Turn on thread page Beta

Differences between public and comprehensive schools watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kates:))
    I both, at the same time, loathe and love the fact I went to a comprehensive :-/
    Pretty much my feelings, though I'm not sure I would stretch as far as 'love' :p:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Edenr)
    Pretty much my feelings, though I'm not sure I would stretch as far as 'love' :p:
    :p: :ahee: it's just a saying for effect dont'cha knooooow
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It's been on the news as well recently on Milburns elitism piece that independent school provide their students with an all rounded CV/UCAS qualifications, whatever. To be honest, I don't see how much different they can be to state schooled children. I'm not talking about funding, quality of teaching and facilities but what we leave school with. We leave school with GCSES and A-Levels too so the only thing I see is the extra-curricular activities. I personally feel my state secondary school offered a ton for the top students and I'd have things to mention on a CV/UCAS form.

    I'm personally curious to hear about the extra curricular activities provided by independent schools which could give their students the upper hand. What kind of EC's/schemes are provided?
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by Mr. Cool)
    Was just wondering, what do you guys think are the main differentiators between public and comprehensive schools? What makes the public sector so much more effective when it comes to schooling than it's government counterpart? Specific examples would be good too.
    It's actually private sector :wink2:

    Basically, getting good grades is considered normal, if not cool , at private schools, whereas doing the same at state schools will get you a starring role in a particularly violent Youtube video (or whatever is the latest fad I don't know).

    Also, the teachers at private schools generally have university degrees and they actually care about your education.

    (Original post by Palladio)
    I'm personally curious to hear about the extra curricular activities provided by independent schools which could give their students the upper hand. What kind of EC's/schemes are provided?
    CCF, Duke of Edinburgh award, career advisors, much much more help with univeristy applications (reams of UCAS talks, help with personal statement. My friends who go to a state school haven't had as much help as I have).

    Private schools have the capability (read: money) to offer so much. As mentioned by a previous poster, they have CCFs with armouries, localised swimming pools and other quality resources etc.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by K the Failure)
    It's actually private sector :wink2:
    Oh. Well, apologies
    (Original post by K the Failure)
    Basically, getting good grades is considered normal, if not cool , at private schools, whereas doing the same at state schools will get you a starring role in a particularly violent Youtube video (or whatever is the latest fad I don't know).
    This did provide me with much lulz . The thought that simply doing what they're expected to do in a state school will get a pupil bullied..
    (Original post by K the Failure)
    Also, the teachers at private schools generally have university degrees
    Aren't all teachers supposed to have i) a specialist subject degree followed by a one-year Graduate Diploma of Teaching (Secondary) and ii) a combined specialist subject degree and secondary teaching qualification?
    (Original post by K the Failure)
    and they actually care about your education.
    ..mmm, we can't just assume state school teachers do or "don't care".
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr. Cool)
    I'm intrigued, how does this work?



    Which qualities? And to my knowledge universities aren't biased towards public schooling, or is this only the official stance?

    If, like me, you cannot afford to attend the school, but have shown that you have a few brain cells sparking up there, then they will give you a scholarship and bursaries which bring down the cost of the school, for me, I pay around £1000 a year, as opposed to the £15000 that others pay

    Unis arent biased towards public schooling "officially", but in reality they will pick the public over the state, and the qualities I was refering to were the huge amount of time and care which the individual teachers give, we get our ps looked over many times, they help with everything that will help get into uni and they also help give you the confidence to be able to speak with adults and others in the appropriate manner, to know how to conduct ourselves etc. and to be comfortable in our own abilities and to be constantly urged and motivated to further ourselves, things which are sadly not encouraged in the state schools

    hope it helped:cool:
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Teachers are payed a lot more, and parents pay fee's, how pissed off would you be if you paid £15k + a year and you didn't get straight A's... So more pressure on both teachers and students to succeed.

    Selection of better pupils, they can take in the best of the best if they want.

    Finally, stupid rules, like "No running with headphones in." and "No public displays of affection off any kind, including holding hands." 2 of the rules at a local school near me....
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr. Cool)
    Aren't all teachers supposed to have i) a specialist subject degree followed by a one-year Graduate Diploma of Teaching (Secondary) and ii) a combined specialist subject degree and secondary teaching qualification?
    All of our teachers have full uni degrees, many of which have huge reams of experience in their subject in the real world as industy people etc. The majority of them have PHD or some sort of title on their name
    (Ba, Masters, etc.)
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by infernalcradle)
    If, like me, you cannot afford to attend the school, but have shown that you have a few brain cells sparking up there, then they will give you a scholarship and bursaries which bring down the cost of the school, for me, I pay around £1000 a year, as opposed to the £15000 that others pay

    Unis arent biased towards public schooling "officially", but in reality they will pick the public over the state, and the qualities I was refering to were the huge amount of time and care which the individual teachers give, we get our ps looked over many times, they help with everything that will help get into uni and they also help give you the confidence to be able to speak with adults and others in the appropriate manner, to know how to conduct ourselves etc. and to be comfortable in our own abilities and to be constantly urged and motivated to further ourselves, things which are sadly not encouraged in the state schools

    hope it helped:cool:
    Yess it did, thanky.

