Fees aside....

[StewardsEnquiry]

My head is going round and round with this and I need some advice here, please!

Can you explain why I might want to choose a grammar school instead of an academically vigorous selective independent school?

The child in question is very academically able, but no particular talent for sports or music - although enjoys participating in all of these activities.

Thanks!

To be honest the finances as some lesser independent schools are not so hot either. They have to look glossy to compete but this comes at a cost and the numbers on roll are vital, especially as some schools are not rich enough to afford generous bursaries or many of them. All is not rosy in the independent sector. Therefore I think comparing like with like is important. Some independent schools don’t attract the very brightest in large numbers but also, where we live, the Grammars are not full of the super bright either. Which suits your child best in terms of ethos, leadership and quality of teaching and learning would be a starting point.

I think you should choose the school that DD likes best.

I would be very very careful. We chose an independent academic senior school for the children and years later the exam factory is all it is. Stressed teachers, shouty, stressed on edge children and very few extracurricular unless your child is in the top sports team; with over a thousand children, the chance of that being slim.

Dd1 was always a hockey player and plays for county but was cut from the team with no.explanation, so pretty ruthless too.

I moved my son to a different independent (boarding) and it's worlds apart and a much healthier environment. Planning to.move dd1 too.

I too was a big fish in a little pond and actually I don't think it benefitted me one bit.

Steward, is that because you think you weren't pushed to try your hardest, or because other kids rejected you?

Both!

1. Because you are a socialist/communist/egalitarian of some sort.
2. Because you mistakenly think that a grammar will have pupils from a wider cross section of society (provate schools tend to have pupils from different countries and socioeconomic backgrounds and political persuasions while grammars in most areas are predominantly British left leaning middle class-although not in all areas, it really depends on the school).
3. You don't think that it is important for your child to be well rounded so long as they perform academically.
4. You are looking at a secular grammar school because you don't want your child to go to a school with a religious element (as many private schools do).
5. You don't like how full on private schools tend to be (with all the extra curricular a it can feel like your child is at school six or even seven days a week).
6. You are one of those parents who doesn't want their children to have what they didn't have (assuming you were not sent to a private school).
7. You want your child to go to a mixed sex school (where your private options are all single sexed).
8. You feel intimidated by private schools (assuming that you do).
9. You child's friends are going to the grammar (assuming that they are).

10. Your child wants to go to the grammar (assuming that they do). 11. You want your child to do A levels while private school in question favours IB (which is stupid, IB provides a higher standard of education even if it makes it harder to get into British universities perversely). 12. Grammar school is more conveniently located. 13. One of your child's bullies will be attending the private school. 14. The grammar is affiliated with a certain university unofficially (for example if you live in Cambridge).

Lots of reason is the long and short of it all.

OP we are going through exactly the same thought process ATM. Haven't made a decision yet (and finances will play a part, as will where he gets in, obviously!), but we are probably leaning towards independent for the following reasons, not in order:

1. IB (DS currently quite rounded with a bit of maths bias, suspect he will be become much less rounded in A Level system).
2. Co-ed. Huge factor for me.
3. Ethnically/internationally far more diverse than the grammars, if less financially/socially diverse.
4. Subject diversity, esp. languages. (On a recent open day I was quite surprised to find that one of the very well-regarded local schools - a high-achieving non-selective state - only offered one foreign language, and that only two people were taking it at A Level. Not through choice I'm sure. But DS loves the language stuff he's done so far and is really eager to try others.)
5. Less rugby-obsessed! I was surprised to find how much trad sports seem to dominate the grammars, esp. the super-selectives (DS much more likely to enjoy the more niche sports (swimming, badminton etc etc) than the big team sports. And may be more likely to find his 'tribe' as a result?)
6. Seemingly genuine success in teaching critical thinking and inspiring curiosity as well as instilling subject-knowledge for exams - I'm sure not linked to lack of desire on grammars' part to do this, but a function of smaller class sizes, outstanding calibre of staff, overall resources.
7. Potential widening of opportunities and vision for children - chances to travel abroad, listen to visiting speakers etc, may inspire appetite for eg working abroad, pursuing interesting careers in future (I know this happens at grammars but perhaps less so?).
8. Because of location, commute to school easier at independent.
9. Genuine and deep-seated fear over what is happening in state education, as someone who knows lots of people on the inside - appalling levels of teacher stress, staff turnover, ridiculous government interventions, funding crisis etc.

