to wonder why people send their children to private schools?

[TheStripyGruffalo]

People I know have done it for various reasons a) because they want their children to get all A* grade b) because they don't want their children mixing with the people at the local comprehensive and c) because they think it looks good to have children at a private school.

If you send your children private do you mind saying why? I'm genuinely interested (and I'm not a journalist). We didn't choose private schools because we thought our DC would not be comfortable being amongst the poorest families there.

mini

That might be true but also the poorest schools are in areas where there are no grammars or private schools.
I have said this before but no way would dd attend any of the secondary schools in our area.
If it wasn't for the school she is at now she would still be H.ed.
It is awful when you have no choice but to see your children not reach their potential or have to come home and study for GCSE's completely on their own as once again the teacher wasn't able to teach.

Bobochic - I meant really independent schools which are not "sous contrat" and therefore free of the curriculum. I understand that the vast majority (90%?)of "private" schools in France are Catholic but are still able to be funded by the government and parents only have to pay a small amount in addition - around €3000 a year, which is nothing compared with fees here.

I would be interested to know how many totally independent schools there are in France.

"Your children go to a very good state school where they can gain a place through selection. Not all schools are like this"

85% of the places at my dc's school are randomly allocated. 15% are awarded on potential for music and sport.

Over a quarter don't have English as a first language. 30% have been on fsm in the past 6 years.

It's a school which some of my friends wouldn't consider in a million years and is surrounded by very popular and high profile private schools.

What makes it a good school is the fact that many m/c parents locally are willing to take a punt on it, so the school has lots of clever and talented kids there and committed parents, which makes it a better place for all the children to be.

If parents with money and influence refuse to take a vested interest in their local schools by sending their own children to them then they will continue not to be great places.

despite paying a huge amount of tax we're not in the catchment area for any local schools.

There are very few independent schools because being at one creates a lot of difficulties for pupils wanting to move to another school or onto HE. Independent schools are not monitored or inspected and tend to be rather peculiar beasts.

exactly mini. The best comprehensives are usually in more affluent areas. So of course more people with the budget for private. So again, perhaps some of those sat on their moral high horses about the inequality of private should realise they are benefiting from an even greater injustice in the huge discrepancies in what the state system offers.

"That might be true but also the poorest schools are in areas where there are no grammars or private schools. "
Really? Stats for that, please?

mini

That's lovely that you have a school with such a variety of classes.
With respect, you haven't got a clue what the schools are like round here.
Working class parents who have an interest in their children's education wouldn't send their dc to the school my ds1 attended.
Why can't you take the word from some people that their choice of school is dire. Or they don't stand a chance of attending a better school as they live too far away, missed a place by 500 yards.
If you are faced with this and you can afford it, or earn a place/ receive funding you'd be a fool not to accept it.
I have no idea if this school will work out for dd, if it doesn't she won't attend a school in this area full stop.
Now if you have found a great school for your children be glad because some people don't.

Selecting 15% of the intake still makes it selective, mini, and music in particular isn't a cheap pastime and doesn't tend to be done by children with little academic ability.

When my dd was six she told me excitedly "Mummy! There's a school for clever girls!" She went there from 11-18 and her own dd is in the same school's kindergarten now.

Bertrand

I don't need stats I use my eyes and live in such an area.

iguana yes the system is very different in France - I would think that no more than 1% of students are at truly "private" schools. Regular French private schools are nothing like UK private schools - my kids went to a "private" French primary where some parents were so poor that they paid the canteen bill, when they could, in 5 and 10 centime pieces!

My kids are back in state schools now for reasons of distance and in DD's case because she cannot do her chosen course in the local private secondary school.

"My local state is outstanding, but he was going to be in a year of 60 with 4 teachers - when I dropped him off he would have to go sit on the carpet with 59 other kids."No he wouldn't- if he was in a year of 60 with 4 teachers he'd be in a class of 15.........

I know there are shenanigans that go on in France too - my French exchange went to a secondary school that she was only able to attend because she gave her grandmother's address.

Largely though, the state education is far superior in France, in my opinion. (Plus they don't change the whole bloody exam system so much).

"Bertrand

I don't need stats I use my eyes and live in such an area."

Ah. Good old Anecdata.

"That might be true but also the poorest schools are in areas where there are no grammars or private schools.

