Should i leave my state school ?

Conor Reidy

I am currently in a state school in 3rd year but i parents want be to attend a boarding school i would prefer to go to the boarding school but i don't know about if i get good grades.

Ajsoprano

Conor Reidy wrote: »

I am currently in a state school in 3rd year but i parents want be to attend a boarding school i would prefer to go to the boarding school but i don't know about if i get good grades.

Do what you like. Private school will lead to more opportunities. State school will be grand.

spurious

Your grades depend on you.

Pawwed Rig

spurious wrote: »

Your grades depend on you.

Couldn't agree with that. The environment and standard of teaching plays a huge role.
OP there was a survey done on all schools that showed the percentage that went to third level. Have a look at that which should be an indication of the schools standards.

RobbieTheRobber

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Couldn't agree with that. The environment and standard of teaching plays a huge role.
OP there was a survey done on all schools that showed the percentage that went to third level. Have a look at that which should be an indication of the schools standards.

https://www.irishtimes.com/feeder-schools/

Del2005

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Couldn't agree with that. The environment and standard of teaching plays a huge role.
OP there was a survey done on all schools that showed the percentage that went to third level. Have a look at that which should be an indication of the schools standards.

Why is how many start 3rd level an indicator of how good a school is? There is a huge drop out rate in 1st year of 3rd level so that would mean that a large proportion of the people from the school with high 3rd level entry sent their pupils in the wrong direction, is that good education?

Day Lewin

The children of the bourgeoisie get good grades in schools because education is their primary asset.
Whatever school they send their kids to, will produce those results.
If posh parents sent their offspring (and their money) to the roughest of techs, the standard of output would shoot up.
It's the same Leaving Cert, wherever you do it: people sit this exam in Old Folk's Homes, in jails.
It is entirely possible that there could be more dedicated teachers in the tough school than in the posh one.
Throwing money at education does not always change the results: that point about the drop-out rate in First Year is very true, and demonstrates that you can't make a silk purse out of a leather shoe, and parental hopes don't always translate into offspring's performance.
Change school by all means, if it increases your motivation and commitment to work hard. But probably, commitment and hard work will deliver the same results wherever you go.

Pawwed Rig

Del2005 wrote: »

Why is how many start 3rd level an indicator of how good a school is? There is a huge drop out rate in 1st year of 3rd level so that would mean that a large proportion of the people from the school with high 3rd level entry sent their pupils in the wrong direction, is that good education?

Because it is an indication of good grades which to OP asked about. I went to a school with a poor conversion rate to 3rd level. Most of the teachers time was spent dealing with behavioural problems. Many of the teachers were unable to teach affectively. Our leaving cert results suffered from this (ignoring the constant threat of assault)

Pawwed Rig

Day Lewin wrote: »

The children of the bourgeoisie get good grades in schools because education is their primary asset.
Whatever school they send their kids to, will produce those results.
If posh parents sent their offspring (and their money) to the roughest of techs, the standard of output would shoot up.
It's the same Leaving Cert, wherever you do it: people sit this exam in Old Folk's Homes, in jails.
It is entirely possible that there could be more dedicated teachers in the tough school than in the posh one.
Throwing money at education does not always change the results: that point about the drop-out rate in First Year is very true, and demonstrates that you can't make a silk purse out of a leather shoe, and parental hopes don't always translate into offspring's performance.
Change school by all means, if it increases your motivation and commitment to work hard. But probably, commitment and hard work will deliver the same results wherever you go.

Very naive post there. A parent does not have to be posh to want their kids to have a good education. Every parent should wish this for their child as it gives their child options.

If you attend a school who have the leaving cert course finished by March and are just practising exams you are way ahead of the school (my school) whose teacher had to give extra classes 2weeks before the exams just to finish the course.

Your point about more dedicated teachers is just naive emotion unless you can back this up by data. It certainly wasn't true in my school where teachers were bad tempered and just going through the motions day to day. The good teachers quickly moved on to greener pastures.

Avatar MIA

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Very naive post there. A parent does not have to be posh to want their kids to have a good education.

No, but it's more likely a posh kid will end up at a boarding school or the like.

While a highly regarded school will do better than average for the likes of the Irish Times school league it will be significantly down to parents/children's motivation and desires. Half the teacher's job is done.

Look how well the Gaelscoileanna are doing - you're almost guaranteed to have very motivated (parents) children going to these schools, with little to no messing. And yes, the schools can probably cherry pick teachers for that reason.

Then there are schools that could have amazing teachers, but have to teach through a haze of ADHD, malnourished, disinterested, spectrum kids. How invaluable are those teachers?

To answer the OP, the boarding school will possibly/probably be a better educational environment, but what about your current social network, joining a new/different class isn't going to be easy and can be disruptive. Good luck.

spurious

I will not name schools but having corrected mocks for many years from many schools, I can assure you fee-paying is no guarantee of universal success. It depends on the child.

Pawwed Rig

spurious wrote: »

I will not name schools but having corrected mocks for many years from many schools, I can assure you fee-paying is no guarantee of universal success. It depends on the child.

Agreed but a good child will do well at a good school. They may not do well (or as well) at a poor school.

spurious

We will have to agree to disagree. I would say by JC the good or bad habits/attitudes/skills are already there. Personally I believe the type of play/interaction with adults (verbal and physical) before school is the main factor. Many children are playing catch up or are well ahead of the field before they even get to school.

