Hey Guys, I was wondering if anyone can suggest a reliable site for Sydney primary school rankings?
I've done a few googles and just can't seem to find something reliable to compare local schools.
I found a site called: myschoolranking.com - not sure if reliable. Happy to pay the fee if it is.
If anyone can shred some light on this, would appreciate it.
Thanks so much!
Not necessarily the closest but definitely the zoned for public.
Just a FYI that NSW is relaxing rules for out of area enrolments this year. Not sure if its applicable to primary schools too
Oh interesting. I didnt know this. Where did you read that?
Oh great now there will be even more traffic during school times
It's common for people to rent an address so they can enroll where they want.
In Sydney, Artarmon public is consistently ranked at or near the top, they have had people rent a garage to get their kids in there lol
Pretty sure you don’t get a rates notice for renting a garage.
Pretty sure you don’t get a rates notice for renting a garage.
Yeah, I think this might be urban myths these days. They're onto all those temporary scam artists these days and do a pretty deep dive and even home visits for anybody who raises suspicion. Additionally, enrollment can be withdrawn if caught being dodgy later on.
The schools are zoned because of how many children they expect to have in their catchment area. Too many "outsiders" and the classes become overcrowded because they can't turn away any children who are genuinely in those catchment areas.
Too many "outsiders" and the classes become overcrowded because they can't turn away any children who are genuinely in those catchment areas.
There are several possible solutions:
Option 3 seems to be choice.
Hire more teachers at the in-demand school and if necessary construct more classrooms.
Some schools don't have the land to erect more classrooms - that is often the reason they are capped and have a catchment.
Some schools don't have the land to erect more classrooms
Build it up build it up build it higher
Built it up up up into the sky
Build it up build it up build it higher
Built it up up up into the sky
With older schools this isn't possible.
But some of the new schools are being built this way.
Haha, construct more classrooms… you're so cute… with what money? They cannot maintain and resource the ones they have.
They are getting top minds into the profession despite the pay.
Cannot do performance pay. Extremely unethical and unfair.
The Australian covert curriculum is atrocious.
They want to hire them, but they're not applying
I was talking about the in-demand schools where people fib about their residential address to get their children in. Are you sure those schools have difficulty finding teachers?
you're so cute…
You made me blush.
with what money?
There's plenty of money and a lot of it being poorly allocated. As a start: fewer publicly funded underground plunge pools for the likes of Kings school; don't just cease funding, legislate to require them to repay the funds. No more publicly funded rugby fields and archery ranges for elite private schools. In fact they should simple cut all public funding for private schools who charge above a to-be-determined modest (and indexed) fee threshold. Re-allocate all those funds to public schools (for the additional teachers, classrooms, and performance pay). If you want your kid to make use of public funds, send them to a public school.
but they won't…
Open a few Schools of Hard Rocks and hire a few big, burly security guards and assign take-no-shit teachers and give them some danger pay. Send the trouble makers to these outposts after they have been expelled from two schools. Allow all other schools to reject students who have been expelled at least two times but they can accept the student if they assess the case and determine the child has been rehabilitated and likely won't reoffend.
They are getting top minds into the profession despite the pay.
I'm not saying there aren't top minds in the profession. But there's also a big cohort of lazy, hopeless, lowest common denominator ones too. Lift teaching quality by introducing performance reviews and performance pay.
This is Australia. Nobody gets access to a quality overt education unless it is augmented by additional initiative or external activities.
The Australian covert curriculum is atrocious.
Absolutely. But many good kids from good homes with parents who take the initiative get rejected/banned from quality schools simply because of their postcode. They don't get access to quality schooling at all. Not all parents can afford to send their children to quality overt private schooling instead, or afford to actually move to a postcode that gives access to quality schooling.
Are you sure those schools have difficulty finding teachers?
Teachers are employed by the State, not the school. Govt has to staff all schools.
