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.

They are not the same.

I don't care for the elitism and segregation that comes with private school. Both my children need help with maths, I can't I do it, so I pay for a private tutor once a week. Yes that is a privilege I work to pay for, I don't think it encourages segregation and elitism.

oooooh come on do tell, it’s not at all obvious, but it is definitely condescending

This is a very fair point. I said I'm against private school on a point of principle but I also happen to live in a catchment area of excellent schools with nice kids. Would I compromise my principles for my child? I don't know because I haven't been in that position. Also, I was living here before kids and schools were on my radar so the time I developed my views and principles was of course influenced by these factors. So while I may disagree with your choice in theory, I could never hand on heart say I wouldn't make the same choice in your situation.

Why not? What about people whose children need help with maths, or anything else, but can’t afford to pay for a private tutor?

You can afford to pay for a private tutor, and you do - so you’re segregating your child from another child whose parents can’t afford it.

1:1 tutoring is worth far more in educational terms than a private education. All you people saying private school is against your principles, and then buying something ultra private are just like two tier himself. You have your principles until you need to cast them aside to suit yourself/your kids. But you pretend that you haven't - OP for instance justifies it with £2k vs £25k. That's no justification. You've bought your kid a massive advantage so just own it. You know quite well that unis don't find out about tutoring. But they do know about private school.

My DS went to a private school. I am considered to be an evil cunt for this. It makes me want nothing to do with society or community at all. I sent him private due to ASD and bullying. Not because I am some sort of snob. And also, because my local comp is shit. Nobody ever got anywhere near the GCSE grades my kids got. Why should I accept a shit school? I bet OP's state school produces some good grades.

Not all state schools are the same. Loads of Mumsnetters have their kids at nice state schools and pretend that they are the salt of the earth for using them. Like Rachel Reeves' own education - bussed to an all girls state school because her well to do teacher parents knew how to get her the best. But pretends that sort of opportunity is available to the man/kid in the street. Let's be real. It just isn't.

I am not sure what networking anyone thinks I've bought. My DS has left. He has a small handful of friends - rather like a kid who's left a state school. What network is it?

The principle is the same. It’s about giving your own kids an advantage and access to experiences and learning, whether it’s paying for private education, tutors, music lessons, etc.

I have more time for people who’re honest about this. I have a number of acquaintances who wang on about having their kids at state school and how they’d never go private because it’s not aligned to their morals and politics but happily moved house and paid a ridiculous premium on their new homes to make sure their kids were in the catchment for the “best performing” secondary schools.

All kids should have access to a high quality education in the broadest sense - academically , access to the arts and music, playing sports, outdoor activities etc, but I think this sentiment probably makes me a dangerous radical.

No - imo that's ridiculous.

I have to work full time and so does my spouse. Families who have a parent at home for whatever reason arguably have an unfair advantage over me because they can sit with their children for hours and provide extra help. I pay someone to spend the extra time on homework and learning that I don't have.

Political objection is all well and good.... Until you end up with shit career prospects

im going to go on the record and say that if your child needs help in a subject, you get them help. If you can’t afford a tutor, you find another solution. You barter, you use online solutions, you look for community programs, you learn the material yourself, and you do whatever it takes to help your child in the subject.

If you decide not to help your child out of some misguided principle, you are a bad parent.

I’ve found this thread interesting, and have never thought about the contradiction tbh. Yes, it is fair to critique why are some against one form of privilege and not another. But, I don’t think the scale is remotely the same. A massive proportion of of MPs, judges, people who ‘rule’ us and hold the most power and influence, are privately educated. It’s systematically built into our society as a structure that creates tiers in our society that benefit the powerful and keep the powerless at the bottom. So I don’t see private school and tutoring as equal. On the same spectrum of privilege, sure, but not the same. By extension are people saying that music or sports lessons are the same as sending kids to private school?

If you are wealthy or financially comfortable, I don't understand how morally it is worse to spend that money on your child's education and extracurricular activities (whether private school, a tutor, music lessons, culturally educational holidays, whatever) than to spend it on a bigger house/cleaners/nicer car/designer handbags or whatever. Surely if you had the money to spend it is morally and ethically "better" to spend it on education (and possibly indirectly fund better medical care/scientific discoveries/innovation etc) than worthless designer tat or acres of land?

i bought my child access to an amazing state school by buying the right house. It is in many ways better than the private options. I don’t pretend that makes me better or more principled than people who use private schools.

Yes, but do you extend it to private school - that's the question the OP is asking really.

Just to say I am finding the discussion fascinating. Thank you for all engaging so thoughtfully.

It isn't fascinating. It's just full of parents who are happy to buy their DC 1 type of privilege yet are incredibly judgy towards other parents buying another sort. "It's fine when I do it but others shouldn't" level hypocrisy.

Tutoring is not the same as choosing to segregate your child all day. Totally different impact.

"Segragate a child" give your head a shake.
It is morally precisely the same, like I said the mental gymnastics and hypocrisy are hilarious.

I think there is a difference between taking a political stance on how you believe the system should be and taking a stance on what will work best for your children within an established system.
I'd love there to be no private schools and every state school have a broad balanced curriculum that allows children to access the education they need and pursue their passions. That affects my vote.
Within a system that doesn't quite meet that for my kids, I tweak things as best as I can.
ETA that includes tutoring, drama lessons and (what was practically actually a mistake) private school for one of them.

Quite so. And as I said upthread, everyone who sends their child to a sixth form that has academic selective requirements to enter the sixth form is indulging in that same “segregation”.

There are at least 2 state schools near me that have higher requirements to get into the sixth form than DD’s private school has (with others being on a par with her school).

No party offers what you want.

There will never be the hallowed comprehensive system that so many crave because no government will spend the money required.

The system is broken so parents do what they can eg tutoring/independent schools. The fact that using 1 of these alternatives is held as morally acceptable when the other is morally reprehensible is just fucking hypocritical champagne socialists trying to justify their own privilege.

By extension are people saying that music or sports lessons are the same as sending kids to private school?

It appears so! Giving your dc swimming lessons or enrolling them in a ballet club is a privilege as other dc don't get this chance. This privilege means it's the same as private school 😆

I think you’re misunderstanding what I am prioritising by not using private. I don’t think it’s preferable - or even possible - to avoid giving children any sort of privilege. The fact that my children have home cooked meals on the table every day already privileges them.

I do however think it’s morally problematic - for me - to avoid engaging in my local community, to purchase the ability to avoid the difficulties inherent in many state schools and to only have a social group among the most well cared for children in society. So I personally choose state school but would have no moral issues with tutoring or dance lessons or a better laptop or whatever. This is just how I prioritise, no issues with how others do it (I have friends who use private, friends with electric cars, friends who never fly for carbon footprint concerns… I have friends who prioritise in all sorts of different ways)

Apologies - I don’t actually know how it works in England. I’m in Scotland so there’s nothing like this setup.

"avoid engaging in my local community" so independent school DC don't live in communities? They don't live on estates and in towns and villages the same as state DC? They don't have friends and hobbies outside of school?

They are normal children you know. They just happen to go to a different type of school. They aren't immune from parents splitting up, illness etc or basically life.