Please share good experiences of state secondaries-having a wobble!

[colourdilemma]

Dd is in year five and will be going to a state comprehensive in year seven. We're starting to choose and I'm feeling wobbly. Our finances and philosophy both mean that we need and want to send all three of ours to state comprehensives, almost certainly co-ed but we have several high attaining independents near us. Dd has been to a number of activity days at two of them and I am finding it hard to keep my head when the marketing material comes home and dd has had a lovely time.

Please can you share your good experiences of state education. Dd is academically able and enthusiastic, but also struggles in some ways to focus and I fear (dh does not!) she might not be the "she'll succeed wherever she goes" type. We are both teachers, but that isn't helping me stop wobbling.

Well, we have a great state secondary school. I have been sooo impressed with it. I believe it has a great pastoral care system and they hold high standards of behavior throughout the school, which I think makes a big difference. I love our state secondary. Seriously I do.

Oh and I believe my DD has thrived at this school. It's been so good for her.

My Dd17 is just finishing up her final exams in her middling Scottish state school. Last year at 16.5 she achieved 5 A grades at Scottish Highers (no A* in Scotland). She gained unconditional offers to study a very popular course at several Scottish Universities, including Edinburgh and Glasgow. Lots of her year group are also heading off to University. Even if I could have afforded school fees, there would have been no value to paying them.

In fairness, the first couple of years were tough, especially before they started to stream some of the subjects. The social side of the school was difficult at times and there was some very poor behaviour around her. The teachers have been incredibly supportive of her and the other pupils who showed and interest in their subjects, they really cared about lifting these children above their 'stations'. My dd was involved in lots of lunchtime clubs and groups which helped her to avoid some of the social nonsense that waylaid many other pupils. She got lots of great visits and experiences on the back of these clubs.

Her state school has set up her up for life, but you do have to keep your child busy with extra-curricular interests to stave off the possibility of joining the herd of distracted kids.

And I should add from what I know of the other kids and the other parents (at the school) most of them will absolutely go to uni and I imagine be very successful (they all seem to work hard and keep busy learning as most kids do if given the opportunity at this stage in life).
I am sorry but I don't think you have anything to worry about OP. And if you are feeling wobbly because it's a new and bigger school than your child is used to (from primary), I think it's fair to say overall most kids do very well moving to secondary and it's the parents who struggle with the changes.

Your child will be absolutely fine.
Hope this helps you.

Have you looked at leavers' destinations and / or A-Level results for the local state schools and independents? Round us, the highest performing state schools are very almost touching some of the private schools in terms of A Level results, and in fact the school DH teaches at (outstanding state, although semi-selective) performs better than a nearby independent. He reckons about three quarters of students at his school go to university, and there are certainly plenty of aspirational parents and students. I've just had a look at their 2015 leavers' destinations and 10 students got a place at Oxbridge that year. They have thriving music and sports departments with pupils performing to high standards. They expect high standards of the students.

So why not have a bit more of a look into exactly what local schools are achieving? I do get your OP - both DH and I went to private school (and have done well academically) but it's impossible for us to send our DC private, even if we wanted to, which I've never thought through properly since we can't afford it!

My dd started year seven in January a term after every one else. We have been living overseas so we had worries about her fitting on.

She's quite shy and not very grown up and she did not know a single person. And she's mixed race in a very white area.

She's going to an academy that hasn't had an ofsted that was a failing school that was closed down.

On the first day I had to go in with her as she has anaphylaxis. The school had arranged tor another girl to come to the reception and get my dd to take her to the first lesson. In she came all swishy hair with a handbag on the crook of her arm. And off they went. I was nearly sick during the day I was so terrified. Thinking she was going to be crying in the toilets. Her first lesson was RE which she had never done in her life and her second lesson was history which she hadn't any knowledge of at all!

I picked her up at 3pm and she got in the car and said 'is it ok if I go to netball club now?'. And that was it. She was just fine. When I asked her if anyone had said anything about her wearing a vest when she got changed for PE (she was freezing because we lived in a hot country before) she was all affronted. Why would anyone care she said.

She's really enjoying the work too. It's much more interesting doing a lesson for an hour then moving on to something else. There is just so much going on. She's started piano and last week went to another school to play rounders.

Sorry to gush again, but I think I love you all . I feel relaxed for the first time in weeks.

Here's something else I want to check out. Dh, as a secondary deputy, spends absolutely masses of time supporting vulnerable students to stay in school. Is this typical. Just lets say dd has wobbles in her secondary career and its not all plain sailing. My gut says state might invest more in supporting needs of all different kinds. Would that be fair? I want a school for mine that, once they're through the door, does as much as possible to help and support.

In my experience, state schools deserve credit for not making the assumption that all roads lead to university and then showing the range of opportunities available. In the past few weeks DD has had the chance to go to a talk from a former pupil who went to Oxbridge, a 2 day programme to explore medicine at a local teaching hospital, the chance to attend a week long course at the National Oceanography Centre and a STEM workshop day.

