I had told her after comments by an Old Paulina, that she would only ever experience that alpha girl culture again if she found herself in a women's prison.

And she got, if anything better academic results...............

Eight years on, same sht