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.

Think about that stat though. What it's actually saying is that private schools can get less able candidates onto the same courses as more able state school pupils.

I think anyone paying for contacts will be very disappointed if they are not paying for one of perhaps 5 schools.......

My DD has severe speech and language difficulties. She was in a maintained mainstream school, which was ok, but it became evident (even with a statement) that DD needed specialist help which a mainstream school couldn't provide and the gap between her and her peers were already widening, and she was in reception.

I looked at maintained special schools, but the children seemed lower functioning than DD. Also, they didn't follow National curriculum levels. I then looked at speech and language units, but was disappointed to see that the speech unit was just a classroom and the children only spent 2 hours a day in the speech unit and it didn't provide the intensive support that DD really needed. Also they are not many speech and language special schools in the UK.

It wasn't until a parent told me that I should look into private special schools, as they have a strict criteria and they were a lot more provision for children who are considered "high- functioning" ( no learning difficulties etc) but needed more specialised support.

I then came across a private special school, and the school fees cost way more than a regular private school. But the children in the school get intensive support, which you possibly could not get within a maintained special school or unit. DD has group speech and language therapy everyday, directly from a speech and language therapist, she has direct support with an OT three days a week and has 1:1 OT sessions twice a week. She also gets 1:1 speech an language intervention three days a week, onto of the group therapy.

I've also noticed that they have enriched activities, eg. Horse riding, fencing etc.

As you can see, this is a lot and I knew I had to fight DD to get her into that school.

I feel quite ashamed to tell people, from our local community, that DD attends a private specialist school, I even just tell them the name of her school ( without mentioning it's private) but they can instantly tell from the name of the school that it's private. I come from an area where the majority of children attends maintained mainstream schools, I get judgement from my local community for putting DD into a private school. They instantly say things like ..." Oh look, the government is paying for her disabled child to attend a private school, it's not fair.." blah blah. They don't know that I had to spend £££££ of my own money to pay for the court fee's, solicitors, independent reports to persuade the Local authority and the Judge to place her into that school.

I think if DD didn't have the difficulties that she has now, I would of liked her to remain in her maintained mainstream school.

I agree bertrand it's really mot about contacts unless you are at one of the very top private schools. I don't think that knowing the children of eg solicitors, accountants and doctors is going to magically open doors for my children.

Why do people keep saying contacts? What contacts are to be gained from a large co-ed day school? Surely contacts only really apply to public schools and perhaps a small number of girls schools such as DH or Roedeon.

And Ubik, the term 'waste of money' is very subjective, is it not? You may deduce that I would have wasted my money if my children get the same Alevel grades they would have achieved at our high achieving comprehensive. I would disagree as 4As is not my objective for them. I want them to love school. To take part in as many different experiences as possible. I pay for their everyday enjoyment and experience. Good grades is just a byproduct as far as I'm concerned. As I said, my academically gifted DS2 would have achieved in most environments. I certainly haven't paid to ensure an extra A.

Thank you minty xx

Anthony

people were asked why they send their children to private school.
A couple of people including myself posted about contacts and future work.
You can disagree as much as you like, I know my dds reasons included making contacts for the future.
People have an identity to her school throughout their lives, support each other and yes, book each other for work because they are old mates.

Roedean

Wow some comments are eye opening. Better children, better morals, less stupid kids etc. Just wow.

Kids in state education learn to mix with all types. That is an education in itself and not always a bad thing. It can be an advantage. Kids with excellent grades from state schools could be said to have done better than one from private school with good grades (and many top universities see this).

In my experience of the people I know using private the vast majority did it as they feel their child is so clever they will miss out. Second reason most heard is that the local school is too rough. In other words they don't want their kids mixing with the working class kids. I also agree with the poster that said people do it to buy their kids an advantage over others. Wouldn't it be better for everyone to have an equally good education?

My older two are very bright and offered to go private but they chose state. They got top grades. I am not comfortable with private schools and would never choose it. The only time I wouldn't view it as snobbery is if a child had special needs or was let down by state

Newlife-surely you need to explain the nature of your dd's school? She is, as far as I know, unique on mumsnet- her experience does not mirror anyone else's private school experience.

And yes, she will make valuable contacts. Due to her unique circumstances.

