to be amused that the more exclusive a school is..

[seeker]

.. by faith, fees, ability, aptitude..whatever- the more diverse a community the school's parents say it is.

As I said in my previous post - if your child having the best possible education is an ideal for you, then you are going to spend money/effort getting them into an academically challenging school. I wouldn't think twice about sending my DCs to an academically excellent school if I could afford it. Not because I'm thinking "ooh, I don't want them spending time with the lower classes" it's because I would want them to have an amazing education and feel that it is one of the best things you can give to your child.

snappy I don't know why those things happen. My parents would say its because their are too many parents who send their kids to comprehensive schools who just aren't interested in education, so raise their children not to value it. But I think that's too simplistic a view, not entirely true.

My sister is a teacher in a state primary in a heavily ethnically diverse but equally heavily segregated part of the uk. She complains a lot about being weighed down by paperwork and initiatives from the govt of the day, all of which in her mind take time away from teaching and from discipline and pastoral care. I guess in private schools they don't get quite so interfered with. The teachers, that is.

Hope has something to do with attainment too, though. The absence of hope, the absence of belief that education can make a difference, surely undermines any desire to knuckle down to hard work. I suspect there are a lot of people living without too much hope that things will ever be better for then and their children right now in the uk.

All of the above is just idle musing from me, no evidence to support any of it!

I totally agree, Abs. DH and I sacrifice a lot to send our DCs to the schools that they attend.

When I see MN threads about "is it okay to take my DCs out of school for their birthday, or to visit granny, who they haven't seen for 3 weeks" I realise that my DCs education is a lot more important to me that it is to those parents. So why shouldn't my children benefit from that?

Thebossofme, I do think a lot of the reason private schools do comparatively well is because there are more parents who care about their DCs education. That attitude is then passed on to the children. The teachers spend less time on trying to "sell" education to the children.

This is a broad generalisation, of course. Many state school parents care a lot, and I'm sure many private school parents don't value education at all but I've never met any of them

not everyone who sends their children to selective (fee paying or not) schools is doing so out of some desire to segregate their child or out of snobbery. ..I doubt anyone would do that for these reasons. People just do because they can.

I also doubt the reasons behind someone who does have a choice would deliberately chose to send their children to sh*t school "to set a good example to others" - that is an ultimate snobbery in my books. Whats is a deep psychological reason behind that if not to make them feel better about themselves. There are surely better ways to achieve that .

Gosh, I've definitely met some. I was at a boarding school for a while where some of the parents really didn't give a crap. What they cared about was which boys schools were coming to the school mixers, or how good Millie's forehand was doing. I didn't last long there!

I do think however that some parents tend to treat schools as a service provider when they are paying for the education directly and can be very demanding of those schools. I remember a particularly cringeworthy moment at my school where my DM berated a teacher for not having an answer down pat about how they were going to handle the exam board changing some set texts for exams. DM of course had read all about the change, researched it thoroughly and had a firm POV about how she would like it be handled. In her mind, she had every right to have an opinion about something she was paying for. So did a lot of the parents.

theboss so much of what you have said chimed with me.
As a family we are neither white, nor middle class.

Our view as to what you have to do, or may have to do to survive in life is very different to many people, particularly here on MN. I find so many people complacant about their place in society and the world. They think that everything is theirs by right.

The idea that just because I say my DC will be happy and will do well at school whereever they go is astonishingly arrogant to me.

I think they need to put their money where their mouth is and really sort out primary education - smaller classes, less faffing around with the latest education minister's hobby horse, more trust of teachers, more teaching directed at individual children.

DS has some learning difficulties (he is on the 'dys' spectrum ). I loved my state primary, so when DS was 4 I confidentally marched him off to the outstanding local school. However, the list of things that he couldn't really cope with and therefore 'wouldn't be forced to do', turned out to include sports day, school trips and afternoon school. We have made financial sacrifices and he is no longer in the state system.

I don't think a random private school would have done any better. However, most people only have access to the state system. There are a lot of children like my son. Many children in the state system don't speak English as a first language. Teachers are expected to provide increasing amounts of pastoral care. How on earth you do this with 30 children in a class, diminishing playground space and a new government bright idea each week is beyond me.

Unless of course the point of state education is still to do what it was designed to do by the Victorians - to keep heathens off the street.

"your qualifications aren't good enough, you didnt go to a good enough Uni, even though they used the same exam boards and papers as the Uk, or her English wasn't good enough, even though she came from a country which had until recently English as its first language, and spoke only english at home and in school"

This too. A UK education has a lot of global currency - it's recognised everywhere, the degrees are recognised everywhere and I am not too sure of the extent that non-immigrants are aware of this. For e.g., my cousin has a Master's degree from one of the best universities in South Africa. When she and her husband were living here, she applied to do an OU course and they said that she wasn't eligible, as her masters was only equivalent to second year of university in the UK. Officially, South Africa isn't even recognised as an "English speaking" country by the Home Office, even though the majority of the population speak English, government/legislation etc. is in English and there are sections of the population for whom English is their native language (like in my family).

