Private Schools

[Caesar]

"But if you’re only interested in academic achievement, the results from most of the 30-odd Australian studies since 2000 suggest that private schools are no better at progressing students’ learning than state schools, once you’ve controlled for socioeconomic background. "

Isn't that the qualifier that makes all the difference? By and large, parents who send their kids to state schools can't control for socioeconomic background. Private schools are a common way to escape a shitty catchment area.

Even in relatively good catchments, the socioeconomic background of the schools is still probably going to be below a lot of private schools. I mean, we can't all live in Point Piper.

 

[Deliverance]

Isn't that the qualifier that makes all the difference? By and large, parents who send their kids to state schools can't control for socioeconomic background. Private schools are a common way to escape a shitty catchment area.

Even in relatively good catchments, the socioeconomic background of the schools is still probably going to be below a lot of private schools. I mean, we can't all live in Point Piper.

Nah, I've taught some great kids in shitty schools who aced their VCE. You don't have to be rich to raise your kids like a rich kid.

 

[checkraiseulite]

Nah, I've taught some great kids in shitty schools who aced their VCE. You don't have to be rich to raise your kids like a rich kid.

define aced.

in the vast, vast majority of non-selective state schools - it is very difficult to score 98+ - it is, or at least was when i did vce, the dumb way the system works which unfairly discriminated against state school kids. a lot of the time they have to work twice as hard for the same result - and gamble on the fact their careers counsellor may advise them properly about scholarships etc.

at a lot of private schools you can cruise to an enter score that leaves you with a tonne of career options - i speak from personal experience.

aside from the way the system is set up - you need some degree of competitive force to motivate students.

parents are the biggest factor i agree but not everyone has the time, ability or inclination to help bring out the potential in their children. this will only get worse.

 

[Caesar]

Nah, I've taught some great kids in shitty schools who aced their VCE. You don't have to be rich to raise your kids like a rich kid.

The study in the article you linked to compared private schools to public schools of similar socioeconomic level. Not students.

Which means there’s no point paying for Cranbrook School if your kid can walk down the street to Rose Bay Secondary College - but there’s no guarantee they’ll do as well if they’re stuck at Liverpool High.

 

[Caesar]

But the currency in high school alumni is limited. Schools don't need to be anything special if you have decent parents.

It depends on where you’re looking for currency. Some ridiculous percentage of NSW’s Rhodes Scholars (like, 80%) come from GPS schools.

 

[Deliverance]

define aced.

in the vast, vast majority of non-selective state schools - it is very difficult to score 98+ - it is, or at least was when i did vce, the dumb way the system works which unfairly discriminated against state school kids. a lot of the time they have to work twice as hard for the same result - and gamble on the fact their careers counsellor may advise them properly about scholarships etc.

at a lot of private schools you can cruise to an enter score that leaves you with a tonne of career options - i speak from personal experience.

aside from the way the system is set up - you need some degree of competitive force to motivate students.

parents are the biggest factor i agree but not everyone has the time, ability or inclination to help bring out the potential in their children. this will only get worse.

95+

 

[big_e]

Isn't part of the reason parents send their kids to private schools - the top ones, anyway - because of the old school tie effect? That going to, say, Scotch, will open doors for them in later life?

 

[checkraiseulite]

Isn't part of the reason parents send their kids to private schools - the top ones, anyway - because of the old school tie effect? That going to, say, Scotch, will open doors for them in later life?

yes - and it does work directly and indirectly.

 

[Deliverance]

Isn't part of the reason parents send their kids to private schools - the top ones, anyway - because of the old school tie effect? That going to, say, Scotch, will open doors for them in later life?

Private schools are very worried about the rise of platforms like LinkedIn, which break this network down for the new generation. They're actively planning to counter it.

 

[darcytiger]

Isn't part of the reason parents send their kids to private schools - the top ones, anyway - because of the old school tie effect? That going to, say, Scotch, will open doors for them in later life?

In the case of schools with the cost of Scotch, I think the fact that the parents can afford to drop ~40k a year on school means that most doors in life should be chocked open pretty solidly anyway.

