To think you can’t take the moral high ground on private schools if….

I agree..far more correlation than direct causation. I don't think schools that end at 3pm (or earlier..two in our town end at 2.45) is a good preparation for the sort of jobs that require a totally different "no clocking off" approach. Law, the City, medicine etc require you to just work until the job is done. Private secondary schools often run til past 4, with many kids staying til 6 for activities, sometimes Saturday school. Boarders can have extra sessions in the evening. By 6th form age, kids should not be done by 3pm. Again, not for a minute saying you cannot do those jobs from state..of course you can and many do, but an awful lot of self determination and motivation is needed..with PS the more demanding structure is there so those that may have drifted don't and the longer day is normal.

There is a lack of contemporary empirical evidence for a reason. Yes, there are statistics which list the % of judiciary, politicians etc that are private educated vs the % of the country but I think that the old school tie networks have way less influence over the last 20 years than they used to, and also there are lots of other factors that will come in to play. The link is not a simple one of causation.
So I don’t think there is “reasonable argument” in both my opinion and in my experience. There are lots of much better sticks to beat private schools with!

I went to Private school, I made precisely zero contacts that helped with my career.
We all had a nice holiday once staying with a friend who had moved to France but I am sure that could happen from State school
I suppose if you go to one of a small number od Private Schools in The South and go into Banking or similar there MAY be people from the same school who can help you but I don't think an Old Boys network applies to most of us

@NuUN

"My point was purely about the old cliche that going to private schools (even the likes of Eton) gives you unfettered access and connections. It’s just rubbish."

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323125454_Old_Boy_Networks_The_Relationship_between_Elite_Schooling_Social_Capital_and_Positions_of_Power_in_British_Society

There's not actually a lot of evidence from research, but there absolutely is a reasonable argument that having a network of connections with people in positions of power over hiring and finance increases the likelihood of obtaining a job or work through these connections.

My husband and I earn a decent living and we live in a bigger house. My son’s best friends are

• a very well off child of a banker and a scientist who lives in a massive house
• A child with a single parent whose father died by suicide a few years ago. He lives in a 2 bedroom flat with 6 people
• a child of a blended family with a taxi driver and a min wage worker for parents. Living in a small flat and sharing a room with his sister
• A child of Palestinian refugees with many children and a single mother. To be fair we have never had this child to our house nor has my son been there. Not because I’m opposed, but because the mother doesn’t speak English and I haven’t been able to figure out how to make her feel comfortable about it. The boys play together at school every day.

Minus the last boy who I’m trying to build a better relationship with (we are Jewish and I’m slightly worried that’s a problem), these kids are all into and out of all our houses regularly. They play together all the time. They represent the full spectrum of financial situations at the school and only two of them have parents from the same country. The one boy didn’t speak a word of English last year. So no, I don’t believe that children just find people with the same family they have at all.

This is my experience as well and my point exactly.
You remove private schools but people will still form friendships and relationships with "people like them", it won't change anything

@nearlylovemyusernameno I don’t think anyone with funds for private school would choose my dd school. Our town has very few school places so there is a good chance they would be allocated it though. I’ve met some home Ed families who are doing so while on waiting lists for school. Our council must waste so much money on school transport as so many kids are allocated school far enough away from their home they qualify for school transport. To my knowledge two schools have been extended to take more children and both were in the nicer parts of town with the more expensive housing.

Just had a look on Rightmove and to move into the closest outlying village with a good school catchment I would have to loose a bedroom an pay and extra £100000 for the cheepest house that is in need of modernisation. The only other two houses for sale are £500000. The only rental option there is £1650 a month. So that’s 4 houses available in that village. In my town the cheapest rental is £1200. Closest private school is not in the town and has fees of £8k a term. No parent who can afford such fees will be living close to the schools in town- they would take one of the 4 houses in the village. Maybe that would push some of the middle wage people out of that school but they would be able to afford a house in a different local village that are out of the price range of most people

Mine were at Private secondary BUT I can answer that question relating to their State Primary.
My DC did have some minor variation in friends across socio economic groups but in the main they were certainly "people like us". Not so much in regards to wealth but more with regards to values and behaviour.
I neither encouraged nor discouraged any friendships for my DC, they just naturally gravitated towards kids who they had things in common with, interestingly for DS that was largely kids from Asian heritage families for some reason. There were some exceptions but in the main the kids at the school arranged themselves into friendship groups that represented their backgrounds

Except the court case has forced the government to admit that they knew from the start that VAT wouldn’t raise any money at all. This was never a fiscal policy.