There's plenty of money and a lot of it being poorly allocated
Preaching to the choir brother/sister!
In fact they should simple cut all public funding for private schools who charge above a to-be-determined modest (and indexed) fee threshold.
They can't.
and performance pay).
This absolutely cannot happen. Thought you wanted an equal and just education system and one that particularly benefited the lower income child/family?
Open a few Schools of Hard Rocks
We have some…
But for the rest, we simply can't. A child does not exist in a vacuum.
Lift teaching quality by introducing performance reviews and performance pay.
They have the former, They cannot do the latter. . You need to think of something else.
Absolutely. But many good kids from good homes with parents who take the initiative get rejected/banned from quality schools simply because of their postcode. They don't get access to quality schooling at all. Not all parents can afford to send their children to quality overt private schooling instead, or afford to actually move to a postcode that gives access to quality schooling.
I think something that's missing from the whole school debate is that the overwhelming vast majority of schools are "fine". We've just created this crazy culture where parents have become obsessed with seeking every tiny benefit they can and treating education like some form of cut-throat elite sport.
I personally went to a "bad" school, but everyone turned out fine. Most of us turned out to be regular people - I have school friends who have become tradies, engineers, doctors, car mechanics, nurses, teachers, all manner of other various "normal" professions.
I get the pressure parents are under - I still remember my parents getting side-eyes from other parents, questions of "why would you send your kid there", "isn't that a terrible school", "what's it really like"…etc.
The schools in "good postcodes" are mostly just positive selection bias - the parents who care the most about education move there, they're also the parents who are most on their kids' backs about education. This makes those schools look better - it's not like they do anything differently.
My advice is usually to just send your kid to the local school, give them educational opportunities, be a good parent, make sure they stay on the straight and narrow. They'll have the opportunity to get a scholarship to a top school, or get into a selective school later on.
@tenpercent: The school funding debate nearly always misses the key fact that public schools are run and funded by states, while the vast majority of private school funding comes from federal government.
The state governments are the ones underfunding their own schools. The have the money to fund them better, but don't want to and instead spend the money on roads, etc. it is VERY convenient for them that the majority of people happily point the finger at the federal government and 'over-funded' private schools, and blame them for under resourced public schools, when in fact it is a conscious decision by all state and territory governments.
TLDR - you could reduce funding to private schools but it wouldn't make a difference to public schools
and also, no government is willing to reduce funding to private schools
@larndis: Where does the funding actually come from though? It isn't from state collected stamp duty and car rego.
@Jono05: Renters don't get a rates notice for a whole house.
If you jump through hoops, a garage would be workable
@JakeyJooJoo: Also committing fraud and will get kicked out of the school if they pay you a visit in your garage and discover that’s not your place of residence. It has been done.
Renters get an electricity bill.
@Jono05: Imagine a primary school kid managing to keep that secret for seven years.
How long until they have a friend over their house to play, or they talk about their real home at school?
@Muppet Detector: That's what I thought too… but I have seen it work. A real residence, not this hypothetical 'garage.'
@Jono05: Yes. My brother was a public school principal (retired last year). He was in the position a few times where he had to confirm and/or reassess eligibility of his students for his catchment area and then redirect some students to a more appropriate zone for their address.
Additionally, most seem to think that if the child does gain legitimate enrolment in a particular school, they can stay there if they later leave that zone. However, if they then leave that school's catchment zone, the child can be directed to whatever zone is appropriate for their address.
Continuity of enrolment via jurisdiction is only a preferred policy, it isn't protected by law.
Sometimes a child may qualify for out of zone enrolment if their caregiver works in that zone and they can demonstrate that this makes access to their allocated zone unreasonably arduous. Apparently very rare though.
@Muppet Detector: They don't have to keep it secret 7yrs, just the first year. Once enrolled you can generally move as continuity is in the best interest of the child - just change address part way through year 2 and claim issue with rental market if asked.
