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?

Like most people our children go to state schools. They're free and we (again like most people) couldn't afford to pay (over and above our taxes !). I have made considerable efforts though to ensure that they both go to good schools. Both primary and secondary have been classed as "outstanding"
In a way I do think YAB(S)U to ask ! (S = slightly)

Mrs Guy:
Those people who are so sanctimonious about 'fairness' - do you deprive your children of good food, cuddles, clean, safe, uncrowded housing, clean water, warm clothes, vaccinations, medical inteventions? Because unless you do, your children already have a massively unfair advantage over most of the children in the world.

But we don't segregate by those things, do we? We don't put all the childred who get cuddles in one place and make sure they don't rub shoulders with those who don't. This is aside from the 'is it an advantage' aspect of the debate, which I must say I've heard the other side being a bit inconsistent over as well!

I feel fortunate that they are able to go to such good schools, and for the contribution their schools make to their learning, development, and well-being.
I know not everyone is so fortunate, especially when you think of children all over the world.

joan of argos, I don't think mrs guy meant the rubbing shoulders thing. I think her point was that if it's unfair to buy your children education because other kids don't have that advantage, should we also withdraw all the other things that make our own kids lucky - cuddles, good food etc.

A paid education is just one of myriad advantages that some kids will have over others.

Well maybe that's the rub - because I think that since all those things (cuddles, fruit, encouragement) are very variable, and since we can't tackle them all at once, in my utopia all those children would be educated side by side, so in an unequal world at least you would fence off the ones who are already more fortunate from the ones who aren't.

I think that most people actually agree that school is more important than those things, which is why you hear people say they go without holidays to spend money on school fees but you don't hear them saying 'hurrah, I shall buy a new car every year with my saved fees' - this in itself tells me that those who make what they perceive as sacrifices to send their offspring to private school think - as I do - that school, and who you go there with, is largely more important than other things.

Ergo, it is not just one among a list of things which are unfair - it's the most important.

at least you wouldn't fence them off, sorry.

All this anecdotal stuff only means so much. I could tell you at length about the state secondary school that my eldest 2 go to and how delighted we are with it. But I have nothing to compare it with. We are also that much vaunted MC cliche - the involved and commited parents - I suspect it mightn't be quite so delightful with parents who are not.

And there will be other anecdotes that tell us how their children were roasted over a slow fire for their dinner money.

I could also tell you how miserable I was at times at my private school and the ways it disadvantaged me socially. And there will be those who say that their DC' private school is the next best thing to paradise.

I don't think it's possible to generalise.

Gooseberries - I don't know if you have any children of school age...I think that is a very odd suggestion..."send your children private and volunteer in state school"? The private school would probably need me to volunteer for exactly the same reasons the state school does. They need to fund raise; they need parental involvement too. Every school thrives on it.

In answer to your question, I would hope that the interest I show in my child's work, the books I read to him, the conversations I have with him, the relationships I make with other parents at the school gate on the strength of our children sharing the same school and having the same teacher would feed into the school and what sort of school it was.

But we don't segregate by those things, do we? We don't put all the childred who get cuddles in one place and make sure they don't rub shoulders with those who don't. This is aside from the 'is it an advantage' aspect of the debate, which I must say I've heard the other side being a bit inconsistent over as well!

what is your problem with educating children in different kinds of schools if they are both equally good, as you claim?

who is being inconsistent?

I think my private school is better for my children and it's better than a lot of state schools.

That seems to be what most people generally think if they have a child at private school. It's not hard.

Whereas you are saying

how dare you have this advantage, especially when state schools are just as good (eh? so where's the advantage)

and your kids are rich but thick, but bring them to our school to improve standards (eh?)

and the middle classes are hatefully aspirational, but please bring your aspiration to our PTA so we can organise a reading rota

Gooseberrybushes The well motivated PTA can achieve marvelous things. In my DD's state primary it financed an all weather sports field, white boards, a very well stocked library and many school trips. No knocking PTAs please.

V good post gooseberry. That is the point I have been trying to make.

And I don't think you knocked PTAs??

Quote

{{{what is your problem with educating children in different kinds of schools if they are both equally good, as you claim?

who is being inconsistent?

I think my private school is better for my children and it's better than a lot of state schools.

That seems to be what most people generally think if they have a child at private school. It's not hard.

Whereas you are saying

how dare you have this advantage, especially when state schools are just as good (eh? so where's the advantage)

and your kids are rich but thick, but bring them to our school to improve standards (eh?)

and the middle classes are hatefully aspirational, but please bring your aspiration to our PTA so we can organise a reading rota }}}

Well said Goosberry bushes - I agree with all that

Gooseburybushes - well said - that is the inherent inconsistency with the arguments that get repeatedly rehease on these threads. There used to be a prolific poster ( maybe now named changed or gone?) who called themselves Unquiet Dad, who always tied him(?)self up in (il)logical knots by simultaneously
a) sneering at parents who were deluded enough to think they were ' buying a better education', when a state edcuation was just as good and
b) fretting that other parents were buying an unfair advantage/Oxbridge places by paying for education

It's not about how good the school is, it's about segregating kids by wealth and academic achievement. Which I don't think is right.

Please don't tell what I am saying.

Joanof Argos - we are ALL separated because of wealth and not just as children - that's life all over the world.

gaaah, I know, that's why I think it's wrong to keep children apart on this basis and thus perpetuate it - whilst also perpetuating the prejudices and misapprehensions on both sides.

(also I said segregated, not separated).

I have no problem with children being educated in different schools.

I just think it's a bit sad when some parents just assume the local state school is not for them. And worry so much, and sacrifice everything for fees to the detriment of family life. If it's not a sacrifice that's fine, but your children can do as well at State Schools. As well as they need to
It's back to the geographical argument. If you are a Londoner there will always be parts of London you don't want to live in. But there are people who live there. And are happy, and can't understand why you would have a problem with Streatham rather than Richmond....
But Richmond is so much more leafy, and the river....and the connections...(I'm fantasizing here as I don't actually live in Richmond, but it sounds a nice place)and the shops...
Yet people don't scrimp and save to live in Richmond, and pine because they don't live there and tell everyone how horrible it is in Streatham. Meanwhile, the people in Streatham are perfectly happy..

gaaah, and I said separate.

Well that's a bit like if I argued with your post by saying we shouldn't be spliced by health then, isn't it?

8swan* guess the difference is that the good people of Streatham aint planning to make Richmond illegal.

In theory, if all state schools offered you what you wanted - pretty much, and bearing in mind that I imagine any parent has the odd teacher they're less keen on, letter home they don't like so much, policy they'd change if they could, right? - is there a point at which you'd say, Ok, we don't need private schools any more: really everyone should send their children within the state system now?

you don't want children "separated by wealth and academic achievement"

ok

why?

what difference does it make to you

You're awfully combative, Gooseberry.

It makes a difference to me because I live in society and that is something I think is wrong. I don't suppose it would have much impact on my own life, in my little bubble, but that's not the only reason ever to think anything, surely?

(ps, I said segragate - if you're going to quote, quote properly!)

segregate