Why do people favour elite schools?

[Stick]

This is more of a rant than a debate, but feel free to comment. I don't intend to insult anyone, but people may find themselves offended. If you do feel hurt or angered by my comments, I apologise. You can probably detect a frustrated tone in my words. I feel like I just need to get this off my chest.

-----

Back when my father was at high school, he just went to the local state school. While he was there, he was exposed to a lot of different students with different ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds, as well as varying (although overall, below average) academic abilities. My dad, although not the smartest of students, was an incredibly hard worker and had a desire for a more prosperous future. He ended up being the school's dux and was one of the few students from that school to ever go to Melbourne University.

He's always told me that it did not matter where I went to school - as long as I wanted to do well, I'd do well wherever I went. My mother, on the other hand, who attended a private school (and was not very academic), was very keen to send me to an 'elite' school. After many months of squabbling about 'my parents' investment in my education' and touring many of the best schools in Melbourne, my parents both felt the local private boy's school was the best choice - a happy medium between my parents' experiences. Most of the boys from my local primary school were going there as well.

I go to a fairly modest school. It is certainly not an elite school, by any standards. Most year levels here start off with about 200 students, with eight classes of approximately 25 students in each. When we get to Years 11 and 12, about a quarter of the students elect to undertake the VCAL program and the rest of us do VCE. We're not well-known for our academic excellence - we only get about 20 students each year who get an ATAR of 90 or above. Our school is further humbled by the presence of many other elite private schools in the area. Many of my peers tend to blame the teachers or the school itself for their poor academic success, despite it usually being their own fault. My friends' parents have also threatened them that if they fail to perform well academically at this school, that they will be moved to a more elite school. Other than the usual 5 or 6 boys who sit the Melbourne High exam and pass, most students who leave our school expect their new school will be the solution to all their academic problems. It's as if the students feel they have to live out the reputation of their school - 'my school's crap, my education will be crap so I might as well do crap while I'm here'.

I've always believed that every teacher is more or less the same wherever you go. I know personally that there are certainly bad teachers out there - trust me, I've had a few over the years myself. But they all have similar qualifications and the school they teach at is not determined by their ability; in most cases the school they work at is close to home or it was the school they attended when they were younger. So why do people believe that certain schools will guarantee academic success, while others will not? A lot of these elite schools seem to gear themselves towards VCE success by 'poaching' talent away from other schools. We credit certain schools for their high quality of education when they merely lure achieving students in the form of scholarships and kick out underachieving students. Each year at my school, we get a major intake of students in Year 11 who were told to leave their school because they were underachieving. We also lose several kids with genuine academic or sporting talent to elite schools - one boy was offered a scholarship which he didn't even apply for (he took it anyway). This swap of students is what gives a school its reputation and parents, wanting the best quality of education for their child, often gravitate to these pseudo-reputations.

It's all very easy to say this now while I'm on my high horse, but I used to feel as if my school was bad as well. I was determined to get out of my 'hell hole' by the end of Year 7. I told my parents in no uncertain terms that I wanted to sit the Melbourne High exam, so they got me heaps of tutors to help me out. As the exam was approaching, however, I began to have second thoughts about how I felt about my school. It had all the services and facilities that any student would ever need - it was only its 'reputation' that was bothering me. I sat the exam anyway and I was still over the moon when I got the email of acceptance, but after a lengthy period of thought, both my parents and I agreed that it would be best for me to stay at my current school. Could it have been one of the stupidest decisions ever? Potentially. But I don't regret it one little bit. Because I want to show my cohort and the future students who walk past the gates of my high school that reputation doesn't matter. If you want to succeed, you will succeed no matter where you go.

Why do schools feel the need to obtain VCE success by taking talent away from other places, rather than honestly educate their students to the supposed high standard of education they boast to offer? And why are parents so eager to follow these trends? If schools did not 'swap' their students around, we would clearly see a far more level playing field.