Once enrolled you can generally move as continuity is in the best interest of the child - j
Continuity is only policy, not law. It is designed to address the likes of foster placements or others subject to temporary unstable domestic displacements, not for manipulative scammers.
Govt has to provide for all children, not just that one child whose parents abuse or otherwise exploit the system they make available for every child to access and receive an equal and just education.
If student enrolment numbers becomes unsustainable or untenable at a specific location, they will have no other choice but to redirect/relocate unqualified students to their legally appropriate zone.
@Muppet Detector: Sure but in practice that policy means students stay in the school they started at the vast majority of the time.
@IM-Cheap: As demand increases, they are tightening this up. If it continues, eventually they will just remove the loophole and make it unavailable for anybody, including the vulnerably displaced.
@Muppet Detector: Which ones? Specifically can you name ones that have unenrolled a child moving out of catchment against the families preference?
@IM-Cheap: Hey? I was asking why you wanted to know that.
I don't understand what you mean by "why not", I'm sorry.
@IM-Cheap: Generally this won’t happen. Siblings are usually enrolled out of area to make it easier for families.
@Jono05: One of the selective secondary schools in Brisbane seems to not only require a rates bill (you can own a rental property to get one of these), but also a couple of utility bills due to past attempts at enrolment.
@Jono05: You're making unfair assumptions by saying it's fraudulent.
A renter could lease a large garage conversion as their primary residence for a year or so in order to get the school they want. Lots of less well off people from different backgrounds would do that in a heartbeat for their kids education.
I've split a house into multiple dwellings before, separated utilities with second meters etc. It's not hard to do to the right property.
I've split a house into multiple dwellings before, separated utilities with second meters etc. It's not hard to do to the right property.
Yeah, that sounds legal. /s
A renter could lease a large garage conversion as their primary residence for a year or so in order to get the school they want.
That sounds legal as well /s.
Australian laws apply in Australia.
Besides, what happens when they leave that catchment zone?
You're making unfair assumptions by saying it's fraudulent.
There would be very few exceptions.
@Muppet Detector: It's clearly not your area of knowledge, so your assumptions don't hold any weight.
For those with experience it's not a super challenging feat to legally and correctly divide up an old house and block of land in an area that has favourable zonings. Many of which are in old neighbourhoods with desirable schools.
For those with experience it's not a super challenging feat to legally and correctly divide up an old house and block of land in an area that has favourable zonings.
Oh rly? As someone with a bit of rezoning experience (at developer and residential levels) and knowledge of what is a legally inhabitable place of residence, particularly for the purposes of providing rental accomodation (short and long term) as opposed to owner/occupied. I am interested to learn about what I apparently do not know.
Many of which are in old neighbourhoods with desirable schools.
Many? Sorry, but I call shenanigans.
I could have accepted "there are exceptions", but "many"?
That doesn't happen.
@Muppet Detector: What the hell are you talking about. I'll put my NSW hat on here. The NSW gov rezoning land around heaps of train stations. NSW gov has also put in complying development pathways making it even easier to chop up blocks across R2 low density zones. Plenty of progressive councils have been rezoning R2 blocks to R3 in their LEP over the last decade, creating fertile ground to do exactly what I'm stating.
Lots of less well off people from different backgrounds would do that in a heartbeat for their kids education.
This is just exploiting vulnerable people.
@Muppet Detector: No it isn't, quite the contrary.
Being a dog slumlord with unethical values, illegally doing works can result in people exploitation.
Legally working within the rules to create more housing out of older detached house blocks does not exploit anyone, it helps contribute to the massive housing shortage problem we've got, giving people the opportunity to either buy or rent spaces which they need and struggle to find.
@JakeyJooJoo: Whatever helps you sleep at night.
A renter could lease a large garage conversion as their primary residence for a year or so in order to get the school they want. Lots of less well off people from different backgrounds would do that in a heartbeat for their kids education.