Bertrand

I see your point, but it isn't a stand alone school there are quite a few tbh and the performing Arts specialisms are the same.
I suppose it was the blanket generalisation and the need for people to challenge because all the schools operating like this add up and are obviously included in stats and reports on sector norms. Not sure if that's the correct term
I should imagine it's the same for the boarding schools, public schools, others I may not have thought about.

There is only one reason why people send their children to private school.

They can afford it.

Perhaps the question should be: "You can afford to send your children to private school, but you don't - why not?"

I think all the advertising of smiley happy children in smart uniforms.- with clever catch phrases must make a difference (and makes me wonder how much of the school fees goes on this).

I dont remember all this advertising when I was younger

Dodo

I am in that category.

1. I am an education expert and I have seen first hand that some of the teaching in independent schools can be rather dodgy, not least because some of the teachers are unqualified or really only capable of teaching one 'ideal type' of pupil successfully, i.e. middle class, white, intellectually unthreatening, identical background to the teacher. I am also aware of teachers that have been kicked out of local state schools for being lazy or vaguely incompetent, turning up in local independent schools. They look the part and are well-spoken and therefore get away with it. I also worked with people like this when I was an independent school teacher. The independent school inspection service is comparatively toothless and looks at the wrong things so this is generally glossed over.

1. The drugs problem in some independent schools can be a real concern for some parents and is something the sector rarely if ever speaks about as it would be so bad for business. in some top schools it is absolutely rife, especially boarding schools within striking distance of London. I am frankly amazed OFSTED isn't more concerned.

1. The management of independent schools can, quite frankly, be atrocious and it is possible to spend your £10k-£30k+ a year and your child to slip through the net because the Senior Leadership Team is just not across things. For example I bowled up at my DD's expensive boarding school for an open evening in Y8 only to find that one or two teachers didn't really know who she was and unable to give me an indication of her progress, and on another occasion I visited the school to find a sixth former manning reception and no adults in the boarding house, with something like 100 girls aged 11-12 completely unattended for twenty or so until the housemistress could be found (she turned up without a bra on and clearly pissed). Not acceptable. (In actual fact the headmistress was sacked shortly afterwards, but it never should have happened).

Ultimately not all independent schools are bad, far from it, but people who assume just because they are paying for something means it is better are very naive. Parents should be much more canny consumers and ask much more difficult questions of independent schools.

Prople do realise that publicly educated children also develop contacts for life right? Sometimes they are even better ones

If you want a view on the inappropriateness of the supposed state/private divide, Hans van Mourik Broekman's articles are always worth reading (he is head of a school that was one of the original HMC schools and has recently converted to become an academy).

Mimi if a huge swathe of your classmates at boarding school are the children of Russian ex-KGB and Chinese civil servants I am not sure what that will help you with unless you are trying to live out some sort of junior James Bond theme

We moved to dHs hometown when the DC were little. The house we wanted we didn't get, the one we got turned out to be in the catchment area of a school that was in special measures. So I did home ed (ex teacher) intending that they would go to the state secondary. Only one secondary in the town, others wither a bus or train journey away.

The secondary went into special measures, head left, there were 6 heads in two years ( admittedly some were only supposed to be temp ) and many of the kids were out of control. I knew that home ed for secondary was not going to work for us - PIL stepped in and paid a huge chunk of private school fees.

In retrospect it was absolutely right for two of my dcs but not the third, but we made the best decision we could at the time. If I had DC now of secondary age I might Well send them to the local comprehensive - new head turned it round eventually. Otoh as a teacher myself I really loved to see how much more freedom the teachers had in the private school over curriculum and how my DC never had to stress over SATS and had a whole host of extra curricular activities built into the school day.

Ironically one of the reasons we moved from a big city to dHs old town was because we were really impressed with the local schools and sense of community - our timing was just unlucky.

I didn't go to private school and I taught in the state sector. I never thought in a million years my DC would go to a private school, but it seemed the right thing to do at the time. That's all we can do, make the best decision we can for our DC, for some that will be private school, for others it will be moving into the catchment are of a good state school, for others it might be extra tutoring. Some will be very lucky and have a good state school nearby and get a place there.