Abs I've had the Home office comment of how good my English is - I am a YANK! They are twonks.

I was so pissed off when I found that out, I sent them an email asking them to explain themselves. They didn't - just came back with some twaddle about official guidelines or some such wank.

"not everyone who sends their children to selective (fee paying or not) schools is doing so out of some desire to segregate their child or out of snobbery. ..I doubt anyone would do that for these reasons. People just do because they can."

I would love to agree with you! But I have witnessed at first hand at my DD's school the parents that send their children there purely out of snobbery and a desire to meet the right sort of people. Fortunately that is not the whole constituency!

No-one said his or her child would be ok 'just because I say so'. I think we all to some extent have to hope and trust that they will - or else how would one ever move forward? In speculative or fretful moments I wonder what I'd do if one of my children was so severely unhappy that the school they were at wasn't sustainable - but surely no-one sends a child to school thinking 'weeelll if it doesn't work out, which it may well not, I will move them to B or C'? And to be fair, I can wonder all I like but there's no obvious answer anyway, so may as well, in the meantime, calculate on the probabilities and be reasonably sure that that won't occur.

I don't think that's anything to do with thinking the world owes you a living and your place in it is assured - I think it's probably a good thing to commit to any
school in a spirit of optimism.

And I do wish that if people must say 'it is my choice' etc, they didn't feel they had to then make vague generalisations about how 'so many' children are bullied and 'bad behaviour is tolerated'. This idea keeps coming up about 'well they should just make comps better', and it never seems to based on anything concrete that 'they' should do to achieve this, or what it actually is that needs to be adressed.

"but surely no-one sends a child to school thinking 'weeelll if it doesn't work out, which it may well not, I will move them to B or C'?"

I disagree very strongly. We are very open-minded as a family and constantly question our choice of school! We moved the DSSs 18 months ago and may well move DSS2 again in 18 months' time. If we can improve on his experience of school, why not do so? I already have a shortlist of schools we shall apply to for DD for secondary and I constantly revise it in the light of new information that comes my way.

What I am saying is that the class divide, which is particularly reinforced by those exclusive schools which do not select by income

Seeker I do not think there is a single school in this country, state or otherwise, which selects by income.

I don't believe that for a minute. It's in Chelsea, so if I pitch up looking like something out of My Big Fat Gyspy Wedding, with squillions of pounds but practically illiterate, with no class, an awful accent, the Sun tucked under my arm, and not remotely famous, they'll take my child?

I doubt it.

Schools select on all sorts of things. Those 'sorts of things' often go hand in hand with money. But not always.

"And I do wish that if people must say 'it is my choice' etc, they didn't feel they had to then make vague generalisations about how 'so many' children are bullied and 'bad behaviour is tolerated'."

Well actually my first choice was to send my child to the local state school, but unfortunately they were completely floored by his behaviour.

Sorry, just to check - is 'dys' spectrum as in dyspraxia?

AbsofAwesomeness my children's education is a priority to me but that does not mean I would choose academically selective education or a fee paying one. They do not need to be segregated to get a good education, in fact because I care so much I ensure that they get a good education within a state comp.

Anyway, just posting now as meal is imminent, and sorry for ignorance - I just wanted to say that I saw you did acknowledge that a random private school probably wouldn't have been any better with this, and so I guess I'm just saying that I don't see why the fact that this state school couldn't is more damning of the state system than a random private not being able to would have been damning of the private sector.

Also what niceham said. Ask my daughters whether they think I'm bothered about their education.... !

Sorry, TheBoss, I had "taxi duties, so I've been gone for a bit. Your description of the boarding school parents made me .

Merrymouse, I also have a son who has been described as dyslexic/dyspraxic. At his first private school, I was told he was lazy and needed to speed up. But, apparently, that's "typical for boys" Once diagnosed, the so-called SENCO didn't even meet with me.

Now, at another private school, the SENCO arranged a meeting, and extra help within his first few days at the school.

You don't always get what you think you are paying for!

I'm using 'dys' as shorthand for all the ld's that tend to go together - dyslexia, dyspraxia, dysgraphia etc. etc. - you could also add adhd and asd tendencies, but they don't start with dys.

Why should a random state school be better at providing for these things than a random private school? Because the LEA is obliged to educate all children, whereas private schools aren't. My son is intelligent and theoretically should have a place in mainstream state education. The reality is a little different.