Sounds like you have very limited experience of private school then. The majority, certainly outside the SE, are not like that at all.

@Ketzele the best way to get rid of them would be to make them unnecessary. The way to go that is to pump billions into state and accept that it will take decades to turn around the numerous factors that cause people to opt for private. The VAT is not going to make one iota of difference, and is causing children (and it doesn't matter how few or many) to have to leave stable and thriving placements. The only way to raise that sort of revenue is general taxation. A tiny proportion of the population (most of whom are not uber wealthy, just on half decent professional salaries) should not be expected to pay even more above the tax they are already paying for a service they don't use whilst those that do use it are not being asked to do the same.

There are have been so many threads on this, so many posts from people explaining that they chose private out of desperation and really struggle to fund it (not just one fewer holiday). If the VAT would fix the issues in state then there would be an argument for it, but it won't and it's not even a "step in the right direction"..the money isn't ring fenced and even it were, equates to less than half a teacher per school.

Speaking as someone who lives in an expensive leafy suburb and whose kids attend the local comp, I'd say that this debate shouldn't ever have become about which individuals inhabit the moral high ground. We all do the best we can for our kids, as far as our pockets permit and in line with our beliefs and values.

But politically, I am against private schooling. Not against the pupils there, or their parents, but against how it entrenches inequality. I wouldn't abolish them but I would be working towards reducing their role in public life.

Similarly, I support the VAT not because I want to penalise wealthy parents, but because we are in a tough economical place and I think it's fairer to claw back there rather than benefits, public services etc.

I don't think that's hypocritical. I do wish we could have these discussions without everyone getting so defensive and personal. We are all making ethical compromises the whole time, aren't we?

That's not my experience at all.

There were huge differences wealth wise in PS my DC attended (we were by very far the poorest ones), but socially/culturally we were all the same, despite being very international community. My DCs best friends had bedrooms larger than our entire flat, this didn't matter at all as we (families) were interested in the same things, discussed the same events, read the same books etc.

My experience so far is that in socially diverse environments people tend to gravitate to their own group and as kids get older, they will chose friendships with people from similar social backgrounds with similar interests, I don't mean bank balance. So I'm not convinced that this tale about connections made in PS stands, those connections would be made in any way.

@PurpleThistle7 That sounds like a great PTA - but so much of the PTA activity very much depends on how much the Head and SLT allow the PTA to get involved with. It’s not just about the parents: if the Head doesn’t want to engage with or support the PTA (as was the case in one school DD was at), then the PTA won’t be able to do much either.

I’m not sure how to answer this but my kids have friends from a lot of different family situations. The catchment has areas from 2-10 on the SMID scale so looking purely at that and based on where I’ve dropped my daughter off or picked her up at friends houses I’d say she socialises across most of that range. I wouldn’t know the specifics of the families of course as high school friends are a mystery.

@nearlylovemyusername yes, my son doesn't even ask his friends where they live what their parents do or that type of thing. From what I hear ps kids are keen on figuring out the pecking order, the families I know who do private school are pretty obsessed with money

I don’t think any specific parent can fix systemic issues in their school. Of course we can’t affect funding or hiring or SEN provision. But I am also sure that I am leaving my children’s school better than how I found them. I was on the team that ran the fundraising for the primary school pta and started the first school library, created the nurture room for children who need a break, bought resources for the outside classroom, funded the forest school teacher training, and other similar things. We sent the whole school to the cinema - many of the children had never been to a cinema and they were so excited. It was lovely.

These are specific positive actions that took place in part because of me and other keen parents. Are these groundbreaking amazing things that will fix the school forever? Of course not. But every single child will benefit from them and they all foster opportunities for more relaxed, engaging, and creative learning.

Less clear examples in the high school ‘but’ I do have one. About 10 years ago there was a terrible tragedy in the school and a child died due to negligence. For years the community was promised a new high school building to avoid another disaster. Then the funding was taken away and a new high school built in an affluent area instead (am sure there were other reasons but this was inherently true). Our building is one of the oldest in the city and in a terrible state but the funding kept being promised and then delayed. Then Covid. Then post covid on and on and on. I started going to every single community council meeting and raising it. And showed up at the MPs office. And emailed. Many times. Many people. I got to a first name basis with some of them. And of course I couldn’t make it happen by myself but I didn’t let any of them forget about it. And the new building will open next year.