I know that is the answer to the opposite of the question you asked, sorry. Remaining reasons for considering grammars instead:

1. Never thought I would consider independent education. Think in theory that the country would be better without it. Will have to live with own hypocrisy. This is somewhat mitigated by the fact that I don't believe in the grammar system either!!!
2. Worries about lack of social diversity at independent - although not actually convinced that the grammars here are all that diverse! Esp given tutor-driven 11+.
3. Concern that DS would be poor relation at independent; we will never have the car/house/holidays that quite a lot of his peers will have.
4. Conversely, worries that DS would turn into a spoilt/entitled brat at independent.
5. Concern about what would happen in case of a change of circumstances. Would not want to have to move DS.
6. Effect on friendships - more mine than DS's (I know that most children move on from current friendships once they start secondary). Hardly anyone else I know considering independent.

Between the grammars and the independent, a lot of it now is practical decisions (can we afford it, what if we can't in future etc). The moral conundrum is probably more should we reject both grammars and independent and go for non-selective - but given DS's level of ability and types of interest, I think that would be quite a bold decision to make, and I would be very worried that my own desire to ease my conscience would come at the price of him finding it harder to fit in, make friends etc. If we lived near a co-ed, academically enriching, truly comprehensive, non-secular school, I would be going for that. But in the system where we live, I think independent will probably win out for us over grammar.

“worries that DS would turn into a spoilt/entitled brat at independent.”
Over the years I’ve met some entitled spoilt brats in the independent sector and I’ve also met them in the state sector it’s the parents who create spoilt brats not the school.

Yes, I would hope that you're right. Plenty of spoilt children in the state sector and not-spoilt children in the independent sector. But I suppose I still can't entirely get rid of the fear that being cut off from (most) people for whom life is a financial struggle in your day to day life, can encourage the perception/ expectation that this level of wealth is, at best, 'normal' and, at worst, somehow your due. Sorry, spoilt brat was a bit of a crude shorthand!

And a correction, I meant 'secular' not 'non-secular'. A lot of high-performing state schools round here have a religious ethos which I would rather avoid.

I think you have a point Witch children in the independent sector can start to think wealth is normal. But then I suspect children in nice MC areas at high performing states schools could think something similiar.
On the other hand children in the independent sector may also come to realise that wealth doesn’t make you happy, that messy divorce, poor health and untimely death still happens regardless of you wealth and that material possessions don’t make you happy or a better person.

Our DD is at Private school but went to Primary in a mixed area. She is well aware of how a lot of people struggle to live ordinary lives. Our friends are a mixed bunch as well so she mixes with a range of people ( although admittedly not the very poor)
The super rich at her school are very much in the minority and being flash is certainly not cool
While I agree that being at Private school can limit your friendship group to a certain sector of society it's not always the case, it's down to the parents.
Our DD is so" spoilt" that when we got her an iPad for her birthday last year she assumed we had got her something much cheaper and were just using the box as packaging!!!!

3. Ethnically/internationally far more diverse than the grammars, if less financially/socially diverse......5. Less rugby-obsessed! I was surprised to find how much trad sports seem to dominate the grammars

It all depends on the grammar. My son's grammar is very ethically/internationally diverse, far more so than any other nearby schools as ethnic communities seem to value a good education more than the indigenous population - probably half his form are asian/african ethnicity. Yes, his grammar is "rugby obsessed" and is often in the semi-finals and finals of national rugby competitions, but it's certainly not forced on them and the ones who aren't in the teams have plenty of alternative options. My son only played rugby in year 7 which is the only year it was compulsory and that was only for a single term. I've been impressed at the various alternative choices they've had - he's played badminton, done cross country running, and played football in later years as alternatives to rugby.

I don't think it's always obvious. I have taught in a grammar and went for interview at the selective independent.

