How do you decide between private school or state school?

[Hecegoza]

I'm so torn... There's a lovely prep school, relatively close (15 min drive) and it only has 123 students - from age 1-11. I'd want mine to start at Pre-Reception.

It's very family-like and has great pastoral care (which I think is more important than results, for sure).

It's reasonable price - it's £21 a morning session for Pre-Reception and then £2,900 each term up to Year 6. That includes lunch/swimming, etc.

Then there's an 'Outstanding' state school which is walking distance, it's a lovely newly built building. Then friends he met at school would most likely be in his village too... So that's a bonus, and most likely to go to the same secondary.

I'm struggling to decide if your kids go private, why is that? If state, why did you pick that? I feel they both have good benefits!

But by no means are standards in private schools far better. I've worked with private schools in partnership and in one as a young teacher. I think there are far more independent school teachers who wouldn't cope in the state system than vice versa.

I'm. Prepared to accept hat some state provision is poor but also is a fair amount of private, anecdotally here on this thread and in my own experience it's been confirmed.

lurked I did not fudge the data. I explained how and why (briefly obviously) it exists and what it shows. But you don't want to accept that, so fine.

I also gave a number of reasons why state schooled pupils attend the least selective courses (these days ABB is not considered very selective). Low aspiration was just one of them. Deny that as an issue all you like, but it remains a problem.

As for casting doubt on where I work, well fill your (presumably un-nailed boots). We're all anonymous here, although plenty of posters have worked out who I am ...

I've said repeatedly that you take your choice and it's fine.

My only warning at first was that if your forgoing everything else to pay fees and can't afford the other trappings that you might want to think about it.

I also got a bit defensive when the issues of behaviour nd attainment were brought up so sorry about that.

When we started down the independent school route one of my main drivers was to keep them slightly further at arms length from government meddling in their education! That and the smaller class sizes.

(subsequently they've both ended up as choristers, which has helped as affordability was borderline for us)

lurked I understand that people, especially parents, get defensive. It's natural.

But I do think in many ways it is a barrier to better provision. The traditional middle classes are now pretty much priced out of the private sector (especially the top end). Their children are in comps. They are in an ideal position to bring about change.

python with this government and their current twatting about with SATs, GCSEs, AS, A levels, it was probably a bloody wise move.

It's strange then that you misread the data so badly. It also states that a* students from state schools do better than those.from private. I suggest you go back and read it again.

You mentioned bbb, and less selective courses, which implies that it only looks at lower grades and not the most sought after courses which is just not true. Blatant misrepresentation.

You then go on to discuss low.aspiration amongst state school students. Well tell you what if Oxford spent more time doing out reach to schools and less going to independents (25% of your time is spent going to 14% of schools) who already have advantages you may see a difference.

So it's true at all levels. High performing and mid performing a level students from state schools out perform their counterparts from independents in HE.

The Rodiero and zannini research btw.looked at Oxford and Cambridge and Russell group universities.

lurked for students who attain three or more A*s at A level, there is no recorded difference in degree classification at the most selective universities. There just isn't!

The idea that state schooled pupils are brighter and more successful at this level is simply not borne out by the facts, no matter how much you wish it were so.

As for work widening participation, you have no clue how much I or any of my colleagues do. Nor do you have any clue how many state schools we contact but do not wish to engage. Nor do you have any clue what percentage of state school applicants have entirely the wrong academic profile. Nor do you have any clue how many contextual offers we make or how those students pan out.

Then why does the data shows that then?

But I am bowing out now as I am going to watch my DD perform at school (I hope her hob nailed boots aren't too tight) and then I am going to work .

Also how come.in one year Oxford went 9 times to Eton and 12 times to Marlborough college on out reach?

I don't know of one state school, selective or not, that have achieved something like that. I love the schools do not wish to engage thing, my last school.we had to pester to get a visit!

Lurked could you kindly link the study? I've found only paywalled ones.

It seems that Haircut suggests that in the case of average pupils, the state ones will outperform the privately educated ones whereas the there is no such disparity for those having a clutch of A*s.

Have I got that right?

www.theguardian.com/education/2015/nov/05/top-state-school-pupils-get-better-degrees-than-those-from-private-schools

I don't have the study on this computer, but the Guardian link says it all. Its not just average.

I'm not doing down private school attainment, they get great results, and I'm probably being a bit defensive, but haircut's assertions ticked me off.

The Guardian article is frustratingly limited.

I'd like to see the results broken out by A-level results. I'm certainly not surprised that privately educated students with average results are less capable than comparable students coming out of the state sector. I think we all know that there's a lot more hidden potential there.

I understand your feeling defensive.

It does make me smile the assumption that there must be something wrong with the school if the fees are cheap by London standards.