Day Lewin

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Very naive post there. A parent does not have to be posh to want their kids to have a good education. Every parent should wish this for their child as it gives their child options.

If you attend a school who have the leaving cert course finished by March and are just practising exams you are way ahead of the school (my school) whose teacher had to give extra classes 2weeks before the exams just to finish the course.

Your point about more dedicated teachers is just naive emotion unless you can back this up by data. It certainly wasn't true in my school where teachers were bad tempered and just going through the motions day to day. The good teachers quickly moved on to greener pastures.

Not naive at all, I can firmly assure you: there are FIVE secondary teachers in my immediate family - mother, siblings, a son: I have listened to many a H-Dip student (it's some kind of phony Masters now) and a ton of staffroom gossip.

My own five children went to local state schools and they include chess champions, a Master in mathematics, and a Doctorate in engineering.

I can barely count the number of anxious parents among my suburban neighbours who have spent heavy money, even raised mortgages to pay for private schools and grinds, in an effort to drag their offspring into, and through, higher education; in the belief that this is some sort of passport to a living. It is one of the most persistent shibboleths. Often a very expensive investment for a half-baked return. I stand over my post!

ignorance is strength

Drop-out rates decline the higher is the average points score. It's about 25% for ITs, 10% for universities and 5% for TCD. This is despite the fact that a university degree is likely more demanding than an IT degree. (I'm certain that the top tier of students at ITs would comfortably be able for a university degree; just that the level needed to idle through is higher at universities.) This would seem to refute the claim that the higher "feeders" are disproportionately responsible for dropouts. That said, I agree that feeder schools are poor indicators of the educational "added value" of schools.

It has to be conceded that, if you average the performance of students, those in a class with motivated and well-behaved peers, taught by competent and experienced teachers, will outperform those not exposed to such. I'm aware that children's aptitudes are largely determined in their youth, heavily based on environmental factors. But that shouldn't distract from the fact that, over a highly-stressful and destabilising two-year leaving cert, certain school structures lead to improved Leaving Cert performance. Too many people, in arguing the opposite, focus on exceptions (Day Lewin boastfully lists their children's achievements, as if that proves anything!) when, in reality, statistical analysis is required to expose the advantage. Someone said that "your grades depend on you". I agree, but often you depend on your environment.

LambDev

I went to a state school with a good reputation. I tried hard, I was respectable, but school wasn't for me. I did ok in my leaving cert, and secured a position studying computer science in a college people sometimes laugh at because it's not "An ancient/traditional university" but employers and recruiters seem to love the grads from the course.

Yes, it's up to the child, but it's also up to the environment they're in.

lawred2

Ajsoprano wrote: »

Do what you like. Private school will lead to more opportunities. State school will be grand.

That's not a rule

randylonghorn

LambDev wrote: »

Yes, it's up to the child, but it's also up to the environment they're in.

Yes, I think I'd go with that one.

Obviously, the young person's basic ability and whether they're interested and prepared to put in the work are absolutely pivotal, but the environment at home and the environment at school do significantly help (or hinder).

Where I'd be a lot more cautious would be in assuming that private schools are automatically better at this than state or public schools. I wouldn't deny for a moment that you could find examples of both which would seem to support that thesis ... but certainly in my personal experience you will also find examples of each which would tend to throw doubt on that thesis as well.

While I'm always wary of using individual cases in these kind of arguments, I'm going to mention two here NOT as "proof" of anything broader but simply as illustrations / examples.

I went to a very "ordinary" second-level school ... not private or fee-paying or anything like that, not a so-called "rough" school either ... a very normal, co-ed, mid-sized rural school. A very normal, co-ed, mid-sized rural school where both staff and to an extent even the students took a certain glee every year in equaling and often out-stripping the LC results from the rather posh, fee-paying, (mostly) boarding school in the next town over. And we didn't have to wear their poncey uniforms either ...:pac:

On the other hand, a neighbour followed family tradition and went to the fancy school. He wouldn't have been the most academically inclined (unusually in that family) and struggled, especially with languages and maths, although he would have worked fairly hard in fairness ... wouldn't have been a "swot" as such, but he did put in a reasonable effort and would have wanted to do well (certainly, there were no discipline / behaviour problems or anything like that).

Coming up to Junior Cert, it was gently suggested to the parents that he "might be happier in another school" after Junior.

Now, I will leave this one to you all to judge for yourselves ... do you think the school's primary concern here was the educational and general welfare of the student, or the prospective LC results stats for that school a couple of years later?

I will say that family tradition was broken thereafter ... his younger siblings, all academic high achievers, attended our school when their turn came around.

I will also say, in fairness, that as an adult working in education I have encountered private schools who would have a very different attitude ... and others who don't.

I'd give the same advice to the OP as I've often given to both parents and students in the past ... don't assume anything based on state vs. private or even on the school having a "big name".

Do your own quiet "whole school evaluation". Talk to students who go to the school(s) / their parents. Look at results, certainly, but also try to assess the general environment and the culture within the school ... the latter can be hugely important both for the student's general development and for that most basic of issues: is the student going to be happy in that school?

And remember, apart from the fact that most students would prefer to like their school and most parents would prefer their children to be happy in their school, students who are happy with their school are more likely to achieve to their full potential.