When parents are slagging off the local comp...

[Everyoneafter3]

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.

I apologise - phrased the post above badly - I do not mean to say that even if you do not pay for school you can get good exam results - quite the opposite - do not pay for schools because you think you might get better exam results. I hope I have somewhat made myself clear.

I have to say, the universities themselves really emphasise good A level results & generally good academic results:

www.undergraduate.study.cam.ac.uk/applying/what-are-we-looking-for

"Academic ability and potential

We're looking for students with the academic ability and potential to flourish at the University. Therefore, you should be aiming for excellent examination grades. Typical A Level/IB offers and subject requirements are outlined on each course page. Entry requirements as well as typical offers for a range of other examination systems/qualifications can be found in the applying section"

They then go on to say they want independent thinkers & people who love their courses. All very well and good, but I don't see how going to Westminster rather than QE boys means you will be better at either.

Finally, User 615 said this:

"I'm very interested in widening participation (to the extent that I spend a lot of time doing it). It doesn't help to give out misleading information, though. Very few contextual offers are significantly below standard offers (i.e more than one grade down) at high tariff universities. Very few contextual offers are made on the basis of the student being "rounded", unless roundedness is actually relevant to the course. Many RG universities are unwilling to drop offers at all in subjects where lower entrance grades are strongly correlated with higher failure and drop out rates (maths, computer science etc). "

Which indicated to me that grades were the most important thing.

If they're not, then Oxford/Cambridge should make this clearer, as this knowledge may only reside in schools with a lot of Oxbridge experience, everyone else has to rely on the website.

Come on: you are again being disingenuous.

Oxbridge and other highly selective courses require high grades, and select from those who have high grades. They won't necessarily offer to those who have the highest A level grades but all those who get offers are likely to have very strong grades. Strong grades are necessary but not sufficient to get an offer.

Many RG courses select only on grades and offer to all those who have the required grades. Strong grades are necessary and sufficient to get an offer.

The two cases are not the same, as has been said over and over on this thread. It is you who is focusing on the first case, while quoting studies which (by sheer numbers) are dominated by the second case.

As user says, the grades are the minimum entry requirement. Everyone applying will have top grades or be predicted top grades at A level or pre-U. There are reasons why students from Westminster might be more independent thinkers than those at QE Boys but I suspect you will dismiss them. They would be to do with both the style of teaching, the courses taken (many Pre-U at Westminster) and the demographic, including parental influence on pupil choices.

A few years ago the HT at Westminster also told one of the senior tutors at Oxford that if what Oxford wanted was for applicants to stand on their heads at interview, then that is exactly what he'd teach them to do. I wouldn't underestimate that input. While inexpert prep from poorer quality independents is likely to be a bad thing, Westminster prep will be spot on. By contrast, my DC at their (superselective) state school have had no help whatsoever with pre-tests - nothing at all - and only a single practice interview with a subject teacher immediately prior to the real thing. I have absolutely no quarrel with that - there just aren't the resources - but the two batches of applicants are not coming through to pre-tests or interviews on an equal footing, that's certain, despite the 'middle class bastion' approach that so many tutors hold towards grammars.

I think slagging off the local comp or any school is breathtakingly rude.

That said I don't want my DDs to go to ours particularly. It is skewed towards lower ability due to vile superselective grammar system.

School choices elicit a lot of emotional response though, I have a good friend who seems to take really personally the fact that I would consider independent/ we may move to get into the outstanding comprehensive in the next town (although I don't want to really). The other school we'd get into doesn't have a sixth form so that is an absolute no for me, I'd choose the catchment school over that. I've also had one of our neighbours take quite personally that I have no intention of coaching dd1 for a year to get into the grammar - I don't think a highly competitive academic environment would be right for her, even if she got in.

As others say, people see it as judgement when in reality we are all just trying to do our best.

My DC's independent school does not offer more than a practice interview. It's very dubious whether specific interview or pretest prep makes any difference. Of course teaching above and beyond the syllabus, and encouraging students to think deeper throughout their education, probably does make a difference to at least some subjects. (Although I'm unconvinced that it makes a difference to mine - we can figure when somebody has already been exposed to a bit of maths and just switch the questioning to some topic they haven't met before.)

It will depend on the quality of the pre-test and interview prep. At the top end, it will make a difference.

At the end of the day, we think we know our childrens' qualities & abilities, we have our own "baggage" of our experiences of our own education, we have our own perceptions of the schools around us that are available to our children. We need to be able to make our own decisions but most of all, we shouldn't question or look down on other peoples' decisions.