[shinny]

I don't think it's largely about the teachers and facilities and whatnot, but rather the types of people you're around. I believe that VCE largely comes down to motivation rather than 'intelligence' (a term I use loosely). Of course it helps, but I think one can succeed in many VCE subjects by compensating 'intelligence' with motivation and hard work. So what happens is that many students will more or less emulate the level of achievement of those around them. If you study too hard in a poor performing school, you're often looked down upon by others, hence lowering your motivation. The reverse can apply to other schools, hence increasing motivation to study. If someone has an internal drive for motivation though, they can succeed where ever they are as we can see from the several very high performing students from poor performing schools that come up every year. Problem is the large majority of people don't have this internal motivation to study, and that's the advantage of pooling students together in these selective schools.

The other way of looking at it is the fact that yes, if selective/private schools didn't poach all the high achievers, they would help to create a more level playing field somehow. I actually don't believe this would help much at all (more likely scenario is that the 'smart' kid would more likely get pulled down by the others, rather than the others get pulled up), but going by the assumption that it does, the fact remains is that people are inherently going to look out for themselves. Hence, not enough people will take the hit to stay at their local public school to improve it. It's just human nature really.

[Phy124]

Some students choose (or rather their parents choose) to attend private schools because the students generally have a good work ethic (generally because 'bad' students are kicked out). By being surrounded by such students you can be more motivated to do well and be less distracted. Also, although it isn't always the case, often you will have better teachers at a private school because they are attracted to such schools due to larger incomes and/or the same prestige as students.

It can also aid academically if things such as SAC scaling.

e.g. you are rank one in a strong cohort, you stuff up your Exam (your exam mark isn't top mark, so rely on someone else's), you get the no. 1 Exam mark which is good as your SAC mark. On the other hand rank one is a weak cohort, you stuff up your Exam(your exam mark isn't top mark, so rely on someone else's), you get the no.1 Exam mark which is bad as your SAC mark. Overall your study score will be lower in the weak cohort. Unlikely situation but still possible.

Most of this comes about from things of the past where underachieving students are asked to leave these top schools and students who are academically talented are offered scholarships and what not.

If, one day, I become a parent and my child is highly intellectual and is willing to be in such an environment, I would be happy to let them. But I think the student should be able to have opinion on the decision of which school they wish to be at, despite age.

[tea.squaredd]

Mhm, before I attended Melbourne High, I was among a rather low-tier public school. The difference in the environment and the quality of people you meet is tremendous to say the least. If I stayed at my old school, I would, most certainly, have lacked motivation or think I was already the best that there ever could be. Once you experience other environments however, you notice that your intelligence compares dismally against other intellectuals.
Also, a lot of the people at my old school find a 90 atar a huge achievement, whilst, not trying to be an elitist, people at MHS will think 99+ is the achievement to attain. Not only this, there are a greater number of smokers, drug users, those who do not respect society or themselves at the lower end schools than the elite ones.
Thus, the environment you are subjected to changes your attitude to life and study as well. Additionally, a lot of high tier schools will have a proper school spirit and ethos that can be properly felt by the students, whereas at my time at my former school, such a thing wouldn't even exist.
Having friends that are hardworkers and intelligent is of a paramount importance and these are also found at the higher end schools. If not for them, I would not be where I am today.
 
This is how I see why higher ranked schools are more beneficial than the others.
And yes, it is possible to do very well by yourself at a lower end school, but these cases are rare such as yourself.

[s...]

yes, going to Macrob/MHS would be great, but I think the pressure would be huge.

It's bad enough already: I know at some school some kids pick on others, and make them feel insecure, saying stuff like:' You know (insert name here) did 4 Methods practise exams and only got 1 thing wrong in total?" Which is really mean. I'm not saying that this happens at elite schools, as I don't attend one, but it sure happens at mine.

anyway, we should be like max payne: it is really up to the student more than the teacher.
s.

[funkyducky]

Well, to use anecdotal evidence, my school is non-selective and stingy with scholarships, yet consistently gets amazingly high scores. It's not so much that it "poaches" students, but rather, people who care enough are compelled to enrol in schools like mine. There's no tests to get in, no one gets kicked out for having low grades.

Like others have said, the people and atmosphere make a big difference.

[paulsterio]

I don't know why, but I've always had a soft-spot in my heart for public schools, maybe because it's that I've always been to a public school!

I don't like the really competitive atmosphere of some schools, I like my school cause it's competitive ut not extreme. Had I gone to somewhere like MHS, I would probably felt the need to place greater pressure on myself to do well (less facebook, not have a girlfriend, less going out...etc.) which isn't necessarily a good thing.