If every single parent with options took their kids out of our schools we’d have no one to fundraise from and no one to fight for these kids. As the previous poster said so well, when you’re fighting for your own life you can’t possibly take on anything else. And yes there’s plenty politicians and policies should be doing and a million ways children are failed every day, but I personally would find it too depressing to just give up and opt out. I hope I’m showing my kids how to fight for things too.

But of course I have no idea how they’d do in another environment as you can’t run experiments on your own kids. I’m sure there are lots of amazing things happening at the private schools here - I’ve heard about it from friends and work next door to one of them and it sounds amazing. But it wouldn’t be right for my family.

Re connections - can I ask parents in very socially diverse schools if your DCs (secondary schools) form friendships significantly outside of your socio-economic group?

Too late to edit so add it here

@Burntt

Do you believe that PS parents who are pushed out to state sector will send their DC to your DD's school? and make it better? even if PSs are banned completely? or will they rather find an option to go to those two better schools thus pushing poorer families to your failing one? or home educate?

You see, I was forced to take my SEN DC from their private where they were thriving. Luckily I got grammar as a back up. We weren't planning to get that place, but hey ho. All it did to wider society is it took a place from another child whose parents couldn't afford private. Means that child will now go to comp in a grammar area. On the top of this the money saved on PS fees will now go to DC's housing deposit, uni etc, making inequality even worse.

You clearly have difficulty reading. Try and read my post again. I don’t say anything about private schools being of a higher quality than state schools.
I also say that private schools obviously contribute to inequality in society.
My point was purely about the old cliche that going to private schools (even the likes of Eton) gives you unfettered access and connections. It’s just rubbish. There’s so many other valid reasons to argue against private schools that it does your argument no favours.
I think the fact that you’ve completely misread my post just shows you are exactly the sort of person that is inflexible in thinking & who immediately jumps to the conclusion you wish to find. There’s literally no point in having a discussion online with you because you will always be right. Good luck in whatever wonderful country you’ve moved to (look like you’ve also got lots of time to spend on here arguing with strangers so enjoy!)

It's a bit of a pointless post because most people are opposed to private school and most people don't live in the catchment of an outstanding state secondary or have school age kids so whether there are a small proportion of people that move to an area for the school that could afford private is pretty much irrelevant. I think this is a point a lot of people forget, we're a society of people of all ages, backgrounds, incomes so it's not just people in expensive houses on one side and people who can afford private on the other.

@Burntt
This is one of the best posts I've seen so far on PS threads.

The irony of it is that you're using all your available resources, no matter how limited, to isolate your DC from disruptive environment and give them the best education you can. You are not trying to improve the environment for anyone else. Your reasoning is that your resources (time, emotional etc etc) are limited. This is exactly what other parents who care do - they use resources available to them to make better life for their own children.
Of course there are few exceptions, but overall people are doing all they can to isolate their own kids from disruptive environment and give them the best education they can, be it school catchment, tutoring, cultural capital, help with homework or paying for private schools. The only difference is available resources.

And I do believe that "quality" of school very much depends on its catchment - it's only so much SLT and teachers can do if most of families simply don't care about education. No MC/strong elbowed parent with some options will send their DC to such school and try to improve it.

This sounds awful and I’m sorry that things are so tough for you, balancing both caring and education for your DC.

I would say though that I really think it’s a fantasy to say that parents with time and opportunity can do anything to significantly change a school. I appreciate that it seems like that would be possible, but in reality parents have very little impact on the cultures of a school no matter how sharp their elbows. I was a governor of my DD’s primary school the whole time she was there, and it wasn’t even possible for the governors to do much to change the school culture, because so much of that is formed by intransigent things like the funding available, the SLT competence and style, the local authority/MAT dictating from above, the material buildings and fabric of the school, the availability of teachers and TAs. In some areas even if you have a TA-provision EHCP the school can’t recruit any TAs. Governors have a really limited purchase on the school culture if a controlling Head/SLT is determined to keep them out. Some areas are dominated by social problems that suck up the school’s funding and the SLT’s time to an extent that nothing else gets much of a look-in.

For the most part, helpful and committed parents are still just not going to impact on a school enough to make any real difference. Even less so in a secondary school — these are set up to have much less input from governors or PTA than primary, and your DC’s experience is much more dictated by the overall quality of teachers the school can recruit (and even governors will have very little ability to intervene in this as it is very determined by locality, funding and school culture).

