To feel jealous of friends/family able to educate their kids privately

[NewDay10]

Just that really. I know IABU to feel this way. I could go back to work and pay school fees and educate my kids privately. We've chosen for me to be a SAHM. I've just been looking at Facebook and can't believe how many of my friends educate their kids at prep level privately. Also I don't know how they afford it?! E.g. One couple both are teachers (state school) but still educate their kids privately. I'm feeling bitter. IABU and need to be happy as it really is a first world problem. We have great state schools here. I also know this debate has been done so many times on MN! So sorry to the veterans!

Spunky There's a brilliant bit on this in one of the "Is it just me or is everything shit?" books (if you haven't read them, probably slightly dated now, but very funny!). The author talks about these sort of charity holidays and says it's like asking you to give me £20 to go down the pub and I'll put the change in the Lifeboats box. You say no. I say "but it's for lifeboats, you mean git!"

I think he's spot on, actually. Someone is asking you to pay for her cycling holiday in Rio and give what's left to charity. Errr - why doesn't she pay for her own holiday and I'll give all the money to the charity? I suppose - from the charity's point of view they are getting money they may not have got in the first place, but I do think there's something distasteful about people basically getting freebies in the name of asking their friends to donate to a worthy cause. It's also never very transparent what percentage of your donation goes where.....

In fairness, I know private school "charity" trips aren't run on this basis - it's the faux altruism I object to, rather than the dubious use of funds. And the claim that the aim is to get the odd to mix with disadvantaged children - if you wanted to do that, I'd be surprised if you had to go more than 10 miles down the road almost anywhere in the UK. It certainly wouldn't necessitate an international flight....

• the odd? The kids! Bloody autocorrect!

Why do you think private schools are better?

I'd rather go with state education and then use (some of) the money I would have spent on private school fees on enhancing the experience ie paying for school trips. language courses abroad, extra-curricular activities.

myfavouritecolourispurple

Why do you think private schools are better?

I think they are better for the typical and oft-repeated reasons. I'll get the boring housekeeping out of the way and say that these aren't exclusive to public schools, nor do all fee-paying schools have all of these, but:

• Better sports facilities. We have indoor 25 and 50m pools. All weather pitches, tennis courts, gyms, multi-function sports hall(s), cricket pitch, astro running track and football / rugby / hockey pitches.

• After school activities such as golf, pottery, languages: something for everyone.

• Specialist teachers for music, languages, art, drama, PE, aquatics, library and IT and (gasp) highly resourced SEN.

• Equipment: track and field, Macbooks and iPads (1:3 of each of these in prep) cameras (still and video), IT suites, expansive libraries, classroom resources be they photocopying / exercise books / colouring paper / pastels etc or simply the extra spend in general for things like cooking or a larger enquiry piece

• Small class sizes (13 max at my school KS1 - Upper 6th.

Aibophobia Your list reads like the marketing brochure for the first prep school my kids went to....until I saw what was really going on and pulled them out pronto. I agree with your points on smaller class sizes, equipment and specialist teachers - although research does show that teaching quality is far more important than class size. I also agree that selection benefits a more academic child (which is why I'm still a fee payer!). But....

• I think a lot of private schools are run as a business. The parents are consumers and are pandered to as such - which can have a detrimental impact on how a school is run.
• You may attract the best teachers, but many are there and locked in so their own kids can have discounted fees and this can cause a rather unhealthy dynamic. Plus - at the first school my kids went to, a phenomenal number of the teachers were all related to each other. That's my experience of the nepotism attaching to private schools!
• I think that, unless you've been to somewhere globally recognisable - and these days that's likely to be one of three or four schools - it won't matter a jot where you went to school in a globally competitive environment. When I worked in the City (some years ago now) there was a definite anti-public school backlash in some places and you'd have had to get over your old school tie rather than it opening the door for you. I've even seen a bit of that in an Oxbridge context too. So I don't think it's the one way street that people like to portray.
• I think your connections to enhance the school can have merit at the higher levels of the school - I've seen some very impressive sixth form lecture series, for example. But you don't need a chef to talk to a load of Reception children about a healthy diet and arguably, the children would take a lot more notice of something that came from their own teacher.
• The only mixing with people in a similar income bracket is not a positive, at least in my opinion! One of the biggest dangers of private education is that kids grow up in a bubble and not aware of how privileged they are compared to the wider society. Plus - there is no one, neat "income bracket" and, at least in my experience, a lot of the parents are horribly obsessed by how rich everyone else is. (One little shit boy told my DD's friend that she had a much smaller house than my DD. This was true, but as neither he nor anyone in his family has ever been to our house and he wasn't even someone my DD knew, I can only assume this was common dinner table conversation and the result of a Google Earth search. Ugh!)
• After school activities, interesting trips, doing more at home - all of these can be done yourself. I think I do far more interesting things with my kids than they do with the school, to be honest, but of course that's because I can tailor things just to them. There is a big range of school clubs, but it's convenient to use them rather than it's impossible to get what is on offer elsewhere, if you see what I mean.

