Why do grammar schools always do well?

[darkz]

Well, VCAA does attempt to address these inequities by boosting people's selection ranks with SEAS. However, of course, I don't know enough about SEAS to be able to give anything insightful as to whether it provides a huge impact to those in difficult circumstances - I have heard of people's selection ranks being boosted by almost 10 ATAR points though.

Also, apart from the discussion centred around the ability to afford tutoring and educational resources, here's some more food for thought - the fact that there's a deeply embedded cycle within low SES communities. If you think about it, if a student's parents were unemployed, or maybe struggling financially, I doubt that the focus of the student would be on studying i.e. in these circumstances the value of education is lower since there are most pressing issues to attend to. In most of these families, the students are pushed to enter the workforce early instead of pursuing tertiary education (hence, a high ATAR doesn't really mean anything to them), and start providing and this endless cycle will simply keep occurring. I know that not everyone will agree with this mentality - in particularly, those with immigrant parents (not excluding others though), but that's simply because there's a different value and perspective on education. (e.g. in some schools, studying hard might make you the 'nerd' of the year level, but in others, studying hard is looked favourably upon and you're more like a 'god')

Sorry if my comments came out as a bit mean, I do understand that some people just have to prioritise the basics first and everything after. I am understand that sometimes exams costing a bit of money can be well out of reach for many parents, I am so sorry to those students in those situations and it is certainly not there fault. I always promised myself one day if I finish VCE and get a good study score, I will create resources for those who can't afford it. I understand not everyone is as fortunate as me/you/us and that is why atar notes exist we all help each other. My public school is an average one, but the neighbouring public schools are really bad. My school is around 200-ish and some schools around me are around 400-500+ YET some people there still score a study score of 50. It is possible to do well at any school, tbh you don't need money to do well if you are really committed and look around for free resources. One day when you guys finish school and do well will you promise to help out those who aren't fortunate? I want to write practice exams for the disadvantage kids.

I mean, yes, I do agree to a certain extent that if you're committed, the sky's the limit. But, as I've said above, it still depends heavily on those around you and the value placed on education. In lower SES communities, there's a lower chance that students are going to have the level of commitment needed to score highly (I'm not calling them lazy, but that there are external factors which need to be considered). Also, there would be a point where no matter how hard you might want to pursue education, you can't.

[Bri MT]

There's been lots of SES and education discussions on AN in the past and I doubt this will be the last one. In the past I've written heaps on this so feel free to look that up if you're interested.

One thing I want to quickly add to this discussion that that SES isn't just about whether you can afford resources, tutoring, can afford a school etc. it also influences whether you even hear about that school in the first place, know school rankings, know people who had high scores etc. It influences hard to measure things like whether you even believe you can achieve a high score in addition to more obvious things.

I knew classmates whose parents didn't provide for them at all, let alone paying for extra resources. I also know that for many students the idea of buying practice exams didn't occur to them. Some people have more stressors outside of highschool than others, and while this can come from many sources other than SES, SES causes or at least correlates with many of these.


The idea of wanting to help out through free practice exams is a kind thought but imo it's easier to share resources for free with everyone than to try and target it towards disadvantaged students. This is me speaking from my experiences being a disadvantaged student in an underrep school, my experiences as an Access Monash mentor etc. I'm not sure how you would effectively get a resource out only to disadvantaged students & I feel that trying to target in this way would mean many disadvantaged students would be missed.


Also @ashmi and @angrybiscuit I certainly don't think there's anything in your posts that needs to be apologised for

[angrybiscuit]

Well, VCAA does attempt to address these inequities by boosting people's selection ranks with SEAS. However, of course, I don't know enough about SEAS to be able to give anything insightful as to whether it provides a huge impact to those in difficult circumstances - I have heard of people's selection ranks being boosted by almost 10 ATAR points though.

Oh SEAS completely slipped my mind... I go to a low SES school so I am eligible for SEAS and yes you are right in that I do get a 'boost' if my I do not meet the required ATAR. If I get an ATAR of 86, I can potentially get into a course that requires 90-91. I have heard of others where the increase is higher, especially in those in difficult circumstances.
Sorry, yes you are completely right, VCAA does attempt to address these inequities

Also, apart from the discussion centred around the ability to afford tutoring and educational resources, here's some more food for thought - the fact that there's a deeply embedded cycle within low SES communities. If you think about it, if a student's parents were unemployed, or maybe struggling financially, I doubt that the focus of the student would be on studying i.e. in these circumstances the value of education is lower since there are most pressing issues to attend to. In most of these families, the students are pushed to enter the workforce early instead of pursuing tertiary education (hence, a high ATAR doesn't really mean anything to them), and start providing and this endless cycle will simply keep occurring. I know that not everyone will agree with this mentality - in particularly, those with immigrant parents (not excluding others though), but that's simply because there's a different value and perspective on education. (e.g. in some schools, studying hard might make you the 'nerd' of the year level, but in others, studying hard is looked favourably upon and you're more like a 'god')