Both exploitive.
it helps contribute to the massive housing shortage problem we've got, giving people the opportunity to either buy or rent spaces which they need and struggle to find.
Not what we are talking about here, is it?
@Muppet Detector: I get the feeling you just don't want vulnerable people in your neighbourhood or sending their kids to your schools.
@tenpercent: Your feelings be wrong.
One of the whole reasons I initially went private with our kids was because I didn't like the school we were allocated at that time.
But that is what was provided. If I wanted something different to what was provided for "free", I got that it was up to me to pay for it, not mastermind some kind of elaborate scam to exploit the system.
Don't confuse social mobility with continuity of education.
I get the feeling you just don't want vulnerable people in your neighbourhood or sending their kids to your schools.
And that's actually quite offensive, I thought that you would have known me better than that by now. oh well all cool.
@Muppet Detector: I thought so too. But there seems to be a bit of negativity from you towards parents who want to improve their child's lot in life even when they don't have the financial means to either permanently move or alternatively send their children to a half decent private school. But maybe I am reading your words with a different tone than you intended, and if so I apologise if what I said was innacurate or offensive.
I don't think temporarily moving to another suburb to get the child entry into a better public school than their local one, especially if it is full of dropkicks or lower performing teachers, is scamming at all. They're not double dipping. They're not lying. Lying about your address such as saying you like at such and such place when you don't would be a different thing and that would be crossing a line, but even then I would have sympathy for their intentions. Anyone who does think it is scamming should instead be looking into why parents are doing it and permanently addressing the real and valid causes, not advocating for or supporting public schools wasting limited public resources acting like Pinkertons.
But there seems to be a bit of negativity from you towards parents who want to improve their child's lot in life even when they don't have the financial means to either permanently move or alternatively send their children to a half decent private school.
The negativity is against exploiting a system designed for every child (or member of that class) for the benefit of the individual.
But maybe I am reading your words with a different tone than you intended, and if so I apologise if what I said was innacurate or offensive.
Our entire family donates significant time, money and other resources to assist vulnerable children acheive access to an equal and just education.
It is one of the areas that we have chosen to support since at least 2001 when we received the absolute privilege of becoming involved with our very first two "charity kids".
I don't think temporarily moving to another suburb to get the child entry into a better public school than their local one, especially if it is full of dropkicks or lower performing teachers, is scamming at all.
I have absolutely no problem with this. If you live in a school zone then this is where you are entitled to expect you will be enrolled. (A few outlier exceptions).
My problem is with leaving that area and expecting ongoing enrolment in a school to which you are not designated.
If fifty kids do that and fifty other kids moved into the homes they vacated, that's fifty extra kids in that school that it isn't designed to cater for. => over crowding for every child, teacher, employee and resource in that school.
Additionally, as those kids are not enrolled in the schools where they live, those schools are not receiving the funding to which they are entitled and the hosting school is being unjustly enriched.
My problem is with leaving that area and expecting ongoing enrolment in a school to which you are not designated.
It is better for the child to have consistency.
If fifty kids do that and fifty other kids moved into the homes they vacated, that's fifty extra kids in that school that it isn't designed to cater for. => over crowding for every child, teacher, employee and resource in that school.
I see your point, but the funding follows the students. More students => more funding => more staff/resources. Funding for fifty students is enough to hire 5 additional full-time teachers and have some money leftover for extra textbooks, etc. Five additional teachers for 50 additional students is a bit excessive though, so realistically a school might increase teacher headcount by 2 or 3 FTEs (depending on the student-teacher ratio before the 50 new students enrolled) and then the rest of the funding would go towards any necessary additional resources. Fifty additional students at a primary school in NSW is over $700k of additional funding. Increasing numbers of student enrollments also supports the school in getting capital works funded such as more classrooms.
Additionally, as those kids are not enrolled in the schools where they live, those schools are not receiving the funding to which they are entitled and the hosting school is being unjustly enriched.
