If you are anti private school are you also anti tutoring?

[WWGD]

Putting aside the obvious - that a tutor is about £2k a year and private school about £25k a year…

My kids are state educated. Many of our friends are surprised by this as they go private, but our objection is political as much as financial. We just don’t believe it is right to buy that level of privilege and opportunity. We’d also rather spend that money on holidays etc.

dd has asked for a tutor in subjects she is struggling with. I have arranged this. But this too is buying privilege and opportunity. Though not the networking and prestige.

I am comfortable with my decisions. I am just wondering whether people who are anti private school for political reasons also think tutoring is beyond the pale?

I was going to put this in aibu but actually am interested in people’s views rather than being flamed.

There is a massive amount of inequality between state schools. If you looked even at the accounts for school PTAs you’d see that inequality.

I have found anecdotally that some of the people who are most rabidly anti-private schooling are pretty privileged themselves and bizarrely hypocritical about private education. Tutoring is clearly a sign of privilege given the cost per hour but I don’t understand why anyone who had the means wouldn’t if they thought it would benefit their child. There’s no other aspect of life where you wouldn’t do something you could afford and offered benefit as you don’t want to be seen to be advantaged.

I have experience of both sectors and actually have one in private and one in state primary. My children are equally privileged because of the fact they have engaged and educated parents, a stable home life etc.

No. They were awful before and then it happened that they went off to private school. I did not say that going to private school made them awful.

Edit: though i will openly say that I would worry a lot about sending my child to an institution where children are more likely to hold elitist views by virtue of their upbringing or lack of contact with a large segment of society.

@Bunnycat101 How much do you think a private tutor is per hour? I'm one and really not all that expensive!!
Also, what does a "stable" home look like to you?

No. They were awful before and then it happened that they went off to private school. I did not say that going to private school made them awful.

@OrangeCrushes I’m not sure what the point of your post is. If they were always awful then what is the relevance of the fact they went to private school?

Some ex state school children joined a private school and they broke up the place and threw food round the cafeteria and bullied the other children, ‘we hate you fucking posh gits’ and so on.
Therefore all state schools are bad.

You clearly didn't read my post. I was very clear that this is an anecdote and that my observation does not have universal application.

To be honest a lot of grammar school kids are like that though. They think they are better than the ones who didn't get in AND the ones at Private schools.

Far easier to be narrow-minded when you've passed a test to tell you you're special.

You clearly didn't read my post. I was very clear that this is an anecdote and that my observation does not have universal application.

Okay, but what was the point of the anecdote? Presumably as a criticism of private schools, even though the private school had no bearing on these children’s characters as they were like that before they got there.

This makes sense. It's a good reason to visit each school and get a sense of which one is a best fit for your child. It's not like all state schools are the same and all private schools are the same.

The grammar school in my area unfortunately seems not necessarily to have the best atmosphere due to factors like this, and the amount of parental pressure that the kids received to ace all the tests.

The point of the post is that the small number of children in my child's cohort at her school who were later sent to private schools seem to have been raised in a way that led to entitled attitudes.

Obviously not all children at private will be elitist and mean, but it only takes a small number to create these social conditions. I also think that inevitably, there will be a larger percentage of children who have been raised with elitist views and strong opinions on social class in private school. Being separated from the general population is unlikely to give them a more nuanced view of the world.

I am not in any way arguing that children at state schools are always better or always have more laudable social instincts. But I don't think it would benefit my child to attend a social institution that is by its nature elitist.

I doubt that’s true. There might be one or two grammars that encourage or allow that attitude (I’ve never heard of it but I’m willing to accept it’s possible).

But over the years I’ve known plenty of kids at grammar schools and adults who went to grammars, and none of them have been like that.

Thanks for calling me a liar and insisting that your view is the correct one.
Did you go to a grammar school by any chance?

Are you calling me a liar?

I went to state primary and then a comprehensive school.

So you would never dream of saying that private school creates mean entitled bullies. It's actually that parents who choose to send their children to private school start that process long beforehand?

I'm a little bit confused about why you want these people around you at all. It sounds like everyone was much happier after those children left your school. What's the problem?

I suppose you're going to feed your children the same food a person on minimum wage feeds their kids, right? You should stop taking them on holiday also. Learning history on trips to Greece or Rome are a massive privilege. Are you really that disingenuous that you think you're not buying your kids loads of privilege??? [Facepalm]

Personally, I can see no problem with the wealthiest in society, leaders of government and captains of industry, excluding themselves and their children from the masses in as many contexts as possible. Glad that we are on the same page.

