Sir, – While facilities, teachers, peers, etc, are all contributing factors, research into secondary education consistently identifies parents as the biggest external influence on a child’s exam success and the rate of progression to third level.
From the outside it can be difficult to measure the commitment of parents in this regard but the choice of school is often indicative of parental interest and influence.
In areas where there are multiple options, some schools are typically designated (by little more than popular opinion) as “good” schools. This designation is mostly arbitrary, given that school facilities, teachers, and the learning curriculum are generally of similar standard, but it is nonetheless significant, leading to these schools being over-subscribed.
Parents who are focused on their children’s education will make special efforts to get their kids into a “good” school, taking action from an early age to ensure they attend the appropriate feeder primary schools, taking part in relevant religious ceremonies and parish events, and ensuring that all the paperwork is completed early so their names are high on any waiting lists.
Joe Schmidt: ‘I felt if we could have built on our lead after half time’
‘It doesn’t have to be them or us’: Teachers behind new book of refugees’ stories want to challenge stereotypes
Ed Sheeran and Mary Robinson are right. It’s time to bin Band Aid
Podcast giant Joe Rogan may have played key role in US elections
The cohort of parents who value education highly will do this collectively, resulting in a virtuous circle. “Good” schools end up with a larger proportion of highly supportive parents than other schools. This results in those schools sending a higher proportion of students to third level, and reinforces the notion of that school as “good”, causing future generations of parents to make similar choices.
Parents who are not focused on education may not have made the necessary endeavours to ensure their child would go to a “good” school, and meaning other schools have a higher proportion of parents who are less supportive, leading to weaker academic performance, and further reinforcement of existing opinions about those schools.
There is one other externally visible factor that indicates strongly supportive parents – the willingness to pay fees. With annual fees around €8,000, a standard six-year second level cycle will cost close to €50,000 per child. While some might send their kids to fee-paying schools out of tradition alone, unless a family is extraordinarily wealthy then paying this amount of money, possibly for several children, demonstrates a huge commitment to educational success.
Parents of children in fee-paying schools have “skin in the game”, so to speak, and their children are no doubt reminded on a regular basis of the very real and measurable sacrifice their family is making to give them the best opportunity. Parents are highly likely to pay very close attention throughout their children’s education – ready to point out that unless students keep working hard, they could always go to the local free school instead.
Going to a fee-paying school thus gives additional motivation to children to work hard and succeed, and it should not be a surprise if fee-paying schools perform better than non-fee-paying “good” schools when it comes to exam results and third-level advancement.
Given the catchment areas they serve, one suspects that if fees were eliminated the same families would still attend those schools, and that results would remain strong, if perhaps not quite as good as they were before. – Yours, etc,
JOHN THOMPSON,
Phibsboro,
Dublin 7.