Personally, I found it very sad that some of the parents of my son's friends seemed to take exception to my son going to his chosen school, to the extent that he stopped getting party invitations, stopped getting invited to their houses, etc., as soon as they found out which school he was going to. I never made any comment whatsoever about their choice of school, but there was some kind of inverted snobbery where they took offence at where my son was going when their kids were going to one of the local comps. Very strange, I'd never experienced that before. Same thing happened to a couple of friends who were going to the same school - their parents said the same. As it happens, it's irrelevant now, as all the kids are old enough to make their own arrangements and a lot of old friendships have been rekindled.

we have our own "baggage" of our experiences of our own education

Plus some people are teachers/ used to be teachers. Plus there is background, some people consider independents to be very elitist and almost for other people. Other people went to independents themselves (or it was at least discussed/ have parents who did)

It's really complex. And of course long term success as a person/ at work is much more complex than whether you get into Oxford or a RG university.

The other school we'd get into doesn't have a sixth form so that is an absolute no for me

Why? Neither of the two high performing comprehensives in my town have a sixth form. At 16 everyone has to go to neighbouring towns for sixth forms in schools or sixth form colleges.

The private girls' school doesn't have a sixth form either.

Because they tend to want to go to the FE college to do A levels. I don't particularly want b that I would prefer they were settled in a school. DC don't like going to a different school for 6th form in my experience. But as we've said, different people have different ideas. An 11-16 school for me personally is a no.

I also went to an 11-16 school myself..... Baggage and all.

It will depend on the quality of the pre-test and interview prep. At the top end, it will make a difference.
Goodbyestranger IME the important preparation is not from mock interviews but from the tutorial style teaching that these top end schools can deliver all through the sixth form and before due to resources of recruitment, staff / pupil ratio and time. There are some amazing teachers in the state sector but in the very 'top end' independents that we are talking about I imagine the staff room is rather like being in an Oxbridge MCR / SCR or equivalent.

Yes I entirely agree with all of that sendsummer. The good quality prep is an extra Godiva chocolate button on top of the cake though, and can only help when properly directed. I don't believe things are equal though and given the drive to increase access to grammars at the point of entry that seems a shame.

Having had two go through this latest Oxbridge cycle, I'm absolutely convinced that the value lies in the general education/encouragement provided than any specific prep, which probably was a lot less than a lot of people expect.

How many apply from your DCs' school Carl? In percentage terms of the cohort. Would you say 80%? 90%?

I don't know with certainly but my best guess from DC would be around 75%. But then there are second time around applicants too which if successful are included in the stats.

What I mean is if 90 get a place, some of those won't be this year 13 cohort.

No quite, that goes for all schools - they all like to beef up stats wherever they can :)

But given the obvious benefit of that style and level of education, plus the teaching-them-to-stand-on-their-heads, it's perhaps less surprising that the whole 75% don't get in. I find that as interesting as why grammars are lagging behind, although it's perhaps of less social consequence.... I'm not sure those statistics help Alyosha's theory of bias, rather the opposite.

-less-

Sorry!

less

Let's try that!

It used to be that even more tried for a place, but with the increasingly international cohort, there is a growing minority who don't apply to university in the U.K.

Plus there are always some pupils who even if they are making a UCAS application, don't want Oxbridge for whatever reason.

Of those that do apply ( and my 75% isn't official BTW, but it's my gut feeling this year) I think they all know it's not something they should bank on. There are always surprises - my DD was definitely not someone anyone would have put money on and other 'safe bets' have been disappointed.

At the end of the day, they're 17. Easy to fluff a pre test or an interview through nerves or cockiness.

Yes we've has some nice surprises in this house too :)

But that's a shed load of nerves or cockiness isn't it? Are the kids at that school unusually nervous or cocky?

User615 - the studies I quoted look at both Oxbridge & RG separately, and find that elite grammars underperform relative to their A level results performance IN BOTH SECTORS.

I also think Oxbridge are the ones being disingenuous if no one on this thread can adequately describe what a State school applicant needs to do to get in.

It's not just enough to have really good grades, apparently the only way they can get in is through somehow managing to get the same kind of expert prep & teaching available at a top Indy...

That's not the impression you get reading their websites; their websites simply say good grades & enthusiasm are enough.

I would say all grammar kids have those in as much abundance as top indies - so what can grammar kids (and state kids in general) do to get into Oxbridge? What advice would User615 give them?