OP doesn't say where she is but 7000 a year is going rate for private primary in my area, FWIW my DD's are under 6000. That's a year not a term. Deprived northern town, a nice 4 bed modern estate house is under 200,000 so all relative.

Pay by DD monthly same as nursery fees (which were actually dearer) So 150 pounds a week term time for 8.30-4.30 inc 11 plus exam prep. At state I'd pay wrap around care for those hours plus tutoring if I wanted exam prep. Class of 17.

I don't see why moving and paying house premium to get into nice state school is seen as acceptable but paying for school is seen as unfair.

I think the article says that the brightest of pupils will get A*s and succeed wherever they go to school. But that a pupils who gets Bs and Cs in a state school will more likely outperform at university a student with similar results from a state school. I would see this as private schools are arguably better at getting average pupils higher grades (whether that is teaching / parental input or whatever) and that universities should be aware that grades do not always equal potential.

I've had children at both state and private.

There are pros and cons to each. One of the best things about the private school was the social side. A meal for example would be held one evening for say the musicians in the school. It gave opportunities for my DD to join in as a right. The alternative was the comp, where social aspects were not as easy to join in with. In effect it was people having, say a BBQ where you just had to hope to be invited.

She went because we had moved to the area and she didn't settle at the local comp. we wanted to give her another start, the private school was the next easiest to get to and money wasn't really an issue.

The private school went to so much more effort to help her get into uni, to the extent of having a outside person come to give her a mock interview not just a teacher.

I don't think it's worth making yourself penniless though, it's nice, but not crucial. There are other ways to help your child, house deposit for example.

It seems to me that the article glosses over the difference for A* students coming from the two sectors, rather than specifically stating that the disparity lies exclusively in average students.

“This study tells us that, unsurprisingly, A*s generally lead to good degrees. School heads already know that prior attainment is the key to later success,”

I go into schools all over the country and run creative assemblies and workshops as a part of my job. It's been an eye opener. All the children have been great, behaviour been great, teachers varying in rudeness and loveliness in both sectors - however, I choose to send my dcs state all the way.

It's a generalisation but in the private schools I've worked with I find the 'structure' too stifling. For instance, one boy had a bit of an argument with me because the workshop I was running wasn't going towards a final mark or even being marked. It was just for fun. The Art teacher bent my ear a lot about his frustrations. Also, I was asked to set a project brief in one (ahead of time) and when I visited the teacher told me very rudely that he found my brief too hard (it was to create a fantastical beast) and he'd chosen to something else. Yes, generalisations but my experiences.

I'm not against private school. My 3 dneices all go/have been to an international private school and have a great education and are lovely well rounded people. However my dsis is very grounded herself.

I went to state school. It was cool to be clever. We worked hard. Went on trips. Went to university etc. My dd is off to secondary this September. I'm hoping she'll enjoy it too.

One thing though, I too wouldn't like tiny class sizes. I think having a larger group brings benefits socially.

However it also says:

"In both Russell and non-Russell group universities, students from independent schools were less likely to achieve either a first class degree or at least an upper second class degree than students from comprehensive schools with similar prior attainment.”

Its not a criticism of private schools, just I got annoyed with Haricut's " 3 bs and less selective courses" point, cause its not true.

Getting good grades only proves you are good at taking exams.

There is so much more to success at work than the ability to pass exams.

Emotional intelligence for example. Who wants someone in their team who is very good at exams but a nightmare to work alongside?

Not say the two are mutually exclusive, just pointing out exams are a very narrow measure of ability.

If you are loaded, self entitled, snobbish and want your child to have no concept of the real world then you go private, otherwise it's state.

DH attended a top public school and I was educated in the state system. We chose a state school that is really just middling but because it is within easy walking distance of our house. We both worked long hours when DS started started secondary school though I'm at home now.

DH had to commute for 1.5 hours each way to school, I had to walk just over 2 miles to school each way from age 9. So it was all about not having to give up a lot of time just bloody commuting to school. The grind of adulthood is real enough with massive commutes for some, been there myself.

Just remember that some fee paying schools are utter shit op and having invested parents will influence DC just as much. There is a poorly performing private school not too far from where we live. My DH enjoys laughing at the parents who waste their money sending their DC to this school. My sons school recently beat them in a local schools competition, his team came 4th out of 12 teams and his team was the only one from a state school and they were one team mate down.

Mine went private because my twat of an ex decided that the only money he would pay towards his children was for their education, no maintenance, no help with uniforms or extra curricula activities, because that way he could make my life as financially hard as possible, while still pretending he was a concerned father. If I had refused to accept the school fees I would have got nothing and would have been the horrible mother who denied her children the chance of a good education.