Super selectives: how much value do they add?

[Oneveryworriedmum]

I'm starting to look at senior schools for my daughter and the head has suggested trying for some super selective schools. Thing is, I found the atmosphere at some of them rather pressurised and competitive and I worry that my child, who is rather academic but not very confident, may be crushed there. She's the type that would do better being a big fish in a small, nurturing pond rather than one of the many in a bigger, competitive pond, IYSWIM.
But would she really miss out if she went to, say, Tormead, Surbiton High or (with a lot of luck because of mini-catchment) our outstanding local comp, rather than Guildford High, LEH or Tiffin Girls?
I guess what I am trying to find out is whether there is genuine value at being at a super selective (better education, more academic 'stretching', access to better universities) or whether their fantastic results are simply down to the fact that they cream off the brightest and best, who would do just as well anywhere else?
Views gratefully appreciated, particularly from people who have gone through the system!

I don't think that is a question to which there is an answer. It would depend on the school and the child.
I have two DC at two different "superselective", dreadful term, grammar schools and they are very different. DS's is super competitive, some boys do struggle at the bottom and support for those struggling does not seem very good, but it is a better fit for DS than the local comp where his geekiness would I feel have made him stick out like a sore thumb. DDs on the other hand is less pressured and options and support adjusted as required and is I think the better school of the two.
We sent DD to the grammar because we felt it was "the small nurturing pond" rather than to the 300 intake comprehensive where we felt she would get lost, but that was the particular schools we had as options.
I think you need to get opinions on the particular schools themselves and then pick which you think would suit your DD best.

I have heard there is some compelling data out there which show children do better academically when they are towards the top of the pile in ability. IE - unless a child is a genius then he/she is likely to do better in a more mixed ability school. If the child would be sure to be in the top 25% of a highly selective school then go for it - will probably be good for the child. Just wish I could remember where the study was. A couple of years ago I think.

Hi Alsoflamingo - sounds logical but there's a conundrum: how to you know if your DC will be in the top 25% when each school is eager to attract the "best" candidates and therefore has an incentive to tell parents their DC will do well? The official line is that a school would not offer a place to a child who they think will not do well - but how well is well?

I think the only way to decide is by knowing your own DC: as Essexmum rightly pointed out, a sensitive child may do better at a less "academic" school (whatever that means) where entrance competition is less fierce, because that is an indication how well they will do compared to their cohort. Being near the top will give them confidence and reassurance that they "belong".

it's more tricky with a highly competitive child: will they do better in a super-competitive environment where everyone is like them and they are incentivised by the competition, or will they break under the sudden awareness that others are, and probably will always be, "better"? Will they be bored at a less "academic" school and become lazy? Or worse: become arrogant thinking they are "the best"?

And if the "super selective" school is indeed the right choice for competitive kids, I guess the best way to ensure happiness (as well as success) is to ensure that DC is in the top quarter in at least one subject, and accepts that you can't win all....

I suspect I know what your local comp is - choose it! You'd be mad to pay for one of the others (yes I know Tiffin is state). I doubt your child's GCSE grades would be any better.

You ask for views from parents who've gone through the system. That's me :) My approach was not to overthink it but to accept a place at the local state super selective (also our nearest secondary as it happens) if each child passed the test. They all did, so they went. They're all different characters but the school has a great reputation and all schools have a spectrum so I'd just go with it, and not get too worked up.

I went to one of the superselectives you name, and although it was fine for me, I don't think I would want to send my daughter there. All the focus was on exam results and so many people seemed to end up with confidence issues, eating disorders etc and there wasn't much support for them. And I don't think they did much extra to engage pupils' interest in subjects - all the focus was on results rather than interesting learning around the subject.

I couldn't comment on whether your DD is likely to get better results at a super selective than elsewhere. But if she is bright then she will get good results anyway so I would say it is worth looking at what the schools offer outside of the academics. Eg personally I think it is worth going for mixed over single sex.

Also - at least some universities give lower offers to those from state schools compared to those from private schools. So even if they do have an academic advantage in terms of grades they may not actually give an advantage in terms of uni offers. And once you've been to uni, A level grades are more or less irrelevant anyway.

My Godson went to one of the schools on your list (the boys school obviously). His parents often told me how the Head would talk about the school being for the brightest of the bright, and the best of the best. There would be a long list of how academically excellent they were, and how many points they left with after A levels.

In comparison, my dc were at small town catholic comp. The head would talk about the importance of giving something back, and contributing to your local community. Lots of talk of your internal moral compass. (And then mention how well the school did academically)
At Christmas, Spiffins would put on a concert in a very prestigious venue
featuring the best singers and musicians the school had.

