In what respect is Private better than state education?

manic the uniform is a mystery to me.
DD has to waer a shckingly unflattering kilt. When she was having her first fitting I started singing Step We Gaily and we both pissed our sides laughing.

DS on the other hand, sports a pollyester blazer and trousers from Tesco!

Oops, sat on 'send' prematurely.

Joanna how on earth do you infer an attack on others' choices from a poster who says in terms that she has no interest in those choices and would buy in education herself if she needed to and could ? .

I did have a quibble about some of the reasoning in various posts which skew a narrow argument about the relative merits of the top schools in both sectors to a pointless comparison of non-comparable schools and then beyond that to the supposed wholesale sanctioning of appalling state provision wherever it exists. No need to defend myself there.

FWIW none of those kids of mine through the UCAS process ever set out at the start of their secondary education with an eye on any particular prize. Once through their first exams when Oxford seemed a reasonable punt, they had one. But no game plan, ever. How at the start of secondary would I or they know that that's what would suit them best?

My ds moved from private to the state FE college. We'll know if this was really a good idea when we get his AS results later this month.

He says behaviour is BETTER there than at his v. posh private.

The private school taught to the GCSE exams relentlessly. At the private school, there was a lot of oafish behaviour, including bullying, and including some gross-out sexual bullying of girls on the school bus. The boys I met were anything but polite.

At his prep school, which is widely regarded as one of the best in the UK, the little dears often smashed computers - staff often came in at 8am to find them all trashed - and one teacher with a twitch and stammer was completely unable to manage the classes he taught; he is now at an ever posher prep up the road. French teaching was dreadful, again due to crowd control problems, and sexual experimentation by the riverbank was common among boarders. Boarders did badly academically because nobody made them do their prep. Some very rich parents bought teachers' time for their sprogs and heirs, leaving other shortchanged. Sport was incredibly important.

That's the downside. The upside? He won a scholarship £300 a year, don't fool yourselves about these. He had a few really gifted teachers at both schools, who fired in him a lifelong love of their subjects. He made lots of friends. He got excellent GCSEs. But overall, I'd say it wasn't worth it, not for us, in our area. if I could do it all again, I wouldn't send him to either school.

The uniform thing is interesting. My dd goes to a high achieving (sorry to have to keep calling it that, but it is relevant) grammar school, and when she started they wore sweatshirts like a primary school. They now wear cotton jumpers instead but no tie and no blazer. They are definitely the scruffiest kids in town- but with the best exam results. There has certainly always been an unspoken "that school wear kilts and that school wear cutaway coats- we wear sweatshirts because we don't have to show off how good we are" vibe going on!

JoannaPancake I'm not sure how you know precisely which school my kids attend, I'm fairly discreet. It would take some digging, especially for a new poster. Even then you might have put two and two together and come up with five.

So other parents can see them and think 'oh, they look nice and well behaved, lets send our DC there!'

One thing I will never understand is why private schools have uniforms that makes the poor kid stick out like a sore thumb in the average high street.

Oh, and to add to my credentials, I also have a god child at "a top public school", another at a prestigious London Prep, and a variety of friends and relations with children at all sorts of educational provision in this country and abroad, including a couple who home educate.

Joanna- I do have a child at a high performing grammar. But I have a ds who in September will be starting at a High school which most of the posters on this thread would sell a kidney rather than send their child. I have one child who is the beneficiary of th grammar school system and one who is the victim of it.

So yes, my moneynis definitely, as they say, where my mouth is.

Fair point theta. I don't buy into the rhetoric and delusions either. There is no question that the GS that Yellowtip's DC attended/attend is fantastic but not everyone is lucky enough to have a school like that as an option, and parents can only base their choices on what is available to them.

I don't believe that Yellowtip has attacked other people's choices. She has taken issue with their rhetoric and their delusions.

I think it's interesting that both Yellowtip and Seeker have/had DC at top-performing grammar schools who are at/are aiming for Oxford. I wonder if their opinions would change if their only state option was a poorly performing school. It's very easy to attack other people's choices from that vantage point.

seeker
yes, I am.
the hoops they have to jump through now linked to aimhigher mean that its verging on positive discrimination (which my kids will benefit from!!)
the RG unis are MUCH more aware now of what they have been missing out on (ie some REALLY bright kids at schools with crap careers departments)
and know that they will climb the tables if they seek out the hidden talent

think of it as value added
turning a C2DE kid from a crap comp into a high rated PhD is just SO worth it to a top RG
especially if they can repeat it!

"top universities give everybody who applies an equal chance"

Sure about that, talkinpeace?

abitwobbly
top universities give everybody who applies an equal chance.
the shocking thing is that there are schools (and a particular LEA) that do not put pupils forward to RG Unis.

Comp schools are NOT the problem.
Comps, done properly, are the solution
in that every child (no matter how lazy, thick or absent their parents) has the chance to be spotted by the school and pushed to the top sets and the best opportunities.
Children with unmotivated parents are very unlikely to go to either Grammar or Fee Paying schools
and are therefore unlikely to reach their potential
and therefore less likely to contribute to the economy
UNLESS they are at a good comp that can open the doors for them

As I have said, you are welcome to pay for your kids schooling if you want selective or religious
but I strongly object to being forced to pay for it out of my taxes

If we are all judged by others posts then everyone on mumsnet is thick and Petronella Wyatt is probably right.

That works both ways, though, wordfactory- if your face turns out not to fit at q private school you can be out the door before you know what's happening!

Well the idea that those with kids at decent state schools must support knife crime isn't too sharp.

I agree yellowtip

I also think the most intelligent people on a thread are those who agree with me.

Oh.

I'm not aware that I've ever criticized your spelling word, you've often said that you've struggled with dyslexia.

Besides which, poor spelling and poor reasoning are two distinct things.

bitwobbly that's all fine and good but there does have to be an interim fix to try to get the best kids into the best universities.

Sorry if nt articulate enough for you yellow i'm dyslexic and had a shit (state) education.

Thing is though, if your DC are at an independent school and you find out they're being bullied, or the teachers are shit, or the HT has gone doollally, you can exercise your most powerful weapon; choice. You can upsticks and move schools.

That, it always seems to me is the fundementally best thing about going private for anything. You get to choose. You can say I like that one but not that one. You don't get what you're given.

Because despite all the flannel, choice within the state system is utterly illusory (to quote Unquietdad, late of this parish)

get the top universities to cast their nets a little wider.

Seeker: how about wrapping your mind around the revolutionary proposition of ... tada!

reforming state education provision????? ANYTHING else is rearranging the deck chairs.

The PROBLEM is the comps. Not 'privilege', the middle classes, private schools, the universities.
The problem is state education and the stranglehold the wrong people have on that education. The ideologies theories taught in PGCE should have every one of those 'lecturers' replaced.