Should we pay 3x our current house price for a top 20 independent school, or stay put and have our children attend a top 275 school?

@Squidsister - Yes, as with Saraclara, I mean in terms of grammar. Our local grammar system, is supporting a huge and thriving tutor industry round here. Kids are tutored from as young as year 2, mostly from year 3 or year 4...and even with prep schools which recommend whether your child is suitable or not are concerned, parents of kids who are just plain average or borderline, ignore the data they are presented with, and get them tutored anyway. And then once they have scraped through that, the tutoring continues. Because without the spoon feeding and the handholding, they are sinking fast. And you only have to look at the distribution around the minimum standardised mark to pass, to see that a good majority, are really just scraping through. It’s madness surely.
Back in the 80s at my inner city comp, tutoring was inexistent. The departure of our A level maths teacher 2 months into my course, meant a lot of time spent navigating the course books on my own. And I still managed it with a good grade, in spite of them never actually finding a replacement.
As with my eldest who had a similar experience with one of her subjects...she had the initiative to research what her syllabus required, and did the donkey work herself from there. Learning is about how we source and accumulate knowledge. It’s a vitally important skill to have. Being told exactly what to learn, and exactly how to learn it, is very much a rote experience. And will not serve them well when they get to university. Even a bright niece who notched up good A level grades on the back of very expensive private tutoring, and went to a good uni...floundered once she got there. And I was shocked to hear how much they were paying to help her with her essays! It is so wrong, and yet so many people, seem to think it’s justified.. in the name of competition. Sorry for the long winded explanation...but that’s basically what I meant..about ‘learning how to learn’.

If they are a state school pupil then they won’t have been tutored to get into anywhere?

@Squidsister if they live in a grammar school area, many children will have been tutored. Every single one of my nephew's friends (except him) was tutored for the 11+.

Tutoring can open up subjects not available at school, and extend subjects that the child is doing at school. So can holidays. I'm one of those weird people who thinks that education is about more than exams.

Also - the advantage of going to a local school is a much shorter journey. It takes DS 20 minutes to walk home. Other children have to travel 1-1.5 hours each way to their selective / grammar schools. So I figure he has at least an extra 1 hour of spare time a day to study. Or get a tutor if necessary.

If they need extra tutoring, it’s because they’ve either needed it to get into the school they are at, or are simply not capable of learning how to learn. And most kids are capable of the latter...
Mumto2two -
Not sure I really understand this? If they are a state school pupil then they won’t have been tutored to get into anywhere?
What does ‘not capable of learning how to learn’ mean?
DS had a tutor for a while last year - not for any entrance exams, but because he was struggling with maths and kept saying he was ‘rubbish’ at it. He didn’t like to ask in lessons if he didn’t understand something, because he thought the other kids would laugh at him (which was true). The tutor did a great job in filling in gaps in knowledge and restoring his self-confidence. He was capable, he just needed some 1-1 teaching which state schools generally don’t have enough staff for. (He is getting on fine in maths now without needing a tutor, btw). What is ridiculous about that?

This anti-private ‘save your money for tutors’ argument, is a seemingly frequent suggestion on here, and quite a ridiculous one at that. Why any child should be encouraged ‘tutoring’, beyond their regular school day, is really beyond me. No matter what school they are at. If they need extra tutoring, it’s because they’ve either needed it to get into the school they are at, or are simply not capable of learning how to learn. And most kids are capable of the latter...
If life throws you an opportunity OP, grab it with both hands. And if it’s for your children..grab it even harder. Good luck!

Shouldn't equal education be available to everyone

Apologies if someone else has already pointed this out but there is often a lot of movement after Year 11 so looking at GSCE results are a better clue if results are what you are basing your decision on. Even state 6th forms weed out poor performers and accept higher achieving students from outside. The required grades vary from school to school as well. The lower A level % school might accept students with Cs at GCSEs but the other one will only accept As. Minefield. Glad I live in an area where all schools are good.

The performance at A levels is obviously better than our local state schools

Not obvious at all. Look at the current thread about Charter school, my local comp (not as leafy as Charter) sent loads to Oxbridge this year, more than 30% of my Dc true comp pupils got AAA and upwards...

Schools reflect the ability of the intake. You are talking about selective schools that offer scholarships!

Top 20 school = higher fees, £35 per music lesson and parents who have brand new Porsches, a second house, multiple holidays and who kit their kids out in Supreme.

Top 275 school = a broader mix of parental wealth.

Where will you fit in? And yes, it does matter.

I agree with the who said the effect on your child will be marginal at best. Given that there are a significant number of kids who got top grades in all their A levels at my daughter's local state comp, (and they send several to Oxbridge every year), I wonder just how much difference there can be between a top twenty and a top 275 school as regards a single pupil's grades.

I think it's a huge amount of pressure on the kids for you to move for their education at a highly competitive and results driven school. I'd stay put for all your sakes.

What would be the most appropriate ones for each of your children.

Which schools do your children feel the most comfortable in.

That is the starting point and if it is the bog standard comprehensive at the end of the road or the one where you have to sell your house and move they will probably do better there than anywhere else.

I was sent to a private school which had a high O level pass rate rather than the local Secondary Modern with my friends.

I was miserable for the 5 years I was there. I failed everything and would have done much better had my mother saved her money and sent me to where I wanted to go in the first place

Name the schools, or accept you aren't going to get useful advice!