Small town would put on a church service with the 3 school choirs and both orchestras, and in school, the sixth formers would write and produce their own panto for parents& students.

At the end of the year, Spiffins results were always excellent and the points per pupil very high. However, this included the points from the General Studies A level that every student has to sit, a qualification that is not recognised by most (all?) good universities.
In comparison, small town comp does not offer qualifications that are not respected externally. It offered A levels and a couple of (subject specific) BTECs . Students took whichever was most appropriate, and some students would only take 3 A-levels. Or just the BTEC.

Both my DSs either matched or exceeded my Godsons A level results. None applied to Oxbridge, Godson declared after 7 years of working at the pace Spiffins set, he wasn't willing to put himself through another 3 years of that. For DS Oxbridge don't offer the course he wanted to study.

The moral? All had a great quality education academically. But I feel mine benefitted more from the wider range of students, and the focus on developing the whole person rather than a narrow academic focus.

OP you will get a fair few posts from those with no DC in super selective.

You may wonder where their experience actually comes from...

I have a DS at a selective school ( independent ).

The main pro is that he is being educated alongside ability peers.

I personally don't thin there is anything to be gained educationally or psychologically from sitting easily at the top of the pile. Better to be challenged, to find things hard, to understand what it is to graft.

And just to bust a few myths;

There are all different types of kids at the school; sporty ones, geeky ones, cool ones, loud ones, quite ones. They just all happen to be clever.

The kids are not all stressed. DS is so laid back he's almost horizontal . DD is far more stressed in her mixed ability school. It's just her nature ( drama llama).

They don't get lots and lots of homework. Dd gets more.

Depends on the DC and depends on the school. We have experienced two superselectives in which our DCs are expected to achieve academically rather than driven to do so. Both schools focus very much on extra activities and the pupils manage to fit in a lot in and out of school because they are not having work piled on them and are generally very able so cover a lot more in less time. Not all the pupils have a work ethic or are organised but certainly that is more likely to be the norm by the GCSE year and the teachers are there to help.
I agree with WF about the stimulation the pupils derive from each other's eclectic interests and talents. Also about not having an overinflated view of their own abilities.
There are some selectives I hear where the benefits of having a bright cohort are n't enhanced by the type of teaching and the focus is narrow with little academic (or other) pastoral care for the less organised, motivated DCs.

Word is right. Too many people without kids in these schools say stuff about them which is just not true. My kids come in a range of different sizes and temperaments (no geeks though tbf ) but they all went to the same school and they all fitted in. I've never seen that much homework either at least up until GCSEs (quite a bit at AS and A2 but I think that's the norm). Also, none have shunned decent unis so far on the grounds of fatigue I think they just find it easier to manage once they're there.

Also - at least some universities give lower offers to those from state schools compared to those from private schools.

They don't. They give lower offers to those from low-achieving state schools, in areas where few students attend universities. Adjusted offers are made on the basis of HEFCE's polar data, in particular. So you don't get a lower offer just because you attended your high achieving local comprehensive or grammar rather than a private school. The number of students applying for top courses who are eligible for lower offers on the basis of polar data is small in my experience. The grade reduction offered is also typically quite small e.g. AAB rather than A*AA.

And once you've been to uni, A level grades are more or less irrelevant anyway.

Also not true - some graduate employers filter on the basis of A level grades and subjects. Not having A level maths is apparently a disadvantage for accountancy, for example.

In my experience "superselectives" are not always that much more selective than other selective schools, particularly when they are private. The differences in league table scores are probably caused by the average being brought down by less able students' scores in the "non-superselective" schools, rather than by top achievers doing any differently. I was actually quite surprised at how easy it was for my DC to get into superselective (private) schools, despite speaking English as a third language and spending most of their primary school years abroad.

All state schools will have a value added score. This is available on the government's website and you can compare all the schools you are considering. Often value added can be harder to attain when everyone is super clever and starts out that way. Sometimes more nurturing schools add more value. I would look at where your DD will fit in! A happy child will achieve well. If the school has negative value, perhaps don't consider them because results can be less than the capability of the child.

Just to bust another myth - yes state school kids will be at school with the whole of the ability range - but they won't be TAUGHT with them. Pretty much all state school set for each subject, so your child will be taught with kids of a similar ability. And trust me once they've settled in they don't tend to mix with kids from the other sets simply because they don't see much of them.

And no, universities don't make offers based simply on state/private. A few schools are flagged as very low achieving and they may well yield a one grade lower offer, but state schools in general don't.

Some state schools set. Not all.
My three local comps; one sets, one streams, one doesn't do either until year 9.