The last thing parents who have high expectations for education can do is complain. Everyone knows they would be called ‘pushy’, or ‘that parent’. Or possibly elitist for requiring certain standards.

Where did I say it was up to parents to improve them? I didn't say that at all, I said that the political will to support state education will not exist while there is an elite private and two-tiered state system that effectively means powerful people can buy and game their children into advantageous positions, and uphold the existing class system in their favour. Closing private schools alone without other educational reform is not the answer, and nobody sensible would suggest that it is. But closing private schools is important, not only practically but symbolically.

And yet, after the 1947 Education Act came into force, very large numbers of middle class parents were perfectly happy to send their children to state schools because they could see that they were good schools where their children would do just as well as at a fee-paying school. (It probably helped that taxes went up to pay for the schools, the NHS and the rest of the welfar state, so these parents didn't have as much disposable income to pay fees.)

Even when the 11+ started to be withdrawn in most parts of the UK, the middle classes mostly carried on sending their children to state schools and the numbers going on to higher education went up and up. A lot of bright working class children benefited too and social mobility has never been higher than it was in that post-war period. Then in came Thatcher and the income gap widened again and we are where we are now.

@Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g except none of the late 1940's group or subsequent decades included children with sen. Corporal punishment aside, group behavior was much more controlled (most likely by expelling students or routing them to vocational schools early). If you ask most parents who's children attend grammar and independent one of the driving factors is perceived low level disruption, antisocial behavior and lack of adequate support for sen and mh needs in some state schools (small wealthy catchments often exempt).
There were decades where council estates were tightly regulated with rules regarding cleaning, maintaining exteriors, laundry and window washing. People were expelled from estates for antisocial behavior. There was more personal pride.
Socially there has been a huge shift on many fronts, my sil says his education was hugely disrupted by antisocial behavior and full on disruption in class during the 1990's.

'Mummy, why do I have to go to tutoring in my free time, instead of joining in with my friends' activities? Couldn't I go to a school where they teach properly instead?'

My children went to prep school until they turned 13, before moving to state school. I still pay for tutoring because the teaching doesn’t quite meet the same standard, and disruptive students are allowed to get away with too much.

Parents should have the freedom to educate their children as they see fit, without judgment from others who ultimately don't have their children's best interests at heart.

Let’s not forget that parents of private school students pay taxes as well, supporting state schools. If they didn’t care about society, they could have argued against funding state schools.

Honestly, maybe it's time for a radical rethink of education altogether. If AI continues evolving, who knows—one day traditional schooling might be obsolete, replaced by personalized learning that actually reflects the needs and values of each family.

Feeling snarky today, I can't help but add a touch of sarcastic realism and futurism. I’m optimistic about AI’s evolution and hopeful it will advance enough to resolve these issues. After all, no one will outpace AI, regardless of the school they attended.

Private schools, tutoring and paying extra for a house in a particular catchment are all actions which aim at furthering your child and if you are against one of these, you should be against all three.

With finite university places, your child’s progress is at the expense of others without the same privilege, of course, though this is not the aim most people start with when eg they engage a tutor.

Note also that the fewer children whose parents are using the state system the better for those are in it. Private parents are paying twice. The state should be thanking them.

Lastly just be honest about your desire to do the best you can for your child.

I'm not against private school attendance so long as there are no tax breaks from the rest of us to support it, and provided there are no enhanced opportunities/influence that derive directly from it.
I would think that any parent would and should do everything in their power to help their child out if they were falling behind in a subject, including tutoring if they can afford it.

It wasn’t a ‘tax break’. JC how often was that repeated? Obviously to no avail. I got tired of explaining it ad infinitum in the debacle as Labour introduced their bitter spin.

Suffice to say that private school parents are paying twice. Once for state school kids to get a place/s they’re not using, and again for their own kids at private school. And now they’re paying tax on their kids education too, which no other European country does.

I tutor mainly children with dyslexia, and many of the families I tutor for are not at all wealthy but are using their child benefit to bolster their children's learning. With schools budgets so tight, many children with SEND are not having their needs met. Having someone support your child's learning when they are not getting the support they need is school is hardly buying privilege.