Stress of secondary school choices

maman

Person_one wrote: »

They have to pass the entrance exam and live in the catchment area though. Why the confusion?

Thanks for the clarification. Where I live children can sit the entrance exam even if they live out of catchment and, if they pass, they get in. I assume those who live in the catchment and don't pass have to go to the comprehensive down the road (or go private if parents can afford it;)). Maybe there are more places on offer or maybe they just want the very brightest pupils to boost their results.

Strapped

The single most important factor in how a child performs at school is parent involvement.

You can't buy that.

wiogs

Strapped wrote: »

The single most important factor in how a child performs at school is parent involvement.

You can't buy that.

It is certainly one of the factors but for those that send their kids to boarding school perhaps not as important as others.

Strapped

maman wrote: »

Thanks for the clarification. Where I live children can sit the entrance exam even if they live out of catchment and, if they pass, they get in. I assume those who live in the catchment and don't pass have to go to the comprehensive down the road (or go private if parents can afford it;)). Maybe there are more places on offer or maybe they just want the very brightest pupils to boost their results.

Where I live (close to the border between LEAs) the grammar schools in the neighbouring LEA operate an admissions policy where the first "x" places are allocated strictly on performance in the 11+ (anyone can apply, whether in catchment or not) and the remaining places are allocated only to those within catchment who can pass the 11+.

Strapped

wiogs wrote: »

It is certainly one of the factors but for those that send their kids to boarding school perhaps not as important as others.

Or the persons acting in loco parentis.

FBaby

Not all private schools are about better education either. We have quite a few around us, some excellent, some no better than the good local comprehensives, however, they market themselves well and many parents fall for it, assuming that because the classes only have 10 kids, they will do better, when the reason why they have 10 kids is because they are struggling to recruit.

peachyprice

Strapped wrote: »

Where I live (close to the border between LEAs) the grammar schools in the neighbouring LEA operate an admissions policy where the first "x" places are allocated strictly on performance in the 11+ (anyone can apply, whether in catchment or not) and the remaining places are allocated only to those within catchment who can pass the 11+.

Here, there is only a very vague catchment, they take pupils from 3 surrounding London boroughs and a county council, if your grade is high enough you will get a place regardless of where in that area you live. But they do only take the very highest performing pupils, just passing the 11+ will not necessarily get you a place.

seven-day-weekend

Gigglepig wrote: »

No need to listen/care if you don't want to.

If these parents are so unkind/spiteful/judgmental about other people's school choices, why do you even care if they would no longer invite yournkid to play woth theirs? I'm sure you'll find nice (and not so nice) families at the new school too.

Agree with this. It's just spitefulness. Send your child to the school best suited to them. They will make other friends.

aliasojo

Person_one wrote: »

Not to diminish the young man's accomplishment, but does a 2:1 from Nottingham really justify all that money that could have been spent on other things? Loads of people get a 2:1 without an expensive private education!

I do see your point and yes, loads of people do get on well without private education.

It's a sad fact though that loads just don't achieve in their local crap school.

It's a question of priorities for me. Education is much more important than spending money on other things imo.

I agree with Bylromarha's comment about short term pain = long term gain, that's how I feel about the financial aspect.

If I could afford to send daughter to a private school, she'd be there now.

Yes schools should be all equal but they are not. It's the community that plays a large part and until you can ensure school catchments are made up of people who care rather than those who don't, you will always get problem or lower performing schools. It's down to demographic.

seven-day-weekend

Person_one wrote: »

He'll be fine at the comprehensive, most of us are, and because you won't be scrimping to pay for something that should only ever be free you'll be able to do lots of nice things in the holidays and at weekends that he'd miss out on if you were shelling out a fortune to prop up an unethical and unfair system. Bonus!

My son genuinely WOULDN'T have been best at the Comp most of the others in his class went to. He was bullied unmercifully in his primary school and couldn't wait to get away, he didn't want to go to the same school as them . Luckily he got a place in the church school that was our first choice and all the bullies went elsewhere.

Had he have not got into this school, we'd have sent him to a Comp school in the next county (as we are on the borders of three), or paid privately if we could have scrimped the money together. No way would he have gone to that local comp, I'd have chained myself to the railings first.

You must do what is the right thing for your child.