Intrigued by the 'bright child will succeed in any school'

[findasolution]

This comment fascinates me. I am a long time Mumsnet user (name changed), making my first post as an OP.

I was a relatively bright child, straight As up to 3rd year of senior school (in old money), when things started to go wrong.

I got tired of being bullied for being smart and driven, lost my confidence to in being different and dumbed down/rebelled to fit in, resulting in leaving school with 4 O levels - way below my potential.

My mum sent me to a local comprehensive (West Midlands) because it used to be a 'grammar'. Such was the due diligence 30 plus years ago . Couple of years after I left, each entry year was closed to allow the school to run out before the school closed, premises bought...at least there was a reason behind the teachers (most, not all) being completely disengaged with us.

Anyway, that's my background, and I know this is not reflective of most schools today. With so many making choices where they can, by religion; location; intelligence; cost etc allowing), I am really interested in people's opinions on how children can definitely achieve their full potential in any given secondary environment, and therefore considering alternatives to their local state schools is not necessary...

[Chinesealan]

There us a type if brightness that this is true for. This child us resilient, bully proof, very bright with an exceptional work ethic As in spends hours in their room on homework without any caring necessary. I've taught a handful of these in a laugh school.
Otherwise people who make this statement are talking out of their a..... s. It's normally people who don't know what they're talking aboout or people who need to reassure themselves about the fact that their child isn't necessarily in an environment they'd have chosen if they'd had the choice.

[Chinesealan]

Apologies for all those typos.

[Funandgamesandfun]

I don't agree. My eldest is very bright. He did well at a failing primary, level 5's (they didn't enter anyone for level 6) but as he wasn't pushed he did the bare minimum.

He's now at an extremely high performing comprehensive where he's challenged for the first time and he's absolutely thriving. His intelligence and my insistence on practicing for the CAT tests got him into the top sets. His intelligence has kept him there. The teachers are constantly striving for the best and just as crucially, so are the children. He doesn't talk about if he goes to university, he talks about when he goes. He might aim for Cambridge but if not then he fancies Bristol or Nottingham. He knows that's our expectation of him but it's not something I ever discuss, that comes from having similarly minded peers who want to do well. I also keep a close eye on his behaviour log and what work he has as its all online. I'm going to send him on a revision course in the summer as he doesn't know how to revise and he has an English tutor to build his confidence. He's a 6a/7c in year 8 so still doing well but we are helping him build his confidence as it is his weakest area and his set are very strong.

I've no doubt that he would do fine anywhere and would get good GCSE's, he's that kind of child but the added value he gets from being with a likeminded cohort is much more than exam results. We chose the school for that reason but as it has an 85% A-C at GCSE with nearly 70% of those at A*-B we figured that even if he decided to do as little as possible then the chances are he will still do ok in a way he wouldn't have done if we sent him to a lesser performing school and just hoped he wanted to work.

[bojorojo]

No-one gets anywhere by the previous results of other children and doing as little as possible themselves! Each cohort is different and each child is different. The results of other children have no bearing on your child. What does make a difference though is ethos of the school, quality of teaching and value added. A school with good results may actually be coasting if the children could have done better with better teaching. Also, some schools get less progress out of children than others and some children actually go backwards. There are many schools who fail children by being unable to recruit good teachers and have supply teacher, after supply teacher, after supply teacher! If a school is struggling in this way, it is highly unlikely the children will do as well as they should have done.

I would therefore say that most children at schools where the value added score is low could definitely have done better. I think 8 points = 1 grade lower in one GCSE. So if a school is 968 value added, that is 4 grades dropped.

How do you revise for CATs tests? If you have to do this to get into the top set, then I would worry about pushing too hard.

[Funandgamesandfun]

Borojo I can assure you that there is no issue with being in the top sets, he sits v comfortably well above the middle of the sets and in several subjects in the top 2 or 3. Everyone prepared for CAT's here, exactly the same as they do for grammar school tests, verbal, non verbal and numerical reasoning. CAT's are used for setting from day 1 and they have the children into school during year 6 to spend the day taking them

[Clavinova]

DS1 spent a few weeks going over verbal/non-verbal reasoning test questions as preparation for the 11+ and his CAT test results miraculously rose from 129/130 to 140 plus so they must be very similar in style - it's just a question of knowing what to look for - no one showed him what to do as he looked through the books himself. He's now very comfortable in the top sets of his selective independent. Smart parents we know also prepped their dcs for SATs in 6 to guarantee a place in top sets at the comps - they're not the level playing fields you might think.

[Sallyhasleftthebuilding]

30 years in children are targeted and monitored - your "failing" would now be picked up.

Expected A* student would be pulled up and dealt with.

Kids are now on an expected grade as a comparison ....

[bojorojo]

If all schools pick up children who are not getting the grades they should, then how come some schools have below 1000 value added? This is clearly not happening in lots of schools because the teachers and management are not good enough. it assumes all schools have robust assessment and tracking of progress - they do not! If children prepare for CATs (mine didn't but that was a few years ago) then it makes a high value added even more difficult for the school to achieve because the base line is inflated. Also, if a child is in the top 2-3 of the set then is there any need for all of this revision and tutoring? He would have got there anyway.

