To be in awe of private school's...

[whydontwehaveasharpknife]

I am a nanny, the other day I accompanied the girl that I nanny for in rural Northamptonshire to the schools open day, it was AMAZING- the grounds were like a national trust property, the uniforms all hand made by a famous London fashion designer, there was a lake, climbing wall, beautiful dining room, tree climbing, den building, the children who already attend the school were incredibly polite and sat in the library reading broad-sheet news papers.

I grew up on a council estate with a peado living round the corner that used to terrify me when I walked the dog, my mother is mentally ill and I've never lived with her, in my early teens my step mother left to become a heroin addict.

Needless to say, I have had to fight pretty hard for my A levels/sanity/ health and have applied to university this year but I must admit I couldn't help but feel 'lower than these people, the staff, the parents and even the children they were all so refined and I felt they could see that I am not of the same breed.

It is just luck though isn't it, why do some people who are born into fortunate circumstances get all the opportunities at success whilst others have to work really hard into their late twenties just to get the success these children achieve when they are 18.

Fennel it depends what the local bog standard comp is like, doesn't it.

Fennel it depends what the local bog standard comp is like, doesn't it.

Indeed. Not all state schools are created equal.

Oh Fennel, be careful on that horse! He seems very high.

I am absolutely certain that you give your DC advantage that is not available to many, nor strictly necessary. Does that mean that your DC do not deserve their successes?

Cherry picking advantage is a middle class game. This one is accceptable, this one is not. Eeny meeny..

I also think people undervalue the knowledge of how things work and the confidence to engage with institutions. It took me a while for example to feel totally confident in restaurants however smart - simply because this was not an environment I was used to at all.

I actually think we need more private schools, not fewer. My reasoning is this. If you have a system that is entirely run by the state, aka a monopoly, it becomes very prone to various inefficiencies and assumptions, for example that there is one way to do things and one way only, and any resistance to this is useless. So if the state decides it is fine for children to spend hours each day mucking about in the sandpit, or surfing about on the internet, or doing lengthy pseudo-therapy in 'circle time', then that's all people get. On the other hand, if you have a number of different school types promoting different models of successful education, it is possible to point to these and for parents to question why one model is deemed superior to all the others in the absence of hard evidence. Turn that around and you get the possibility of greater inclusion and diversity in the private school system, with greater scope for tolerance and social awareness, through the experience of teachers and pupils being broadened beyond their ivory towers.

The problem is that in the 19th century, a lot of working class private schools, such a factory schools, were closed down, arguably sabotaged by political agendas at the time. So we are left with very much a class based system, or at least a finance-based one. However were we to concentrate more on opening up that system, so lots more children got an experience of both types of education rather than just one or the other, I have a sense that this would be to the benefit of all. After all, many children attend private nurseries and playgroups funded by the state for 15 hours a week, but run by parents or private individuals/organisations, and there doesn't seem to the be the same controversy there with regard to whether they are state maintained or independent. That's because there is probably a fair bit more ebb and flow between the systems. So I suppose I am arguing for this to continue through pupils' school careers, as a means of achieving greater community cohesion and enhanced educational outcomes.

OP, yes, private schools are great because they have the resources plus the parents are well motivated and engaged. You are IN NO WAY INFERIOR!!! None of the parents there are better than you and don't give up on your university dream.

Wordfactory - we have the same background and you talk a lot of sense - most refreshing. I went to a dismal comp, then a grammar, then a sixth form college and thence to Cambridge. I sent my DS (currently in reception) to the local primary but am moving him at the end of this term to the local private prep, reluctantly. Why? Because the school is cronically resource constrained, and the teacher is engaged in crowd control, not teaching. I want him to make progress and in a class of 30 children, 20 of whom are boys, this is very difficult. I know I am very lucky to be able to do this, most do not have the choices I have.

We're currently trying to find a school place for my DD1, due to join Y9 in September. Our local senior school is full and the next nearest one has spaces but is dire.

