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?

Kenobi - you sound like me! I used to stay inside, hide in the cloakroom and read. Eccentric was also a term used for me - still is - but I don't see it as an insult.

How lovely that you found an English teacher to feed your habit. I was lucky too in that department - it does make all the difference!

One of the reasons we send ours to prep school is that the head and staff are more responsive to parental concerns.

DD was supposed to go to state primary, and after a conversation with the head prior to her starting, I had concluded that we were never going to have a productive relationship.

Cue, DD going to prep.

I think the danger in the state system is because no-one is paying for it directly, there is less of a feeling of accountability to the parents. The fact that we are paying through our taxes is ignored. (Obviously I can't generalise, but that has been my experience.)

Ironically, the prep has less funding that the state school, so doesn't have all the latest kit, but the ethos and pastoral care more than make up for it.

I don't see a huge benefit of private primary schooling TBH but a lot depends on what your schools are like. Our state primary is superb.

DS1 is now at private secondary and the difference in facilities is huge. That and the fact that he is in a smaller class than he would be at state school and expectations of him are higher are what makes the difference IME,

"One of the reasons we send ours to prep school is that the head and staff are more responsive to parental concerns.

DD was supposed to go to state primary, and after a conversation with the head prior to her starting, I had concluded that we were never going to have a productive relationship."

But IME that is simply a difference in Head, not the difference between private and state. I get the feeling that the private secondary that DS1 is at is far more responsive than another he was offered a place at and as responsive as our state primary.

Slhilly Less chance of your children mixing with other children you don't approve of. People won't own up to this, but by God it's true, as is the converse (more chance of mixing with children you do approve of)

Despicable sentiment, but I suppose I have to applaud you for being the only person honest enough to admit this.

It fundamentally comes down to whether you think it is right that the children of the wealthy should be educated with the children of the poor. If you think they should, you shouldn't use private schools.

And don't anybody start on about how private school parents make huuuuuge sacrifices and drive old cars, or there are people with bursaries, because you know full well that the vast majority of parents in this country could sacrifice until the cows came home, and still £12k a year in disposable income wouldn't magically become available.

[shrug] I didn't choose private to avoid mixing with riff-raff, I chose it for the opportunities it gives. There are, as it happens, a mix of boys at DSs school from posh to ordinary.

Now I'm scared.....

One reason some parents send their children to private schools early on is because they can see they aren't academically outstanding and without the extra push from a private school they doubt they will get into academically selective secondary schools. Or, they recognise that the child is not getting top marks and assume that that is the school's fault, when in fact said child simply isn't a high flier (at that age, anyway).

That's been my experience, anyway. At our state primary school the three brightest children in the year all went onto private secondary schools, which I think is very sad, but the two boys would otherwise have gone to schools where they would have stood out like a sore thumb. The girl's family decided to send her to Christ's Hospital rather than our very good local girls' school. The handful of children who left during the primary years to go to independent school were bright but not super-bright, and they all stayed in the independent sector beyond 11.

I really depends on what the state schools are like in your area. If you are able to get your DC into a good state school, then that's all well and good. If not, then paying for a private education ensures your DC get a good (as opposed to a dismal) education.

Define 'ordinary', Soupdragon?

Son of a cabby and a TA for one. Is that "ordinary" enough for you? Librarian's son?

Obviously I am not party to the ancestry and parental employment history of every boy there.

JoanofArgos: I agree that the sentiment of not wanting to mix with different social groups is distasteful.

However, I disagree that rejecting the ideological position that rich and poor shouldn't mix means that you shouldn't send your kids to private schools.

I don't think it's the fault of parents who use private schools that so many state schools are failing. I think that the majority of parents would send their kids to state schools if they were as good in the UK as they are in Finland or several other European countries. Those who pay for private education for snob value or to make sure their kids only mix with the "right sort" are a sizeable minority but still a minority.

The failure of so many schools to equip children for higher education, work or life in general is the fault of successive governments who have failed to invest meaningfully in the state education system (not just money, status and power of teachers, raising awareness and expectations etc..) and close the opportunity gap between children from rich and poor backgrounds.

But if those people did send their children to state schools, the state schools would be very different, no?

There are some parents who only wnat their children to mix with other rich children, but not many in my experience.

If they were that bothered they wouldn't let their kids join the local footie/running/swimming/rugby/gymnastics clubs would they?

And almost all Dcs school friends play sport outside school at local club level.

That said, I do appreciate very much that most of the parents at DC's schools are like-minded. Nowt to do with cash. Just mindset.

[Hmm] I really don't agree with the assumption that private school = better teachers. Just because they can offer more money does not mean that the best teachers teach there.

Arse, I can't even do a smiley...

It's everything to do with cash - the kids whose parents don't have any, aren't there!

joan I hear that said a lot, but if my DC went to the local state school, do you honestly think that the HT would start imposing proper uniforms/latin/competitive sports/choirs etc at my request?

Yes, the state schools would be very different if the private school children went there. They'd al be at the "good" ones leaving the spare spaces at the less well performing schools for the less well off. Nothing would have changed.

No, you might have to live with the lack of 'proper' uniforms, less competitive sport, and no latin.... or you might not, I don't know. Y But that wasn't what I meant. I meant the atmosphere and the attitude would be different.

JoanofArgos: I don't think they necessarily would be that different but I'm always open to evidence and reasoned argument to the contrary. (Several of my friends hold your view but they've never managed to sell it to me.)

I think you overestimate the positive influence that the presence of a greater proportion of middle-class kids may provide.

This isn't going to provide a revolution if the ceiling is still leaking, the school library and IT centre are badly equipped, a significant proportion of the school are selling and/or taking drugs, none of the teachers have more than 5 years experience or higher than a 2:2 degree etc..

I think the change has to come the other way round. Improve the schools and let the parents choose.

Personal opinion I suppose. I currently send my DC to a private school but do not assume its better than all state schools.

I get mightily pissed off that people assume that is what I think.

When I chose to send my first DC to private school initially it was because we could not get her into any of our schools of choice then. The school offerd was imo not as good as the private option. We (fortunately) could afford to send her to a private alternative at that stage. Although I thought the our private option was a better school than the one we were offerd I did not assume or think it was better than other state options but people assumed I thought this. The fact was we just could not get her into any of our first choice schools.

I would rarely mention my DCs school but found once people knew where they went, they jumped to conclusions and what really gripped my shit was how they felt they had the right to tell me what they thought of my choice, something I would never do to anyone else. TBH - I could not give a shit what school anyone else chooses for their kids and am amazed at the "interest" and sometimes "furore" at our choice.

Incidently - we moved house and happily moved our DD into the local state school because that was what I thought was the best option to us at our new address in a different part of the UK.

We have opted in and out of the private sector as we have moved house. I would say we have been satisfied and happy with all schools our DC's have attended in both sectors bar 1 - which incidently was a private school.

Much smaller classes makes a MASSIVE difference.
I suppose people who can afford it would chose the best for their kids.

Interestingly I would if I could, BUT I also feel that it is really unfair that people with more money can afford better than others.