Did you go to private or grammar and are sending your child to state school?

I went to a state grammar school, my dh to a private boarding school (public school...). Our children are state educated - one now at the local comprehensive, the other still at the local primary. We love the comprehensive school - he is so happy there and it has a lovely atmosphere. I just don't see the need to hanker after anywhere else.

I went to private school and my experience put me off ever doing the same with my children. Lucky, as we couldn't afford it!

Larger in comprehensives in places like London where a disproportionate number of high ability and education focused children are in private (15%) and socially exclusive church schools. This makes them harder places in which to teach and learn.

And yet London comprehensives, on average, outperform comprehensives in other areas of the country, in terms of outcomes for different ability bands. You are more likely to outperform the national average for a school of comparable make-up in a London school. Statistically, you are more likely to attend an 'Outstanding' school in London.

I can think of at least 3 comps in my general area where the FSM level is much higher than national average, and so are the results.

Obviously there are schools where there are problems - a critical mass of harder to teach pupils.

Nicole: London has high levels of wealthy population, (alongside high levels of disadvantage), high levels of international corporate employees with school fees paid in with the package. I wouldn't assume the overall reasons for a higher level of private ed are based on feral London youth, or as having a disastrous effect on the make up of London's schools!

I went private from age 11, my ex went private all the way (but in another country)

Ds has just gone private, mostly because the area I live in has really bad failing schools with high staff turnover and large class size, and I would have had to of moved to get a place at a school that I think he would have settled at.

I also, personally, feel that I let ds down a bit because I'm a single parent (I know, I know) and the one benefit I can see from me and his dad being apart (asides from our sanity!) is that the cost of the school fees is halved which is the only way it is affordable for us. I am the black sheep of the family, and I just wanted to give ds the best education I could to try and make up for that.

I went to a grammar school which also took fee-paying boarders. It was a lovely school in many ways, and part of me would love to send DD somewhere similar, but that's just sentimentality as the local comprehensive is actually a much better school.

My dh went to grammar school and I went to the sink comp.
2 of ours went to local state schools, I wish they'd have had the opportunity to go private, in another town.
DD boards, but not for academic reasons. I'm still glad she's not in our local state schools.

Some are amazing, good as any private. However, some are dire and it doesn't seem fair that there are such discrepancies in the standard of education.

I went private and DH state. Our DC are at an outstanding comp that we were very lucky to get into. I work in a lovely selective private school. Sometimes I feel a bit guilty that we can't afford private, but am really not sure that there is much value added in private compared to my DC's outstanding comp.

There aren't any comprehensives where I live (Kent). I went to independent and comprehensive, DH to a sec modern.

DS is at a superselective and DD is still at primary. She won't be going to independent.

If you met me in the street Nicole (god forbid), would you single me out as different? And if so, how would you identify that?

Would you judge me if I said I worked in private, public sector, self employed or...a stay at home mum?

But it's ok for you to judge me because I did not make the same school choices as you, and that you hold me solely responsible for the education sector as a whole? But your friend who chose state school A over B is what, ok to hang out with? (because all the state schools are equal of course in your world)

And that my 'community' schools are full (because it's London) and that therefore it's my duty to have my DD travel 8 miles out on 3 different modes of transport...to what. Breathe a different community that she doesn't even live in?

I repeat, given the choice, most of us would choose to send our children to the local comp. That a private education does not necessarily equate to a better education. By this thread, wouldn't even provide a better learning experience by those already posted.

I think your prejudices run a lot deeper than schooling choices alone.

Going back to OP's point - they said they feel a bit sad that they can't offer the same education to their children. I think they've got a pretty balanced and objective view from the posters here who are hopefully reassuring to their choices.

Well, some at least.

Just accept that you are buying into a deeply unfair system - one of social, intellectual and financial apartheid in education which both creates and perpetuates social inequality. You are helping to sustain it

You know what else creates social inequality and the other problems you mention? Kids who's parents couldn't dream of sending their kids to private school not getting a place at a good school because richer people are coming in and pricing them out of area/buying a hugely expensive house down the road etc. I send my kids to private, we can easily afford it, and live in a very socioeconomically divided area with few good schools, one of our catchment states is one of the best in the country, should my children take the places at those schools and force the ones who's parents can't afford private to have a bad education at a bad school? I don't think so.

