What is the real value of highly selective independents/grammars now?

[Bubblesbobbles]

Genuine question for parents further along in the process - what do people now see as the actual value add of highly selective Independent schools versus strong grammars/comprehensives?

I’m asking because the level of pressure around 7+/11+ entry for some schools (Bancroft’s/WCH/ICHS etc.) seems enormous now, with many children heavily tutored just to gain entry, and often still requiring significant tutoring/support afterwards.

At the same time, I know pupils from schools like Woodbridge who avoided that whole prep school/11+ treadmill, yet still ended up at places like Imperial studying Engineering and Physics with top A level results, EPQs, UKMT participation, competitions, strong extracurriculars, etc.

It also made me wonder whether mixed ability teaching environments may actually suit some children better in terms of confidence, independence and self motivation.

Another thing I noticed when visiting schools was that advertised “small class sizes” sometimes appeared to refer to form groups rather than actual teaching sets, which surprised me a bit.

I also wonder whether the gap between grammars/comprehensives and Independents is narrower than it used to be now that curriculum resources, enrichment opportunities and good teachers are more widely accessible.

For parents who chose either route — what do you genuinely think made the biggest difference for your child:
academic environment?
peer group?
confidence/networking?
teaching quality?
extracurriculars?
university outcomes?
pastoral support?

Interested in hearing balanced experiences from both sides.

Oxbridge don't really favour state school pupils. There are still around 30% private school pupils at each compared to a national average of 7%. State school students may get slightly lower offers depending on circumstances.

Exeter has quite generous contextual offers based on postcode.

@Stowickthevast The number of private dc in 6th forms was always above 15%. So 7% was never accurate. There’s always the issue that very bright parents in high paying roles are found in many good private schools. They have extra bright dc. They also accept bursary dc that skews the numbers too. Then there’s the subjects offered and teaching. Eg: look at MFLs. Oxbridge are unashamedly requiring literature to be studied. Many dc want to swerve this. So plenty of bright dc from the comps don’t see the teaching as suiting them.

@Goleen what school do your kids go to? (DM if you prefer?)

I can’t afford independent school for 2 kids (HHI is £300k btw!) so weighing up grammars vs comprehensives for my DC, who are both bright (DH and I also both went to Oxbridge, from working class families). We live in London and our local comp is one of the very strict ones, so looking to move.

For me (if I could afford it) the advantage of private schools would be the extra curricular opportunities, as both kids are very musical, and the peer group - kids with committed parents. Grammar offers some of this but not all, and the tutoring regime is depressing (have no doubts my kids would succeed, but so unnecessary).

To those saying things like “surrounded by like-minded students” and “parents who value education” these are basically code words for you want your child to be surrounded by other middle-class children. Maybe just be honest.

I’m a teacher in a state school and I sent my children to the local state schools. I teach in a grammar school area and see first hand every year the effect on demoralised 11 year olds who feel like rejects before they even start, because they didn’t get into grammar school.

In my experience, the best teachers stay in state. People
move to private or grammar schools for an “easy” life. A friend of mine moved to a local grammar for a promotion and said she was amazed by the lazy teaching she saw - just turn to the next page of the textbook etc.

My DC have had a great time and lots of opportunities at the local state school. They have friends from all walks of life who all live locally, no massive commute (unlike the grammars) . Eldest DC is doing A Levels at the local sixth form, she is predicted straight As and is set to go to a Russel Group uni. Compared to children of friends who went to grammar/private the ones who went to state schools seem much more independent, street smart and generally confident.

@Platypus7 There are good and bad teachers in both comprehensive, grammar and private schools. However, I would guess though that the average teacher in a grammar and selective private school would have higher qualifications than a comprehensive school-in terms of being more likely to have gone to the top 10 universities. State school teachers may be better at discipline with disruptive classes but I think private school teachers have a better grasp of subject knowledge. In comprehensives many children are taught by non-specialists and I think this is terrible especially at A-level. IMO, being taught by non-specialists is less likely to happen in a grammar or selective private school.
It is a complete generalisation to say that children who go to state school are more independent, street smart and generally confident. Children who go to a rural state school are going to be less street smart and independent than children at London day private school who often travel across London on their own to get to school. I would also say that many children who go to private schools have much more confidence in public speaking than children at state schools.

