to wonder what the fuss is regarding Private Schools?

[peppapigandhumf]

A friend has 2 kids at a local prep school. She doesnt really bang on about the school to me etc but i wonder why bother pay for education when schooling is free.

Is it really just about small class sizes and fancy expensive uniforms?

So because I can afford a 911 I shouldn't have it because others can't. Ridiculous.
Apparently private school is shite and waste of money, so you wouldn't want it anyway would you ?

I have no problem with people choosing private education, I possibly would if I had the money, but what makes me mad in these threads is the notion of scrimping, saving and sacrificing blah blah blah and then it's possible. The cost of sending one child to a private school would cost more than my entire annual income, someone tell me please, how I can scrimp save and sacrifice to send my 2 dc to private school!!!

The fact is that if by giving up fripperies you can send the dc to a private school, you must be having a shedload of fripperies in the first place.

Oh please someone argue with me as sometimes I think I must be missing something!! (I realise sometimes it's grandparents paying etc)

MM That's what I meant.

It is baffling how people who are happy with the state education their children are receiving are so excercised about how other people educate their children. I can see why people who feel their child's state edcuation is bad would feel aggrieved, but no-one articulates that.
If the indie parents choose to waste money on education that is no better than what is 'free' why do you care so much? And if they are stupid enough to do that, why do you imagine they would be so much better at raising standard if their 7% minority of children were in state education as the 93% majority - who you presumably judge to be are too sheep-like and ineffective to achieve improvement already?
I see people wasting money (in my opinion ) all the time on fancy handbags/clothes/cars/waitrose food etc - that's their look-out, more fool them - at least it keeps the purveyors of those things in employment - I am very happy with my own choice of cheapo clothes etc and think I look just as good on a fraction of the cost, so why would I foam at the mouth about their choice?
LM makes a good point about the fact that those who prate on about social mix (and miss the point about the fact that school is not a child's only social environment) do not also choose their own job/friends/location/home on that criterion -why not?
As to the levelling down - one of the many absurd things that Christine Blower has spouted is that because 'private' schools get better results they should be abolished . If that's her level of logical reasoning just as well she's out of the classroom.

exercised

DS is at a state Grammar, and I do feel he is getting as good an education, if not better, than children at a minor independent school.

He is not getting as good an education as he would be doing at Ampleforth, for example, because his school doesn't provide the range of extra curricular activities that a really good independent school provides.

I have friends with children in minor independent schools who are envious that we live in a Grammar school area, and I am envious of people who can afford to send their child to a really wonderful, culturally enriching school.

I don't think any of these schools have much of an impact on the schools that are doing a really poor job of educating children.

Just a few points

I teach in a school where almost no parent would be able to afford private school, they have to scrimp and save merely to ensure there is food on the table and a roof over their heads. They may spalsh out on a few luxeries such as TVs and playstations, but the cost of these wouldn't even come close to school fees. This doesn't mean they don't have the same concerns that any parent considering private school does. They want their children to have the best and do well in life, particularly those who have moved to the UK. Why on earth do their children not deserve this just because of their parents financial situation. I think some people need a serious reality check as to what 'choice' actually means to lots of people (as in can we afford to send our child to the better school further away because of the increased cost of the bus fare and uniform).

Secondly why is it that in this country we are so obsessed with this pantomime judgement of schools, they are seen as either amazing or hellholes. The reality is the majority of schools in this country are good but there is always room for improvement (which would probably be much easier if politicians and the media weren't so inclined to making instant, ill-thought out and hysterical proclimations in order to sell themselves).