The funding follows the student. A school doesn't have an entitlement to more funding just because a potential student lives nearby. Families should not be expected to subject their child to the local public school full of dropkick students and disillusioned, apathetic teachers. It's not just tiger moms trying to enroll their kids out of area for the perceived benefit of a school achieving 80% of ATARs in the 97%+ range vs their local one that is only achieving 80% of ATARs in the 95%+ range, it's also genuine good parents with good kids but limited financial means wanting to limit bad influences and ensure their kids don't fall behind.
@tenpercent: It costs a school $500 for a classroom, a basketball court, a toilet, a fence, a photocopier, a library, a school hall, some playground equipment etc etc whatever other fixed costs arise.
Whether there is two children in that class drawing funding or fifty.
There is more to it than just hiring more teachers and buying extra text books where the demand is..
Even if there were only two children in a class, they still need a teacher for that class.
Then planning and providing the infrastructure for each school…
More to consider than "hiring more teachers (which we don't have anyway) and buying more text books.
It's a lot more nuanced than that.
I don't even think that state provided education is a protected right. I think they only do that because they want to.
@Muppet Detector: They are absolutely the same thing. A professionally converted garage into a 45sqm studio apartment can be done well. If you're not doing it properly, you're not getting it approved.
My mate lived in a smaller studio apartment than that for years and was very happy with it.
Give up with the victim narrative. There are problems to be solved and those ethically solving them don't care about your grandstanding. We need density in our cities for the benefit of infrastructure, congestion, and the environment.
@JakeyJooJoo: We are in a discussion of temporarily manipulating an address to fraudulently gain an otherwise non designated placement.
If you want to support that and believe it to be ethical, then shame on you.
You're not talking about providing essential housing, you're talking about facilitating fraudulent practises for personal gain.
What, the human trafficking business slowing down now that we're accepting more immigrants, so you had to pivot into another revenue raising avenue?
Ranked by whom and by which metrics?
Artarmon Public - more like a place for likeminded parents (mostly Asians).
They release the marks on the last day of school every term so to avoid parents calling up the school and demanding either an explanation or re-grade.
And the competitiveness goes beyond academics – even the holiday music bands are a sh*tfight.
It's common for people to rent an address so they can enroll where they want.
Continuity of enrolment is policy, not law.
this
People move to get closer to the schools they want for their children. I know someone moving to Castlehill from StMarys. Seems like a wise decision.
They are probably looking to buy a property in the right school catchment.
OP, just let primary school kids be kids.
Primary school creates the foundation for the rest of their education and lives.
Any deficiencies and/or gaps created in primary school, will only be reinforced with progression and by the time they are identified, it is usually too late or too difficult to correct.
There is no legitimate way to rank primary schools.
If you are seeking a good school for your child, visit those available to you and speak with the staff. You could also speak with other parents, but that is very hit and miss.
You might also look at naplan results aiming for improvement between y3 and y5, but there are so many factors involved it is a very blunt instrument.
The best school for your child is unlikely to be the best school for my child, so how would you rank them?
This.
Rankings will be based on (iirc) NAPLAN results. And for an entire cohort to be achieving high NAPLAN results the reasons are very likely to do with factors outside the school- i.e. parental focus on early childhood education and tutoring. Parents choosing to move to a school with an already high ranking but continuing to tutor their kids to pass OC and selective high school exams.
It's not the school, it's the parents.
I agree with the general idea. However, some of the 'elite' schools encourage low performing students to stay home on Naplan testing days.
NAPLAN results are largely pointless and probably more a measure of the demographics/socioeconomics of the area rather than how good the teachers are.
@rumblytangara: If you had some other way to measure or rank demographics/socioeconomics of the school then you could compare apples with apples.
As do public schools, let's include all the facts, eh?
@tenpercent: "There are over 800,000 students with a disability in Australian mainstream schools."
"Some mainstream schools also have special units or classrooms that are only for students with disability."
