Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Original poster

When parents are slagging off the local comp...

779 replies

Everyoneafter3 · 17/04/2017 08:43

I've posted before about my concerns over the local secondary, which, thanks to comments on this board and an excellent recent Ofsted, are very much allayed. I had a very good read of school newsletters etc and am much happier. Dd1 (Y4) is musically gifted and will also audition for a specialist music school.

The area in which we live is very affluent: many children round here go to fee-paying independent schools. These dc are going to school and telling my dd (and others) that the local secondary is rubbish ("my mum and dad say..."). One particularly stupid parent has said at home that "no child of mind will set foot in x school" which of course is coming back home with our dd.

Dd1 has now got it into her head that the local school is terrible, that she's really upset to go to not a good school, that she wishes we weren't poor (we're not! But no, we can't afford independent school fees without having to sacrifice other stuff we prioritise as a family). She's been researching exam results and all sorts.

For our part we've said well look at any local school she'd like to, although as we live across the road from the school in question it'd be unlikely that she'd get in.

I'm heartily sick of parents telling their dc how awful the local school is. It's simply not fair. My dc won't receive a 'lesser' education. They aren't going to a 'rubbish' school. If this continues I'm tempted to speak to their current primary school tbh. What else can I do? I've told dd to not listen, we've looked at the school website, talked about results (!) but I'm at a loss.

OP posts:
Alyosha · 19/04/2017 16:03

HBS school gets just 13% into Oxbridge, whereas NLCS is on at 33%. The populations are very similar demographically.

Clavinova · 19/04/2017 16:55

I still think subject choice is important;
www.qebarnet.co.uk/achievements/2016_school_performance_-__a__level
How many boys at Queen Elizabeth's Barnet chose A levels in religious studies, modern languages, ancient history or classics compared to Eton?
www.etoncollege.com/StatisticsALevel.aspx (nb languages mainly under Pre-U)

Eton's most popular degree subjects for Oxbridge (260 pupils per year group by the way);
www.etoncollege.com/Universities.aspx

'Easiest' subjects for Oxbridge acceptance;
www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationpicturegalleries/11639288/Top-10-easiest-Oxbridge-degrees-to-get-accepted-on.html?frame=2884799

Alyosha · 19/04/2017 17:15

www.hbschool.org.uk/userfiles/henriettamvc/pdf/academic-life/exam-results/final%202016/A%20Level%20Results%202016.pdf

www.hbschool.org.uk/userfiles/henriettamvc/pdf/academic-life/University%20Destinations%202016%20as%20at%2030-8-16.pdf

Most popular HBS Oxbridge subjects:

At Cambridge 9 humanities, 9 science places

At Oxford 9 places for humanities, 3 for sciences.

I can't see equivalent Eton info?

Clavinova · 19/04/2017 17:29

Your link shows that 0 (zero) girls chose religious studies for A level at HBS - my link shows 77 boys at Eton chose religious studies which is the 'easiest' subject for acceptance at Oxbridge.

Alyosha · 19/04/2017 17:41

I'm sure you're right Clavinova, but I'd love to see the data table - can't see it in your link or on the website, probably have idiot hat on - where is it?

I would also like to point out that the deeply mediocre private school, The Forest School, get similar Oxbridge acceptance to the top Grammar schools in the UK, which are far more selective and get better results.

Perhaps they all did religious studies!

Lalalandfill · 19/04/2017 17:43

Forgive me if I've missed it but has anyone said how many girls from HBS applied to Oxbridge, because all this endless comparison of HBS to Westminster is meaningless without that stat ...

I would bet not as high a proportion for all sorts of reasons, not least because Oxbridge isn't necessarily their destination of choice either because of the subjects they want to study or because they want to stay closer to home, in London

user7214743615 · 19/04/2017 17:50

Any comparison is meaningless without looking in detail at the applications and interviewing the candidates. Success rate percentages are completely and utterly meaningless without knowing the calibre of students at the school, the detailed UMS of the grades they achieve, their subject choices, their performance in pretests and aptitude tests etc.

Aloysha would presumably prefer for selection to be made by computer on the basis of given data, with no human input, rather than trusting academics to judge academic ability and potential. But in reality most of the RG courses already judge by computer rather than with human input - and arguably make worse choices than those courses which use academics to select.

Alyosha · 19/04/2017 18:01

Yes, we have mentioned the % acceptance, which at 13% is one third of nearby and very similar NLCS.

Alyosha · 19/04/2017 18:04

Lol at HBS being lower calibre than NLCS!

One of the most selective schools in the country, the elite tier of grammar schools, a grammar school which is more selective than about 99% of private schools, but it's OK not to wonder at its low Oxbridge acceptance vs. SPGS/SHHS/NLCS (less selective schools, with very very similar results) because Oxbirdge admissions tutors have no bias. None at all. They honestly don't care where pupils come from!

User = academics are pretty crap at assessing potential if state school pupils end up doing better than private school pupils.

The data says you aren't great at selecting!

user7214743615 · 19/04/2017 18:07

You have provided no data about the effectiveness of Oxbridge selection. The onus is on you to provide some to back up your claims.

On the one hand, you say Oxbridge are worse than everybody else and keep quoting meaningless percentage rates of Oxbridge places. On the other hand, you quote a report that looks at the entire Russell Group, which includes many courses that simply select by computer. Find a report specific to Oxbridge.

Lolly49 · 19/04/2017 18:10

My Dd went to local comp lots of parents saying oh I would not let my child go there.
Local comp now rated outstanding people desperate to get dc's there Dd now in second year at Oxford and doing really well hanging out with Elton tec.

Lolly49 · 19/04/2017 18:12

Etc sometimes I despise My I phone.

