to ask if you use state or private education

[manicinsomniac]

Sorry, I know it's a little rude and personal but I only ask because I think that only 7-8% of the children in the UK are privately educated yet on mumsnet it seems to be massively higher than that which I find interesting.

So, if I'm not being too unreasonable to ask, do/did/will you use private or state education for your child/ren?

independents are not free I assure you.

We've done both. Private Montessori pre school in London because we had just moved to the area and had no hope of getting DD into any hugely over subscribed state preschools.

A few terms of that completely crippled us. It was a really lovely little school but living in London, paying for private school and having a good quality of life just wasn't a possibility for us in the long run, so we upped sticks and relocated to the country.

DD very happy and truly thriving in a lovely state primary now. The state secondary here is outstanding and very popular so we are very happy with her moving on to there.

Might pay for 6th form though as have heard a few negatives about the local 6th form college, though by the time she gets there it could be amazing.

What I love about being in the state system though, apart from not worrying about being able to afford it, is that we are in a catchment area, surrounded by friends who share their lives at the local school and community (so important as we are relatively new here). No more shipping DD half an hour down the road every morning and afternoon thank goodness.

well I've just read a few posts complimenting themeseles on their higher morality and sense of justice for going through the state system

which I find exceeding odd

Partly because I think private schools do more than any other single factor to perpetuate the class divide in this country, and I think this is wrong.

I think that used to be true, and is still true at the most elite level (Eton, Westminster) but it's broken down, so much, with the expansion of the private ed. sector. The other thing about the private sector is that it isn't all elitist; it's just non-standardised. You get Steiner, Montesori, Summerhill, all sorts.

'I think that used to be true, and is still true at the most elite level (Eton, Westminster) but it's broken down, so much, with the expansion of the private ed. sector. The other thing about the private sector is that it isn't all elitist; it's just non-standardised. You get Steiner, Montesori, Summerhill, all sorts."

It still separates 7% of children from the other 93%. And gives choices based simply on wealth to a tiny minority of the population.

I wouldn't argue with that point Seeker and for me it is one of the downsides of the education I have chosen for my children.

However, the way I see it, the biggest divider in this country has nothing to do with private school, but is between those who can access good education (be that independent, garmmar schools, faith schools, outstanding comprehensives or home education) and those that can't.

And any of us sitting in that first camp ought to keep our pointy fngers to ourselves.

at it's most basic, and if we could put aside prejudice and bigotry on both sides, where you have an area with an independent and a state school, how can it not be the case that those at the independent look at the state as 'somewhere my parents got me out of, somewhere not good enough for me', while the pupils at the state school look at the independent and can only conclude 'somewhere that isn't open to me'.

And that is why I think it is divisive and does more than any other factor to promote social divides. And you can say, 'well I buy my child apples and you buy yours fruit winders, so surely that's the same', but I don't think it is.

If you drive a very old car to send your child privately, or make any other financial sacrices to do so, then that can only be because, like me, you think that where a child goes to school matters more than anything, and it trumps holidays, expensive foods, etc as a determinant of their future. So you can't then argue it's the same as an apple.

The majority of the population couldn't afford private education even if they give up holidays, meals out etc and drive an old car-they can't afford them in the first place andso they have nothing to give up!

Of course that's right.

Without even considering education my DC are absurdly advantaged, I know that and so do they (I probably bang this particular drum a little too often).

To be honest, if they went to the local school (where I volunteer) they wouldn't be any less advantaged and those children wouldn't be any more advantaged. The mere presence of my DC wouldn't materially affect their lives. There would just be two posh kids running around the class.

My ds has always been at state school I prefer the whole ethos. I think it's up to the individual though and what suits them. I do cringe though at people who can,t really afford it living off credit cards and beans on toast to try and give their kids a 'better start'. You need a lot more than the basic fees to really take advantage of the whole experience the extra curricular stuff is good but pricey. You do not produce a better person from private education that unfortunately is the luck of the draw.

I guess what I'm saying is that I think the problems those children face go far beyond education...

noddy I guess it depends on the alternative.

You see very often on thse boards parents who are in despair that their children's SEN are not being met at state schools. Children who are not getting access to any meaningful education...I suspect they would say any amount of beans on taost is worth it.