Boffin - my experience is that the parents at the private schools I know are very canny consumers and will jump to others schools if they are happy with what their money is purchasing. They tend to be extremely involved parents who will attempt to "get their way" if they are not happy with things- they don't always get what they want, but they will definitely strongly make their point. There is no wriggle room for sloppy SMTs and less than adequate teaching at the pre-prep level (the majority of parents enter these schools having their eye on the prize of the top Preps/Senior Schools). However, the area I live in has many, many private schools, increasing demand for spots at the elite schools, and subsequently increasing demand at schools lower down in the league tables as students who normally would have gotten into higher tier schools are now not being offered spots.

Any parent would be a fool to think that drugs would not be an issue in ANY school. The more expensive the school, the better the drugs! However, in London, all the schools mix socially and the drugs scene is not limited to one particular school, but a particular scene.

However, my experience is West London, which is a different world, and definitely would not describe the situation where there are very few private schools, let alone Big Name schools. Here, the phrase caveat emptor should be well heeded.

jump to other schools if they are NOT happy...

Re. the contacts, I'd agree with Bertrand that any sort of "old boys/girls" network of significant use is limited to a handful of top boarding and London day schools. Can't say anyone from my local private school has really set the world alight (other than literally, resulting in short custodial sentence).

The fact remains that the majority of people in the Uk cannot afford private education. However, due to the admissions system, they may still be able to access an education of a higher quality than someone who can afford it, depending on catchment, religion etc. The reality is that there are good and bad state schools, and good and bad private schools. I will put my neck on the line and say that IMO the worst school in the country and the best school in the country are probably private. What someone decides will largely depend on the options available to them and how much of a sacrifice school fees would be.

I don't think it is a straight choice between state and private, but equally between boarding and day, and so many other factors. One child will thrive in one environment where another will struggle.

Dodo. I am half and half in that DC1 and DC2 attended a well known private school near to London as 'day boarders' ie their days were so long that it was considered necessary for them to have a bed there! It was also Saturdays and bank holidays, which didn't leave much time for family time, or out of school activities.

They both decided to go to local state schools for A levels, one of which was very good and one less so, but both obtained places at RG unis. They both say that they gained from having been taught in both sectors, and that you need to be much more of an independent learner at state schools; there is less 'spoon feeding'.

I agree with a lot of what Boffin says. Some of the teaching was excellent, a lot of it reasonably good, but there were a few who were just not up to the job. They were weeded out fairly quickly, but somebody only has to be in position for a year to do quite a lot of damage, especially where GCSEs are concerned. I had to engage a tutor for one subject which, given how high the fees were, was not appreciated.

The parents of the 'day boarders' were typically City types, lawyers, accountants etc, whereas some pupils were children of parents who were posted overseas, and yes, there was a significant number of children of 'oligarchs' (which boosted the GCSE results in the relevant languages!). Some of the latter had vast wealth and yes, drugs were a problem, although it would usually be hushed up.

I am also smiling at the belief that the privately educated pupils are better behaved. They might be in the school environment but when they are let off the leash, they can seriously misbehave....!!

I also switched between the 2 systems. Agree that a 6th form college environment was beneficial in preparing me for a very low contact hours undergrad course. However, the flip side of that was that there wasn't much effort to identify people not achieving their potential, so providing you passed they werent that bothered, and they taught entirely to test (i.e. A-level syllabus. Not a penny more. Not a penny less.) and picked the exam boards which were easiest. I reckon I did as well there than if I'd stayed at my previous private school. However, would I have been better prepared for University if I'd done A-levels somewhere like St Pauls/ Westminster? Yes, without a shadow of a doubt. I do feel that I lacked the broad knowledge base to really make the best of my undergrad, which students from the top public schools had. When you need to choose a century to study in depth and all you've done is the Romans, henry VIII and Hitler (3 times), it's difficult to make an educated choice.

Mine were at private for primary because we tried state and it wasn't very good and we didn't fancy taking a gamble with another state school. We could afford the fees without blinking so it was a no brainer.

One has gone to state secondary and the others will follow. We chose it because it's an amazing school. The sport isn't fantastic but it's not bad but academically it's one of the best in the country. The expectation of the school is that most children will leave and go to RG uni's and Oxbridge.

We don't particularly want our kids mixing with everyone, I'm perfectly happy with them in a nice middle class bubble. We want them in schools where high expectation is the norm.

We didn't choose private for contacts but they will have contacts just by virtue of the families they know.