    Btw on the topic of schools and unis; I heard Galloway mention last night that Oxbridge accept eight times more privately schooled pupils than state schooled pupils, which could partly be explained by the bias you refer to. Interesting stuff.

    You also mentioned public schools "help give you the confidence to be able to speak with adults and others in the appropriate manner, to know how to conduct [y]ourselves etc". Could you tell me a bit more about this? Sorry to keep probing but this is good stuff, I'm starting to become muy curioso.. :holmes:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr. Cool)
    Yess it did, thanky.

    You also mentioned public schools "help give you the confidence to be able to speak with adults and others in the appropriate manner, to know how to conduct [y]ourselves etc". Could you tell me a bit more about this? Sorry to keep probing but this is good stuff, I'm starting to become muy curioso.. :holmes:
    lol, no problem. What I mean is that unlike state schools, we have good informal (& formal) relationships with our teachers, (we can joke with them etc.) and this allows us to speak to them as equals and not as teachers. Also, in things such as CCF and other ECs we are encouraged to speak up for ourselves and we will frequently have mini debates in classes on issues. We get taught to conduct ourselves in the simple way of acting polietly and with manners and knowing how to act cos if we dont, we get locked up in detention.

    If you want anything else, just quote me :yes:
    some good rep woudn't hurt either :yep:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by infernalcradle)
    lol, no problem. What I mean is that unlike state schools, we have good informal (& formal) relationships with our teachers, (we can joke with them etc.) and this allows us to speak to them as equals and not as teachers. Also, in things such as CCF and other ECs we are encouraged to speak up for ourselves and we will frequently have mini debates in classes on issues. We get taught to conduct ourselves in the simple way of acting polietly and with manners and knowing how to act cos if we dont, we get locked up in detention.

    If you want anything else, just quote me :yes:
    some good rep woudn't hurt either :yep:
    Rep? No probs, it's on the way. And thanks, will do :yep:
    Offline

    13
    I don't think that anyone has pointed this out yet, but I think it's very major: The National Curriculum, or the "one-size-fits-all" curriculum.

    Just by saying that it's wrong. We're all different, work at different paces etc, and that's what the NC lacks. It bases it's curriculum on age, not ability.

    Also, from 11-14 you have to study somewhat 14 subjects. Private schools have the freedom to teach what they want, when they want.

    To reclarify, some subjects, which I will not name, are just not worth studying from the NC. I feel more time should be spent on developing the basic maths, english and science skills, as 50% of school leavers can get 5A*-C. Instead of focusing time in, what the heck: Art, Drama, DT etc, more time should be spent on English, Maths, Science etc. State schools should be free to focus more time on these important subjects. Because, tbh, standards for the less traditional subjects at non-paying schools, generally, are shocking, put off by the subject, and in short A WASTE OF TIME.

    Private schools, on the other hand, concentrate on the most important subjects, generally speaking, and this is why I hear on TSR, private schools do somewhat 8 subjects and concentrate on those, than, in general, comprehensives give out as much GCSEs and vocational qualifications in order to hit the 5A*-C target.

    Tbh, I could go on about the NC, but I think that is probably the most important factor.

    The next is the people. If you aren't motivated to learn, work hard etc, chances are you're not going to do well - WHEREVER you go. It just tends to be harder at comps because, in general, there are more of "those sort of people". etc etc

    Resources, atmosphere, work ethic, teaching etc are all contributing factors, but all, we got to be honest, money is a factor. It is.

    Tbh, we can't just poke out one thing and say "this divides the standard between X type of school and Y type of school". There are many factors involved. Like how there are many factors in global warming etc. However, I feel the NC is a huge factor. For reasons that are quite obvious.
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by Mr. Cool)
    ..mmm, we can't just assume state school teachers do or "don't care".
    :gasp: I should have thought before writing that. However, I do think that in private schools teachers are much more likely to care because the pupils are more likely to care about their education. I remember the good old days in primary school where my teacher would just give up cos of a handful of interesting characters. You don't get that in private schools simply because you are essentially purchasing a good education. However, I'm sure there are state schools which do do well (grammar schools mostly I would think)