Despite being bright, articulate and having loving supportive parents to encourage her I won't be sending her there. She might well do ok but I'm not willing to chance it as it offers such poor teaching. It's no good saying after Y11 "oh well she bombed as she was utterly let down by the school, but at least we gave it a go".

I don't want bespoke uniforms, climbing walls and archery lessons - but I do want her to receive a good education in a safe, nurturing environment and unfortunately I don't believe that school can offer that. At this rate I'm tempted to sell a kidney to fund private school

It's not "cherry-picking advantage", my children already have (I feel) enough advantage. If they succeed in various ways I will of course be pleased (they are all fairly young at the moment, it's a bit soon to tell). But if a child from a rougher background and little encouragement from home does similarly well, I would be more impressed.

Sidge, consider state boarding schools as an option?

Lots of state boarding schools here

Actually our local comp is one in an area which is often slated on Mumsnet for being a place it is Absolutely Impossible to Ever Contemplate sending your child to state secondary in. Children from our comp and the other local ones are deemed to spend their time doing drugs in the local park instead of attending lessons, getting pregnant at 13 and generally not achieving at all. People will move, discover religion, go private etc, anything rather then send their children to "our" comp.

I have one dd there so far and she is loving it and we are happy but it is certainly not one of those wonderful comps everyone might like on their doorstep.

Sorry fennel but from where I'm sitting you are cherry picking what you deem acceptable and what you don't.

I bet you have a house full of books. This is a huge advanatge not available to the vast majority of DC. And with the demise of the library service even more DC will be brought up in a world free of literature. Will you still buy books for your DC? I expect you will. You will be heaping advantage upon advantage.

Ditto if you pay for music lessons. Or ballet classes. Or sports clubs. Thes eare the preserve of the well off and heap adavtage upon advantage every bit as much as private school.

But cherry picking allows you to heap advantage upon your DC while still taking the moral highground. Nice work if you can get it

BoffinMum it's an option we've considered, especially as DH went to a SBS. We're also considering applying for bursaries.

DH is military and we should find out our future plans in a couple of weeks so can make further decisions for DD1.

I just find the comments along the lines of 'just send your child to the local comp as they'll do well if you support them at home' odd. The people who make those comments probably live in an area with decent state schooling. Unfortunately we live in an area of very poor state provision, especially at senior level.

£2999 a term full boarding?

But I think that's my point wordfactory, I am not saying noone should ever send their child to a private school. I know there are various reasons for doing so. Even some of my close friends do so.

I'm saying that the assumed advantages it confers are often available as a by-product of the independent system, and people conflate the sort of families that use private schools, and the resulting children (nicely spoken, reading their broadsheets) with something in the school that you'll miss out on if your children slum it in the state system.

"Of course schools influence your values, attitudes, friends, experience of childhood etc. But private schools don't sprinkle magic dust on kids."

My dd went through primary in tops sets for everything. She's gone on to a fairly rough comprehensive, albeit one with a good ofsted and good management.

She does absolutely FUCK ALL in school and at home, despite all our encouragement, pleading, threatening, bribing. She talks through all her lessons or sits writing notes to her friends. Her maths teacher phoned me to complain about her behaviour in class a couple of weeks ago. Said that he simply didn't have the time in class to deal with the problems she was having with her work, partly because there are 30 children in the group, and partly because he's having to deal with her and her friend's poor behaviour.

Learning at secondary level in particular is strongly, strongly impacted by the culture within the classroom, and by peer influence. My dd is surrounded by children who have fairly low expectations about what they'll do later on in life. This really does make a difference to their academic performance. And to my dd's performance, because she doesn't want to stand out and look and be different from her friends.

"The reason why private school kids mostly do better is because they are a self-selected group with affluent, well-qualified and motivated parents. Those kids would have done just as well had they attended comprehensives."