[CaiTheHuman]

There is always a percieved notion that kids in private schools excel more then kids in public schools. When parents are blasted with private school advertising coupled with media reports about how private school students excel in comparison to their public school peers. There is a sort of pressure to give their child the best. I mean my old school, which was a private school basically had ads at the airport. It's more of an advertising and marketing gimmick which influences people's decision to send their child to a private school. If they hear from one their friends " oh my child did so well and he went to this elite school called ........". Then this sort of word-to-mouth communication will surely have an impact on a parent mind.It causes them to think and evaluate their child/children's education. "Are they really being offered the best education at their current school".

[Panicmode]

Well, to use anecdotal evidence, my school is non-selective and stingy with scholarships, yet consistently gets amazingly high scores. It's not so much that it "poaches" students, but rather, people who care enough are compelled to enrol in schools like mine. There's no tests to get in, no one gets kicked out for having low grades.

Like others have said, the people and atmosphere make a big difference.

Umm Funky, you go to PLC. The thing about PL is, it is highly selective (not on grades) because the cost is friggen ridiculous. This creates an environment where parents are not only able to afford extra help, but can guilt trip their children into taking it and succeeding because they are spending so much money.


I go to De La Salle and to be honest Stick, it sounds a lot like your school. I am proud to have gone to my school and I am proud of what I have achieved.

[Panicmode]

How are the fees at DLS ? I thought they were quite high?

They're slightly less than 7 thousand a year.

Compared to:

St. Kevins $13,150
Xavier $16,298 + $1,100
PLC $22,136
Siena $7577
Sacre Coeur $15,859


To name a few

[Sellingman]

Honestly, some times I find Private education a bit of a laugh.

I went to a public school, I got 98.45 ATAR with only 5 subjects in total. 

What did I pay:

$3.50 for my local library card, borrowed books when I needed them to supplement my textbooks and teachers.

What did I do?

Motivated MYSELF, parents didn't care about school. Read the textbook and taught myself.

Private school:

Little bit better ATAR (let's assume 99.5).

What did they pay:

~200k over the course of their education on uniforms textbooks etc.

What did they do?
Get PhD teachers to explain to them what I read for $3.50 from my local library.

I honestly laugh at them, it's like parents are insecure and doubt their kids abilities so they give them overqualified teachers to compensate. Anybody who actually thinks their kids are intelligent and hard-working on their own wouldn't bother with private school expenses.

[Russ]

Congratulations on your results.
Whether or not you need a private school to do well is debatable, but private schools offer a better environment (both academic and otherwise) than public schools and saying otherwise is just willfully deluding yourself.

[paulsterio]

Russ, I disagree, private schools are more uniform, in that most of them do relatively well whereas public schools fluctuate, there are some who do really well and some who do really crap, the best public schools are probably not far behind the best private schools in my opinion.

But the truth is how much the better environment can help one succeed.

[Sellingman]

Better environment?

Academically, it inclines you to study. Why is this a good thing? We have loads and loads of people being pushed to study and enter Commerce amongst other 'prestigious' professions(look at the stats of Scotch and Commerce).

I personally think, if someone wants to study, they should study. They should not be influenced by external factors such as parents or school. If you truly want to succeed academically, you will. If can't transcend the difference of whether the kid next to you is studying or playing on his phone, as far as I'm concerned, you didn't want that place at university bad enough.

At my school, more or less everyone wants to study what they actually like.

We have many kids wanting to be athletes, rock musicians and tradies. They all pursue there interests.

Is there some freakish interest amongst Scotch students whereby 80% suddenly WANT to study Commerce. Please, parents and school pushing them for prestige and crap like that.

[Russ]

the best public schools are probably not far behind the best private schools in my opinion.

Compare the average and it's a different picture. The "best" public schools are well above the rest of the public schools and it's not a good comparison to make.

We have many kids wanting to be athletes, rock musicians and tradies. They all pursue there interests.

Great. This has nothing to do with students succeeding academically at public schools though. If parents are pushing their students into certain careers, that's not good, but it still doesn't detract from the fact that the private/public divide is very wide.