In practice, the idea that parents can drive or affect the school culture in any significant way is more wishful thinking than anything else. Parents don’t create the school culture — the school culture attracts certain kinds of parents (and often the most middle class and financially successful parents are actually the ones who have the least involvement in the school - they choose a school precisely so they can sit back and not get involved. This is something the “middle class parents will drive up standards” argument never quite understands: the more well off the parents, the less time they generally have to contribute to the school — that’s often why they choose grammars or private to start with. Their kids going back into state isn’t going to mean they are suddenly in school lobbying for better teaching. The very opposite - they’ll just top up and tutor outside school time instead.)

I understand that this isn’t the reality people want to hear - it sounds like an ideal way to increase state standards is to say other parents are going to do it in some mystical way that doesn’t really cost any money but harnesses some magic class powers.

BUT, in reality what does it for a school is: a proper vision and leadership at all of the DfE/LEA/MAT levels, cold hard cash, good teaching, better facilities, a shit hot senior leadership team, decent classroom teachers and proper SEN provision and social support, and that’s expensive and lucky as well if a school has all those things in place. It requires a proper vision and strategy for education across the country, proper central funding, a local authority which knows what it’s doing, and a leadership team and teachers in a group of schools and the individual school who can put it all into action. That simply isn’t all going to happen just because Arabella and Sebastian who used to go to a prep and have middle-class parents have suddenly fetched up at the school.

Thank you . This is a really important perspective. I’m very sorry. SEND provision is completely inadequate and too many state schools are under performing ( for the reasons discussed) .

I don’t feel that parents who choose to opt out of state education should be judged as it’s not an individual parent’s responsibility to improve state education. However I do feel that a lot more should be done to bring all state schools up to the standard of the best state schools.

I think there is alot to think about in this thread. I also think it’s hard to feel deeply the inequality unless you have experienced it. I grew up in a middle class area with poorer parents but back then houses were affordable, we lived in good catchment but I had no parental support as my parents were always working. I did ok because the behaviour of other students was not as disruptive as schools have to deal with now. The school was by far better than the school my own children attended as those who struggled had private tutors, high needs SEN were not in mainstream etc so the teachers had the time to teach.

Because for various reasons I plummeted down the social ladder and am now dirt poor I’m experiencing state education for my children from a completely different perspective. Before I was poor I’d have said the state school was fine- because it was. Even I’m not the best area the school was fine. However now I’m in one of the worst areas in my county. My road stinks of drugs, the police are about frequently. You hear shouting and swearing. Litter everywhere. Many people not working due to disability or other reasons. The attitude of the local kids my children make friends with us vastly different, as are the rules and expectations of their parents. And I’m not judging because life is hard. But life here feels COMPLETELY different. I have a high needs SEN child not being provided an education which keeps me unable to work and financially poor, but I’m not time poor like the working parents in my street who all work loooong hours in low paid hard labour jobs.

my non SEN child in the “good” but in reality shit school due to pupils behaviour. Was doing ok but this took a lot of input from me. I have time because I can’t work as no choice but to care for my son. And as others have said library museums etc have restricted opening hours and need to drive etc that I could not have accessed had i worked full time or not had a car. I also had a good education myself so was able to supplement her education myself without shelling out for tutors. When she got “working towards” in her SATS and the school told me they won’t be providing extra support as she’s one of their high achieving children I pulled her out and now home educate. Again an option only available to me because I cannot work due to caring for my disabled child. If I worked it would be tough shit that school is the only option because despite there being good schools a little further away they are all full and two years on waiting lists she never got a place.

To engage in this debate most of us will have above average reading and writing abilities compared to nationally. Google it. The average reading age for adults in the uk is 9-11 years. So it’s not fair to say state education with good parental support is fair as most parents actually cannot support in real terms. And not all children have parents who would support were they able anyway. So while I would never judge someone for doing the best for their child I do think we have to acknowledge if private schools were not an option those with the money and time would push for better state education which would help those children who’s parents are unable to push because just feeding and housing their kids takes all they have. I would love to fight for better education, particularly SEND, but I cannot. I can send angry emails and sign petitions but don’t have the funds for anything else and as I have my disabled child constantly I cannot attend meetings or marches or volunteer etc. I do not have the power to make any change, I had power when I had money and school places for my children and access to childcare/babysitters but now I need change I can do nothing about it but rant on mumsnet