I simply disagree. They have less time for both teaching and learning in many comprehensives because of the sheer numbers of students they are having to manage, and because of more disruption in the classroom.

And I personally have worked at schools where children only spend a tiny fraction of their time in the classroom learning because of high levels of disruption. This isn't unusual.

shagmund do you think if your DD were in a different environment (one where high expectations were prevalent among students and teachers) she would conform?

Should add, don't assume that your children can't end up thicker and more poorly educated than you yourself, despite your best efforts: DH has a PHD and I have a degree and a PGCE. Our house is stuffed with books. We talk to our children. We take them to galleries and museums, theatre and the cinema. We make our own home-made spelt bread and listen to Radio 4.

None of this has stopped DD from turning into Vicki Pollard since starting at her inner city comprehensive, abandoning all attempts at reading anything apart from 'Take a Break' and tv soap guides, or showing an interest in anything at all other than eating junk food, screeching down her phone to her friends and trying to steal my iphone so she can post idiotic status updates to her 'homies' on Facebook.

"shagmund do you think if your DD were in a different environment (one where high expectations were prevalent among students and teachers) she would conform?"

She'd probably be the class 'bad girl', but I still think she'd learn more and have more ambition than she has at the moment.

At the moment she swans around feeling complacent because she has the highest reading age in her year (despite being one of the youngest children), and because her English teacher thinks the sun shines out of her backside (when she's not being hideously rude she's very funny and sharp as a tack).

I just find the comments along the lines of 'just send your child to the local comp as they'll do well if you support them at home' odd. The people who make those comments probably live in an area with decent state schooling.

I think there is a lot of truth in this. It is easy for me to make snippy comments about people who send their kids to private schools because I am confident that dd's state school is actually better than the local private alternatives. However, if I lived in an area with less desirable schools, I can't say absolutely that I would stick with the state system. And although I am not a fan of private education in theory, I'm not entirely sure that I would be willing to sacrifice my dd's future on the altar of my principles.

Boffinmum - do other countries where children achieve highly (like Norway and Germany) have a mostly private system?

Or do they have less social inequality and good state provision?

TBH I don't think the involvement of the state in schools and teacher training is a problem. I think my children's teachers are fantastic, incredibly well-trained and vastly better than the shitty, shitty, poor teachers I had at my private girls' school in the 1980's.

Once again you make a good point shag.

I do find a certain strata of the middle classes (frequently fond here in MN) extremely complacent. They seem to think that their position in life and education gives them a guarantee that their DC will do well.

They appear not to have noticed how the UK and the world has changed.

Whereas many of the parents at DC's schools, despite much wealth, are not remotely complacent. Their DC's education and futures are subject to veritable campaigns. Sitting on their laurels is not part of the equation.

Now I'm not quite there. I don't have the time or the energy for it. But I am not remotely complacent. I parent my DC very consciously, wiht the end in mind. I idnetify very strongly with my friends who are immigrants with high aspirations for their DC.

I do think we put a lot value on education and whilst I wouldn't knock it I do think there are other skills that are far more important and it is still very much not what you know but who you know in this world.
Just 10 years ago somebody I know got into medical school with worse grades than I had because her father played rugby with somebody of interest and that was dropped into the conversation at interview.
I'd like to think that doesn't happen any more but frankly it wouldn't surprise me, you do not come accross many medics or solicitors with a broad accent.

I don't think unis and wotnot could get away with that heswall but what has replaced it is just as unfiar. I give you the internship.

Securing them often involves pulling a favour. And of course the DC have to be from rich enough backgrounds to work for nothing.

Whenever I meet my editor she is flanked by a new intern. Most often a bright articulate uber posh and glossy young woman. She will have a degree, possiblytwo from a good university. Somehow he is able to fund living and working in London on no salary. Oh and she has nice clothes and hair. On no salary.

Universities have become better at hiding it, more discrete I'm sure.