[Millionprammiles]

Not if that bright child is going home to a chaotic environment with nowhere quiet to study or if they're a carer for siblings or parents.

'A bright child will succeed in any school' reminds me of Tebbits 'get on your bike' response to unemployment. Thatcher liked to place all responsibility with the individual, which possibly works unless you're a child. Or ill. Or disabled. Or live below the poverty line etc.
Not groups that a right wing government are overly concerned with.

[Lurkedforever1]

You can't use tracking progress to pick up on a child being dismally failed if they are still achieving those high grades. Nor does tracking progress pick up on the kids that for whatever reason arrived with artificially low targets.

[Clavinova]

Top sets = like-minded cohort and good behaviour + the best teachers + high expectations = better outcome. Most grammar schools have high value-added scores as do private schools. You can be top 2-3 in languages or science for example but that is not tested for at age 11. If you don't make the top sets/streams in Year 7 at many comprehensive schools then you're often restricted in what language you can study and you definitely won't be offered Latin if it's available. With many schools starting to choose GCSE options in Year 8 now it's going to be even more important to be in a good set from Year 7.

[neuroticnicky]

findasolution _I wasn't necessarily talking about tiger mums in the Amy Chua sense - I was talking more about parents who supervise their children's academic studies properly (a surprising number don't even bother to look at their children's homework books) and who insist on their children making their academic studies their first priority so there is no play until homework is done etc.

There is quite an interesting recent book by a US psychologist -Leonard Sax- called "the collapse of parenting" in which he bemoans the fact that over the last few decades US/Western parents have sought to befriend their children rather than to accept that they -not the child- need to take responsibility for making decisions and be more willing to impose discipline.

This may be easier for ethnic minorities since they still have more of a culture of respect for elders and parents tend to be more willing to impose discipline on their kids like banning electronics/phones in the bedroom which in many cases have a very detrimental effect on academic performance.Indeed ultra selective state schools like Henrietta Barnet now have a disproportionate number of ethnic minorities see eg www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/education/article4269612.ece

The truth is parents need to accept responsibility for their kids education; if the school is no good and your DC can't move consider extra tutoring outside of school whether online or with a tutor or do it yourself - GCSEs and A levels are not that hard and most parents can help more than they think.Indeed if you have a bright kid your duty is to do everything you can to maximise his or her performance; too often parents simply blame the school as if they had no responsibility.

[opioneers]

I think it depends at what stage. For a child who has been supported at primary school, it might be true. But if a child is bored and switched off at primary level, it's hard to make up that ground later on.

[notagiraffe]

Not RTFT, so responding to OP's post mainly. It's bollocks, that theory. I had a similar problem to yours. Ex grammar comp. Bullied for being bright and keen. Lost motivation. No one noticed. Because I was still achieving Bs and Cs in most subjects and As in a couple. Only two teachers intervened - a maths teacher (bless him) who helped me get up to grade B and a lovely French teacher who taught me practically everything I learned in seven years at that school.

I hated it. And I left with the very deeply ingrained defensive belief that hard work is something to be scorned and will leave you friendless. That the smart thing to do is wing it. That got me into real difficulty at uni.

As some posters have said, a happy child is more likely to succeed at any school. (Not necessarily though. They may be so busy having fun with their peers that they don't bother to study. )

To this day I struggle massively with self motivation and organisation. That's partly genetic. DS2 is similar but goes to a great school where it's cool to work hard, where the popular kids are the ones who come top. He has become so much more hard working and connected and methodical than I ever was. It's a joy to see. And DS1 who is natural born hard worker and geek just scampers in joyfully, never bullied or mocked for his eagerness.

I strongly believe that bright pupils are done a massive disservice by many schools and that they need and deserve a school where the ethos is on hard work, personal best, achievement and intellectual curiosity coming as much from their peers as from the teachers. Well, all pupils deserve that, but the academic ones who don't shine on the sports field or in drama/dance/singing do especially, as they can be less socially gregarious and need an atmosphere that includes them.

[neuroticnicky]

opioneers I think that failure by parents adequately to support their kids at primary school level is shocking.It is not exactly difficult to listen to your kids read / read to them at night/ensure they have books they enjoy and know their times table etc. Indeed in the state sector kids get very little homework and some parents can't even be bothered to assist with that. In my experience at primary level the kids at the top of the class are almost always the ones whose parents are the most involved in their education.

[neuroticnicky]

I guess if the question is "Can a bright child succeed in any school?" the answer is clearly yes (if there is parental support etc) whereas if the question is "Will a bright child succeed in any school?" the the answer must be "it depends/not necessarily".