To those saying things like “surrounded by like-minded students” and “parents who value education” these are basically code words for you want your child to be surrounded by other middle-class children. Maybe just be honest.
Actually no, the school my DC go/went to is not at all middle class. We chose it because it was a faith school (80% Christian, 20% other faiths). And yes, because of that parents have to make a really active choice to send their DC there so probably do value education. But the other reason we chose it was because it has a city wide catchment -our city is not a rich city- and an incredibly diverse cohort. We could have chosen our local comp which is very middle class but we did not. My DC have a wide and varied friendship group, the commonality is that they are bright and ambitious and have parents who want the best for them.

Why on earth would you think teachers at private, grammar etc have higher qualifications?! If anything, private schools can get away with appointing teachers without proper teaching qualifications. It is absolutely not true that in comprehensives “many” students are taught by non-specialists. That may happen occasionally in KS3 but not at GCSE.

In my own personal experience the state school students tend to be more well-rounded, streetwise and independent. Just my own observations.

My son went to a super selective for sixth form. The difference he has noticed is there is no bullying. They only offer the usual A level subjects , not anything different like business or politics.

As an experience DS would have mixed feelings about the ss grammar. On one hand the pupils aim high - DS is going to UCL in September. He probably would have gone to university which required lower grades if he’d gone to the local comp. But on the other it’s a really unreal experience with lots of the children of very middle class parents who are very aspirational.

DS had teachers who moved from his grammar to the comp and back as they simply didn’t fit in at the comp.

The figure for sixth formers lies between the two. It isnt above 15%, but is above 7%.

13% of a level entries in 2024 were from private schools. However, the proportion of sixth formers in private schools is likely lower as BTEC and other vocational qualifications are not commonly offered in private schools.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/provisional-entries-for-gcse-as-and-a-level-summer-2024-exam-series/provisional-entries-for-gcse-as-and-a-level-summer-2024-exam-series#entries-by-centre-type

Not our experience at all about the specialist teachers. My DD has consistently had specialist teachers at her independent school. Even when the usual issues of maternity leave and long term sickness have happened, the school has been able to rearrange staff or get in specialist cover. Her local friends have been through significant teaching gaps at our local comp. The issues haven't been short term and haven't been covered by specialist staff. The use of non-specialists hasn't been restricted to KS3.

Sciences are taught separately by subject specialists at my DD's school. I used to be a science teacher in the state sector and the expectation was that we could and would teach all 3 sciences to GCSE. My highest qualification in biology was a GCSE, no way was I really a 'specialist'.

There is a shortage of teachers in some subjects. I suspect that isn't impacting highly selective independent and grammar schools in the same way it is impacting some other schools.

@Platypus7 You must be at one of the only state schools in the country where children at state schools at GCSE and A-level are being taught entirely by specialists. My friends' children at the local comprehensive have had many non specialist teachers even at A-level. They are constantly complaining about this. I also know that every single comprehensive school in my local area has had problems recruiting teachers and constantly have cover teachers. I live in an area with an increasing population.

@fairyring25 bogstandard comp, bogstandard area, I assure you. We may, on occasion, get a PE teacher delivering Y8 Geography for example, or a science teacher delivering Y7 Maths. All Y10 and upwards is delivered by specialists. Teacher recruitment is a nationwide problem I agree, for all types of schools. But private schools do not attract the best of the profession, in my experience.

To those saying things like “surrounded by like-minded students” and “parents who value education” these are basically code words for you want your child to be surrounded by other middle-class children. Maybe just be honest.

So you think "parents who value education" equates to "middle class parents" only and poor people cannot value education?

That's an interesting outlook for a state school teacher 😂

To those saying things like “surrounded by like-minded students” and “parents who value education” these are basically code words for you want your child to be surrounded by other middle-class children.

I want my DC to be surrounded by children who are more disciplined and hard working than the national average. I want my DC to be surrounded by children whose parents force, not merely encourage, them to complete their assignments on time, and who will ensure they catch up if they're falling behind, whether through extra work themselves or through paid tutoring. I want my DC to be surrounded by children who believe there is a point to learning what they are being taught at school and that a better education is worth the effort.