The teaching at the grammar was far better in that at the independent teachers were often using same material 20 years on. Low mobility of staff so less engaging lessons at times as they can rest on laurels a lot. However they only had 9 in the class so could ensure all do well.

Also standards/results slightly higher at the grammar as locally many move to the grammar from the prep if they get in and stay otherwise.

However the facilities were incredible at the independent, and calm, well behaved motivated students etc. But less children to make a friendship from and 9 in a class at GCSE can have less group/class dynamics - a bigger class can be better .

Wonderful music and sport however it's all very high level so could feel second best if just playing locally and not nationally at something.

If money were no object I'd be tempted by both. We will probably do grammar and buy extra experiences!

Mine is very specific to our schools though and may well be different in a different area!!

I would see the shorter school holidays as an advantage of the grammar school.

If you work full time it’s going to be hard to make sure your young teen is constructively occupied for the long private school holidays.

If that isn’t an issue though you might see the long holidays as an advantage as you can go to places when they aren’t as crowded

I love the notion that most Grammars have parents who are left-leaning middle class! Have you checked out the big majorities achieved by the Conservative Party MPs in Bucks? No doubt replicated elsewhere so are parents of grammar school children not voters too?

At any good school, independent or Grammar, there should be enough activities for your child to enjoy and take part in without being selected out. This is vital or school life can be very one dimensional. Also many children like taking part in extra activities at weekends - my DDs loved it and were very keen to rehearse for plays and music, go on trips and be part of house events. Not every child sees extra activity as an annoyance and not every parent either. If this style of all round education is for you, then go for it.

The other aspect of education that some independent schools (and some Grammar schools) do very well is getting influential speakers to give talks to the pupils. Authors, explorers, business people etc. and this really adds to the experience of the school. We also found the independent school did a lot of events where parents were invited and did them well! So everyone came to the carol service in the cathedral, school play, school music evening, singing competition, sports competitions and came to House supper and all the house competitions where their DDs had worked so hard to participate. If you like to see what your child is doing in addition to the curriculum, choose a lively independent school and there is a lot to enjoy and a well rounded child. At the end of y10, elder DD was taking part in 12 extra curricular activities.

Also I have found there are tribes at independent school and they sort themselves out. Your child doesn’t compare themselves to the super rich - they know there is no point. They don’t become spoilt unless you do it. They do have a myriad of opportunities and if they grasp them, the world can open up.

Obviously a huge amount will depend on individual area and schools. Round here the population is very white-dominated, and the grammars naturally reflect that. The independent has about 40 different nationalities on roll

it’s the parents who create spoilt brats not the school

happygardening i do largely agree with you (though I think that the school's ethos regardless of sector could have an effect too) but i find it interesting that on here particularly in discussions of well-known independent schools x pupils are spoilt brats tends to be attributed to the parents whereas x pupils are socially skilled well-rounded delightful individuals tends to be credited to the school!

I could be talking rubbish but I don’t see how any school however wealthy or liberal can turn a child into a “spoilt brat”. All schools have rules and expectations, they don’t shower their pupils with gifts or tolerate rudeness, it’s all about being part of a community where everyone’s opinions are at the very least listened to. In school no child is on a one to one with doting parents hanging in their every word. So I don’t see how a school can spoil a child.
But schools can facilitate children in becoming socially skilled well rounded individuals, partly because you are part of community, there are written and unwritten rules you are not number 1 in a field of 1 and you do at the very least have to listen to others. I know a few spoilt brats whose behaviour has shall we say been modified by boarding school. They may not be perfect examples of socially skilled well rounded delightful individuals but they might be better individuals at the end of their time at a school than at the beginning.

if spoiling is something that is related to an excess of presents/attention/lack of boundaries then yes, i see what you mean that schools can't spoil a child. What i meant re ethos is perhaps more that the school's approach could contribute to whether the children grow up entitled or not - some schools (as some parents) will be better than others at helping children reflect on what they have, consider others in the school community, develop their values etc.

Again, this will be true across schools and across sectors, it's not a comment about private schools specifically.

I think that the idea that they are destined for leadership and great things and therefore somehow superior can come from attending grammar or independent. I knew some at Oxford (stereotypically public boys school usually) who were horribly arrogant and entitled but I think grammar schools can do the same!