"There are also 46,700 students in special schools that cater only to children with disability."
Disabilities include (but not limited to) Intellectual Impairment, Hearing Impairment, Speech and Language Disorders, Autism.
I wouldn't bother paying for info that is free on the 'My School' website.
My school- ACARA
I would start by looking at the ICSEA indicator, which shows the socio-economic level of the school community. 1000 is the 'baseline' score so above this indicates students are likely to come from a more privileged background. (Though there are very good schools sitting below that level, and the wealth of a household is just one factor at play.) For example, Hurlstone Ag is about 1150, where a nearby high school is 950.
You can then check their past NAPLAN scores- you'd want to be seeing lots of green to indicate the students are exceeding expectations academically, especially when compared to a similar school group. (ie Comparing two North Shore schools instead of comparing one with a school out west.)
But there's a lot more to schools than data. Does it have a nice environment and a good ethos? Consistent wellbeing focus and expectations? Before and after-school care? Strong leadership? An active parent community? Caring teachers? Opportunities for sporty kids to sport and for kids to learn things like coding, robotix, eisteddfods etc?
It is my experience that keen students who are well supported at home and happy with their school and peers will achieve their potential at ANY school.
Thanks for the reply, I much appreciate it :)
ICSEA is not a great indicator of teaching quality or school performance. It’s based on what level of education the parents received (but doesn’t even differentiate postgraduate beyond bachelors) and current employment, which again are pretty broad categories. What it will show to an extent is what kind of families peers are coming from in terms of parents. It’s essentially a snobbery score. Naplan progress is probably the most useful metric to compare (for primary schools).The things that matter most, like school culture, how bullying is handled, access to specific programs etc can only really be assessed through school tours and word of mouth. QLD public schools also publish student wellbeing survey results, private don’t though, so hard to compare. Not sure about other states.
You can take from this what you will. A chart of Naplan Y3 reading rate versus ICSEA index and income per student.
(Income per student is how much a school receives per student from the different sources.)
https://imgur.com/a/naplan-scores-versus-student-Btb4hdN
Also if you are from Perth, Perth's map of the Naplan reading rate….
https://imgur.com/a/perth-reading-rate-QeXaTQ8
Not 100% correct. Whilst ICSEA is not a great indicator of teaching quality or school performance, you can compare school performance within the same ICSEA band. As an example, if a school has an ICSEA score of 1150 in theory should achieve higher NAPLAN scores than a school with lower ICSEA score.
Conversely, if a school with higher ICSEA score only achieved similar NAPLAN results as a lower ICSEA school then it could indicate that school might have issues with school management, teaching quality, student quality, parent supports etc. If you compare schools with similar ICSEA values and one of the school scored Well Above or Above then you know that school is objectively a better school. ICSEA is not a great and only indicator one should look at.
Schools with Well Above and Above across Reading, Writing, Spelling, Grammar, Numeracy typically indicate the school has quality teachers, high engaging P&C, great extra curricular activities, good culture, good facilities, good community, good attendance, good pastoral care etc. Haven't come across schools with poor quality teachers, poor culture, poor attendance and non engaging parents scored Well Above or Above in all metric.
Well that’s true, and why ICSEA is collected, but on its own is fairly meaningless unless you judge a school by the parents of the students (many will). ICSEA helps us understand NAPLAN.
unless you judge a school by the parents of the students
An apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
@tenpercent: For sure - I think that’s why most people look at it even if that’s not how it was intended to be used. I just doesn’t speak to the quality of the teaching or school.
A lot of family and friends are primary and secondary teachers.
Overwhelmingly they nearly all agree the biggest determiner in a child's education and success is the parents. Focus on more yourself and how you plan to involve yourself and assist your child's education more than if a school is "a few points higher" etc.
This
biggest determiner in a child's education and success is the parents
Is too difficult and too involving. So let’s forget that.
