Do you think it's immoral to put your children through private primary school to ensure they get a place at a state grammar?

[purplepumpkin]

Just wondered - I overheard two women discussing this today and it was pretty obvious that they could afford to send their children private at secondary level, as they would do so if they failed. But their children would be taking up grammar school places that therefore would not be available for state school pupils that could not afford to go private.

So is that immoral or just the way things are nowadays i.e. everyone for themselves?

[littlerach]

But private doesn't always mean "good" academically.

Whereas grammar does.

[palaver]

Surely state grammars are for everyone who passes the 11+, not just the poor

[Doobydoo]

I know that often people who have tons of money manage to get bursaries or do the sort of thing outlined in your op.Not sure if it is immoral or not.
Is it along the same lines as going through the NHS when you could afford to go private?Taxes paid etc,etc.

[PortAndLemon]

So you think that morally everyone who can afford to send their children to private secondary school should do so (given your problem seems to be that "their children would be taking up grammar school places that therefore would not be available for state school pupils that could not afford to go private"?

Anyway, no, I don't think it's immoral. They are presumably paying the taxes that entitle their child to a state school place (and to a state grammar place if they can pass the test); the fact that they aren't taking up the option of a state school place for primary school shouldn't disqualify them from ever doing so in the future.

[CantSleepWontSleep]

Oh yes, how immoral to want to take up a school place that their taxes have helped to pay for. They'll be wanting free NHS prescriptions and their household waste collected by the state binmen before you know it.

Get real.

[marmalady]

Everyone is free to choose what they spend their money on. Holidays, private health, manicures or even education...............

And then (gasp) they may pay for private tutoring instead...........

[jimjamshaslefttheyurt]

Our younger 2 go to a local private school. Most of the children in the school go on to the various local grammar schools. I think the local primary would have prepared them for the 11+ as equally well as the school they're in tbh. But we didn't choose the private school for academic reasons.

[oi]

same as being able to buy a house near a good school (where the house prices have a premium for the schools) where other people can't afford to do so

or

paying for tutoring that some can't afford

tis a fact of life that some have and some haven't and those that have, end up with more choice when it comes to education (and pretty much everything else)

[NineYearsOfNappies]

Would it be equally immoral to send said child to really good state primary school and then pay for private secondary ed?

Doesn't seem immoral to me. Not something I'd choose to do necessarily (or be able to afford to do), but don't think it's immoral.

And fwiw I think it's probably less immoral than pretending to be a regular church goer in order to get into local school.

[SqueakyPop]

Not immoral

[fanjolina]

Not immoral at all. State schools are there for everyone - that is the point of them.

[tallulah]

Well my DS3 went to private Junior school so that he would pass the 11+ and go to grammar school...

We were lucky enough to get an Assisted Place for Y3- Y6.

The Head of the primary school he started off at didn't approve of grammar schools and made a point of only entering 2-4 kids a year for the 11+. When she deliberately blocked our DD from a grammar school place even though she passed the 11+ we decided she wasn't going to do the same to our younger children. She was the immoral one.

[Blu]

There's no 'ensure' about it, of course!!

[Lilymaid]

I can't see how it could be judged immoral and I don't understand the last phrase "everyone for themselves?" Does the OP think that a significant proportion of parents have ever been willing to sacrifice the opportunity of a good academic education for their child so that someone else's child might benefit?

[Heated]

As long as the parents can accept grammar school is still a state school and not private ed on the cheap.

[Cammelia]

They will have to live in the catchment area

[ScottishMummy]

grammar schools are selective state schools so accessible to all who pass the entrance exam

no immorality as the parents are as entitled to access state school as anyone else

plenty state school primary parents use private tutors to try enhance graded and secure a place

grammar schools have rigid selection inc allocated catchment/travel distance criteria

[Marina]

Agree with Blu - round here the majority of the grammar places go to children from the local state primaries, and some places go to children from independent schools.
A lot of the state entrants are coached into the ground at weekends and in the evening by all accounts - the independent schools at least acknowledge the situation and integrate the coaching into the curriculum.
IME parents will always do whatever they can to try and ensure their child gets an education suitable for his or her needs. Agree with others that money usually plays a part - through property, school fees or coaching. I really have no idea how you eradicate that, but I would say that on balance our local grammars have a reasonably local intake reflecting the local demographic (ie lower/middle middle class families rather than wealthy chattering class carpet-baggers). It helps that there are six of the schools and they are all multi-form entry, so more places available for children of above-average but not super-tutored potential.

[Marina]

Good point heated. IMHO that is a big fat plus about our local grammars - they most certainly are not private education on the cheap

[Quattrocento]

How jolly unfair of them to take up free school places like that.

[roquefort]

Not immoral but may not be effective. Boys' prep schools don't necessarily prepare children particularly well for 11+ - they are more focussed on Common Entrance at 13+. Not unusual for boys around here not to get into Tiffin Boys' Grammar School but to get into St Paul's and other extremely selective independant schools. Only those who get specific tutoring for 11+ tend to get in.

[cba]

are all grammars selective?? I was looking at the website for Harrogate Grammar and I am sure it didnt say anything about entrance exam, although I could be wrong

[ScottishMummy]

no not all grammars schools are selective

[MadamePlatypus]

Agree with others - most children applying for sought after grammar school places seem to be coached. Which is fairer - to pay £100K more to live in catchment area of good primary and pay for coaching or to pay for prep school? I suppose the moral thing to do is to send your child to an unpopular school and campaign for more funding and devote your life to the PTA. I suppose some very, very, very moral people do that?

The disadvantage of the prep school route is that you then have to be pretty sure that you can pay for a private secondary as a back up if your child fails to get into the grammar - prep schools don't really prepare you for the local comprehensive.