That's not true. Some of the Medway towns have very poor areas and also have grammar schools. Also further down in Kent - Dover etc. Plus areas of Essex.

iguana hmmm ... Well there are things that are better about it, partly because rich kids aren't systematically creamed off into schools that are out of reach of ordinary people. My daughter is at a state sixth form college in a poor area (after junior high in an even more deprived school) and has nevertheless been able to access an "elite" course. But it's just as subject to moronic reforms (my younger child will be caught up in the latest one) and while the brightest students do well, it fails a lot of below average students.

In fact the presence of grammar schools tends to have an adverse effect on the school's everyone else goes to. But as all mumsnetters children pass the 11+ that doesn't matter.........

I actually find that my DSs private primary school instills a better work ethic, the expectation is that you will work hard in everything, schools, sport, music, xmas plays, absolutely everything. All achievements, particularly progress, are recognised and as a result both my boys do not understand why people do not want to work hard and school and do well.

We are lucky as it is a small non academically selective school, they will not just take 'clever' children, they take children who fit in with the cohort I suppose, they turned down a friends child who was very bright as on his assessment day (more like a taster day rather than just tests) he said he wasn't bothered about working hard as he could just pass exams etc. They were not interested even though he would have been a clear winner for their GCSE results.

My DD goes to a private prep school because it is the school which I think best suits her needs.

The small class sizes were a big plus for me. The school has a great school ethos with enthusiastic and well supported teachers and great facilities. There are specialist teachers for art, music, PE, science, foreign languages and ICT. There is a broad-range of extra-curricular activities and other opportunities within the school- these would simply not have been available at the state school.

Our local state primary wasn't up to much- not failing, not a sink school- just not brilliant. The head teacher didn't fill me with much confidence and seemed to have little interest in any questions we asked. Classrooms were drab and few activities outside basic classroom activities. I am sure it wouldn't have been a disaster if she had gone there, but I think she is getting a better education where she is.

I agree with other posters about the moral aspect of it- I cannot right the wrongs of the world/country by not doing the best for my child (as I see it).

Why should any school have the right to, in effect, say 'no, you're not our type' to anyone?

We only had two realistic travel options on moving to our house. Local state or private. DD firstly went to local state, which was considered good. Private one was full.

Horrendous experience, she did ok academically, as she studied at home learning stuff she should have done all week at school. Watched film after film in class. I think we counted 25 one half term. 7 science teachers taught her that year. No orchestra to join in. No school play. One day was sent home with concussion as some boy hit her with a bat, apparently intentionally. He got tea with the head of year, attention, as he came from a bad background. Mine got to spend a few days recovering at home. No sanctions.

If parents realised just how bad behaviour is sometimes managed in class ( putting a nice quiet next to a naughty disruptive child) I think more people would send their children private.

Eventually we managed to get her in at the local private school. She had a much better experience, and I believe could concentrate better in class. She enjoyed school then.

I think you can do as well academically in both systems, after all learning happens in your head but it was far more enjoyable in the private system.

I do think mini above has a point, btw. Our local junior high is too far from the nearest private school for going private to be a realistic option for most local families. So although it's a school that is recognised as being amongst the most deprived in France, it also gets it's fair share of middle class families (like us). It is a decent school albeit with some difficult classes (unfortunately including my DS's this year).

I certainly don't blame families for looking elsewhere if their local schools are really shit, but ultimately if middle class parents support local schools it really is better for everyone.

It's vile because it's unfair that money should be able to buy you a better education, education is a universal need.

That's not just independent schools though.

Yes, you pay for independent schools. But that isn't that much different really to all the other ways people pay for "better" schools...at least the independent school way is up front and honest about it.

Moving houses to be in a "good catchment"
Paying for tutoring to get into a grammar
etc

And then again state options are also not equal in other ways, not just the financial differences (see both points above)... there's also..

• grammar schools - why should those who can pass an exam get a "better" form of education, even worse when they pass the exam due to extensive tutoring I guess.
• grammar again - only available in certain parts of the country - why should where you live give you a better form of education?
• church schools - church schools are very often near the top of the school leagues; why should your child's (or rather their parents) religion allow them into a "better" school
• catchment - often schools rated highly, especially at secondary level, end up in areas where housing is dearer (highly rated schools become popular, therefore housing is sought after and prices rise) - so money determines a child's ability to get in to a school

etc.

And the UK is not unique in this inequality in education.

TBh the independent schools are probably the least of the problems - that only equates to relatively small numbers. The issue regarding inequality in state schools is far larger.

That's the basis of private education. It's also the basis of university offers, job offers ...