Whereas sending your kid to a “prestigious” school and expecting everything to go right / scream at your kid stating how much you’re spending on their education and all the life changing decisions you’ve made is easy.
100%.
This is another reason to find a good school to reduce your chance with bumping into trashy parents and their problematic kids.
shred some light
You need a refractor
Pick a school with lots of street parking. After a few weeks of fighting for spots, that's all you're going to care about. I know the parking situation at every school in my area because my friends won't shut up about it.
Or buy/rent a house where you can walk to school.
Have you seen house prices in good school catchments ??
We will be a slave for life.
Check out the public Facebook pages and community groups for the local schools on your shortlist, this should provide an understanding of their culture and values.
The other obvious choice is to just book a tour and ask questions.
Check out the public Facebook pages and community groups for the local schools on your shortlist, this should provide an understanding of their culture and values.
The other obvious choice is to just book a tour and ask questions.
If the school has one, I usually suggest going to the fair/fete/herbsfest or whatever they call it. Most of the people there will be the students and their families - especially the families running the different stalls. That will also give you a good idea of parent satisfaction.
Make your own spreadsheet to compare ones you’re considering. You can go to myschool.edu.au and get naplan results, student numbers, school funding received etc.
There’s not much other than naplan in terms of ‘achievement’ to rank them on, and most teachers tell me naplan is not very reliable.
In my opinion do the school tours, talk to parents in the area, get a vibe for fit for your child.
it is the child not the school determines their scores
you cant make a dumb kid a smart kid by paying $$$$$ by putting him in a rich school — you can just fool yourselves and make your selves poor
Source: i went to public then private the catholic , they did nothing for me because i was WAY ahead of their curriculum. But then i started school in the balkans b4 coming to aus — the material we learned in grade 2 i only saw here in grade 6 — here at grade 2 they were still sitting on the floor listening to their teacher read to the (extremely boring) , no maths , no geography , no hustory — everying i learned 4 years before
My daughter studied medicine, never set foot in a private school, based just on her knowledge not on the statistics some posh school pushed
as i said a posh school will not make a dumb kid smart
posh school will not make a dumb kid smart
Not necessarily, however a posh school may get dumb kid to achieve higher grades and set them up with good connections. It sounds like you and your daughter are naturally smart (though your written expression could be improved) and as such the benefit is less. Probably the biggest benefit of a good school (private or public) is getting average kids to achieve what they need to progress their future and achieve their goals.
Yes artificially inflate their “genius” and hopefully when youre in a hospital in oprtating room you will get one of these “geniuses” operating on you
Being a ‘genius’ genuine or otherwise doesn’t make a good surgeon. High IQ alone doesn’t make a good doctor, a reasonable IQ can make for an excellent doctor.
A good surgeon is intelligent enough to understand the body systems they are working on, but more importantly has a good work/study ethic, has steady hands, endurance, ability to concentrate, is calm but effective under pressure and can lead a team. So schooling can absolutely help with these things.
Study skills to take on large amounts of information, make meaning of it and apply it to perform to the assigned task is pretty useful for most work roles. Sometimes the highest IQ people lack other traits, or have not learned what they need to be the best possible doctor, lawyer, engineer or whatever. This isn’t to say high IQ people can’t also have these other traits, they absolutely can and often do, but average-high average IQ folk can also perform well, and schooling can help with this. It doesn’t need to be private schooling, but some parents might decide that the public school in their area can’t offer ‘good’ schooling in , other places public schooling might be the best option. NSW is a very different educational setting than QLD for example.
Also an absence of harm during education is a massive factor to consider when considering what long term outcomes you want for your child. If your children is relentlessly bullied, sexually or physically assaulted at school, having a thorough understanding of complex maths, world history and geography won’t matter much.
May I ask which country and decade? Do you know if they still have the same curriculum?
Do you even get a choice of primary schools? (apart from private). I thought you were required to go to the closest.