MumTryingHerBest · 19/04/2017 18:41

Alyosha Yes, we have mentioned the % acceptance, which at 13%

I hope you don't mind me asking, where did you get the 13% figure from?

The only information I can find is here and it only goes up to 2015:

www.ox.ac.uk/about/facts-and-figures/admissions-statistics/undergraduate/additional-info/applications-and-acceptances-ucas-apply-centre?wssl=1

BasiliskStare · 19/04/2017 20:35

I do not know those two North London Schools. I do know that Ds was interviewed and had to do an essay , aptitude test etc and other stuff to get a place ( Oxford) He had a lot of 6th form work to do , outwith his aptitude tests etc.

He came from a selective school , so it's not rocket science that his school might send more to the more selective universities , is it?

Alyosha · 19/04/2017 21:37

Hi MumTrying

Data is here:
www.suttontrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/sutton-trust-he-destination-report-final.pdf

Page 19.

Well Basilisk ,the question is why do the most selective schools (Grammars) not get at least the same % as private schools?

Answer: bias towards private schools.

User - the data is the only data there is. It was bloody produced by Cambridge University, who I am sure would say if it turned out their selection processes were better than everyone else.

The data shows you are wrong; you have no evidence to the contrary. Not all RG select by data/computer - if they did, state school kids with equivalent grades would get in to unis at the same rate as private school kids, but they don't, even outside oxbridge.

Alyosha · 19/04/2017 21:48

It's not just about oxbridge -the same sutton trust reports show indies dominating above more selective grammars in all RG unis.

Alyosha · 19/04/2017 21:53

And lo and behold, SHHS gets 20% into Oxbridge despite having worse/equivalent a level results than most of the grammars (page 31).

I think I know why.

EmpressoftheMundane · 19/04/2017 21:57

Why do you reckon that is? I can only think of two reasons:

  1. Snobbery and "the old boys network"
  2. The Indies are providing a better education than their state equivalents.

I'm not British born. I see this society with the eyes of an outsider. It looks to me like people tie themselves in knots to be "fair" and not to seem elitist. I don't think anyone in higher education could get away with blatant bias without being called up on it.
So that leaves me thinking that these elite private schools really do deliver a superior education. And that education matters. It's not all raw capacity that matters. but what you do with it and how you mould it.

It appears to me that private education is worth it, in spite of the stigma because while social attitudes change over time, education is an immutable good.

Alyosha · 19/04/2017 22:07

Delivering a superior education that doesn't show up significantly in their A level results vs. super selective grammars, or indeed any other quantitative metric? My old private school does about the same as super selective grammars but gets far more girls into Oxbridge...

The old boys network/girls network is a factor, the other is that admissions people just think private schools are better, it's a self fulfilling prophecy.

When state schools with identical grades to private schools get half the number of oxbridge entrances you have to think something funny is going on.

Ontopofthesunset · 19/04/2017 22:29

But Westminster and HBS don't have the same A level results (55% A Star at W, 40% at HBS) and nor do NLCS and HBS (46% A Star and 57% A Star equivalent in IB compared to 40%). Maybe these schools are just actually either selecting more effectively due to interviews (including at 16) or the better resources, including smaller class sizes and ease of recruiting and retaining teachers, really does make a difference.

It's a fallacy to look at numbers applying to schools and assume that the one with more applicants is more selective. Many people who couldn't afford private schools apply for grammar schools. And many people apply for multiple schools, including multiple grammar schools. And I can assure you that most people at Westminster didn't apply to grammar schools and choose Westminster as a back up.

Disclaimer: Have no children at any of the schools I've mentioned, though certainly 40 years ago HBS was a back up school for the sisters of friends who didn't get into NLCS. But that was a very different time (assisted places still around).

Alyosha · 19/04/2017 22:41

Ontopof...the differences in A level are really quite small though aren't they?

But the differences in Oxbridge admission are enormous, 3-5x the numbers of kids from the private schools getting in.

My experience is that SHHS was the backup to HBS, no idea about NLCS.

Alyosha · 19/04/2017 22:42

I.e. 6 ppt difference between NLCS & HBS A* A levels, but 3x more NLCS girls getting into Oxbridge...

EmpressoftheMundane · 19/04/2017 22:42

I think there is more to education than mere grades. Once everyone applying has all As and A*s, it's what is taught above and beyond the curriculum that matters.

In Britain, education narrows greatly at 16! At least for most children who won't do the IB. For many children they may study nothing more in the humanities after this age. Having a really good education to set the foundation in this situation matters greatly in my opinion. The broader education of reading the great philosophers and studying literature and history into my 20s alongside science lab work and differential equations won't be available to my children. It will be one or the other.

A degree is important. But it is not the whole of education. If they choose STEM, the last time that they are likely to debate ethics in a classroom setting will be their mid-teens. I want it to be the highest quality possible.

Two people, both with good degrees from good universities in Physics for example do not have equivalent educations, if you drill back and see that one has been given the chance to really analyse history and think about their refine their opinion on modern philosophy for instance, while the other has had only a superficial pass through it.

Alyosha · 19/04/2017 22:44

It's really not a fallacy in London. Latymer, HBS, Tiffin are definitely more selective than SHHS, Habs, Latymer Upper, Highgate. Probably more selective than NLCS & SPGS as well.

Most parents would choose the London elite grammars over the private school mentioned as there is the perception that an elite grammar is a private school education for free.

Alyosha · 19/04/2017 22:45

I'll say that Westminster is probably overall the same level of selectivity, as is Eton. But I wouldn't be surprised if there are parents who'd take Tiffin boys/QE Boys over Westminster.