    (Original post by Mr. Cool)
    Aren't all teachers supposed to have i) a specialist subject degree followed by a one-year Graduate Diploma of Teaching (Secondary) and ii) a combined specialist subject degree and secondary teaching qualification?
    And you're most probably right, you probably do need a degree to be a teacher. You definitely do not need a degree to become a teaching assistant though (at the primary school I went to, most of them had cockney accents)
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    The teaching in private schools is often of a higher standard than that in state schools (often, but definitely not always!) My friend who goes to a state school told me how some of her teachers don't teach properly/don't know what they are doing/don't care/class is never paying attention or out of control and I think two left because they had a mental breakdown. o.o I'm not saying that all state schools are like that at all but I've never had anything like that at my school, whatsoever. All the teachers keep at us to work hard and try hard as well. Also maybe its just a complete coincidence but nearly all the teachers at my school seem to have come out of uni with 1st degrees. (We asked, they told us when we were talking about uni stuff.) That doesn't prove they are good teachers however it proves they are dedicated to their subject and are excellent at it, which is always reassuring.

    Its also standard to get very high grades and you are pressured very much by everyone to do well, your parents, teachers and friends. I once got a low A* for a GCSE coursework and I was asked to redo because it wasn't 'quite up to standard'. :woo: Its insane, but it makes people work. Basically, it seems embarassing if you do worse than your friends so that in turn forces everyone to do better. There is pressure on teachers to get students at a high level too, so its probably just as stressful for them. Its not pressure to the point of suicide though, its kinda of like something which lurks in the background... no one speaks of it.:ninja:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    Spoiler:
    Show
    I don't think that anyone has pointed this out yet, but I think it's very major: The National Curriculum, or the "one-size-fits-all" curriculum.

    Just by saying that it's wrong. We're all different, work at different paces etc, and that's what the NC lacks. It bases it's curriculum on age, not ability.

    Also, from 11-14 you have to study somewhat 14 subjects. Private schools have the freedom to teach what they want, when they want.

    To reclarify, some subjects, which I will not name, are just not worth studying from the NC. I feel more time should be spent on developing the basic maths, english and science skills, as 50% of school leavers can get 5A*-C. Instead of focusing time in, what the heck: Art, Drama, DT etc, more time should be spent on English, Maths, Science etc. State schools should be free to focus more time on these important subjects. Because, tbh, standards for the less traditional subjects at non-paying schools, generally, are shocking, put off by the subject, and in short A WASTE OF TIME.

    Private schools, on the other hand, concentrate on the most important subjects, generally speaking, and this is why I hear on TSR, private schools do somewhat 8 subjects and concentrate on those, than, in general, comprehensives give out as much GCSEs and vocational qualifications in order to hit the 5A*-C target.

    Tbh, I could go on about the NC, but I think that is probably the most important factor.

    The next is the people. If you aren't motivated to learn, work hard etc, chances are you're not going to do well - WHEREVER you go. It just tends to be harder at comps because, in general, there are more of "those sort of people". etc etc

    Resources, atmosphere, work ethic, teaching etc are all contributing factors, but all, we got to be honest, money is a factor. It is.

    Tbh, we can't just poke out one thing and say "this divides the standard between X type of school and Y type of school". There are many factors involved. Like how there are many factors in global warming etc. However, I feel the NC is a huge factor. For reasons that are quite obvious.
    Good post and eye-opening. Had never thought of it from this angle and wasn't aware that private sector schools weren't bound to the curriculum. Kinda ties in with what Janos_D was saying about political meddling.


    (Original post by K the Failure)
    :gasp: I should have thought before writing that. However, I do think that in private schools teachers are much more likely to care because the pupils are more likely to care about their education. I remember the good old days in primary school where my teacher would just give up cos of a handful of interesting characters. You don't get that in private schools simply because you are essentially purchasing a good education. However, I'm sure there are state schools which do do well (grammar schools mostly I would think)

    And you're most probably right, you probably do need a degree to be a teacher. You definitely do not need a degree to become a teaching assistant though (at the primary school I went to, most of them had cockney accents)
    Ha no matter, just seemed a bit too sweeping as a comment at the time. Fair points nevertheless.. Excluding the last bit, that was below the belt :rofl: Anywho, apart from the general demeanour of your teachers/tutors/peers can you say there was anything you had at your disposal that you might have missed out on had you gone to the local comp (esp resource-wise)?

    (Original post by HighSkies)
    Basically, it seems embarassing if you do worse than your friends so that in turn forces everyone to do better. There is pressure on teachers to get students at a high level too, so its probably just as stressful for them. Its not pressure to the point of suicide though, its kinda of like something which lurks in the background... no one speaks of it.:ninja:
    Lol yup this seems to be coming up a lot.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Mr. Cool)
    Good post and eye-opening. Had never thought of it from this angle and wasn't aware that private sector schools weren't bound to the curriculum. Kinda ties in with what Janos_D was saying about political meddling.
    Thanks. :p:

    But it's really true. I mean it's really unfair to compare private and state schools when one has the freedom to develop their own curriculum, one is glued to the state.