I send my kids to private school for many reasons, but that is one of them, I can afford to send them to a good school like Holland Park comp (our local, also some more deprived neighborhoods in catchment), but with them going there, that is going to deny someone who might never, ever be able to afford such a high standard school.

The good state school places being taken up by millionaires is outrageous IMO. It's a big problem here in London and it's terrible.

Strange notion also that those children from deprived areas cannot be clever, talented children, who could, given the right opportunity - develop into children that people would not take an exception to.

Not all schools are adept at identifying these children...but some are, from all sectors. Not all schools are selective in other words - from both sectors and therefore these children, if motivated enough, may turn things around with decent teaching, peer groups and collaborative working environment. Something that both sectors have, but not all.

Just like a bright child motivated enough with a strong ethic, may have this stripped to bare if having to push that water up hill from the get go. This also applies to both sectors.

"they are individual to me, not you."

You live in a community not in a vacuum - as do your children and the other children in local schools. Your decisions and those of tens of thousands of other parents are what shapes the character and intake of the schools that the rest of our children have to go to.

"Stop being so judgy for making my choices...they are individual to me, not you."

Just accept that you are buying into a deeply unfair system - one of social, intellectual and financial apartheid in education which both creates and perpetuates social inequality. You are helping to sustain it.

Us. And we could afford private. Our children are getting a better education than I did. We have great local schools.

I went to private schools but Dh went to state schools and is anti private schools. We live in an area with excellent state schools and so our sons have only been in the state sector (no grammar schools in the area).

If the state schools had not been as good I think I would have found this position harder. Many of our friends send their dc to private schools so over the years I have sometimes worried if we were doing our "best" for them.

But i am now sure we made the right decision. Ds1 did his GCSEs this year and got great results. Ds2 is less academic and will have different options available to him while they both attend the same local school. And we have saved lots of £s on school fees.

And there you go again Nicole creating the 'generic' state school argument in every thread that you can. By the very nature of where we live we are surrounded by the very socially exclusive schools that you mention. Don't live in the catchment for the remainder good comprehensives. Know the over subscription of those out of catchment we don't stand a cat in hells chance of getting. But you think that I should accept this under some kind of altruistic duty to my community. Or move. Because going to any old failing comprehensive (as the good ones are taken) is something I should be obliged to do, even though my DD will come out social excluded of forming friendship groups from the majority of the ethnic population that attend the catchment school because they don't mix with outsiders (and yes, I am from an ethnic background and am in a position to state how socially inclusive this race is...46 years in this country's worth of experience).

Obviously I don't agree. So, we look at other options. The very location of my DD's senior school means that it's near 50% intake of junior state school children, are not really that representative of the children attending state schools you are referring to. Because of the location.

And therefore, the bursary intake is important in my example, as it is trying to reach those outside of the population who do not live in the multi million houses that much of West London housing stock is worth, but I admit it's still a drop in the ocean. Not denying that.

Why do people go to school open days in the first instance? if it's too see which schools may suit their children on many counts, then based on their location, it may be a private/state, dependent on their needs. What follows are some serious soul searching to make the right call for their children. As this thread shows, the good news is that the right call is often the state school. Do you want to penalise them or exclude them from your debate - because I don't think many of them chose their local state school if their ofsted report was always 'fail/needs improvement' and then say ha, wouldn't that be a fun place to send our offspring'. You might though

Of course money buys you a route out of. What you don't have the insight to say, but feel the need to judge, is what people are buying themselves out of. I have many needs, some of which you may have right, but not all of them.

We not forced to work in one place of employment, be disgruntled because the leadership will not deal with the jobs worth, disinterested staff who call in sick daily. We have choices, to put up or move on if things cannot be changed, albeit moving on is not so easy all. Why should we make our children do the same if the environment is toxic?

I survived from having my head dunked down a shitty toilet frequently, turned down a scholarship to the local indie (twice) and came out ok. But, I did lose my ability to learn to my potential. Stop being so judgy for making my choices...they are individual to me, not you.

I went to an independent grammar so i tick both boxes. DP went to state grammar. DD just started at comp. There was some dreadful lazy teaching at my grammar and my partner had some bad experiences with bullying. So neither of us had this "grammar or disaster" feeling about things.
As it turned out DD probably wouldn't have been happy at a grammar anyway- good academically but very uncompetitive and actually prefers the practical subjects. The local non-selective private schools didn't seem to be offering anything better than the local (excellent) comp she wanted to go to.