I second this. While not particularly prominent in Australia, education inequality and the problem with America's SATs are highlighted in this video. I know we are deviating from the original discussion but the video highlights how high SAT scores are usually a result of a wealthy financial background which in turn results into entrance to a more prestigious college which in turn results into a higher income. The same occurs in a poorer financial background where they go to community colleges (less prestigious colleges) resulting in a considerably less annual income. This results in a cycle of inequality. Of course, here in Australia, we are lucky that college entrance is not indicated by a single test but just highlights the huge role socio-economic background (unfortunately) plays in academic performance.
_{Again very sorry if this is off topic}

[a weaponized ikea chair]

money

[eloisegrace]

I must agree with whys on this bit. Nearly everyone at my school too does some form of tutoring, in fact, at my school, you would be part of a minority if you didn't get tutored in at least one subject. (By the way, I go to a government school and have never been to a private/grammar before. If someone does go to a private/grammar school and wants to share their experiences that would be great to hear!)

I go to a private grammar school so I would love to put in my input.

I am only in year 11, but I would say that at least half of my cohort would have tutoring. However, this does not always correlate to the highest achievers in the year. I would say that this is pretty similar to the Year 12 cohort. Tutoring can both help and harm people, it can help people consolidate content, but it often makes students contemplative in class so they don't do the work.

I think there are multiple different reasons that private/grammar schools usually perform better. I love the idea presented by @milanander. Private/grammar schools do often attract more academically oriented students. This is most likely due to the prestige of the schools (high median ATARs and study scores). Additionally, private/grammar schools often have a large range of resources that can be provided to students.

Wealthy backgrounds can also be a factor. For example, for my school, over 80% of students have a financial background in the top 25%. I find it very sad that students from disadvantaged backgrounds are often disadvantaged, however, VCAA and other organisations have tried to level this out.

[tigerclouds]

Where have you heard that "a lot of high-achievers did not take tutoring"?

For example, this thread:

Do students need tutoring to succeed in the HSC?
(HSC Related, but very relevant to the VCE still)
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/the-question/do-students-need-tutoring-to-succeed-in-the-hsc-20111014-1loyq.html#ixzz1awasrT82

I must agree with whys on this bit. Nearly everyone at my school too does some form of tutoring, in fact, at my school, you would be part of a minority if you didn't get tutored in at least one subject. (By the way, I go to a government school and have never been to a private/grammar before. If someone does go to a private/grammar school and wants to share their experiences that would be great to hear!)

A good amount of high-achievers from my school or friends in general who tended to have higher ATARs did do some tutoring to help them get there. I mean, tutoring impacts those in different ways, could be both beneficial or an overall negative impact depending on the individual themselves

Wow, I actually had no idea. It's hard to know when you're not in that environment. My belief was that high-achievers wouldn't necessarily need a tutor if they're already comfortable with the content.

I hadn't thought of quite a few other points that were raised actually so thanks for sharing guys. It's a much bigger issue than I had anticipated...

[Sine]

For example, this thread:Wow, I actually had no idea. It's hard to know when you're not in that environment. My belief was that high-achievers wouldn't necessarily need a tutor if they're already comfortable with the content.

I hadn't thought of quite a few other points that were raised actually so thanks for sharing guys. It's a much bigger issue than I had anticipated...

hmm I didn't really read the thread in full but skimmed parts of it. I think the question's they were posing were not too consistent. It kind of altered between do high achievers get tutoring and the efficacy of tutoring. These are completely different questions.

Hopefully, this thread can clear up on how prevalent tutoring is. I personally would also think that these experiences would be low-end estimates about how many people get tutoring since there are those who don't really make it known that they are getting tutoring.

Again the "need" for a tutor is different from whether someone gets a tutor. As a tutor myself I don't think tutoring is 100% necessary for someone to do well in VCE but if you get an effective tutor it makes the students job so much easier.

edit: minor fix

[jborn007]

As a current Year 12 student who is not studying at a grammar school but at a top-ranked private school that a lot of people consider it on the equivalent level of a grammar school, a factor that is also facilitating the process of students fortunate enough to be studying to achieve supposedly high-scoring results is the particularly early and fast-paced learning that we're studying at.
For example, we're going to complete our 2nd last SAC for Units 3/4 English next Wednesday and at the end have substantial time to revise and adequately prepare for the VCAA exams. Also, we formally initiate our classes in mid November which a lot of schools don't implement.
As other users have previously aforementioned, our top-scoring students/duxes or should i say the 99.95s are indeed a promotional and marketing mechanism that our school uses which does attract students from all demographics. I also second that fact that those duxes are perceived as the divine which at honours assembly the unimaginably-loud applauses mainly from students, but also from teachers and parents is something not as per usual to experience and most of us are definitely inspired/motivated from them.
Just my two cents.

[vox nihili]

There's a lot of hearsay in this thread, despite there being a really strong body of evidence about the reasons that wealthy schools do better.

