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

Absolutely - think I said similar earlier in the thread. There are good and bad parents at every income level and at every school and a child's home life will always be more important than their life for the few hours they are at school. For what I prioritise, the state school system is working really well and my kids are thriving. If I was relying on the school to wholly educate and feed them - there would be concerns, but we do lots of that at home.

What is interesting is that as our school is in a specific catchment, children actually are prioritised for university places as part of the widening participation initiatives at Scottish universities. A very judgmental mother who lectured me about private school was horrified to learn that my child would actually have a better chance for selective university places than hers - all else being equal. This was in no way a part of our decision making but it is interesting that some of the benefits 'some' parents are looking for might actually backfire on them.

Yeah I sure some are. But they all say that. They all say they work sooooo hard. They just prioritise education (unlike almost everyone else). Also private schools are actually really diverse (if you ignore the lack of poor people). Also the local state wouldn't suit their particular child (but they are ok for everyone else).

Also that by sending their children private they are actually doing everyone else a favor.

I get that. Many also have beautiful listed buildings and herbaceous borders. The immense school fees are partly necessary to cover maintenance of these. But none of these change educational outcomes. Plenty of state schools organise eye-wateringly expensive holidays abroad. Many also had a huge amount spent on their physical environments in the Blair years. Some more recently. Food, I agree, is often less than desirable, despite Jamie Oliver’s efforts.

I’ve taught in both state and private, then returned to state. On average, the kids who thrive are the same in both - not the richest or the poorest, but the ones with a stable home life. That doesn’t have to be two married parents living together. It does mean parents who take an interest in their children and don’t throw the furniture at them or parents who aren’t too busy jet setting to care that their child is in detention again. Parents who cook supper, ask about the child’s school day, take a brief look at a child’s homework... That sort of basic thing that most of us do without thinking. I’ve seen neglect in both the state and private sector. I’ve known children from overseas who full board and are sent on every school holiday and summer camp available, only seeing their parents twice a year.

To answer (3) - because sending my children to state school aligns with my morals and what is important to me. I have options and I choose to support the local school because that's what I believe is the right thing to do. You can disagree, but you cannot say that I don't have any morals, that's just inflammatory. I'm not 'refusing' to send my children - they aren't even asking as they are happy at school.

My children also aren't 'suffering' - they are perfectly safe and reasonably happy and learning lots. They have friends and activities and wonderful teachers, a quick walk to school and plenty of time for clubs and hobbies as they don't have a commute. It's a strange attitude that anyone with a choice should automatically choose to send their kids to private school - plenty don't for many reasons.

@Creepybookworm

Hallo. Nice to meet you. I am one of the counting the pennies and I can find you 17 more in my DD’s class.

There's a definite correlation between FSM and challenging behaviour in schools.

Which has been studied. Of course it doesn't mean causation but a complex correlation.

Or the school is ok and will provide an adequate education, not amazing but just ok. Not all children in state schools are suffering - what a warped, narrow view of the world!

My Dc's Private school couldn't be more different from the State school about 1/2 a mile further down the road, its not just a "bit better"
And if anyone is wondering how I know I am a Governor and every time I have to deal with an exclusion or similar I thank my lucky stars we were able to afford Private
I have met some lovely, motivated kids there too and I really feel for them and what they have to deal with on a daily basis and there are some awesome teachers there too - The Deputy head has the patience of a Saint, BUT the nonsense they have to wade through before they can even teach is mind blowing.

Why? Is this because

1. the school is excellent - in which case you wouldn’t need private
2. because the school is crap but you can’t afford better - in which case you never had a choice so it was never a moral choice or
3. Because the school is not as good as private schools which you can afford but refuse to send your child to - thus making your child suffer on purpose - how is this moral?

Where I live the private schools are a totally different world - they have grounds and cafes and computer labs. They have brand new science labs with 3D printers and mandarin lessons. They have a place to sit at lunchtime and school trips to museums and Paris. So while of course the quality of the teachers are not in question (my children have had brilliant teachers all the way through), the environment and access to food and extra enrichment mean it's a whole different thing over there.

Some people feel confident that the values and work ethic they've instilled are good enough for their child to perform in any adequate school.

What you gain on the swings you may lose on the roundabout. There are many people who send their kids to carefully researched schools and it ends up not being fine at all.

In some cases what people mean when they say 'fine' is 'my kids are lovely and did well, but I'm not going to shout about it'.

Parents need to just be secure in their own choices and not worry about how other families make choices. It takes a whole lifetime to measure success anyway.

100% agree

i bought a house that gives me access to an amazing state school. Then for good measure, we used a private school summer program for most of our holiday coverage when dd was young. Crazy expensive, but absolutely fantastic.