All of her immediate family are educated to graduate & post-grad level (with the majority from a state school background), so we know what's available, but this could be opening other pupil's eyes. As only 7% of all children are privately educated and they don't all go to university, they are far out-numbered when they do go into higher education, as the majority are state educated.

My DH's state school certainly seem to rally round students having difficulties. There is a really established system for alerting relevant classroom teachers to a student who needs an eye kept out for them, for whatever reason. Sometimes he has to fill in some kind of report or log if there are concerns about a student, whether that is to do with poor behaviour, or lack of engagement, or a drop in confidence, or anxiety about exams. One student was getting so worked up about homework that the school put in place a system where she was forbidden to spend more than 30 mins on each homework, and all class teachers were aware of this and supported that approach.

I guess I don't know whether the parents feel their child is supported, but it certainly seems that the school takes supporting students very seriously and all teachers who come into contact with the students having difficulties are aligned with whatever approach the school is taking (within relevant bounds of confidentuality - sometimes DH isn't told the full background but is told as much as he needs to know to support the student when in his classroom).

You have finally hit on the important subject - pastoral care.

Choose the school with the best pastoral care. Don't worry about results or ofsted results. Choose the school which you think has the best pastoral care.

Ask every parent you can find. They're the ones I listen to the most. Especially parents of older pupils.

And during open evening ask lots of questions. Do they have a head of year or a head of house? Etc.

This is how I chose which school to send my DC to.

Op- you do realise that 93% of children go to state schools?

My eldest went from prep to a comp and my next one will follow in due course. It does have a middle class intake and he's in the top set so my experience is somewhat narrow. The expectation of the students and the staff is that the vast majority (about 80%) will go to Russell Group universities of those and 15% will go to Oxbridge and about 10% to study law and 10% to medicine.

My son's friend commented the other day. "The top set is so competitive because we are all trying to do better than each other".

Overall I'm thrilled with the school. Teaching is generally excellent, almost always very good and rarely not great but that has only been in 1 subject in the last 3 years. Sport is good but not on par with the independents and neither is music but they're both fine and my son does his serious sport playing out of school.
Behaviour is generally excellent. Poor behaviour is generally low level chatting and smart alec remarks but I think you get that everywhere. There's no chair throwing or fighting or anything like that. They have a very strong tradition of community and charity work which I like. The kids are nice, even the ones they refer to as naughty and badly behaved really aren't at all.

Is it as good as a top independent? No, it's not but its non selective and doesn't cost me £20k a year. Is it good enough? 100% yes.

In an outstanding school there are likely to be enough dc with university aspirations. My dc appear to have found similar friends. For some things there are fewer children than locally as some have gone private but that may open up opportunities as less competition e.g. if a primary school has five pianists and four go private the one who goes to the state school automatically has the opportunity to join the school orchestra whereas the four at the private school have to fight it out. Yes the private school may have a higher standard pianist but the other three have lost the experience.

School really appreciate high achieving dc- sends home letters saying well done for working hard in curricular and extra curricular activities.

In a state school at the end of the day a child is there to be appreciated as a child whatever their potential whereas in a private school they are there to generate profit

My experience of state comprehensive has been very positive - teachers respond quickly to inquiries and seem very caring. DS is quite competitive over grades. He has lovely friends. He also knows to ignore the ones who muck about and they don't affect him.
My feeling is you've been made to feel a bit guilty by the lovely marketing stuff. Ignore it. Of course, if your local schools weren't good, then you might be better off with the independent but otherwise I would save your money.

OP you can't afford it so that's that.

Circling the wagons like this is pointless.

Out of interest I checked out the websites of the private schools my DD might realistically have gone to. Some comparisons: at DD's sixth form 30% of those who go to university go to Russell Group. In two of the three privates it was 30% and 26% respectively. In the other it was a lot higher but that is a real hothouse school she almost certainly wouldn't have got into anyway. In terms of extra curricula two of the schools had very similar offerings to her state school, the other did have a slightly wider range of sports clubs and much better music provision, however as DD has no musical talent whatsoever this hardly matters.

Of course I can't say whether she would have done better at another school but there seems no obvious reason to believe she would have done. And at a cost of £150,000 I think I would have had to have a better reason than that.

I think unless you can comfortably afford it then it's not worth it - unless of course the local schools are absolutely dire.

The fees for local independent school are £18K a year - and that's not including the £100/month bus fare and lunches. And that's for one child. Needless to say, the extras there (as OP has noted at her local independents) are off the scale compared with the dcs' comp. The trips are marvellous. The parents' activities (choir, cocktail parties, quiz night at £100 a ticket ) are all very glossy-looking and above all the sports opportunities are very good indeed. But the academic results? Worse than the dcs' comprehensive, actually.