    I believe that if private schools followed the NC - my, it would be so different. Yes, generally speaking they have better resources etc etc, but if these schools were fixed to the NC, it wouldn't be as good as it could be.

    Likewise, if state schools were out of the NC, and deciding a curriculum themselves to fit all types of children and not just the average Joe, it would be so many times better some will probably be as good, or even better than the top private schools. :yes: I can go into detail about this if you want.

    Because, I've witnessed some much time lost due to the compulsory components of the NC. If the NC was scrapped instead of making and changing qualifications literally every few years (which confuses departments, teachers and students), education in Britain would be so much better and there probably be no bias between private and state schools.

    In fact, there will probably be a lot of difference. It's that significant. Private and state schools will be equal, and like one poster said in this thread, we might have a system like Italy where the underachievers went to private schools to "buy" grade due to, in general, better "stuff".

    The NC is a burden to education in this country, and tbh, I would like to know if there are any political parties against this... Because if this is a Labour thing (and probably is), we're screwed until we get Lib Dems, but more likely the Tories on board to scrap the NC. :yes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr. Cool)
    Was just wondering, what do you guys think are the main differentiators between public and comprehensive schools? What makes the private sector so much more effective when it comes to schooling than it's government counterpart? Specific examples would be good too.
    What do you mean by 'public school'? Do you mean independent school? Not all private schools are public, just the select few, such as Eton and Harrow etc. Obviously the education provided by an independent is more sufficient than that of a comprehensive, yet at the end of the day it's down to what the student puts into the education. Also you should be aware that, under Gordon Brown's labour rule, many universities are being persuaded to take a new perspective: if somebody from a comprehensive has done as well as or better than somebody from an independent, they should be preferred as they have obviously put more in and not just had it handed on a plate. I once met a couple of people who were in one of the 'select' public schools I have mentioned, and I had better GCSE's than them, which I thought was quite laughable really.
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by Mr. Cool)
    can you say there was anything you had at your disposal that you might have missed out on had you gone to the local comp (esp resource-wise)?
    Better facilities, more specialised facilities (we have a bursar and electric carts that our groundsmen can drive around in), and more opportunities to do. For instance, I went to a weekly water polo club for a while when I was in year 7 or something and I probably wouldn't have had the chance at a comprehensive. There is also access to loads of other sports that you wouldn't really play (golf, squash etc).

    Also, we were forced to do some sort of enrichment in year 9/10 such as CCF or helping old people or something. We also have form tutors like many other schools, but they take records of the clubs and societies you are a member of and the extra-curricular activites you do so that not everyone becomes an over-studious bookworm.

    The subjects we do are more varied and in depth IMO. We do subjects such as Latin and Classical Civilisations which I think can really broaden your skills. Also, the classes tend to be smaller, therefore allowing the teachers to give you more attention which allows them to adapt to your needs.

    In summary, private schools have the capability to teach you well as well as providing all these extra-curricular activities to make you a better-rounded person.

    However, not all comprehensives are bad. I have cousins who went to a comprehensive and ended up going to very prestigious universities. However, they did have that work-hard attitude to see themselves through.

    (Original post by histon)
    What do you mean by 'public school'? Do you mean independent school? Not all private schools are public, just the select few, such as Eton and Harrow etc. Obviously the education provided by an independent is more sufficient than that of a comprehensive, yet at the end of the day it's down to what the student puts into the education. Also you should be aware that, under Gordon Brown's labour rule, many universities are being persuaded to take a new perspective: if somebody from a comprehensive has done as well as or better than somebody from an independent, they should be preferred as they have obviously put more in and not just had it handed on a plate. I once met a couple of people who were in one of the 'select' public schools I have mentioned, and I had better GCSE's than them, which I thought was quite laughable really.
    Not much difference between an independent school and 'public schools' apart from the fact that public schools are more prestigious i.e. the select few you mentioned.

    I do believe that it is more of an uphill struggle for someone who goes to a comprehensive, so well done you :thumbsup:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Because they do IGCSEs not "what is the danger of mobile phones" and "which of these statements about suncream demonstrates the risk outweighing the benefits".
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    -selective intake
    -higher aspirations
    -possibly teachers
    -"24h" education

    I think if comprehensive had some way of making their pupils do and understand homework (preps), they'd already do better.

    State boarding schools (they exist) seem to do much better than normal state comprehensives, so I don't think it's just intake.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

881

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year

University open days

  1. Sheffield Hallam University
    City Campus Undergraduate
    Tue, 21 Aug '18
  2. Bournemouth University
    Clearing Open Day Undergraduate
    Wed, 22 Aug '18
  3. University of Buckingham
    Postgraduate Open Evening Postgraduate
    Thu, 23 Aug '18
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.