 

[utility]

in the vast, vast majority of non-selective state schools - it is very difficult to score 98+ - it is, or at least was when i did vce, the dumb way the system works which unfairly discriminated against state school kids.

I have not checked in a while but mature age students (21+) have completely different entrance requirements to Australian universities. Just wait three years and then VCE results or its equivalent is a minor thing.

If you nail an undergraduate degree then things open up more for a Masters degree. A more mature (older) individual is more likely to do this. Two direct examples:

1. My ex was able to complete a Masters degree at Melbourne Uni in one year for less than ten grand. Her school results were not even considered in her application to enter the Masters program.
2. I was accepted into a JD course (Masters of Law) at a top tier university with an ATAR-equivalent of less than 60, and was not required in the application process (I played basketball more than attending classes... hated school).

GPA in an undergraduate degree is far more important and high school results won't stop you from obtaining your goals. I work in the IT sector and nobody gives a rat's ass where you went to school... I probably work with more people that were born overseas.

My advice to parents would be don't waste money on high school fees, just find a decent one. Save the money (180-240k over 6 years) for undergrad/postgrad education. Give them a few years to work or travel if they don't slide into their preferred course.

 

[utility]

Isn't part of the reason parents send their kids to private schools - the top ones, anyway - because of the old school tie effect? That going to, say, Scotch, will open doors for them in later life?

It's becoming less relevant in industry, at least in my experience. Nobody gives shit in the ICT sector if you went to Scotch. I doubt the big four consultancies care either, more interested in uni results.

There would be networking benefits but they'd be limited if you want a professional career or run a business. If you want your kid to be a parasitic pollie then I'd wholeheartedly recommend Scotch and the like.

 

[Caesar]

I work in the IT sector and nobody gives a rat's ass where you went to school... I probably work with more people that were born overseas.

I mean, I would never have expected a technical field like IT to care much about old school ties. It's always had its biggest value in fields like finance and law, where having employees who come from a particular background and move in particular circles (often ones similar to the managing directors and partners) is regarded as a professional asset.

Not sure what it's like these days, but pre-GFC you could throw a rock into the graduate bullpen of any Sydney merchant bank, accounting or law firm and odds-on you'd hit a GPS old boy.

 

[big_e]

I mean, I would never have expected a technical field like IT to care much about old school ties. It's always had its biggest value in fields like finance and law, where having employees who come from a particular background and move in particular circles (often ones similar to the managing directors and partners) is regarded as a professional asset.

Not sure what it's like these days, but pre-GFC you could throw a rock into the graduate bullpen of any Sydney merchant bank, accounting or law firm and odds-on you'd hit a GPS old boy.

I've got a mate who went to Guildford Grammar and works in the arts and he says it opens a lot of doors there, too.

 

[Caesar]

I am 100% sure that I got one of my first jobs in my early 20s because I went to a prominent Catholic school, and the hiring partner was a stolid Irishman whose major client was the Catholic Archdiocese.

Not sure if that would happen these days.

 

[utility]

A million Chinese have migrated to Australia in the last 20-25 years. I don't think they care what school you go to. Probably better of spending money on teaching your kids Mandarin these days. Off-topic but apparently VSL in Melbourne is state funded so inexpensive for language tuition.

I guess it really depends what industry your kids end up in. Obviously merchant bankers are a different crowd to full stack developers.

 

[checkraiseulite]

they seem to like balwyn high.

 

[Roylion]

in the vast, vast majority of non-selective state schools - it is very difficult to score 98+

A 98 means of course you're in the top 2% of aggregates of students in the state.

- it is, or at least was when i did vce, the dumb way the system works which unfairly discriminated against state school kids.

Could you elaborate further on this claim? I have four children that have completed VCE and teach VCE subjects myself.

a lot of the time they have to work twice as hard for the same result - and gamble on the fact their careers counsellor may advise them properly about scholarships etc.

??

