German expat questions value for money of top English private schools

No,She. Most private schools have always made provision for the genuinely poor. That's often in their statutes. These days the bursaries too often go to the formerly rich but they still exist.

It's salaried professionals who are being squeezed out. Doctors, engineers, architects, accountants. Jobs which often require degrees. Not cool but worth doing. I think it's a pity that pupils at grand schools don't meet the children of such people any more.

Perhaps you agree with the High Mistress of SPGS that degrees are unnecessary?

And if you had any interest in real diversity as opposed to self interest, you'd know tat the ultimtate aim would be to merge Westminster School's sixth form, with WH.

Thus people like me and H. Holle, people you like to portray as 'greedy' and 'immora' will pay top dollar, so that children from the local area can have a top flight sixth form education whatever their parents do. The children of bin men, of nurses, of the unemployed.

Now that seems to me a more worthwhile aim, than reducing fees so that lecturers at the LSE can continue with the lifestyle they had as a child.

granola are you seriously proposing that the squeezed middle should be role models for my DC?

Why? What do they do that is so cool?

And what about working class people? It's ok to exclude them from private school , right?

There was an article in The Times a few weeks ago about Westminster Harris 6th Form, the new "free" school (it cost the DfE £47m) sponsored by Westminster School, one of the schools attended by H Holle's DC.

The Times quoted the headmaster of Westminster School (the "public" school) saying that when pupils from both schools were in a class together he couldn't tell who was from his school and who from the new one.

The journalist (an "Old Westminster" herself) was naturally sceptical and asked if this could really be true. "Oh yes," replied Mr Derham, "we're heading for "needs blind" at Westminster you know".

This is palpable nonsense, as everybody on here will know. Such is the schools' PR these days, though, that people do get duped. I can see nothing wrong with H Holle telling his compatriots that British schools are good at appearing great (including pretending to have big bursary funds and to be concerned about diversity) but that they don't live up to their own rhetoric.

I hope he will write another article. His perspective is useful.

He seems to be naive and/or disingenuous. Why would anyone expect diversity (not the street dance troupe) in the highest status private schools? Duh!
While we are good friends with lots of parents through DD's (private) school, including forrin ones, we do find that they often live in a parallel universe with little idea of life outside the bubble. We've been told that we are the only english people they know and that there are no english people in this area - I tell them they need to get out more . We lead a fairly normal family life with lots of extended family nearby. We do lots and lots of culture and visiting interesting places or ..... We hang around at home, do local things, lots of community stuff and we do not have a highly anxious existence despite being in London! It's all a matter of choice, we have never bought into the BS

I had a job interview at Putney Park once - it was a very odd place indeed and I was not at all happy with what I saw. It's a shame if it is still like that 20+ years later.

Davros H Holle's point was that London's diversity is not reflected in its private schools. That may be obvious to you with your dislike of "forrin" parents at the Hall but it wouldn't be obvious to H Holle's readers in Germany. His point was one worth making.

What The last 2 posts are full of good advice. Rich kids can make great friends.

My gripe is not with them or with their wealth but with the heads who fail to see that squeezing out the middle means losing a diversity of professionals and of potential role models

I live in Belsize park, home of The Hall and I agree with everytjlhing fiercebadrabbit said up thread. For years I listened to forrin parents slagging off "the British education system" while wholeheartedly buying into it but pretending they didn't like it. I couldn't understand why, if they really thought schools were so much better wherever they come from, they didn't do everything possible to educate their kids there, the City-earner parent could commute home at weekends, they'd probably see more of them. Then I realised that many of them love it - the competition, status, privilege and even the uniforms they weakly protest about buying. If H Holle couldn't find diversity in London, they even have council homes in Primrose hill, then he wasn't trying very hard. His kids would easily have got places at Haverstock school where the Millibands went (as well as NDubz!). Methink he doth protest too much, he paid for and got exactly what he wanted imo.

what obviously there are rich kids in private school who lead very luxurious lives.

However, please don't assume that they all spend their days doing terribly expensive things. They don't.

When DD has met up with mates this summer, it's involved lunch at Costa or Nandos. Sleepovers. Shopping in Top Shop. The most expensive thing thus far has been seeing Ed Sheeran (ticket 60 quid).

DD's mate on a bursary has been able to join in all this (I think it might be tough if a girl were really strapped) so is having a perfectly normal summer by her mates standards.

