Again, I am not calling any school ‘lesser’ or saying anyone has made poor choices in their children’s school. I fully acknowledged several times that there will be good reasons for choosing the slightly less academic school if one has a choice. I really can’t see that there is scope for offence here. And I have suggested what I said is one way of looking at it, that Op might consider, and after all she did ask for thoughts.
Academic schools tend to set very little. Often there is zero setting to start with and later just in Maths. This often takes the form of 2 or 3 sets or bands. So most teaching is done in ‘mixed abolity’ Groups. In all the schools we are talking about, there isn’t the full range of ability but the more selective has a narrower range. And yes, good teaching can deliver to all of that range well - of course. However the fact remains that a wider range probably alters the pace of some lessons and may also act the curriculum offered in some ways. These things are not problems, just realities to bear in mind when selecting schools for individual children. This will matter to some parents and not others.
It’s impossible to say that in 2 good schools, children would achieve the same grades in either. No child goes through education on 2 schools so it’s impossible to say this. We know that in studies of good comprehensives comparing outcomes of similar cohorts (based on starting point) to those in state grammars and selective, there is little uplift. There is some uplift but it’s less than a grade per subject. Many conclude a good comp will do as well for a clever child as an independent or a state grammar.
However people still choose the more selective seeing value in both grades but also learning with a narrower range of ability. It’s one view that many have and continue with, feeling there is more certainty of the very top grades from such a school. Again, for individual children we will never know.
No-one is criticising schools which get 70% A-A* and which provide all kinds of other benefits. In lots of areas these will be the top academic schools. In other areas they won’t and parents like those on this thread will choose them (sometimes over the more academic and sometimes over a less academic option) for all kinds of good reasons. No problem with that. No criticism of that.
Perhaps views on this become rather influenced by school playground chatter and pecking order perceptions. In some areas X school is seen as THE top school. I’m thpse areas where people have a choice of X and Y, Y is rarely picked. That doesn’t mean Y isn’t great school or the best option for some children, but parents at Y can feel sensitive about their choice and as if they are being criticised and feel the need to defend their choice. They don’t. And doing so probably fuels any ideas people have that X is better. It might be more academic and it might be better for some children and Y for others.
But people often have to choose between x and y. That’s what ops doing. Some say go for the scholarship school and bring a big fish in a small pond. That’s right for some children. All saying is being a little fish on a big pond can be right too for some and unless there were factors pulling me to the small pond, I’d go for the more academic. It doesn’t mean I think the other is rubbish or want to insult parents who’ve chosen the alternative.
I think there’s some sensitivity displayed here about being at an academic school which isn’t the very most academic. I don’t think there’s any need for it. Your child did well st their school and you chose it for good reasons. It’s not the right choice for all. Some may wish for the narrower range of ability. Equally valid.