And a top set at a mixed ability school will still have a range with very few of the most able. To get anything like a concentration of those kids you have to select from a wide(ish) area.

Well, as TheWordFactory says, it's in your nature as to whether or not you find an environment stressful. You know your dd. If she sets her own high standards, rather than assessing the work required on the back of what everyone else is bothering to do, and is made anxious by pushy, competitive environments, then choose the school accordingly. Not everyone needs external pressure and intense competition to do well - in fact, for an anxious perfectionist whose main problem is setting internal standards that are already too high, external pressure and competition could become toxic. After all, a perfectionist NEVER sits easily on top of the pile, because they always have a nagging internal voice telling them that they could do better and that they aren't good enough. They don't need external voices agreeing with them!

Like WF I had one in a super-selective and one in a school with a much broader range. Horses for courses. DS liked education, liked having clever friends and was not bothered when he was out shone by some exceptionally clever kids. He does agree that it was pretty miserable for those at the bottom, and a couple of mothers commented that the school worked less well for one of their two boys. It could get a bit geeky.

DD would have struggled. She was bright enough but dyslexic. A broader range allowed her to be towards to top of the year group in maths and towards the bottom in English. And, importantly, there were others with her at the bottom. Also though bright she was less studious. Certainly never tempted to read round subjects, indeed rarely tempted to read. She was also quite competitive, and had had her academic self confidence pretty well trashed by her prep school. It took a while for her to get into her stride but as concepts in maths and chemistry became more complicated, she starting overtaking those who were super-selective material at 11.

My son loved his education but it was quite sheltered. Good in that he has gone to University thinking it is cool to learn and with a habit of independent learning. But perhaps with fewer practical skills. DD in contrast was expected to support weaker classmates in maths, and is more aware that academic sucess is not everything. The "girls most likely to suceed" were rarely the top set girls but those with strong inter-personal skills and resiliance. The two are likely to pursue quite different careers so both approaches worked.

And to add, DDs GCSE grades were fine. She was never going to get all A*s and I dont think she would have done better at a more academic school. Indeed without the confidence she gained from being towards the top of the year, with aspirations to match, she may not have done nearly as well.

Ullen is right that superselective is a term misappropriated by some parents with DCs attending selective private schools. Most superselectives are state due to demand plus a handful of private predominantly in London vicinity.
Even if demand means they are taking the top 5% applying, selecting ability is a moving target dependent on the test type, a DC's maturity and parental support outside. There may therefore be actually quite a broad range of abilities (as within a top set of a large comprehensive) but probably less so by sixth form.

Ah but you can't win summer.

If I say DS school has great results, I'll be told that this is not because it's all that, but because it's so selective.

If I say DS school is super selective, I'll be told I'm delusional, that the kids there are rich, rather than clever .

Suspecting what the OP's state option is, they do set - I think you'll find the majority do actually (VERY few schools stream these days - agree you should avoid those that do), and the top set at this school would all be likely get places in 'normal' selective schools, and the top half of the top set would probably get places in 'super-selective' schools.

.
Actually private schools like yours are superselective regardless of requirement of income because of high demand and therefore numbers of applicants from an international pool of applicants resident in the UK or not.

Kids at " superselective " grammars here - well 2 at uni now , one still there. Our comps are not IMHO , with rare examples good with the top academic flyers so it wasn't a choice.

Actually, I don't think they felt academically hot housed - extra curricular activities were very strong and as opposed to previously stated community service was a strong element too.

I woukd not send a child who just scraped in say at appeal or who has low self esteem but otherwise I'd go that route again

I agree with summerends. Tiffin 11+ is quite a challenge. We know kids who sent every Saturday morning for about three years being tutored in VR and non VR, and then an hour a day's practice the summer before.

They are selecting the best at their particular test. Ditto, prep schools are called prep schools for a reason. They prep for Common Entrance. However this is easier as the prep school will have a broader picture of the child's ability that the Tiffin type snapshot and will convey this to the Senior school.

I am unconvinced by Tiffin. Given its selectivity the results ought to be better. Quite a number at DDs school had tried for Tiffin with private as a fallback. (The year 7 coffee morning conversation had contributions from several unsatisfied Mrs W customers). Yet DDs school had better results and offered a broader education.

Its really a question of alternatives. If you live near a good state comp which does well by its more able pupils then you dont need to bother. If not, start the tutoring. With the numbers involved your child really needs to go into the exam room prepared to grab every mark they are capable of.

Yay someone else not convinced about Tiffin. Yes everyone there has done pretty well in VR and NVR but since about half of them have English as a foreign language would you want your child to attend? That may improve though in coming years with the change of entrance exams.