to consider private school even if...

[stella1w]

... it means no holidays, treats, nice clothes etc etc ever for the next 18 years?

My parents scrimped and saved to put me and my sister through private school even though they had a very low income.

I also have a low income but feel I should make all sacrifices necessary.. on the other hand, I don't think putting myself under severe financial stress during the recession would make me such a good parent either.

Feeling guilty either way..

Bright spot is local infant school just got "outstanding" ofsted report, though the juniors was only "satisfactory"

Going back to the original post. I wouldn't consider it personally. Although my husband and I are lucky enough to be relatively high earners (courtesy of our state educations - comp and sixth form college in my case, grammar in his - and university grants, we both ended up with PhDs), we would prefer our kids to socialise with a variety of people and have been very happy with the education provided in one of the more deprived areas of the country. I value holidays as times to spend with the kids, and we can both work slightly reduced hours to see more of them - which we couldn't do if we were shelling out a fortune on a private school. If you have a good education yourself, you can be helping them with their homework, reading to them etc. Don't feel bad - it's by no means a 'necessary' sacrifice!

Sorry have not read whole thread.

I was interested in the poster who thought it was ironic that people who went to state school were in professions, while people who went private weren't!

I don't think this is ironic! In my experience it is typical! I have many friends who sent their DC to private school, as there are many in this area. I think there is one child who got decent A levels and has gone on to do anything useful with their life.

On the other hand, many DC who go to the state schools in this area do very well, as did my own son who is off to a Russell Group University to do law this year.

The biggest indicator of success in school for a child is the interest the parents take in the school and the support they give to their child. I am a qualified teacher and also a private tutor, and tutor many children who go to private schools. There is a lot of guff talked about the superiority of private schooling.

Just MVHO.

It has been state schools all the way for us. Even when my employer was prepared to pay the fees (expats) we decided that we would rather send our children to the local state school. No regrets though I wont pretend it was always easy (all those letters home from primary in a language we were just getting to grips with).

Where we were living (Netherlands) practically the only private schools were international schools of one sort and another. Pretty much the Dutch dont send their children to private schools. I dont think that it is unconnected that the state provision is excellent.

Everyone benefits when everyone sends their children to the same school. Parents committed to their children's education whether rich or poor up the average in terms of behaviour, attendance, work ethic etc.

One of our huge problems in Britain is that our senior politicians practically to a man and a woman send their children to private schools. If they had to put up with the state provision then spending and management improvements would follow automatically.

Thank you, GnomeDePlume. I hope parents encountering the English education system - and especially those who send DCs to private schools without questioning the system - see your post and are aware of how bizarre and counter-productive the 2-tier UK system is.

I'm voting for Gnome in the next election

Thank you for the vote of confidence OriginalPoster! Sadly, I dont think my policy would really attract the electorate!

Tchootnika I think your point about not questioning the system is very interesting and I think you hit the nub of the problem. There is an assumption that private education is 'better' without really examining the evidence.

• Those private schools which are academically selective will always produce better academic results (excellent raw materials, small class sizes etc etc) but are they producing the value added?
• Even those private schools which are not academically selective are often 'behaviourally' selective. Children are persuaded out of the school if the school doesnt want to deal with their behaviour.
• Of course one sniff of a financial problem and the private school will be inviting parents in for a 'discussion'.

Where I am the state schools are not selective and have to publish all their results. No cherry picking, no removing the problem children. If a family has problems the school is often one of the first ports of call for support.

Comparing private and state schools is like comparing a sports car with a people carrier. A sports car looks swish and gets lots of attention but it isnt really practical or sensible for the majority of families and is really only there to massage the ego of the driver.

Come off it Gnome.

You are just another parent for whom State school worked very well, so you can be smug about it.

I still have not heard from one single parent whose child was bottom league (may the call it "apples" or "triangles" or whatever) and is as happy about State school as parents like you.

I do not need my ego massaged.

No, I had a child who did BADLY in a class (SEN, 2 years behind where he should be in SATs) of 36 with lots of turnover in staff and many problem children. If my child had done well at school, of course I would not have moved him.

I moved him for the smaller classes really. The Private school is actually inclusive and not selective at intake, they just think they can get the best out of everyone, regardless of ability. To teach everyone to their potential IYSWIM.

"massaging the ego"....right, easy for you to be dismissive. We're not all a bunch of brain dead snobs you know?!

'actually inclusive'. Yes. they 'teach everyone to their potential' as long as the potential already includes parents who can PAY.

I think that everyone wants to do the best for their child. I am a great supporter of state education, and the comprehensive school, but I have deliberately chosen (and can afford) to live in an area with very good comprehensive schools. I don't see that as much different from paying for private education. It isn't helping good education for all.

I've moved my eldest as he was doing badly at school though he's well ahead of his peers and we don't have to pay. Well, only a small amount which is sligtly more than his old school seemed to be getting out of us anyway. For a lot more extras too.
We live rurally so we don't have the option to choose a school in any other way, as it is our other children get the bus the three miles to the nearest primary.

Chandon I guess it very much depends where you live. I live in a rural county. The few private schools where I live are highly selective. The choice you were able to make simply doesnt exist where I live. My final comment was facetious so I apologise for offending you with that.

The state system as it exists is not great. I'm not smug at all. We have a Hobson's choice of one secondary school which goes in and out of special measures like it's caught on the door handle. We just have to make the best of it.

Having a private system means that people with resources can opt out. This is especially true of our senior politicians. By opting out they dont have to experience the problems of the state system. The private system creams off political attention and interest from the state system. Large class sizes, high staff turnover, overworked administration, missed educational needs and problems dont matter unless you experience them directly. They become an academic problem rather than a real crushing need.