 

[checkraiseulite]

i did vce in the mid oughties at an APS private school.

the way the sacs(?) work you were ranked against those students in your school - which from memory - meant that you got a pretty decent advantage if there were a lot of other relatively high performing kids in your school. if you were standout student amongst an average cohort you would be disadvantaged if you had a subpar performance in an exam. i am sure i was a beneficiary of this.

a 98 is a good score for sure - but nothing amazing. at many state schools 98 would be dux, but unless they can get a scholarship based on socioeconomic factors - will not even be close to getting into the top courses (not sure if this has changed since i was at scool).

the last claim obviously doesn’t apply in a scotch vs macrob/balwyn high scenario - but i’m sure it does in a scotch v random public school in a low socio economic area.

vce as a measure of intelligence/potential sucks - have said that many times in different threads.

 

[Roylion]

i did vce in the mid oughties at an APS private school.

the way the sacs(?) work you were ranked against those students in your school - which from memory - meant that you got a pretty decent advantage if there were a lot of other relatively high performing kids in your school.

You were ranked against the other students in your class at that school in that study. In fact too many high results given by a teacher for your SACs is actually a disadvantage. SACs are meant to generate a range of results.

The performance on the exam (which was the only piece of assessment that was the same for every student in that study in the state) was used to moderate your internal assessments against the rest of the state. The resultant study score for that subject was your ranking in that study against the other students in the state. For example what a 40 actually means is that you are in the top 9% (percentile) of students in that study for that year. Top 4 study scores (including English) added together, plus 10% of the two lowest studies (maximum of six studies) was your aggregate. The top 38 aggregates in the state this year received 99.95. The next 38 highest aggregates received 99.90 and so on.

if you were standout student amongst an average cohort you would be disadvantaged if you had a subpar performance in an exam. i am sure i was a beneficiary of this.

Well if you had a sub-par performance in the exam compared to the results in your internal assessments, yes your internal assessment scores woud be moderated downwards, for the purposes of calculating your study score which is a score ranking you within the state for that study. Your internal assessments results are moderated against the exam results.

a 98 is a good score for sure - but nothing amazing.

Top 2% of VCE students in the state for that year. That's all it means.

at many state schools 98 would be dux,

Of course. The dux is usually their top ranked student, as per the ATAR.

but unless they can get a scholarship based on socioeconomic factors - will not even be close to getting into the top courses (not sure if this has changed since i was at scool).

What are the "top courses"? Of course the ATAR requirement is based totally on supply and demand. If there are not many places and plenty of demand then the ATAR will he high. Teaching is a little different, in that at least nominally you need to be ranked in the top 30% of students (minimum 70 ATAR) in the state to be considered for a teaching undegraduate degree.

That is not necessarily correct either. Plenty of students with less than 98 (get into courses). For example students with an ATAR of 88.85 were accepted into the Bachelor of Biomedical Science (Medical).

the last claim obviously doesn’t apply in a scotch vs macrob/balwyn high scenario - but i’m sure it does in a scotch v random public school in a low socio economic area.

Many of the top ranked schools are selective entry schools. They pick and choose their students. Others of course draw their students from a high socio-economic geographic area.

 

[Caesar]

Well if you had a sub-par performance in the exam compared to the results in your internal assessments, yes your internal assessment scores woud be moderated downwards, for the purposes of calculating your study score which is a score ranking you within the state for that study. Your internal assessments results are moderated against the exam results.

Exactly. Most students (especially top students) benefit from being in an academically-strong year group, on lots of levels. And often if you don't get into a selective state high school, the next-best option is a private school.

 

[Roylion]

Exactly. Most students (especially top students) benefit from being in an academically-strong year group, on lots of levels.

But you can perform very well even when not in an academically-strong year group. I've seen it many times.

And often if you don't get into a selective state high school, the next-best option is a private school.

Public school students can also perform very well. I've taught some of them. One of my students finished in the top twenty of students in the state this year for the subject I teach. And that was not in a very strong academic group.

 

[checkraiseulite]

no one is disputing that.

the question is whether those students would perform better at a private school.

in most cases i expect they would.

 

[Roylion]

no one is disputing that.

the question is whether those students would perform better at a private school.

in most cases i expect they would.

But not necessarily because of the way VCAA and VTAC calculate study scores and ATARs.

 

[Deliverance]

no one is disputing that.

the question is whether those students would perform better at a private school.

in most cases i expect they would.

The research says otherwise.