And when they all go off on holiday, I'm only aware of where, not how swanky it will be. I suspect the girl who goes to Scotland each Summer is going to a stately home, but that doesn't impress the girls . They want sunshine!

whattodowithmum My DDs went to one of the name girls' schools. Yes there were some very wealthy pupils there, and there were some who were entitled and attention seeking and who indulged in exclusive behaviour (the latter behaviour does not necessarily correlate with wealth). However both my DDs sought out friends with the same inclusive values and care and respect for others as them. By the by their friendship groups were amongst the most ethnically diverse. Plenty of parents in these London schools, including the Prep Schools, are there because they find themselves with a bright child and no good state option. It never mattered a jot that we don't go on ski holidays, one went on the school trips, the other didn't. There are so many activities that help them meet like minds I wouldn't worry too much. As one of my elder DD's friends said of a particular group of attention seeking madams in my younger DD's dysfunctional year. They have no respect for us, come to think of it they have no respect for each other, or even themselves........

Which is also another point. A particular cohort can vary enormously, who knows Herr Holles may have experienced an unrepresentative cohort at Sevenoaks........ Dangerous to generalise from one personal experience. I know the antics (and poor academic performance) of some of my younger DDs year is the source of negative views of the school and yet my elder daughters experience could not have been more different.

It will be a disaster if she thinks she can assume the attitudes and strategies of a "rich kid," when she is not.

Ah yes. I remember it well ...

Diversity is great, and the very wealthy are part of diversity. Too many though is a problem imho. Their status and power means that they can punch above their numbers in terms of influence.

There are lots of lovely comments on this thread about DC not noticing status or wealth and all getting along and making friendships based on less superficial things. That is good to hear.

I do think it might feel hard to be "part of the gang," when kids go skiing every year and you cannot afford to do so, etc. How do you build relationships/make friends when you are excluded from common experiences because those experiences are expensive? (I bring this up as an example because randomly 3 families have talked to me about skiing already. My children have never been, not once.) This might trickle down to the right clothes for going out, or costs of entrances at dance places as they get older, etc. I am not sure. But I can see that there is going to be less shared ground than I expected.

Despite generous bursaries and reasonable fees (in relative terms) my DD has met 12 girls so far, and all come from prep schools. She hasn't met a single other girl from a state primary yet. There are bound to be some, of course. But it looks like my DD will be providing a lot of diversity for others.

All those things are just annoyances though really. When growing up, there will always be times when one feels limited compared to friends and peers in one way or another. Learning to cope gracefully is part of maturing.

My real worry is that she will be a bit confused by it all and it will lead her to frustration and bad decisions as she starts out in life. People with access to capital, wealth reserves to fall back on, and fantastic connections can afford a certain insouciance that DD cannot. Those kind of advantages mean a person can hold out for better jobs, offers and opportunities than someone without them. They can also lead to a blase attitude and appetite for risk that DD can also ill afford. Education and loving, emotionally supportive are important factors in life chances, but they aren't the only factors. It will be a disaster if she thinks she can assume the attitudes and strategies of a "rich kid," when she is not. I am sure there are many "rich people," who would protest that they are not raising their children this way and that they share my values and possibly enforce them even more stringently. Maybe. I think all the effort in the world doesn't change the facts on the ground. And the material facts do influence everything, like it or not.

We would have loved to send DD to a good comprehensive with her neighbourhood friends. But where we live a a "good comprehensive" seems to be an oxymoron. By the end of yr6 she was correcting her teacher's arithmetic and grammar. Over the past 2 years, it's become clear that she is very bright, and that's great. We want an environment where that is normal and she doesn't become bored, disengaged and arsey. So we've dove in.

Time will tell.

rabbit I may be wrong but I think the UK system, though it still has far to go and it has certainly not been a piece of cake enabling my DDs to fulfil their potential, is ahead of much of the rest of the world in terms of recognising SpLDs and supporting bright pupils to achieve. I have heard some horror stories from the States as well.

However it may well be that systems where children start learning later and /or have more formal teaching methods have enabled children with some SpLDs to survive better and avoid the worst experiences of the UK system. Being asked at 5 to learn to read a language renown for it's lack of grammatical and phonetic coherence by look/see was a perfect storm for a Dyslexic, been there, done that and felt stupid......

And to answer your previous point I think at least partly the competitiveness of the London Educations system is of parents own making. It is still possible to inoculate yourself against the angst and Chinese whispers and keep things cool and have a child end up where they should be without years of parental anxiety, tutoring and preparation. At least some of the increased in numbers applying to schools is the vicious circle of parents circulating rumours that it is more competitive than ever and therefore applying for more schools. And with so many applying to private secondary schools as first time buyers from state primaries without the benefit of experience or advice from an experienced Head about where their child should go / will get in, it is a fertile ground for anxiety to be generated. It can be a positive thing, valuing education so greatly means those who get into outstanding state secondary's make for vibrant school communities and in some cases it has even led to such state schools coming into being.

ps these are just conclusions drawn from what posters on Mumsnet have said about their children with dyslexia, etc, who do not in general appear to have been happy with their children's experiences in France and Germany.