"but are not naive to the skew, no matter how hard a private school aims to increase its bursary intake."

Bursaries are entirely irrelevant.

They're only offered to clever, talented children with a strong work ethic, hardly children that anyone would take exception to.

State schools primarily differ from private schools in their make-up in that they have to make provision for children who aren't able, who aren't interested in education, and who may be disruptive. In some schools children like this may make up a large part of the cohort. Larger in comprehensives in places like London where a disproportionate number of high ability and education focused children are in private (15%) and socially exclusive church schools. This makes them harder places in which to teach and learn. This is what money buys you a route out from.

The underlying key is location and access to a good comprehensive. In spite of my education in a poor performing comp where having your head dunked in a toilet weekly for being perceived as 'smart' would not have stopped me from sending my DD to a comp. I know that that was over 30 years ago, and things have moved on.

But we don't have this access, refuse to find religion, move or change profession, no grammar choices and therefore made some lifestyle changes which enabled her to go private.

She's no better off than her peers. We teach her to not look down to the 93% of state school as she is no better than them, and not to look up to private as they are no better than her. Simplistic I know - as this like does not take account that there are fantastic state schools and dire, same for private. We did not choose our private for social segregation reasons but are not naive to the skew, no matter how hard a private school aims to increase its bursary intake.

One noticeable difference (and this is comparing to our local states, not the countries) is that her music skills are more advanced due to wider exposure from an earlier age. She gets many comments from her friends that she's weird for liking classical vs more popular. Exposure to some of the non academic activities is a value add that we have noted, even though this can also be achieved through out of school/parental support where so inclined.

I am really happy when friends tell me their children are getting a great education and learning experience from their state schools. And tell myself not be bitter that we are paying for ours. Pros and cons to both.

We were both grammar school kids. Of our bunch, two have been very, very well served by local comps. The third is drifting a bit and would possibly have been better at a good grammar -- but might not have got in.

So on balance, yes, I'm happy with the comprehensive system round here.

DH and I both boarded at private schools - I was a 100% scholarship child, DH's parents lived overseas when he started.

We send our children to the local comp, despite the fact that they both passed for superselective grammars in the next town.

Why?

• Locally, with 1 exception, private schools have less good results than the comprehensive. In general, the privates carter to a) overseas children, b) children from the wider local area [therefore outside the catchments of the excellent in-town comprehensives] who did not get into the grammars or c) those whose primary consideration is their astonishing sports facilities.

• Comprehensive genuinely excellent, and has a culture of continually striving to be even better, whereas grammars came across as slightly more complacent and depending on their intake.

• Both children LOVED the vibrancy of the comprehensive when they visited. DD couldn't be dragged away from the open evening!

• Comprehensive is walkable, grammars are bus journeys. DD in particular has a very intensive out of school life (dancer) and gaining a couple of hours a day by not travelling really helps her.

DH went to state and I went to private, our elder DC's went to state until 13, then one until 11 and then the youngest 2 have gone private all the way through (6 all together). I felt fine about it, DH is a very successful surgeon who went to Cambridge so that reassured me that state was just fine , and me the privately educated one is in fashion . You've nothing to feel guilty about at all.

I went to independents. Dh to state. Tbh dh's state experience sounds like it was pretty poor.
Dc are doing state. Eldest just gone to secondary. Independents just too expensive for us (though a part of me wishes it was possible).
Would rather ds got to do the ski trips, language trips, history / geography trips etc..... (I never got to do this kind of stuff while I was at school as there were four of us.) Not to mention the chance to do some fun stuff at home with us which we might not otherwise be able to afford. (Theatre, days out, trips abroad, eating out ....)
May fight for disabled ds to go independent as just don't see the available secondarys (he's in a special school) suiting him but will cross that bridge when we get to it. The wrong fit will matter much more for him than it would for the other two.
Dh and I are happy to provide whatever academic support / encouragement at home that we can and to work on his self-esteem / confidence. Tbh I think that's half the battle.

I went to one of the top girls boarding schools in the country. DH went to a grammar school. We could afford private if we wanted.

DD has just left our local comprehensive with better than anticipated GCSEs. Our local comps are good academically for high achievers, middle and low achievers, and I don't see the point of paying unnecessarily. She has learned to mix with a wide-ish range of people. Can't really fault it.

I went to private school, oh local comp. our kids at our local comp and couldn't be happier. If we had boys may be more worried but our girls doing fantastically well at local school. No regrets.