Godolphin or Latymer Upper?

[Shirleycantbe]

DO has been offered places at these 2 schools and I am struggling to choose between them. She is very bright and articulate but with somewhat slow processing (both schools gave her extra time in the exam). She may need some support with managing time and note taking going forward. She is a bit of a dreamer, very kind and gentle, not especially cool, a bit on the sensitive side, above average sports wise but not amazing. She's had a bad experience with a disruptive group of boys at her prep so is favouring the all girls option but I'm not convinced it would be best for her in the long run.

Any advice or experiences?

 

I am not sure Classics from Oxford is an unemployment factory. I have had two bosses who studied Classics at Oxford and managed to turn out to be reasonably employable in meaningful jobs earning high six figures.

Ealingwestmum -sorry-I will be shutting up permanently after 1 March so you don't have much longer to endure my posts! While it is true that my own DC will only be starting secondary school this year, I don't think you can reject information obtained from the DC of close friends/ family members about their current experiences at schools. In addition, both myself and DH are West Londoners and between us and our siblings we have personally attended virtually all the London private schools I have posted about (indeed all if you include ex boyfriends/girlfriends!) so we have known the schools for many years and know current teaching staff at some of the schools.

Mominatrix-I accept that LU is an excellent school and would be happy to send my own DD there although I have never really liked like the school site itself compared with SPGS/G&L etc. However with grade inflation it has become increasingly difficult to differentiate between schools on the basis of GCSE/ A levels - something recognised by both the Govt with the new marking system and the universities (hence Cambridge's recent proposal to bring back entrance exams) . Oxbridge entrance statistics are therefore IMO still a useful differentiation and I always find it difficult to consider other university entrance stats since a) even our local comps like Holland Park and Cardinal Vaughan claim that most of their pupils go to RG unis and b) private school pupils often do subjects like MFL, classics,ancient history etc where entry to top unis is pretty much guaranteed due to a scarcity of applicants.LU may well attain the Oxbridge rates of the likes of SPS (30% last year) in the future as the intake seems to be getting increasingly competitive but it would need to get up at least to the 20%-25% level for me personally to prefer it to SPS/W etc although I accept other people may find it more attractive due to being co-ed, probably more laid back etc. I have to say though (although Ealingwestmum may object to me reporting hearsay) that all LU parents I know have reported that their DC are enjoying the school.

I would never want you to shut up Neuro!!

I do at times (and probably more recently than before) find some of your comments contradictory, general and sweeping though!

Your insights are of course valid, even if senior school parent 'by proxy', and wish you success with your own result come 1 March...whatever option you take.

It's a serious decision making time for those choosing senior schools, and not all paths can lead to SPS/SPGS/Westminster for all (no matter how much these may be at top of your tree), they arn't for everyone. And therefore doing down all others vs offering constructive (good and bad) insights based on facts vs inmyopinions is my point...but my opinion, not anyone else's!

Ealingwestmum - I'm sure some of your criticisms are justified and I'm afraid that secondary school decisions can lead one into a state of confusion where one is constantly changing one's mind up until the final moment! Roll on 1 March! :)

Having a DD who moved from a school well up all the academic tables / measures to one lower, who got better A level results at the latter (measurably since nobody at the former matched her A* in one subject) I can certainly say from experience that all of these schools have the capability to enable a bright pupil to do well in exams and get into top universities according to their individual potential and aspirations. That includes many good state schools. The fact is that when you turn up to all these top courses at top universities there will be plenty of bright students coming from state schools including comprehensives - and some even from really bad comprehensives who managed to rise above the teaching. The figures may be skewed in favour of private school pupils but a lot of that is down to selection and background. If we had forked out for a private education on the expectation of an Oxbridge place because the school they attended was well up in the stats we would be weeping over the £1000000s, given all our DDs' bright friends from disadvantaged backgrounds who turned up in their halls and on their courses.

Oxbridge entry is a particularly poor measure. There are so many bright students applying that it is effectively a lottery for all but the very very bright (who the likes of SPGS and Westminster will have selected in the first place) and in both my DDs cohorts some of the brightest did not get in and some who were not as intellectually outstanding did. That puts a lot of bright students off the process and they may look to US universities or decide it is not worth going through all that when UCAS will almost certainly yield 5 offers including perhaps UCL, Durham without the extra stress and investment of self esteem. The good schools let them stick with their own aspirations over improving their Oxbridge stats.

The important issue is which school has the ethos and atmosphere which will be most likely to develop their confidence and resilience and best match their personality.