....so I suppose I don't think it's the one way street that you make out. There are good schools and bad schools (and many perfectly average schools in between). Same goes for teachers. There are good private schools and poor state schools. There are good state schools and poor private schools. What paying does give you is choice.

Awful post Aibohopbia, it is so bad it makes me a centre right Tory want to vote for Corbyn ,abolish all private schools and take all public school pupils to the GALLOWS !

Seriously these types of posts are just awful . They do nothing but distance the independent sector further from mainstream society.
I also suggest there a large number of 'wealthy' parents that are delighted that there is resistance to selective state education !

The sad thing is even within the independent sector , there is a hierarchical system. This is intentional , it propels public school boy's in to undeserved carers, public schools were built for this reason to protect the status of the ruling class.

However, if you are not in the 'club' the child of a family who have sacrificed for the fees barely advance further than what they would have got from a state grammar school.

Grammar schools are rather stupidly opposed by certain posters.

Grammar schools are rather stupidly opposed by certain posters.

Hmm, yes, who needs actual research into education? Who needs experts who have actually read and studied the research into grammar schools? And when the vast majority of those who work in and study education are opposed to something, why on earth bother listening to them?

Natalia

It probably does read list a brochure but that doesn't mean it's wrong. Our school is internationally recognisable and nearly became one of those terrible franchises. I'd say that people who went to public schools are perhaps more likely to recognise far more than 3 or 4 of the most well known - even if that's only through extramural socials.

The school has a waiting list so although parents are customers, unreasonable behaviour can (and has, even in this academic year) lead to families being asked to leave.

Besides husband and wife (both teachers, of which there are a handful) relationships, no other teachers are related to each other. I'd say the teachers aren't locked in and, in fact, I'm far more likely to let someone go in an effort to keep fresh eyes and approaches at the school than heads of state schools. No academic staff have had a position for more than 8 years (with 2 exceptions). This is for the benefit of their careers as well as the pupils and school.

I know we're talking about a very specific example but the children prepared several different salads with the chefs in the school kitchens as opposed to listening to someone with a tall white hat. They also got to try different foods and rate them from healthy to unhealthy. It was amazing how many children thought bacon was good for them!

there was a definite anti-public school backlash in some places and you'd have had to get over your old school tie rather than it opening the door for you

Statistics don't lie. Perhaps your former city employers should have put down the Guardian and judged people on their merits. Oxbridge graduates are likely to be the most intelligent. This doesn't mean the best for the role of course, but it does suggest it.

One of the biggest dangers of private education is that kids grow up in a bubble and not aware of how privileged they are compared to the wider society

Yes, but you sneered and ignored the details when I explained the lengths we go to to avoid this.

a lot of the parents are horribly obsessed by how rich everyone else is

I've experienced this a handful of times in my years and only once from a pupil. I think that public schools, perhaps even more so than state schools, can teach you that "there's always someone meaner, bigger, wealthier or better connected than you who will make your life a hell should you act like a wanker". I once heard a prefect tell a second year this and it's stuck with me.

It's true that some of the extra curricular activities can be done at home. I've worked in education for years and can help my children with the core curriculum but can never teach them golf, how to speak Spanish, how to sing in tune, dance in rhythm, use a pottery wheel, draw a horse that doesn't look like a donkey, swim butterfly without stopping to get your breath for 5 minutes or the many other things that people cleverer than I can.

I was careful in my post to say that there're terrible public schools and amazing state schools and you're right that the main benefit of 'having the cash' is you get to choose but, the top end of schools tends to be occupied by public schools and the bottom end by state schools.

holme4andy

Awful post Aibohopbia, it is so bad it makes me a centre right Tory want to vote for Corbyn ,abolish all private schools and take all public school pupils to the GALLOWS !

Besides wishing death on children who go to a particular type of school, why not explain a little more clearly what your issues are?

Is it simply that some people get better chances in life (unfair but a fact) or is there something else that's made you feel so violently opposed?

However, if you are not in the 'club' the child of a family who have sacrificed for the fees barely advance further than what they would have got from a state grammar school.

Do you have any facts to back this up or is this simply the rage speaking?