As it happens, these attributes are positively correlated with middle-class status. But the correlation is not perfect. I would much rather my DC were surrounded by children of, for example, recent immigrants who are desperate for their children to achieve academic success because they view this as the best path to a better life, than for them to associate with children whose parents are well-off enough to want to "let children be children" and to "let them enjoy their one childhood".

In my experience, the best teachers stay in state.

The best teacher for a given student or cohort is not necessarily the best teacher for every student or cohort. The ability to manage poor behavior is less important if a school can minimize this behavior, whether by excluding poorly behaved students as in most independents, or by accepting fewer of them in the first place, as in most academically selective schools, both state and independent. The ability to teach all students well in a mixed ability setting is less important if the ability range in a classroom is narrow, as in most academically selective schools, both state and independent. A deeper knowledge of the subject material is more important if most students in a classroom are expected to get 8/9 at GCSE, or A/A+ at A Level, as at most academically selective schools, both state and independent.

People move to private or grammar schools for an “easy” life.

On this we agree; every teacher I've ever asked about this has said that it's easier to teach a well behaved classroom full of high achievers. But I have no reason to believe that "better" teachers are any more likely to prefer a "hard" life and remain in comprehensive schools. And I have some reason to believe that teachers with high specialist knowledge are more likely to prefer to teach at academically selective schools, whether state or independent, where they can teach to a higher academic level.

@user149799568 to be honest the school we are in has a lot of middle class wealthy children, and there are quite a few who have said they want their kids to 'climb trees and have fun. The parents have money, the kids are spoilt, and will still do ok in life. So the children just dont bother and take for granted the expensive education in the school (independent). Im a child of immigrants and we put a huge focus on education hence the demographic in places like QE Boys. So even in the private sector, you get the kids who just mess around too, so again if you want more, then you have to go to more academic schools.

Very bright and motivated DC1 went to a comprehensive. Came out of theee witb 4x Astar at A-Level and a place at Imperial College. They got a 1st at Imperial.

The keys to DC1’s success were (1) their aptitude and level of motivation (2) having an excellent teacher in the subject they chose to study and (3) being at a comprehensive with a very small sixth form so the class sizes were tiny eg DC1 + 1 other in Physics, DC1 + 3 others in Chemistry.

No one is saying that can't happen, but as lots of people have said, not all comps are the same!

I was a "very bright and motivated" pupil aged 11 when I started at my comp. Left five years later with nothing after being mercilessly bulled for five years, struggling to try to learn in classrooms more akin to Beirut with constant disruption, endless "supply" teachers, etc.

That school is still a "crap comp" today, 40 years later, and has been in and out of one form or another of "special measures" for decades.

Yes, some pupils do very well, but I think it's more luck than anything else. The majority don't as demonstrated by the Ofsted reports, external exam result tables, etc.

It really is luck of the draw, the surrounding/environment, etc.

Ironically, my school had just converted from a grammar to a comp a couple of years before I went, and the local claim by the school was that it would be "grammar education for all" - what a load of crap! Teachers were leaving in droves or going off with nervous breakdowns year on year as the extensions were built and more and more pupils joined from the two "closing down" secondary moderns nearby to create a huge "monster" school instead of having three smaller/friendlier schools.

It sounds like you had a horrible experience. Having many supply teachers is clearly never a good sign. I do think though that there are plenty of decent comps, at least here in my part of outer London. My DCs’ comp was rated as ‘good’, as are most others in our area.

We signed our eldest up for a very good pre-prep and then had a change of heart at the last minute, and sent him and then his brother to the local outstanding state primary instead.

We just didn’t see what value the private school was adding. Both parents are very academic and we thought we’d see how they did in the state school. It’s easy enough to move to private later if they turned out not to be excelling there.

Going to school with and being friends with children whos families are rough; smoking, drinking to excess, swearing, lack ambition or drive, value social unrest etc etc etc is NO badge of honor.
Children get their vibe from their tribe.
Education is a long game, honestly lifelong as a parent I want the experience to be enjoyable enough that at 50 they may want another masters degree, relevant enough that they are not afraid to try. So be it a tiny state school, niche comp in a very wealthy enclave or indi my role is to find the most pleasant environment within my grasp so that my child grows up to love learning and life.