There is crap in both state and private sector however, and no school meets the need of every child. My brother is a case in point. He started at a private pre-prep (paid for by our granparents) which was a disaster as he wasn't suited to the formal and academic approach, and the teachers were far too twee and old-fashioned to recognise this. There was lots of sport and art but it didn't make up for the damage caused and too this day he is still seriously anti-school. Fast forward a few years and he was struggling at the local (but very middle class) comp. Again many teachers didn't have the time of day for those who were more challenging like my brother and he was heading for exclusion. Fortunately he was left some money by an elderly relative and my parenst were able to get him into a local, but undistinguished, private school. It wasn't a miracle worker, but suited him much better and he made it through to get a handful of mediocre A Levels. I went to both of these 'disasters', did well and ended up with very good qualificatios. Moral of the story - state school doesn't = crap, private= all will be amazing, it is down to the combination of child and school.

Lastly whoever said that removing ESL students will solve all is talking out of their arse. My non-fluent EAL pupils are the least of my worries, on the whole they are motivated, well-behaved and learn quickly. People think that they are challenging but they really aren't if you know what you are doing. What does take up my time is paperwork and the huge range of demands my children bring with them, most due to the complexities of general society, not some evil menacing force that working class children possess. My current class are a delight and I genuinally don't believe that they are any less motivated or well-behaved than any private class.

"
"He is not getting as good an education as he would be doing at Ampleforth, for example, because his school doesn't provide the range of extra curricular activities that a really good independent school provides"

Omce again for the hard of understanding. Of COURSE independent schools have loads of extra curicular activities - that's what they spend some of the fees on! People talks as if the polo lessons and sackbut ensemble are somehow free!

If you want lots of extra curricular activities as a state school family, you pay for them - just like private school parents do.

HFJ, how are the children in your school not getting the best education? What do you think is lacking in your school?

From your post, it seems clear that the peer group within the school is a wonderful group of children for any child to be surrounded by, so why is it that your school isn't giving the best possible education? What could be done differently, and by whom?

Seeker, yes I understand that. I don't begrudge children at independent schools their extra-curricular activities and I pay for my children to have some extra-curricular activities outside of school time.

I just can't afford to send my kids to Ampleforth. I don't have any issue with people who can afford it.

Because I can't give them the individual time they need. If I had 15 of them then I actually could offer them exactly the same as any private school teacher. Plus there is the little matter of some of the crap I have to do but really don't agree with just so OFSTED don't come and beat us with a huge stick. We also don't have the money to offer all the wonderful extras some private schools do.

I actually think that if you sent your child to a private school rather than our primary school, then you are seriously wasting your money. It's secondary where a lot of our parents worry (I often get asked about grammer/private options as parents don't know where to get the info). The area is rough, and drugs and crime are a problem. Unfortunately with the large, impersonal secondaries we have, plus many outer undesirable influences a lot of children are very vunerable. To lead one of these schools takes a huge amount of talent and energy, and unfortunately there are only a handful of people out there who have this. I really wish we could reduce the size of these schools, even if there are several sharing a campus and facilities, and make them more about individuals needs, as well as having seperate vocational and academic streams at 14. However it just won't happen as Gove and his cronies are fixated with replicating some 1950s minor public school system, and cherry picking tit-bits from other countries systems without looking at the whole picture.

MrsGuy - Excellent post.

Honestly, I can't see why people are bothered about what other people spend their money on. So what if I send my DC to prep?

If all the privately educated children reverted to state system, there would be endless moaning about well off parents who were swamping the education system when they can afford to pay for the education themselves. The education budget wouldn't increase, yet there would be 7% increase in numbers using the system.

The amount spent on education is a political decision made on what the governemt believes are priorities. If those with power and influence (not just politicians) had to use state education then the amount spent on it would increase as it would suddenly become a much higher priority (i.e. party donors not paying up unless their child was getting the best possible education). However what would probably also happen is that their children would only be sent to certain socially acceptable schools, so the social apartheid would continue, albeit in a different form.

v. good post by MrsGuy

If independent schools were abolished, I'm not convinced that there would be more funding put into state schools.

There would still be social segregation within the state system, and schools in more affluent areas would receive donations from the parents to pay for additional facilities and activities. That is what happens in many state primaries at the moment.