Respect to you, AIBUphobua. You are expressing what I reckon most private school parents think but don't say.

Much better than all the mealy mouthed bullshit most people come out with.

Op there is another way that isn't open to parents who both work - consider home educating them. I'm not necessarily an advocate, but if I'd chosen to be a sahm it's something I may well have considered. Is that an option for you?

Yes, but you sneered and ignored the details when I explained the lengths we go to to avoid this.

I absolutely did not ignore the details you gave. I just fundamentally disagreed with you. That is different. Personally, I think taking school children on "poverty tourism" while encouraging them to give themselves a big pat on the back for all their marvellous work for "charity" is both disingenuous and distasteful. Whatever it does, I do not believe that it helps children to understand how privileged they are in a culturally relevant context. As I have outlined. That is wholly different from ignoring your points.

You also misunderstood my point about the backlash. In my experience, people in the City ruthlessly employ people on their merits. Which means the old school tie thing is pretty deliberately avoided. "Oh, but he went to my old school" would have got you laughed off the floor! And I think that goes on when Oxbridge colleges are selecting students as well. I've been to one and I know people who are tutors and beyond there, so I've seen it at first and second hand. It isn't always an unalloyed positive. Private schools don't like that, but it is becoming gradually more of an issue.

As for extra curricular activities, I wasn't suggesting for a minute that you do it all yourself. We don't live in a particularly big place, but even then I know friends whose kids (from state schools, gasp!) do football, pottery/ceramics, swimming lessons, street dance, all sorts of music lessons, Spanish club, martial arts.... You name it. All these things are available to your child without sending him or her to a private school. You just have to look for them and transport your child there and back. And (shock, horror!) it is often the very same people who come into private schools to teach ballet, swimming, pottery etc who also run these clubs in the community.

Did you say you were a private school head? In which case I'm not surprised that you're not hearing the car park chatter! And of course nobody says directly "Ooh, how much money do they have?". It's more subtle than that (generally!).

Well its funny that all the experts that promote Comprehensive education, seem to always have come through private or grammar schools themselves !

The 'GALLOWS' humour is a reference to the French Revolution ,at the time of writing i could not spell Guillotine .....

Regarding issues : A major issue for instance is the undeserved benefits that come for public school children , such as 'unpaid' internships.

The facts that many internships are down to two things connections and the ability of a family to fund the internship. This means it is almost a closed shop for the majority of state school children.

This is one example of the closed shop of public/private schools working to protect their interests at a cost to society as a whole.

It is also quite telling that there is opposition to MP Alec Shelbrooke's proposal to force 'predominately' public school infested companies to pay something to interns !

The amount suggested want make much difference towards changing this grossly unfair system. However, it does highlight how the Public School system unites to distinguish any threat to power and influence, no matter how inconsequential that might be.

Aibohphobia I think you are right, that's why a lot of parents would pay private.

I read it though and it confirms to me that's absolutely not what I want for my children (the second half of the stuff). Nor do I want them to be around others who think like this. I would be interested in the better quality of education and little else.

Also, you mention Oxbridge as if no-one from state school ever got in there! Yes, it increases your chances if you go private, but I got in from a worse than mediocre comp and so did many of my friends. If I had a child I thought might be Oxbridge material, I'd keep an eye on their A level choices, encourage them to apply and give them space to do their homework, but nothing else. I think squeezing in students who quite frankly aren't intellectually brilliant is a waste of a place and often leads to the student having a difficult time, same as for grammars where a child is towards the bottom end of the ability scale. There was also some concern in the private sector that given the odds are stacked in their favour, private school children who are really good may be disadvantaged as others then get slightly lower offers. There is a bit of discounting of offers behaviour in some unis, at least my own RG one.

Honestly, school songs, traditional values, I just don't get it!

WON'T.

And (shock, horror!) it is often the very same people who come into private schools to teach ballet, swimming, pottery etc who also run these clubs in the community.

The extra curricular activities had better not be run by my specialist staff! They're contracted until 4:40 and need written permission for any form of tutoring. We don't have any specialist staff not employed on a full time contract.

Did you say you were a private school head? In which case I'm not surprised that you're not hearing the car park chatter!

I am and do but it's rarely about finances. If you want to know more about who's husband slept with who or which wife drinks too much then I'm your woman though.

BertrandRussell

Respect to you, AIBUphobua. You are expressing what I reckon most private school parents think but don't say. Much better than all the mealy mouthed bullshit most people come out with.

I change my username weekly at least and you generally hate my opinions! Not that you don't here but I realised as I turned 50 that the courage of your convictions is important. Wish I'd realised it when I was 30!