Similarly at DD's school there are a number of girls coming in from some really challenging areas wiht some of the worst schools in the country. Their families often club in for the fees. I'm sure that they too would say it was worth it.

do you really think that way, Joan?

I went ot my private school because a) it was a girls school, not a mixed school. b) I could do Classics there, and couldn't at the mixed comp. c) I could do a couple of minority sports there (which I was already interested in) which I couldn't do at the local comp, d) it suited my mother's work timetable better (back in the days before childminders on every corner, no family able to help out, didn't want to incomvenience friends to that degree)

so, all in all, it was a better school for me and that is the only way I ever saw it. the local comp would have been better for other families, I am sure.

yes, my school was not open to all (although since I was actually homeless for much of my time there, and living in council temporary accommodation and B&Bs, I owuld say it was fairly open to a wide range of society). but I did not spend my time there looking down on the local comp - why on earth would I?

and as wordfactory has said - my dds are now ridiculously advantaged (especially compared ot ho I was brought up!). dd1 cannot attend the local state school anyway (the challenging behaviour/low ability issue), but sending dd2 there would make her any less advantaged. but again, she will not grow up looking down on the state option - it is not a school I have saved her from, it is a school that does not suit us as a family, for various reasons.

You see very often on thse boards parents who are in despair that their children's SEN are not being met at state schools

I've also read posts by parents whose DCs have been effectively excluded from their private schools because of their SENs.

Having said that, I did consider a specialist private school for ds, who has dyspraxia. We wouldn't have been able to make the £20k fees though - or at least not without working such long hours that we would barely see him (both of us taking second jobs in addition to our FT day jobs). We did fund private OT though - something that wouldn't have been an option for many people. He's made great progress.

Does sending one's DCs to private school affect parents' expectations of what their children will do in life?

I wonder about this because a woman I know sent her three DDs to a good private school locally. As adults, one of the DDs worked at a call centre and is now a SAHM, while her two sisters are both teachers. The mum feels she 'wasted ' her money on the schooling, given that her DDs could have fulfilled these particular ambitions with a state education. That saddens me.

It also makes me rather cross that this woman clearly has such a low opinion of teaching as a profession.

tiredgranny said: "private although it will be finacially crippling it will be worth it i workrd in state secondary school and the amount of children that could not read or write was worrying how did they slip through the system"

Yeah, that's a real mystery how kids at your school came away with poor literacy skills..

That post was also the first one to make any assumptions about either kind of school, and is more offensive than any about the nature of independent schools were.

I think if you pay for education you assume some sort of 'results' for your £. I know most of my rl friends do. It is a risky strategy

I know I'm not wasting my money - they are having good years and are well looked after. No doubt they will have struggles and sorrows. But these are good years for them.

Joan, you might not dislike them because you can't afford them, but you dislike them because everyone can't afford them.

You should direct your ire at the state system. This is a system we all pay for which has just turned out a lost generation of children with poor literacy and poor numeracy and crappy job prospects. That's not my fault or my school's fault. It's the fault of the state system and some state schools - and private schooling is just a convenient kicking stick.

The mum feels she 'wasted ' her money on the schooling

A terrible burden to put on a DC-'I am paying for it so I expect you to get wonderful results and a high flying career'. Maybe they have a burning ambition to be a hairdresser.
I don't see why you would be disapointed to have a teacher-there can't be many careers more worthwhile. Probably not good enough for a boastful mummy!

But I do not agree that that is true of state schools.

After a few glasses of wine I would definitely be on Team Joan

thanks Noddy.... it's a lonely lonely team sometimes! .

I was privately educated ds is at state. There is a reason for that and its not money

"the biggest divider in this country has nothing to do with private school, but is between those who can access good education (be that independent, garmmar schools, faith schools, outstanding comprehensives or home education) and those that can't.

And any of us sitting in that first camp ought to keep our pointy fngers to ourselves."

Completely agree wordfactory.

It really pisses me off when people who have bought or rented a pricey property next door to a great school, coached for grammar or attend church criticise those who pay for education.

It's easy to be pro state education when your kids are in one of the good schools. But as you say, choice in the state sector is often illusory.

Around here (surrey) it seems to be the selective state secondaries that are the most elitist.