What senior private schools in SE would you call mediocre?

[Lovebrussels]

There have been some posts recently about state/grammar vs private and quite a few with the opinion that mediocre indies are not really worth the money given the alternative of a good state school.

Out of interest wondering if people can share what schools/types of schools are regarded mediocre eg in Southeast. Thanks.

This might not be exactly what you’re after but I live in an area with lots of good state and outstanding private schools but there is one private school that no-one I know is that interested in. Compared to the others it doesn’t get the same results. It would be my 6th choice of local private school and I’d need some convincing the investment would be worth it over the state school.

I think you have to consider that one person's 'mediocre' school based on academic results is another person's 'lovely small nurturing' school.

A private school that is mediocre in all aspects won't survive, so they carve out their own niches.

To me mediocre would be a school that was really a paid-for state school. One where you didn't actually get anything different or extra for your money, just the kudos of 'private school'.

The South East is a big place, but where we used to live I wouldn't have paid for Long Close for example. I may have been wrong, but I couldn't see what they were offering that the local schools didn't.

reefed Was the school you mention the same size as the state schools? Our local comp has 250 pupils per year. The nearest private school has far fewer. That would count as 'different' to me.

What do you mean by mediocre?

I went to private school on the Herts/London borders, and some schools were very academic and others you could go to if you paid the fees. Didn't make it a bad school, just not the most academically competitive one.

Well, it has around 300 pupils from 3-16, so I suppose if you want a really small school it has that going for it. I'm not dissing that particular school, I just gave it as an example of one I wouldn't have spent my money on when choosing where to spend my money. There were others in the area I discounted because I didn't think they offered enough 'on top'.

reefed That's tiny! If my DD2 had been how she is now at 16 at 10, I might have picked a tiny private school for her over the local comp.

I guess that's my point. You first have to define 'mediocre'. For some parents/children small and nurturing outweighs academics.

I am not particularly interested in academics. I think top/middle set in a comp/ grammar/ Independent will give a roughly similar classroom experience.

Personally I'm looking for longer days as standard to allow for major co-curricular provision. I want flexi to be available, not because I would use it but because I think it gives a different culture to a school. I do want facilities- swimming pool/ theatre/ music school/ acres and acres of sports pitches etc. I want there to be a fleet of school vehicles so multiple teams can be out at fixtures. I want there to be tutorial & seminar structure to the teaching so pupils get used to learning that way. That is the sort of stuff I will part with my money for.

If a school just offers 8.45 - 3.15, but with slightly fewer pupils in each class, it isn't offering enough of a difference for me.

However, each person will be looking for something different and to others a small, quiet school might be worth it's weight in gold.

Schools can also have a historical 'mediocre' reputation that bears not relation to the current reality.
A school local to me often overlooked and thought of as mediocre was in top 20 of A-level results in 2019 with 25% of the year group going to Oxbridge. It just has bigger flashier more vocal neighbours.
If you are considering a private school you have to do the research.

And ^^ is why smaller independents can continue. Because instead of being a 'one basic model plus minor variations' of the state system that works for 80%+, they can carve out their own niches according to local demand.

The school I went to was so mediocre it closed a few years after I left, but I was happy there.

I do wonder how Buckhurst survives, I wouldn't consider sending my child there

Thanks all for the thoughts. Indeed it is hard to define mediocre hence my question. I saw it used from time to time or something with similar effect especially when comparing state vs private or grammar vs private.

It totally depends where you live and what you are comparing. Some private schools are havens for DC who don’t get into state grammars in grammar counties. They can be selective and can be very good alternatives to the state secondary moderns that parents don’t like. It’s a snobbish thing. They can also be rather average because they don’t compete with any other excellent schools and cannot compete academically with the grammars. Small classes are on offer though.

I would expect great facilities. Lots of sport (Not necessarily outside) and options for music and drama, art and creative expression as well as clubs for broader enrichment and confidence. Often parents like a decent uniform and well behaved pupils. These schools should inspire and have great careers advice, external speakers and a special ethos. I agree that 9-3 with nothing much on top isn’t what I would pay for.

There’s a private school in SW London that is know as the most expensive comp in London. Won’t name it since seems a bit mean. Traditionally known as an easier school to get into. Mediocre results, so in that sense you’d just as well at your local comp, but kids are self assured and facilities are great. Pastoral apparently good, parents often like it a lot. Depends what you mean by mediocre I guess.

Usually it’s to do with how hard it is to get in.

It doesn’t mean it’s definitely wrong for a child though. And they still might push them up well in grades.

But other more academic schools with higher cut offs will naturally have that reflected in results, usually.

Millfield doesn’t necessarily have top drawer results but it’s still a big name school for all sorts of other reasons. It’s often referred to as the most expensive comp. Its nothing like a comp!

My son attends a school that I have seen on here described as mediocre. It has average results. However, in the year he has been there he has flourished - a different kid. I wish I’d moved from state sooner. He’s discovered the joy of good behaviour and actually learning! He’s joined clubs. He feels like his teachers care and like him. As previous posters have said, one person’s mediocre is another’s saviour. That’s how I see his school. It depends how much emphasis you put on results. For me it’s about character, every school is different and every child is different, too.

I've just chosen a private sixth firm for my daughter. It is a good school - good results etc, but she also got into another more academic school which gets better results.
However, results are for the whole co hort. My child is very academically competitive and I know she will get great results (she goes to a non selective private mixed school now and gets very good grades). We chose the school we did as it's all girls and half the size of the other school. It also just suits her character better.
League tables seems to be the measure of the quality in a school, but it is so much more than that.

@Jumpalicious I live close to a school in SW London that used to have that reputation. They now have a new head and have pushed the academic bar so high it’s nearly impossible to get into. I imagine that will translate into higher GCSE results in a couple of years.

I think it’s a shame as it was one of very few lesser academic co-Ed’s. My son would have enjoyed the sport/drama/music there. He is actually very happy at our local state and academically thriving. But it’s glaringly obvious that state school cuts / austerity have really limited what the state sector is able to offer. Motivated parents / fundraising and privately run extra curricular clubs go some way to fill the gap but it’s not the same school experience.

I looked round a primary that seemed mediocre to me in south London. It had a nice building and posh looking uniform but the teaching style was outdated, inspection result poor (apparently they tend to take teachers which have been pushed out of other jobs), nothig particularly creative or exciting happening there either and lots of fussy rules (hands behind backs while walking through the corridoor, even no running in one of the playgrounds!). Presumably the parents paying for it liked it but I would have taken any of the local state primaries over it in a shot.

For me mediocre academic results wouldn't necessarily mean the school was mediocre. If you have a child who loves drama, music or sport and you find a small nuturing school which focuses on this area and doesn't put too much pressure on it might be a perfect fit.

DD went to an independent girls’ boarding school that was really small. Around 250 in the whole school. However it taught the subjects she was really interested incredibly well. Not particularly showy facilities but exceptional staff and DD flourished. Results for some subjects were not stellar but it wasn’t selective. For creative types it was brilliant though.

I think it is a very subjective subject. Round here there are multiple super selective very high league table academically pressured independent schools. The other options, i.e. less selective independents and comprehensives seem 'lesser' in some ways, but actually they are different.
We suffer from the local comprehensives being - in the most - fairly average, which makes all the independents seem pretty good in terms of academics, facilities, range of curriculum, wrap around etc. There is one independent locally that doesn't really seem quite worth the money, but it would be if your child had been elsewhere and not thrived but was settled and happy at that school.

I have thought about this a bit further. I think for me it’s independent secondary schools with no 6th form. They don’t have the breadth or ethos I would expect.