Is Alleyn's School a cuckoo?

[lbsmith73]

Green Goose, wow I must have touched a nerve there! I don't think I have ever been called a jealous socialist but I will take it as a compliment. I can't believe you are tripping out the same old tosh Mr Gove used to spout about standings in the world educational league tables and look what happened to him! May I suggest you look at how well state (or comprehensives as you call them) schools perform, particularly in areas such as London. Paying to go private does not buy you a first class education it buys you a place in society. Why are there so little state school students at Oxford and Cambridge? Is it because they are not bright enough? Or is it because they don't mix in the right environment for them to be accepted? Yes we are way behind America, but not in quality of our education but in our attitudes that those who are privileged, bright or not, get far more opportunities (Mr cameron et al). It is nice to see America leading the way that it is not about where you come from it is about your abilities that count (Barack Obama!!).

[bawdy-nan]

As I understand it bright children, statistically, do better at state schools. I can only assume that the motivation in sending children to private school is either social or an assumption by parents that their kids are perhaps not bright enough.

I went to Oxbridge from a state comp (one of, I think, 45 in my intake year eligible for free school meals) and my impression is (and remains) that a private school education gives children a sense of expectation and feeling of desert. which means, I think, that it is easier to succeed.

In my day my sense is that there were other, intellectual opportunities and challenges afforded to people at independent schools but I really don't see that now. my daughter, at a local state school has, in her first few weeks at secondary school been challenged to think and experiment intellectually, has spent a full day at Imperial College doing maths with academics andhas been offered, in my opinion a world of expectation I never had.

She's also mixing with an extraordinarily wide range of people - some clever, some not so much, some evidently wealthy some not so and they're on an equal footing and engaging in the world and I'm thrilled for her and, honestly, I don't think she could get that at an independent.

(Edited for terrible typos)

[stephent]

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20154358

[glasshalffull]

lbsmith73 wrote,

It is nice to see America leading the way that it is not about where you come from it is about your abilities that count (Barack Obama!!).

Barack Obama was educated at a private school.

[Jeremy]

bawdy-nan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> As I understand it bright children, statistically,

> do better at state schools.

This sounds a bit far fetched to me. Can you find any source for this?

If there are good state secondary schools where you live (and you can get into one) then great, but that isn't always the case. I don't think we should be judgemental towards those who send children to private school, they're just trying to get the best education for their kids - even if you believe they are misguided.

[Zebedee Tring]

Research has shown that state school children who get to university on average do better than private school kids. This may because the private school kids have been spoon fed through school by the school (and indeed their parents) and can't cope as well with their university courses as the state school children when left to their own devices. That's not to say that the private school children will not overcome their inferior degrees by using the connections that school, mummy and daddy will have provided for them.

[Jeremy]

Zebedee Tring Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Research has shown that state school children who

> get to university on average do better than

> private school kids.

What research? This? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-26773830

What it actually says is that "state school pupils do better at university than independent school candidates who have achieved the same A-level grades".

To me this implies that children of equivalent ability level get better grades at private school than they would at state school, probably because they get more attention, or are coached for the exams. Then when they go to uni, things level out a bit.

The article also says that "67% of independent school pupils achieved a 2:1 or above, compared with 62.3% of state school and college pupils". So it's hardly a damning expose of the private school system.

[amydown]

It's disheartening to see judgemental comments about parents who send their kids to private schools. All preconceptions are dangerous and those against privately educated people/ parents who choose that route are no exception.

The motivation for private education is not as black and white as some posters make it out to be. Given the state school place shortage, we wouldn't have got a place in a state school that didn't involve a long bus journey for our kids. Lots of parents in our private school are in the same situation and indeed, some children switch back to a local school when they are offered a place after staying on the waiting list.

At the end of the day, as all parents do, I want my kids to have the best opportunities in life. I don't mean that in the financial/ getting a good job sense but in them being able to experience lots of different activities, which in my view, private schools can facilitate better. This obviously comes at a hefty cost but as parents, we have chosen to spend that money on education rather than other luxuries in life. That's our choice - not better or worse than others' but just our personal choice.

[EDLove]

bawdy-nan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> As I understand it bright children, statistically,

> do better at state schools. I can only assume that

> the motivation in sending children to private

> school is either social or an assumption by

> parents that their kids are perhaps not bright

> enough.

Parents send their children to private school for many reasons - because of the proven high grades, because of the extra-curricular activities, the smaller classes and more personal tuition, some because it's the nearest good school, some because they need boarding facilities etc.

> I went to Oxbridge from a state comp (one of, I

> think, 45 in my intake year eligible for free

> school meals) and my impression is (and remains)

> that a private school education gives children a

> sense of expectation and feeling of desert. which

> means, I think, that it is easier to succeed.

Oxford or Cambridge? I guess both these universities offer good grades, can breed expectation and enable students to mix with a certain social crowd.... like a lot of private schools? If you feel that private education means that it is easier to succeed then is it a bad thing that parents would want this for their children?

> In my day my sense is that there were other,

> intellectual opportunities and challenges afforded

> to people at independent schools but I really

> don't see that now. my daughter, at a local state

> school has, in her first few weeks at secondary

> school been challenged to think and experiment

> intellectually, has spent a full day at Imperial

> College doing maths with academics andhas been

> offered, in my opinion a world of expectation I

> never had.

But someone of your daughter's age at a private school didn't have a productive/interesting first few weeks too? Glad to see that expectation is now a positive thing though :p

> She's also mixing with an extraordinarily wide

> range of people - some clever, some not so much,

> some evidently wealthy some not so and they're on

> an equal footing and engaging in the world and I'm

> thrilled for her and, honestly, I don't think she

> could get that at an independent.