And I would send my girl to a girls school for the chance to experience teaching that is best suited to their needs and to a mixed school for a more normal social atmosphere, less cliqueyness and less opportunity for Queen Bees to exclude and manipulate.

whatwouldrondo - you are right that Oxbridge entry is a bit of a lottery but there is obviously a connection between A grades at A level (or the equivalent) and Oxbridge success .Hence last year according to the Times the A A level percentages for the schools mentioned were Westminster 49.7%, SPGS 49.1%, SPS 42.1%, LU 31.9% and G&L 28.9%. I personally am only slightly obsessed by Oxbridge entry stats since I agree with you that a bright kid will generally do well anywhere and -as finance is an issue in our case-don't want to fork out £200,000 for our DD to go private to find she ends up at the same uni as she would have done at the local state school. Obviously if money were no object, I could consider other factors but I haven't got that luxury and the DC of friends whose kids are at the local state schools seem just as happy as the ones at private day schools.

neurotic Don't forget Latymer has become much more selective in the last few years, it will not be showing in the A level results, possibly not even in the GCSEs. Nethertheless whereas when I was looking at schools for 11+ Latymers results were on a par with schools like Putney and then certainly places for girls at least were attainable for all but the least able 25% in my DDs Prep, their results had improved to the extent it was matching the results at LEH and G&L by the time they took the exams. I would expect that with its increasing desirability that rather remarkable improvement would continue.

I agree.

Oxbridge entry depends a lot on subject. I assume that a child who is, say, in the middle of a Westminster School A level Classics or Russian set would expect to have a good chance of getting into Oxbridge. A child who is in a middle double maths set is very unlikely to even apply to read maths at Oxbridge, and indeed would probably only rate their chances of a place for NatSci, Engineering or Economics as fair.

Latymer destinations are interesting. About three years back they had about six students gain places at very prestigious drama schools, three or so gap year students were in a West End play last winter. They have a regular cohort each year moving on to well ranked art schools.

I think what I described earlier as the Chelsea banker wife ranking system is pernicious. DD was once innocently quizzed by a peer at SPGS about how she could have got a gold in a maths challenge given the school she went to was nowhere near as academic as Putney or G&L (and clearly nowhere near SPGS). The poor girl did not seem to realise that able mathematicians could exist outside SPGS. Nor that teaching could be as good (and I suspect given her subsequent questions, that anything much could be achieved without a lot of additional tuition). Who knows where this came from: parents, peers or school, but its reasonably certain some of her peers will be in for a rude shock when they get to University.

Because of the shortage of 11+ boy places in West London, LU picks up some very very bright boys and top maths sets fly. As we come towards the end of the education process, and seeing how hard DS is working at (London) University I am glad he did not pull out all the stops at school. Yes a bit of effort and a higher UMS percentage might have won him his Cambridge place. However university is a slog, and for many professional jobs you now need a masters. Internships are hard work, indeed even finding an internship is hard work (some my son is trying for, have five seperate application stages, simply to access what is effectively a six week job interview) and work is hard work too. Teenage years should not just be about grades and Oxbridge places, but gaining resiliance and social skills. Time to hang out, and learn self sufficiency and gain self motivation. One particular London problem stems from American College requirements, where the school, class placement within that school and other achievements in sport or music really matter. Cue relatively small children dragged from tutor and music teacher to sports coach, and who may reach an assumption that achievement is the only way to gain parental approval.

Neither LU nor G&L is perfect, but both try, in their different ways, to develop the child as a whole. It is never about the "best school" but the best school for the child, no matter what West London orthodoxy may say.

(Rant over...so glad we are at the end!)

Yes-you're right -I know some very bright kids who have gone to LU in the last couple of years and would expect its results to continue to improve.

One DD is at LU and I can confirm that she has barely any homework to do but according to her reports she's doing fine. I have stopped asking questions like 'how was maths today' because it usually turns out they've been taken out of maths to attend yet another drugs or sex education class. This school is very 'street' but in a good way.. the idea of anything like that being 'cool' is debunked and all the kids I've met have a positive set of values. They want to get on with people and get on in the world. She has equal numbers of male and female 'besties'.

When we got an offer for my younger daughter to follow her none of us hesitated. Yes we had G&L offer amongst others. G&L is a bit dull IMHO. Sort of bluestocking self-parody to be harsh. Suits girls with ponytails from Kensington who let's face it aren't going to work but instead are going to get married....

Shoot me down!

I know someone who's just left LU after GCSEs because they didn't think it was academically ambitious enough and there wasn't a big enough peer group who were aiming really high. So I guess everyone has their own individual experience and outcomes whatever the broad appeals of different schools.

That is a ridiculously dismissive statement to make about the girls at G&L. I am sure many of the ponytailed girls will go to have very successful careers. I have no vested interest in this but I have been impressed by the girls I have met from the school - every bit as much as those at LU and other top schools.

my only input re oxbridge is that I have plenty of friends who went. none have done particularly well in their career.

maybe i only know the underperforming ones

maybe i am biased as i had a big argument with my head of sixth form over my refusal to apply. (the course content was awful for my subject).

i certainly won't be pushing my dd's down that route.

Ontop, DD left LU after GCSE to go to Westminster. It was absolutely the right decision for her for a range of reasons, and she had a wonderful two years. However we are absolutely sure that she would have got the same grades, if not better, at LU. Her friendship group at LU did exceptionally well.

The relative lack of homework and pressure can be deceiving. DD pitched up at Westminster every bit the equal of girls who had been to supposedly more academic schools. Indeed ahead in maths.

At LU she had plenty of peers aiming very high, and a new intake into Yr 12. Yes, there will be more around aiming for art school, drama school or elsewhere, but this is not a bad thing either.