Our decisions have been based on the individual child and the schools available.
DD was academically able and a strong personality. She she had a tight group of friends at her super selective and thrived. The lack of games etc for those without talent was a positive as far as she was concerned.
DS1 got into super selective also and after our experience with DD, factors such as ease of public transport, lots of his peers going, great HM etc we enrolled him with some anxiety.he isn’t a natural student and it didn’t really do him any favours.
DS2 was still v immature at 10so we kept him at private prep and he is at a top boys independent where he is thriving.
The social demographic is similar in all three schools apart from the overseas boarders.
The variety of opportunities for every pupil is huge at private school. At grammar the opportunities were there if the child was highly motivated to access them and talented but not necessarily Available for everyone.At grammar we had reasonable teaching, larger classes, slightly lower expectations but certainly DD and some other family members have done very well and had a lot more free time for pursuing interests at home/ having part time jobs/ having a social life/ learning to be more independent etc.

My DH went to a big name boys school as did DS2 they were never encouraged to think they were destined for leadership and great things.
DH recently attended a funeral of someone he was at school with he met friends he’s not seen for 30+ years, most had your average respectable well paid jobs no world leaders I’m afraid.

Oops, I seem to have opened a can of worms with the 'spoilt brat' comment. Actually, I wasn't really thinking of the school itself making a child more spoilt/entitled, but more the fact of being in an environment where the large majority of those around you are wealthy. As I said above, my main worry would be that this normalises wealth. Also, that it perhaps instils an excessive ambition to achieve wealth and status in later life, to live up to (and eventually replicate) the background in which you have been educated, and also to 'keep up' with those around you. I would be looking for an independent that can credibly claim to fight against this, as I'm sure some do. Interestingly, at open days I asked both independent and grammar what the children did in terms of community service (beyond the ubiquitous CCF) - the indie seemed to do quite a lot, the grammar said they'd love to but they don't have the time or resources.

The whole 'leadership' thing is interesting. Looking at some school websites and prospectuses, some of them very explicitly have this ambition (including grammars - one of the local ones here has 'Learn, Serve, Lead' as its motto). It's a difficult area and seems to me quite important in the political culture of the UK - 1. We presumably want our 'leaders' (in whatever field) to be intelligent, broadly educated, critical-thinking, confident people. 2. High calibre independent and grammar schools seem particularly good at nurturing these skills (not to say that other schools can't). 3. 'Leaders' therefore disproportionately come from these schools. 4. Therefore our 'leadership' is not very socially diverse. 5. 'Leaders' are more likely to have the money to fund private education for their own children (and probably the inclination, as this system served them well), so the cycle continues. For me, the question of principle is, do you therefore opt out of this system because it is unfair and perpetuates wealth-privilege? Or do you opt into this system on the basis that your own (terribly well brought up and right-on ) child might benefit from the opportunities it brings and perhaps use them to do good in the world in whatever large or small way?

“My main worry would be that it normalises wealth”
Obviously it depends on the school but it’s ineviatble that if your DC is at a £36K PA boarding school that most will be wealthy and that wealth will be normalised.
And I guess in some it will instill an excessive ambition to achieve (or in the case of the £36k PA boarding school maintain) wealth and status. The idea that you want to replicate the background you’ve beeen educated in also is a possibility. But my hairdresser who I doubt has ever set a toe inside an independent school is quite honest about her excessive ambition to achieve status and wealth, and replicate the backgrounds of those filling the pages of Hello magazine and I’m pretty sure she’s not alone in this.
I have strong leftie leaning but have never asked an independent school if they can “credibly fight against this” let’s be realistic teachers themselves are no better off in fact at a £36k pa school they are probably worse off than you average parent sending their kids. Few schools promote avarice, I doubt it’s anywhere on their curriculum. But many pupils in the independent sector will have ambitious wealthy parents and their children will see this as the accepted norm and believe in and promote it.
Do you opt out? Not if you like the ethos and think it will suit your DC better than the state school.
We can’t tell if they’ll go out and do good in the world, let’s be realistic most people don’t they just lead normal average lives but then few becone world leaders or captains of industry either.