Yup, and you'd have more kids being forced to do academic extra-curricular activities to 'top up' by pushy parents if the parents thought they weren't getting enough at school. You can't stop parents who have money from using it for their kids education in one way or another if they want to.

I'm not sure I dare stick my toe in these waters, but what the heck. I come from a northern family with parents who were both raised in council houses.
To my surprise, after years of state-funded education then a decade or so of putting something back by working in healthcare, I find myself in the guilt-inducing position of wanting to send DS private.

For reasons that nobody else here has touched on.

I simply can't get him to the local catchment school (and we're in a grammar area too) without having to give up my job.

There isn't any breakfast club provision, not much after-school. I work full-time and when I broached 4/5d with boss I was told they wanted more of me not less.

I live too far away from work to get DS in a state school there. And over a county boundary. So the only way I can get him to school, go to work, hang onto the career I've fought tooth and bloody nail to get despite not terribly good state education and stick with my feminist ideals :) is to send him to the local-to-work pre-prep. Which costs about the same as the nursery he has been in since he was a few months old when I went back to work.

And live with the looks I am going to get from family. I got disapproving comments when I went to university for goodness' sake. Education is indeed the way up the ladder (grandparents = manual labourers, parents = white collar public sector clerks who valued education) and I have the chance to help DS up another rung in the hope it's easier for him than for me.

Though if he turns out to be academically wrong for the school, I'll adapt again. I'd rather he was happy.

moonbells I agree about the cost early on being equal to nursery fees (in fact I am paying less having moved DS to a pre-prep nursery after taking him out of a state one) BUT the fees rise sharply after Year 2.
I totally understand why you have chosen private BTW.

moonbells, access to a preferred school is indeed an important factor. Where I live, 6 out of the 8 nearest primary schools are CoE. And I live in a multi-cultural neighbourhood. If you're Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, atheist etc, your choice is severely limited. Given that this is all taxpayer-funded, I think it's at least as pernicious as private schooling. State schools should be open to all and not impose religious views.

Slhilly - I agree, I think education should be secular - but that's probably a whole new thread ...

OP you seem to have gone very quiet. Have you been answered enough or just bored?

i've just started working in a girls private school and after working in the state system i am very impressed. smaller classes, no disruption, good discipline. Interesting lessons, plenty of resources.

i asked my DD if she would like to go in the 6th form (we would have to really scrimp) but she was happy at her comp.

My local state secondary school has drugs, gang violence, assaults on teachers, one way corridors to stop fights breaking out when one child bumps another in passing, and burly security guards.

I have no idea how as a parent I could possibly improve that situation - i think whoever is suggesting it must be confusing parents with Clint Eastwood.

And no, I don't think that it is fair for ANY child to have to go there, but I do not understand the "ethical" argument that my child should be forced to go there if it is in my power to send her anywhere else. I would think that it would be highly unethical of me to do something that I think is bad for my child if I am somehow able to find her another option. One of my friends was a teacher at a local state primary which feeds this secondary school until very recently. Rather than send her child to the secondary school, she made the difficult decision to move back to Australia (she is Australian).

I think you are right lisianthus that there is a terrible postcode lottery. Around here, the state schools (especially primary) are excellent, and arguably better than private.

I think the only reason people round here send their DC private is because of the fear factor - the insurance salesman theme etc.

I do think there are drugs in most secondary schools - the scale of the problem differing obviously. All the boarding school boys I know were the worst drug takers I knew - but their drug taking was done in a hedonistic way not in a way to block out a shit life and as a relief to depression. And I know there is a difference.

I think the quality of teaching in my DDs state grammar is as good as many independent schools. It can't however compete with the small class sizes and facilities on offer at many public schools. The fact that it is a free education allows us to pay for many of the extra things the public schools have on offer, take 2 holidays a year, change our cars every 3 years and not worry about the fee hike every September. We are lucky enough to live in an area with excellent state provision for those children who pass their 11 plus, if DD had not we would be cutting back on our lifestyle to fund private education.