[NameChanger22]

In the area I live education isn't valued at all, not surprisingly there is very little achievement. I have to keep quiet that I'm a graduate or I get negative comments. My child is bright, but I'm not sure how she'll withstand this. Luckily she has one very interested and caring parent, which is more than I had, so that puts her in a better position than some. I don't think the school is the problem, the school is ok. It's the area and the people who live here. If I would afford to move I would do so in a flash.

[whatithink]

I was very bright (top of the year) in a terrible comp. We weren't in a grammar school area and it just never crossed my parents minds to send me to the next town, it's just not what people did in those days. And as another poster said, they probably believed the hype about the new comprehensive education.

Throughout primary school I had been a year ahead of my age group. Have met a few people my age (early 50s) who this happened to. I think it was probably an experiment they did then. The only problem was once everyone in my year left and went to secondary school aged 12, I was only 11 so had to repeat a year and it was a complete waste. I lost a whole year of my education.

Got to appalling secondary school. Some of the teachers were so dire I couldn't believe they got away with it. Even at that age we were able to recognise the teachers were crap. In our first physics lesson the very old male teacher said girls didn't understand physics. The biology teacher spent all the lesson chatting to other teachers in the prep room. Our German teacher left and the school couldn't get a replacement for nearly a year. We lost so much time none of us in that year were able to do O Level, we could only take CSE. There are many stories I could tell...

Anyway I didn't really realise how bad it was as I had no comparison. It wasn't until later at college when I met someone who was about the same intelligance level as me, but she had been able to take 12 O levels at grammar school. I took the maximum for my school and it was only 8.

[findasolution]

Thanks Neuroticnicky. I understand where you are coming from.

Can completely relate to your scenario whatithink, merging years was a big thing in the 70s that did not always work to one's advantage!

Weirdly, I do look back on my education with some affection, as any school of life person can once the bitterness of circumstances subside, purely as it taught me to fight and undo the wrongs to ensure I got a decent life. And I got very good at handling the interview questions during my professional life of 'why don't you have a degree' (the normal requisite for the career path I stumbled into).

The challenge is for folks now who are not served with decent local choices is the criticism that people like us (middle class by reasonable financial success vs upbringing), is that we have turned our backs on our local community, by removing our offspring (because we can, either religiously, selectively, or by paying) and therefore leave the lower ability children (often with non-supporting families), compounding the issue of the local offering to never raise its game because the invested parents are not there to drive it.

This gets often mistaken for social segregation as the primary motivation, which is not true in all cases (well not in mine). But, I also do not think I should congratulate myself for producing a child that did not reach their full potential, but can wear a badge of honour for accepting the status quo of the local poor performing school. Especially with 20 years of experience of seeing the output each year, and little change to the SLT strategy. It was no wonder that good teachers, that thrive in working in mixed ability schools were eventually worn down and left.

I know there is a major issue for middle/low ability children to excel in the country, especially on low supporting family situations.

But, there is also a challenge for those that have bright children to be adequately supported if in the wrong environment.

[timelytess]

Being bright isn't the issue. Its being committed to your learning that counts. I taught in inner-city comprehensives. Within the same school we had those bright children who didn't succeed and blamed the school, and those who left with a cv and qualifications looking like they'd been to one of the top local independents. Attendance, Attitude, Ability in that order. And 'Attitude' applies to the parents' as well as the children.

[findasolution]

I agree timelytess. I don't agree that all inner-city comprehensives are poor. Look at Tower Hamlets as just one example. Phenomenal success story. But in the same way, I cannot agree that all comprehensives are equal. They are just not, whether that's because of school, parents..or a mix of both.

That's why we exercise other options if and when we need to.

[findasolution]

And I apologise if Tower Hamlets is not all comprehensives, but a mixture that includes Foundation, Academies etc. I have purposely tried to steer clear of my interest being about the usual state v indie or grammar, or London vs the rest of the UK as I was more interested in the generic question of local provision vs alternatives.

But also know how these threads can deviate!

[shebird]

A bright kid will succeed in a school where they are happy and supported and where the ethos both at home and at school is to work hard and achieve.

[SpeedingSnail]

I left school with a few mediocre passes, I was bullied at school all through secondary and was told that I was rubbish at most lessons, my reports all said I needed to work hard and the teachers didn't bother with sorting out issues like having to share a reading book with the person next to me who was a much slower reader, I used to read the page two or three times and then sit and do nothing because I was so bored. I'd get detention because this apparently meant that I wasn't trying. We weren't taught how to revise or taught any useful study skills, most of my revision was reading and no note taking because we were just told to read. A few years after school I enrolled with the OU and did a degree combining physics, chemistry and maths and other short science courses plus a couple of other random subjects. I got a 2:1 in the end, but I'm thick so I obviously got lucky. I think my school has a lot to answer for.

[BertrandRussell]

You do realize that people who aren't clever get bullied for that too........?

At my dd's grammar school, the 7th Maths set had a horrible time. And I bet there are thousands of people who struggled in all sorts of schools who remember being mocked for not understanding things and being bullied for being thick. They just tend not to post on websites peopled largely by middle class educated people..............