There’s too much hype around imagined private school privilege. They have teachers who have done the same training, teaching the same curriculum as the state sector, especially in exam years when they are prepare children for the same GCSEs etc. The children might have a slightly smaller class, but many desirable privates schools have classes of up to 24, verses 32 in the state sector. I’ve taught GCSE classes of 26 and A level classes under 20 in the state sector and I get more ongoing professional development than I would in a private school and a better pension. Private school kids are denied access to almost all university taster courses. For most children, private education is a massive disadvantage in the current climate, unless they are exceptional at a particular sport or instrument and the school has facilities that help support it.

I know someone who paid £2m to be in the catchment of small state primary and secondary school because it was quite a strict 'village' catchment. She was very anti-private school during this time, called it a waste of time, and then the catchment for both schools was suddenly (and without warning) expanded to a new build estate and she immediately moved her kids to local private schools without even waiting to see the impact on the school.

The existence of private schools is a cancer on the state sector. They deprive state schools of the best qualified teachers in shortage subjects

@Sabire9 Many talented teachers choose to stay in state schools as they disagree with private school on principle

We could afford private education but chose state as we felt it better to save money for a future house deposit. So, we were thinking what's the best use of the money, not prioritising our own interests over children's education

And it’s attitudes like this which make me run a mile from private schools! You shouldn’t be proud that your DC’s school has no children on FSM, you should be embarrassed.

I work in a school with over 40% of children on FSM- not one of them is “difficult to educate”.

I have what I would term as champagne socialist friends who are teachers.

Absolutely against public/independent schools but quietly took their inherited wealth to an affluent area in the countryside where the state schools don't see the horrors in terms of behaviour that they experienced during their teacher-training.

💯

I put lots and lots of effort into raising my children. I just don't believe that prioritising fee paying schooling is the right thing to do. I send my children to the local school and it is 'fine'. It's not amazing. They have to learn how to adjust around large classes, behavioural issues, terrible facilities, etc. But that means it's actually more work for me to fill in the gaps myself - I cannot rely on the school's to give my children the opportunities their friends in private school have.

Generalising like this is really unhelpful as at the end of the day, it's a child's home environment that is far more important than where they spend 6 hours a day at school - a child in a safe, caring home with plenty of food and love is going to have a better life than one without regardless of where they are learning for a few hours a day. There are good and bad parents in every single school, fee paying or not.

There is no school closer to us than my DC's private school
If I walk to the bottom of the road I can just about see the playing fields, it was one of the reasons we chose it AND for a variety of reasons our whole family is very much part fo our local community

Some people who say ‘I just sent mine to the closest school and it was fine’ seem to think that is admirable. Not quite sure why. It is almost as if they feel are morally superior for not making an effort.

Yes, see also paying vastly inflated house prices to live near superior state schools and paying for private tutors. I have absolutely no problem with either of these, but have encountered a real.blind spot from many people I know.

My children are in their 30s now, and much has changed since then. London schools are a lot better than they were. However, I still think rather than demonising those who have done the best for their children however they could, we should all be pressuring politicians to improve state schools and to tackle the huge crisis in teacher retention. I don't just mean putting more money in.

When I was a child in the 60s and 70s teaching was a good, safe job with a decent salary and an excellent pension. Teachers were well-respected for the most part and had almost total autonomy in the classroom and very little scrutiny, so it was a high status job, albeit not one you went into to get rich. Put all of that together with the long holidays and it was a very attractive option for many graduates. A family with one full-time teacher parent and the other either a SAHM or (very often) a mother working part-time once her children were at school, increasing to full-time later on, could easily afford a nice house in a decent area and some sort of family holiday every year.

In the years since, teaching has become a far less attractive profession because salaries have fallen behind other professions, the pension scheme isn't what it was, early retirement is no longer an option for most, but also teachers have lost a great deal of that autonomy and now work under a huge amount of scrutiny. They are also not respected as they were. Both parents and children question thier authority (not all, but enough to make this a big problem). Discipline in some schools is also a big issue, which is another factor driving many teachers to leave the professional altogether.

I don't know how the government could solve all of this. They certainly can't do it quickly. But unless they try, that's what's causing the shortage of STEM and other teachers. The fact that it's generally easier teaching in private schools is not the main reason state schools have a shortage. People with STEM degrees can get far higher salaries in most other jobs and far better working conditions. The number who train as teachers and end up in private schools rather than state is a drop in the ocean.

I’m not sure there should be any “high moral ground” taking. If an option is there to pay for a better choice, then people are going to do it.

But I do think VAT should be paid.

I don’t claim any moral high ground at all, as I sent my children to church schools because I thought they were better.

Countries where private education doesn’t exist seem to have brilliant education systems, and it would be better if we just had excellent schools for all.