Goodness there's a lot of crapolla on this thread...independently educated children don't mix with less affluent children? Don't they go to footie clubs, brownies, local drama groups then? Don't they attend holiday clubs? Don't they just getting talking to other kids in the park? Don't they have family members who ^whipsers^ are not rich? Clearly I'm getting it all wrong.

And all this breast beating about all state schools being fab. Uh huh. So that's why the vast majority of home schooled children dropped out of state education, cos it was working so well? That's why under 25% of the DC in the school where I'm governor didn't even achieve 5 GCSEs is it?

God it annoys me when folk smugly say 'a bright child will do well anywhere.' Oh yeah? So all those kids are thick are they? How fecking patronising.

There is no point anyone cacking on about their local state school' shiney sparkly brillness. and how it does this or that.

Anyway OP...would I do without treats to pay for indepnedent school? I dunno. It's a very hard decision based on what you have locally and what level of austerity you're talking about.

I don't buy the idea that DC's will feel sacrifce as pressure. Lord, my Mum gave up food so I could go on a school trip. She worked on the market in the pouring rain and wind so I could have shoes. She really sacrificed. I'm only eternally grateful. Never felt a moment's 'pressure'.

Could you use the state primary and save or pay off your mortgage? Could you earn more money?

Excuse me? There is no point in acknowledging and admiring state schools of which you have personal experience, and commending the excellent work they do? That's 'cacking on' is it?

Under 25% of children didn't achiece 5 GCSEs - right, so 75% did, which isn't a bad result at all - and the reason why they have 25% who don't is BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO TAKE THEM AND CANNOT LOCK THEM OUT FOR BEING POOR! Private schools may have some children on bursaries, or some parents who drive older cars or whatever, but they do NOT have 25% of children with really difficult backgrounds of the kind for whom state schools do their fucking damndest and then get slated because those children's results are taken into account.

I'm sure private school children do meet some other children in some clubs sometimes. The fact remains that 8.30 - 4, 5 days a week, 30 weeks of the year is spent in a bubble of arrogance, snobbery and blindness privilege.

And no-one is allowed to mention (sorry, cack on about) state schools they know which do an excellent job, but you're allowed to berate yours for only getting 75% A-Cs as though that is the same as them failing and being crap? How does that work, then?

In our case it's 8-4.30 most days 6 days a week but the other 15.5 are generally spent with their state school educated siblings. Theres no need to make assumptions or generalise though is there.

Malcontent, ....chip on your shoulder then?!

"a bubble of arrogance, snobbery and blindness"... .

How can I on the one hand be in favour of state schools and happy with mine and yet also have a chip on my shoulder about it?

No mal 75% didn't achieve 5GCSEs ie the vast majority. And as far as I'm concerned they couldn't all have low ability. Even the ones with very high ability vastly underachieved. No strings of A*s here.

So saying 'a bright child will do well anywhere' is just a platitude. And bollocks. Cos unless you're telling me there were none, then the proof of the pudding is in the results.

As for mixing with other kids, you've conveniently missed the point that many DC have family members less affluent than they are. Folk they love and stay with. Folk whose lives they undertsand far more than any middle class people who use the local outstanding secondary ever will.

And in my experience when people say they want their children to mix at school they're often being disingenuous anyway. Sure they're happy for them to mix with poorer children (maybe it gives them some pleasing sense of superiority ....I dunno) as long as those children are being brought up with similar values etc.

They're not so keen to have their DC mix with kids in care, or kids whose parents have substance abuse problems, or kids who get pregnant at fourteen, or the kid with behavioural problems, or the dirty kids who get sent to school without breakfast.

As for good state schools, well of course their are loads of great ones...but pretending that there are lots that have huge problems is sickening. It completely denigrates all the DC and their parents who are being let down by the system IMHO. But feel free to cack on about chess clubs and choirs if it pleases you.

Apologies for misreading your stats.

When have I mentioned chess clubs and choirs?

And how do you know who my children mix with? At least my children know those kids exist, which they won't in a private school. You'd have to be a bit of a tosser to send your kid to state comp and demand they make friends with a least one junkie though. And to say that private school kids have broad social circles because they.... um..... know their own families (??) is a bit odd!

If your low-achieving local school is in an affluent area with an intake similar to a private school, then you're right, those results are bad. Is it?

wordfactory, at the school that you're a governor of, do you consider the staff are doing their best with the kids or not ?(I'm aware that the catchment is challenged). Do they work hard and take a real interest in the kids? If not, your team should do something about it. If so, don't knock them, because what you just said wouldn't inspire me with confidence about the support I was getting if I was a member of staff. You're there to do something positive, not to berate.

'Cacking on' is an ugly phrase and you just managed to use in an ugly way. Plenty of state schools are (if not shiny and sparkly) what you call 'brill'.

Finally, I feel it's unfair that you're effectively discounting the opinion and experience of anyone based on the schools they know and are happy with, yet you're using a struggling school you know as the basis for an argument that state schools aren't as good as private. Why is your experience of one more valid?

Malcontent I may have this wrong and no doubt I'm about to cross post, but I think the school is in NW London where many, many more affluent kids are siphoned off to the plethora of private schools and grammars in the area. I would think NW London is pretty starkly divided between affluent and not, more so than most places. I'm happy to be corrected, that's just my assumption.

Well if you're right, then it doesn't really help Word's argument, does it?

Anyway, Melissa Benn has just said everything I think for me on WOman's Hour!

I'm totally with Gnome that if EVERYONE had to use the state system, then the focus of the powers that be would be MUCH more on bringing it up to scratch!

I live in a country where the Royal Family send their dcs to state schools, and pretty much the only private schools are for ex-pats (where employers mostly pay)

I'm not saying it's perfect here, but the standards of education and discipline seem much highter - and you are free to apply to any school of your choosing.