If you have a very large income, independent wealth or -and I read somewhere that this amounts to one third of pupils - the grandparents are paying, then yes, a private education can confer great advantages, especially for the sporty child. But out of ordinary income? Hell, no!

If you have to scrimp and save to send them, then there's too much pressure to be having a wonderful time or do marvellously well.

I see your point, Wagons, but I disagree that this discussion is pointless. I know my dc will go to state schools, so I think it's actually pretty important to see the benefits of the system they will go into. Otherwise, I might be looking gloomily at what we might have won. As it is, after this thread, I am pretty optimistic that my dc will be getting a good education. Lots of point, I think.

There are excellent, good, average and worse in both sectors. You need to visit on normal working days, look critically at attainment, pastoral care and speak to other parents who have children at the schools. It sounds as though you have good comps in your area. We chose independent as we can afford it and are in are in a position of having only 2 local state options available to us, which aren't impressive. Our independents are academically highly selective and are great. If it had been the opposite or both sectors the same, or if we had grammar options in this area I would have chosen state. It's very dependent on what you can access.

We are in Kent, so we don't have 'comprehensives' in the true sense of the word.

My DS is at superselective grammar and my DD is going to grammar in September - but almost everyone I know at our local state schools is very happy with the education that their children are getting. The only people who aren't are parents whose children may have special needs and the promises that were made in terms of support, haven't materialised.

My son is in Y7 and has done so many extracurricular activities (hockey, rugby, chess, STEM, music, drama, athletics, debating, etc etc) that I don't feel that he is missing out by going to a state school (I do sometimes feel 'guilty' as DH and I were both privately educated all the way through, but with 4DCs we just couldn't do it financially). The school has very high expectations of their students, behaviour is very good, there is very little bullying (and any there is is squashed very quickly). The other plus for us is that according to the Sunday Times, it is the 4th best school in the country for university destinations (even the Head said he wasn't sure how they calculate that, but he's v happy with the accolade and they do have a huge number holding Oxbridge offers this year). But the most important thing for me is that he is SO happy - he's thriving, is being pushed (fairly hard, but he loves a challenge) and his confidence is sky high. I appreciate that a superselective grammar isn't necessarily representative, so in the interest of balance, all of my friends whose children are at various 'comps' here and who have recently taken A Levels, are seeing their offspring heading off to Russell Group universities - but then most of us are either ex or current professionals, all have high aspirations for our children and support their learning and extra curricular activities at home. It sounds as though you are similar in your views, so if you've chosen the right (state) school for your child, then I am sure that they will thrive.

I expect some private school parents will hate this thread because it may make them wonder what they are paying for but if you get the right state school, and are lucky with your cohort, then in my opinion, aside from the potential networking/old school tie stuff, I don't feel that there is anything we're not getting that we could be paying for......

I am also in Kent, and my child is doing very well in one of the schools that 75% of children go to ("grammar area" is a misnomer- "secondary modern area" would be much more accurate). It is a hideous and socially divisive system, but children do well from both sides of the 11+ divide. The system means that the secondary modern schools have more than their share of children from disadvantaged backgrounds and special educational needs, and the grammar school have more than their fair share of high attainers and involved and aware parents. This is reflected in the league tables, which in selective areas are even less of an indicator of the quality of schools than they are everywhere else. But the only way to judge a school is by looking at it, talking to parents and pupils and teachers and doing a deep dive into the stats. The surface tells you nothing.

I'm asking through curiosity, with no intention to be rude, but if you are both teachers, why on earth do you think state school children lack aspiration? Did you both train & teach in private schools only? Surely as teachers you can see what schools are like, especially as it sounds as though you are already in a well-placed area. You must have success stories & aspirational tales all around you.

That's a good question, Sticker. First answer is that the worry is all mine; dh has no worries at all in the slightest! Secondly, I am supremely underconfident and therefore assume that dd, instead of being one of the gorgeous, confident, bright individuals that we have seen go through dh's schools and do very well, or like our friends' children who have got on equally as well at other schools, I seem unable to shake the idea that dd will get in with a non aspirational crowd and not work hard. I know that I have to shake this, but am finding it hard. I found, and find personal study difficult and found out I have adhd, for which I am now medicated. At my comprehensive, twenty odd years ago, I got away with doing virtually no homework (well, not strictly true but it was all last minute and on the bus) and it could easily have gone pear shaped. I am not quite sure why I think independent would work any better for those who, like me, we're bright enough to wing it and convince everyone that I was a hard worker. But I guess I think that the more dd has around her who are working hard, and the more input from the school, the less likely it will be.

Having typed that, there seems absolutely zero logic to it and I have ignored the fact that for one, her mother will be wise to her potentially Wiley tricks. But that's where it comes from.

I am irrational and illogical about this whole business

Thanks Colour. If your DD shares any of your under-confidence, she may find it easier being in a larger school where there are more likely to be girls like her. I went through both systems and I think I found it harder not being a glossy, gorgeous-type in the private system. She'll be fine!