If you want to know more about who's husband slept with who or which wife drinks too much then I'm your woman though.

Love it!

bounty of course state schooled pupils get into Oxbridge ( and on to the other most competitive courses) but let's not pretend their under representation isn't an issue.

There would not be so much work being done to increase access if it were not an issue. Nor would there be contextualised offers ( which reflect an acceptance by the universities that some schools simply do not offer a good enough education).

The bald fact is that too few state schools offer an education which allow all but the very exceptional to access these courses. Which is completely wrong.

There is no need whatsoever to have genius intellect to be capable of undertaking a degree in these fields.

The view that state secondary education is doing a sterling job with its high ability pupils isn't one shared by many involved increasing access.

"I change my username weekly at least and you generally hate my opinions!"

I think the views you have expressed here are utterly despicable. And wrong. I am just delighted to see some honesty. It is a quality sadly lacking in the vast majority of private/selective school supporters.

Bertrand You see, I don't think a lack of honesty in that sense
is the problem; in my experience at least, people who send their kids private are pretty open about the fact that they did that because they thought it was the best thing to do for their child. I would say the same to you. What I wouldn't say to you, though, is that it is the perfect thing for my child. Or an infinitesimally superior thing for my child. Or that I'm paying for something for my child that someone else couldn't replicate for theirs, if you see what I mean. I think the problem is all the hype and marketing, much of which comes from private schools themselves. And of course it does - for all they have charitable status, they are run like commercial organisations. The head of a private school is also the CEO and the Head of Marketing. These schools, waiting list or not, market aggressively to you in much the same way as any other consumer organisation. The difference is that once you have bought it, your other options (ie going back into the state system) are much more limited (as your child's place at the local school will have certainly gone to another child if it is a sought after school). So once you've bought, you really have to believe it, especially if the money is an issue for you at all. As I've said before, people like to big themselves up and especially when they've made a significant financial commitment to something. Have you ever met, for example, someone who drives a Maserati who will tell you that, to be honest, a Ford Focus would have done the job just as well? Or someone who has been to the Maldives who says that they enjoyed their week last year in Blackpool more? Very rarely, I suspect - the psychology just doesn't work like that. I think the private school thing is just the same. People need to believe that it's money well spent....and the schools need them to believe it's money well spent, so it's all a bit self perpetuating.

IME private school parents are not remotely homogenous and not are their drivers to pay for education.

Of course certain people prefer to believe the opposite. That all parents want/think the same things ( such things being generally immoral etc).

But humans are inconveniently complex and we are all products of our own upbringings/education. Of course there are consistencies but the inconsistencies are consistently present .

We all have our own reasons. We all have our own values. And what value we place on our DC's education is entirely subjective ( which is why it's a waste if time and rather daft telling people that schools other than X, Y or Z are a 'waste' of money).

I also suspect 'value' depends highly on how much cash you have and how you got it.

If you scrape to pay school fees or make any perceived sacrifices, you might seek more concrete/objective proof than if money is more freely available?

It might also have to do with personality trait. If you're naturally optimistic then you'll see the good in things. The opportunity available. If you're naturally risk averse you'll find it a harder sell.

Rich/successful people tend to be more optimistic and less risk averse, therefore this type are likely to be more prevalent in a private school community?

phobia you think skiing trips are an advantage??
But snoeshoeing was fun.

However, I thought about this question and had a nice discussion about it with the woman I share an office with. As I wrote above, my schooling was erratic, my English sucks (!) (my German and French doesn't but, still)... and yet I still managed to get a rather interesting job in the U.K.

I honestly don't want to admit it but I probably wouldn't have gotten far enough to apply if I hadn't known a few people. Some were friends of cousins/uncles etc... and some were actually the parents of friends.

This doesn't mean I didn't work hard or that I'm lazy. But I did have certain advantages (others certainly had different advantages. Like a stable upbringing)

SpunkyMummy

phobia you think skiing trips are an advantage?? But snoeshoeing was fun.

Not an educational advantage but most people enjoy them. I'm not sure what you mean by the second sentence.

Bertrand

I think the views you have expressed here are utterly despicable. And wrong

I appreciate your honesty as you do mine so I say this without trying to be argumentative, which views are despicable?

My points can be boiled down to:

nepotism
better staff
better resources

Nepotism isn't confined to the public sector but is more prevalent, of course. The others I wouldn't say are views but facts. Unfair, yes. Despicable? No way. You and your children are a damn sight luckier than the majority of children in the world. Some of the children I teach are a little luckier still. I wouldn't call that despicable.