A common narrative here is that wealthy schools provide a better standard of education and that students at these schools have more access to extracurricular opportunities, especially tutoring. This seems perfectly logical; however, when this proposition is tested it doesn't hold up. Almost all of the variation in grades can be explained by socioeconomic status. One's school actually has very little impact, meaning that a wealthy kid in a crap school tends to do as well as a wealthy kid in a wealthy school. This is particularly true of high-performing students, who tend to perform well wherever they go. Low performing students tend to do better if they are in more diverse classrooms (i.e. when you shift a lot of low performing kids to the same classroom they tend to struggle more).
As alluded to earlier, this also explains the high-performance of select-entry schools. Victoria's select-entry schools, especially those in the inner city, are some of the most demographically homogeneous schools in the state. These schools consistently have among the highest ratings for SES in the state.

Much more important are factors that are external to education. Low socioeconomic status brings with it a whole variety of consequences, regarding access to money, health status, having a supportive environment at home, exposure to criminality etc etc. Shamefully, these issues are compounded when students from low SES backgrounds are all shoved together in the same under resourced settings that are expected to provide an education in the context of dealing with these extraneous issues that impede education.

[tigerclouds]

A common narrative here is that wealthy schools provide a better standard of education and that students at these schools have more access to extracurricular opportunities, especially tutoring. This seems perfectly logical; however, when this proposition is tested it doesn't hold up. Almost all of the variation in grades can be explained by socioeconomic status. One's school actually has very little impact, meaning that a wealthy kid in a crap school tends to do as well as a wealthy kid in a wealthy school. This is particularly true of high-performing students, who tend to perform well wherever they go.

But isn’t the reason wealthy kids do well wherever they go is because they have access to these extracurricular activities? Why is it that high-performers do well wherever they go, is it simply a matter of mindset and drive?

Shamefully, these issues are compounded when students from low SES backgrounds are all shoved together in the same under resourced settings that are expected to provide an education in the context of dealing with these extraneous issues that impede education.

Again, isn’t the fact that the school is under-resourced which places students at a disadvantage? Could you please elaborate on why diversity can help these students, I’m not sure I understand what you meant by that.

[Sine]

But isn’t the reason wealthy kids do well wherever they go is because they have access to these extracurricular activities? Why is it that high-performers do well wherever they go, is it simply a matter of mindset and drive?
Again, isn’t the fact that the school is under-resourced which places students at a disadvantage? Could you please elaborate on why diversity can help these students, I’m not sure I understand what you meant by that.

Those from high SES backgrounds would still have access to resources/extracurriculars that other students may not have regardless of the type of school they go to. There is a reason students from "high-performing" schools still go to tutors (and I would think a much higher rate than students from other schools).
I think your assumption is kind of reversed e.g. you assume "high-performing: is intrinsic and those students happen to be from high SES backgrounds. When it is the high SES background which allows someone to perform better.

School resources are only one aspect of the inequality there is a lot more in the background of an individual which Vox has already touched on. Education is not something that you can isolate from everything else in an individuals life.

I think with variety Vox means that if you put low performing students all together they perform worse than if you were to put a low performing student with a bunch of high/middle performing students.

[tigerclouds]

There is a reason students from "high-performing" schools still go to tutors (and I would think a much higher rate than students from other schools).
I think your assumption is kind of reversed e.g. you assume "high-performing: is intrinsic and those students happen to be from high SES backgrounds. When it is the high SES background which allows someone to perform better.

What is that “reason”? What you’ve said doesn’t align with what vox nihili mentioned about the access to extracurricular opportunities argument not holding up.

[Stormbreaker-X]

There is a lot of debate about schools and social economic status, I think a student with an average social economic status can still afford tutoring and extracurricular. Being in a low social economics area brings along many other issues on top of just money, you all probably know this, but many students who do well are from average backgrounds. Vcaa does its best to counter private schools by giving disadvantage students access to seas, but they do not take into consideration other factors apart from just school and money. I know weather kids and disadvantaged kids, in my life I lived in many areas before so I would have experience from many schools. Being a weather area means good school, near the CBD, no worries about anything and a solid home life. Being in an average social economics area (most people here I assume), decent school, can still afford tutoring/resources, solid family and still have a shot of doing well in school. Being average means you are not disadvantaged nor advantaged. I use to have a guy in my class who had a really screwed up family and as a result he had to move schools. He never had a chance of doing well, I think that just because when he was in my class he never did homework and wagged school. I believe discipline plays a big role and can counter many difficulties, some students just work their ass off no matter what. Strong students tend to perform well regardless of the Schoo they go to anyways just because they have strong discipline and can do things on their own (like run practice exams at home, do homework, go ahead of the class, study etc).

[whys]

What is that “reason”? What you’ve said doesn’t align with what vox nihili mentioned about the access to extracurricular opportunities argument not holding up.

The "reason" is that many high-performing students have the money to afford tutoring as many of them come from high SES backgrounds. A wealthy student has access to extra-curriculars, tutoring etc because they have the money to spend on that, so despite being in a bad school, they are still able to perform relatively well, because such resources do not only come from the school.

[Stormbreaker-X]

The "reason" is that many high-performing students have the money to afford tutoring as many of them come from high SES backgrounds. A wealthy student has access to extra-curriculars, tutoring etc because they have the money to spend on that, so despite being in a bad school, they are still able to perform relatively well, because such resources do not only come from the school.

+1