One thing that does seem to be a bit of a theme is that the French and German systems are hopeless at dealing with specific learning difficulties/disabilities. Are they very much more systems where you have to be a reasonable all rounder, or a failure, than the UK?

There is no movement between the schools.
That's not actually true,...and depends on the federal state - some of which base decisions on parental choice, instead of the primary school's suggestion. It depends mostly on the grades obtained by the pupil, though.

I agree with Mr Holle and I send my DSs to a private school in the UK.

Frankly I would send DSs to a good grammar school if one existed in my town and they were bright enough to get in. We dot have a grammar and DS2 is not quite high enough academic standard so we pay. The alternative is a grim state school in special measures.

The standard of education in DSs private school though is no better than a standard good quality grammar school although it is true they have better facilities than a state school but that is not worth the money I pay.

And now seriously ducking under a parapet.

Perhaps diversity to H. Holle means learning that people from "lesser" backgrounds can be as good as you. Diversity for DC may have been learning that people who consider themselves to be from "better" backgrounds are not necessarily "better". Presumably either way could lead to a lesson in taking people as you find them and valuing different skills and experiences.

And back where we started. DD learned a huge amount spending last summer cleaning and doing kitchen work in a care home. Not just about working with the elderly, but from her colleagues who had they had the same life opportunities may well have been able to have had the same aspirations. It opened her eyes. Her motivation was to tick boxes for her medical school application but it proved to be a really valuable experience in its own right. No reason why H. Holle's DC cannot do the same.

(That was to Poisonwoodlife)

Hmm. Interesting. It wouldn't tempt me to move back to London, though. I thought it was great fun as a young, free and single person (and likewise Paris, where I lived for a bit), but the level of stress involved in bringing up children in London seems, on Mumsnet at least, astronomical. Tbh, also, my parents found plenty of artists, musicians and academics to consort with outside of London when they moved out! Not all artists, etc, like London very much, albeit most people see it as a necessary evil. Nice to hear it can still be fun, though - in the last few years, it has started to feel even more crowded than ever and consequently less buzzy and more annoying, dirty and grubby. Obviously I've been out of it too long!!

Sorry but he makes absolutely no sense,

He spends £1million on his children's education then wonders why they are not meeting children whose parents are petrol pump attendants.

He also needs to realise that only one of his children actually goes to a public school.
The cynical difference between private and public is that as a parent you get them into a public school for the connections and kudos that having a public school listed on their cv will bring.
we parents hand over the tussle over schoolwork, computer games, condoms and hashish pipes gladly for huge sums to the professionals

Is just lazy parenting.

The whole article suggests he has thrown his money about without doing any research then crying fowl.

As for the uk having no social mobility he should take a look Germany's own school system. I bet he went to one of the Gymnasium type schools.

I have a friend, ex pat, who lives there. There are 3 levels of secondary schooling, you are either put in a Gymnasium which is like a grammar school where the world is your oyster and you then can go to University and expected to become, bankers, accountants, solicitors etc If you don't get in there you can then be placed in the next level down. Where you are expected to work in a manual capacity, carpenter, electrician, builder etc if you don't get into there then as she put it you might as well go straight to prison. Her ds took the exam when he hadn't been in the country that long, he is also statemented dyslexic. There is no movement between the schools. He goes to the 3rd level school and the only way out for him is to go back to the uk and board at an English private school which they cannot afford.

Needmore absolutely, being at a London private school hasn't made my DDs materialistic, entitled and narrow minded because we have not parented them to be that way but encountering peers who were has made them develop their own identities in opposition, as well as giving them the skills to navigate a world where manifestly a lot of power resides in the hands of such people. And educationally they have benefitted from so many opportunities as a result of growing up in the midst of so much culture. art is an obvious example it isn't just the trips to all the galleries which could be visited on a day trip, though not at the drop of a hat but having friends whose parents are artists, taking part in artistic communities, being a part of what has gone on in Shoreditch and Hoxton.

Needmoresleep Your dd's experiences and observations are weirdly paralleling my own. When I applied to medical school Sevenoaks kids usually tried Oxbridge, then Guys, Barts, Kings or UCL etc. Some commuted from home and met more of the same background and schooling, and rarely met a non dentist/medic. St George's, and some of the others that I forget now had a more diverse intake. When I went to Liverpool I naively and arrogantly thought I would be the top of the heap having missed a place by one at Oxford. Instead I found a medical school full of extremely bright Northerners attending their local university, most of whom could wipe the floor with me academically. Interesting that the attitudes of many students, and perhaps parents in the southern/London private schools are unchanged.