> (Edited for terrible typos)

Which would be the same in a lot of private schools. Being wealthy does not make your child clever and sending your child to private school does not mean that you are wealthy - some parents choose to prioritise school fees, and of course there are thousands of bursaries every year.

Also, just because it is a state school doesnt mean that you are going to find a wide range of people attending. A lot of state schools will be filled with the children of parents who have managed to buy their way in to a desirable location.

[Zebedee Tring]

Jeremy, I'm not condemning out of hand the independent school system, which in fact educated me (albeit for free). The point I was making was that parents in effect buy better grades for their children, who are then overtaken at university (or caught up with) by state school kids (my own First achieving son being one). And then it appears that the privately educated kids move ahead again because of their connections.

[*Bob*]

Zebedee Tring Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

And then it appears that

> the privately educated kids move ahead again

> because of their connections.

Just 'saying it' (like it's some sort of scientific fact) doesn't make it so.

I have several friends who were privately educated - and none of them got handed anything on a silver platter because of their alleged 'connections'. Sorry to disappoint. It may have given them other advantages, but not on that front.

You open your paper, look at George Osbourne and decide everyone who goes to private school must be like him. You're wrong.

[Jeremy]

So private education buys better grades, but not necessarily smarter kids... even if I decide to send my daughter to private school in years to come, I'd be able to live with that, I think.

In my experience the people who land jobs through "connections" do so via their parents, not their school friends. I don't think private/state school is all that relevant in that equation.

[miga]

.

[DaveR]

"...May I suggest you look at how well state (or comprehensives as you call them) schools perform, particularly in areas such as London. Paying to go private does not buy you a first class education it buys you a place in society. Why are there so little state school students at Oxford and Cambridge? Is it because they are not bright enough? Or is it because they don't mix in the right environment for them to be accepted?"

I sincerely hope the author of this tosh is not really a deputy head teacher. I don't think anybody (or at least anybody who is not blinded by prejudice) is seriously suggesting that private schools don't generally deliver a very good standard of education, or that Oxford and Cambridge don't take students based on academic merit. The real issue is that getting a really good secondary education from the state sector depends pretty much on where you live, whereas going private allows you to buy a degree of certainty. That seems unfair, but the answer, surely, is to agitate for more consistently better state schools.

Of course, there will be parents who go private for other reasons, some of them stupid and/or offensive to some, but ultimately that's just because there are always stupid people out there*

(*See *Bob*'s Law of Cocks)

[mako]

'I don't think anybody (or at least anybody who is not blinded by prejudice) is seriously suggesting that private schools don't generally deliver a very good standard of education'.

I think there is a problem that too many people see exam results and education as the same thing. I don't think private education prepares children to have empathy with all of society which can be a problem when those children go on to run the country.

[legalalien]

Mako I don't see that as a problem. I expect school to maintain discipline, demand at least a superficial level of mutual respect, and educate my children to a stated standard within the academic curriculum (i include stuff like sport, music, art here). Their moral education I consider to be primarily my domain - sure I want the staff to tell me if they're behaving inappropriately, but soft stuff like empathy, awareness of the world around them, etc etc I think is a parental responsibility. And I take it very seriously. Is that so wrong? I have plenty of life experience to share.

[Zebedee Tring]

Bob, I don't think that everyone who went to private school is like Osborne. I went to private school and I certainly am not. And just because you disagree with me doesn't give you the right to try to attribute ridiculous conclusions to me.

[*Bob*]

You did say - twice - that privately educated kids get ahead because they have better connections.

Not in most cases. Now I've said it twice too. You could say it again - all the usual stuff about silver spoons and mummy and daddy. But it won't make it more true.

[*Bob*]

I mentioned Osbiurne because he *is* an example of someone that got ahead because of connections. One of those very visible minority that are often seized upon but unrepresentative of the rest.

I thought that would have been obvious.

[Zebedee Tring]

Bob, don't talk down to me please. I know that it's something that some EDF people love to do this when someone has the audacity to disagree with them but I don't like it. I never said that ALL privately educated pupils get on because of their connections but it is not exactly an original observation to say that very many do. It is something that people from other comparable countries have observed and it doesn't help the UK's competitiveness.

I am not looking at this from the point of view of someone who has an instinctive hatred of private schools. As I have stated many times already, I was myself privately educated and am therefore in a good position to know how the connections of my school contemporaries have been of great assistance to very many of them.

[*Bob*]

Oh, I'm sorry.

I assumed that when you said "private school children will overcome their inferior degrees by using the connections that school, mummy and daddy will have provided for them" and then "it appears that the privately educated kids move ahead again because of their connections" - I assumed that was what you meant - as opposed to, say, some more measured and less definitive statement which didn't manage to come across in the words themselves.

I will be sure to look more carefully next time, to find the hidden meaning.

[mako]

Legalalien, you may well have plenty of life experiemces but you can only have one background and one set of views. A childs own experiences, environment and peers will also have a great influence on them and at schools like Alleyns this is much narrower than at many good local schools. If you were inner city, middle of nowhere or had a failing local school then I can see why someone who could afford it may send their child to Alleyns. However for many children in Dulwich they would be better prepared for life by having a broader experience by attending their local state school.

[legalalien]

Seriously? My son (who doesn't go to Alleyns, for the record) spends most of his free time playing sport with kids from "good local schools" and their life experiences and outlook are no less narrow / more broad than those at his school as far as I can tell. Their parents are certainly less diverse,culturally and socioeconomically.

[mako]

You surely arent arguing that there is more socioeconomic diversity at private schools?

[Penguin68]

I suspect the family income spread for those at private schools is, in fact, far wider (greater percentage between richest and poorest households) than for state schools. All you need is a couple of 100% bursaries and an oligarch and you have a hugely diverse socio-economic spread!