Do you think private schools give your children a advantage in life ?

"Most kids at private schools are there because their parents work bloody hard to pay for it."

The problem is that most people, however "bloody hard they work" could never afford private school fees.

And being outraged by injustice is not the same as being "bitter". Or "jealous" as someone will no doubt come on to say in a minute......

Gently - it's simply not true that private schools are the 'province of those with inherited wealth'. Yes the children of aristocrats will be at private schools but they are the minority. Most kids at private schools are there because their parents work bloody hard to pay for it.

Even our rich friends with inherited wealth are moving near decent state schools and balking at cost of private. Have been quite surprised by this actually.

No, I firmly believe that everyone has the exact same amount of money, and that is why I am opposed to private education. Obviously. And because I am a communist, and I don't realise that communism has been Tried and Failed. And because I don't think anyone should read their children bedtime stories in case it's not fair. And because I live in a billion pound house and lied about being a catholic to get my children into a leafy comp.

I'm just a big idiot, now I come to think of it! Thanks, bonhomme!

bonhomme - it's really not as simple as that though, is it. People with inherited capital are better off than others, almost regardless of income. Earlier in this thread people have been discussing (fairly accurately in my view) the sort of income below which it would be unwise to commit to private school fees for umpty thrumpty years (depending on number of kids) absent a nice hefty chunk of 'extra' (non salary related) dosh lying around either to pay off the mortgage thus freeing up income for fees, or to pay all/most of the fees.

Private schools are mainly the province of people with inherited wealth and that is surely something it's not unreasonable to be a bit bitter about, if bitter you are? (I'm not since my kids go to great schools but I can see how other people could be). Entrenched privilege is not a good look, is it?

" It is a fact of life that some people are financially better off than others."

Has anyone said it isn't?

Get over yourselves ... some of you sound so bitter. It is a fact of life that some people are financially better off than others.

Hak - yup. I had amazing parents. I was very very lucky. Much luckier than many of my more financially lucky friends.

My poor kids have me though so while there is more ££ around, I think they are definitely lacking in the brilliant parent category. Although they seem to like me so there is that, I suppose.

Children can also be very privileged indeed but not rich.

It's easier to get away with bad behaviour when you're rich.

Yes, indeed, Bonsoir. Not just emotionally neglected but neglected in other ways too. We know a well off couple with children who got divorced, and the mother was a drug addict and as a result, a poor parent. I'm not an expert on such matters, but as far as I can see, rich parents are less likely to be investigated by social services.
I could be wrong about this, though.

Children can be simultaneously materially privileged and emotionally neglected.

1. "Rich" and "privileged" are not synonyms.

You might laugh, TheWordFactory, but I say that as someone who went to schools with tiny classes, individual attention etc etc as did many of my cousins/friends of the family and my experience is that those issues are very real for some DC. There is truth to the concept of spoon feeding and of being overprotected from just how harsh the competition is in the RL.

In my experience the people who went to private school were advantaged not because of the school but because:

Their parents went to uni so could help with high level homework, choosing subjects/unis & had expectation their DCs would go
Their parents paid for tutors
They lived in big warm houses with their own quiet bedroom to study in
They had a decent diet
They went on holidays to interesting places and had opportunities to practice foreign languages
They had active hobbies outside school, getting exercise & fresh air eg skiing & horse riding
The really well off ones had swimming pools or a tennis court in their garden
Their parents usually had 2 cars so could drive them to places/activities
They had stable lives (no moving house, no family breakdowns etc)

mini afaik the assisted places scheme didn't just offer places to super bright kids (that's what the scholarships were for) but to average kids who had poor parents.

I knew quite a few. Some did very well. Some dropped out because they never felt like they fitted in. Most ended up in fairly regular jobs.

taz yes it's a disgrace that some schools prevent pupils from getting the requirements for uni. Afaik some only allow a max of 4 highers in 5th year- immediately closing doors for able pupils. I've also heard of some schools not offering 'harder' subjects like chemistry and bussing pupils to other nearby schools of they want to take that subject!

Sturgeon needs to take lessons from someone, funnyossity !

Oh, and the point that Mini was making was that even at bloody awful schools there are extraordinary children getting amazing results- at every school. This isn't true.

Anyway Sturgeon says Scotland is to take lessons from London Taz!

The current generation are having the same issues.

Hak these are current results for these schools. It just so happens that the school that DH went to still has the exact same results. I'm not comparing between generations.

I do think comparing the schools that people now old enough to be parents went with the schools that are available to children now is not a fair comparison. They are very different. Yes, of course there are poor, even dire schools. But they are far less able to get away wth it under the current system than they were. And they are held accountable in a way they never were.

Taz I went to just such a school in England. There are still similar schools in the area where my cousins' kids attend where the brightest are not given the tools to compete.

I disagree, Mini . It may well be different in England, but in Scotland there are too many schools (Wester Hailes, Craigroyston, Castlebrae etc) where it is more typical for no one to leave with enough Highers for uni, than for even one to achieve decent results. Even the schools at the next level where typically 4-6% achieve 5 Highers, typically the results are at the lower end. These are what I would term the "bloody awful" schools. I believe there are extraordinary children at these schools (DH certainly had the potential at one of these schools but came out with poor results) but they aren't getting any sort of amazing results.

I'm loving the idea that independent schools with small classes and individual attention are a disadvantage......

All those poor disadvantaged children. Never getting into good universities or having successful careers...it's a terrible shame for them...

The only way to judge the value of assisted places schemes wily be to have a control group of similarly bright children from similar socio economic backgrounds and compare how they achieve in the state sector.

My belief is that the sort of super bright kids who benefited from assisted places are those same extraordinary kids who get amazing results at even at bloody awful schools. Every school has them!