@user149799568 when I say the “ best” teachers I mean those who are passionate about education and about their subject, those who are innovative, interested in the latest educational research and committed to their students. As opposed to those who just want to wait for their teacher pension by delivering the same old lessons to a bunch of compliant middle class children. Teachers in state schools absolutely have in-depth specialist knowledge, and teach grade 8/9 students every year. It’s quite insulting to assume all we are good for is behaviour management.

I hope that when contextual offers are next discussed on MN the barriers children at comprehensives face that have been very robustly highlighted on this thread are recognised.

@BreakingBroken I really hope you don’t pass on these incredibly prejudiced views about children on to your own children. Remember we are talking about 11 year olds here. If, perhaps, they have not had the best start in life, I don’t think branding their families as “rough” helps anyone, it just perpetuates stereotypes and division.

I don’t believe in selective education, for many reasons. I wanted my children to see that I have the conviction to live by the values that are important to me, and inclusive education is one of them. A lot of their friends you would probably categorise as “rough”. I don’t, I invite them round to tea, any friend of my child is welcome in this house, I don’t care who their parents are. My children understand the value of education because they know it’s important to me. They know they are lucky to have parents who are able to help them with GCSE revision, and a lot of their friends don’t have that. We have a lot of dinner table discussions about the education system and class system in this country (more so since DD is doing A Level sociology!) and they have grown into, I think, well-rounded and caring people. Not elitists who think anyone different to them is “rough”.

It’s a bit weird to compare all three schools together. It's much better to look at them separately.
If an academic DC gets a grammar place and the alternative is a comprehensive, then they should absolutely go. It's a no-brainer, as both grammar and comprehensive are free. Whether you look at the quality of the school, the peers, or the parent community, it’s really hard to argue that a comp is better than a grammar.
The OP mentioned that the main con of a grammar school is the cost of 11+ prep. Generally speaking, if your child is naturally academic, then the prep is absolutely worth it. We shouldn't look at 11+ prep as pure torture and waste of child life though. By exam prepartion you cultivate a life long habit of hard working. Having said that, if it too much and requires that much of a miserable struggle just to pass, then a grammar school probably isn't for them.
As for private schools, with the massive fees, it’s indeed hard to justify them over a grammar (unless it’s one of those top elite, super-selective independent schools). IME, I highly doubt the idea that private schools are automatically full of 'parents who value education". While grammar parents mostly value academic excellence and hard work, you don't necessarily get that with an indie anymore. With fees being so sky-high, indies are no longer filled with ordinary middle-class families; a lot of the kids are from wealthy backgrounds and already set up for life, so they're happy to just coast through university and focus on networking rather than top grades. If you're an ordinary family just about stretching to afford the fees, putting a naturally academic DC into that environment can do more harm than good. When their peers don't care about grades because they have a massive safety net, a bright kid can easily lose their academic drive. They need driven, hard-working peers to thrive, which is exactly what a grammar school offers.

So be it a tiny state school, niche comp in a very wealthy enclave or indi my role is to find the most pleasant environment within my grasp so that my child grows up to love learning and life.
Yes, I think this is pretty much me too. I went to terrible schools. Well, my parents moved so I could go somewhere different for 6th form and it wasn't as bad, but still nowhere near a Mumsnet approved leafy comp. I could not have done any better academically elsewhere - I got the highest possible grades in my O levels and A levels - but I could have been a great deal happier in another school and emerged a far more confident and rounded individual. Not that I am suggesting that an independent school guarantees that. I know people whose schooldays in some of the most expensive and well known schools in the country were at least as bad as mine. Possibly worse in fact as I did at least get to go home every evening to a safe, happy and supportive family whereas they had to sleep in the same room as their bullies. But that's by the by, the point is that there are some schools that provide an environment in which a particular child is more likely to thrive than others. Depending where you live that may be in the private sector or it may be a state school. We were lucky to find what we needed in the state sector but I'm not naive enough to believe that that experience is universal. If they are fortunate enough to have choice I think that most parents are looking for where they feel is best for their offspring. If I had been facing the prospect of sending my DC to my old school I would have crawled over hot coals to try to prevent it.
I get irritated by sweeping generalisations on this type of thread though - "state schools are X and private schools are Y" type comments are usually wrong. There is a huge range in both sectors and it's best not to jump to conclusions.