I agree with @LangClegsOpinionIsNoted - very bright will be fine locally and lower ability would get horribly stressed with the 'top' school's pressure. Personally even if you had kids in the middle who might benefit from hothousing I'd save the cash and hassle and get a tutor to supplement the local school, and pay for more holidays and activities and trips instead.

If you move house, sounds as though your children will be surrounded by even richer kids than where they live now. Which I'd say is not an advantage. I'd stay put, and you'll have shedloads of money to pay for individual tutors and holiday courses to help them do better academically or in extra-curricular activities like music, if you think that is a good idea. Getting a child to Oxbridge is not rocket science, and in my view parents can do a lot to facilitate that, outside of what happens at school, if that's right for your children.Several of my family have recently had offers / got into Oxbridge, and none of them went to top private schools.

I would stay where you are if you comfortable financially and you are happy with the school. It is always good to have some money put aside for emergencies.

Don’t also underestimate the work put in outside school by kids, parents and tutors to help achieve top results. They get a shitload of homework and 20 weeks holiday a year when much of the revision (and often actual work) gets done. The people I see succeeding (aside from the academically elite ones that the top school will already have selected) are the ones whose parents are most engaged and involved, regardless of how good the school is. So unless you have an elite child then the outcomes are likely to be fairly a similar and depend on much wider factors, specifically how much time and effort you and your kids are likely to put in outside school.

Which school would suit your children better?

That should be your starting point (and middle, and end, tbh).

Then work from there.

I currently have 3 dc at schools in 3 different counties. School runs are a nightmare, but each child is where they need to be (and each one doing very well, in their own way) and more importantly, happy and settled.

Given an overall standard of decent education, the only deciding factor should be where your child would be best placed.

My middle child ended up at what I thought would be my last choice school - from virtually the first moment I stepped into the place, it was the right choice for her (absolutely the wrong choice for me as in the wrong direction etc, but I worked the logistics out).

Where we live, the top independents with the crazy high results & destinations massage their figures by offering scholarships to the top performers from other independents & states nearby. Which means that the other schools also LOSE some of their top performers, slightly bringing down their results. Some other indies that have slightly less than stellar results have them because they lose their more ambitious 6th formers to the local outstanding state 6th form college with the epic results.

So make sure you understand WHY the two schools you are thinking about have their results before moving.

I would be uncomfortable with Option 2 financially because it is nice to have a buffer. But I would definitely consider a state school over a mediocre indie - you could do extra curricular and specialist tutors if required.

Option 2....I’d move; no question. They have the opportunity to be part of an amazing school and all the benefits that brings. You can live in a nicer area. You cut back on some things sure but this doesn’t sound like it’s putting you on the breadline. It’s an easy choice for me...

Remember, in the top 275 school, there are children who get 3 A at A Level. Funnily enough, they will be the cleverest children in the vast majority of cases. More might get 3 A in the other school - but that's because more children there are in the 'cleverest' bracket.

Shiny facilities don't equate to better results or education. Schools don't turn sow's ears into silk purses - the different results are mostly due to there being more silk purses in one school already.

There are some benefits of being educated in an environment with lots of very clever children rather than a smaller number - they can feed off each other and stimulate each other and go at a faster pace. But good schools can work with a bigger range of abilities and help all get to their maximum - the fat some get lower grades isn't a sign the school is less good, just some of children might have a lower maximum. To be able to get a broader range to their differing maximums is actually more impressive than getting lots of very clever people to do well.

The impact on your child will probably be extremely marginal,Mir both are good schools. I agree that if the local school is not impressive but mediocre, why consider paying for it in the first place. But if it is a good school doing well for its Intake, it can do well for your DC....and if they are clever they will get hem to the A*_B bracket and if they aren't that clever, then they won't.......but actually neither school can make your child something they aren't.

I think the question isn't about the higher performing school but the local one - just how good is it and is it worth it and will it help your child fulfill their potential? That's the real question. If not, there might be several others that could do so that don't require the move and the other school.

I'd think what sounds like a marginal gain isn't probably worth the huge expense.

And re whether top 275 is good or not, well 60% A*-B doesn't sound that great actually. Lots of state schools will deliver similar. Lots of ind oendthe to will deliver better. However,not here is massive regional disparity in terms of nos of high performing schools.m in lots of regions there is no school in the top 30 and only 2 or 3 in the top 200 - large numbers are based in Limdon and the south east. Op sounds like she's not there, because otherwise there would be more choice of great schools in a smaller radius. I still suspect there are more than the 2 possibles mentioned though.

Send to the best one. But dont move house.
The OP has already said she doesn’t want to inflict that journey on her children, and quite right too. Parents that do this (especially when they have other decent options) have lost sight of what is best for their children’s well-being.

Where does the OP say the local state school gets 80% A-B??*

She didn't, sorry I should have directed my post at @bluedogyellowcat

Send to the best one. But dont move house.

I assume you and your dc have visited both schools, and you would all be happy with them attending either? Dc are happy with the choices?

What would you need to miss out on as a family to be able to move and send your dc to the more highly rated school? Are you all happy with that?

Would you be able to afford the move, fees and extracurricular additional costs?

There is a life outside of school, not just for dc but for you all as a family and that needs preserving.