... to think it slightly odd that so many of my school mum friends are hung up about secondary schools already, when their kids are only 5!

[sandyballs]

It seems to be the sole topic of conversation lately - how good/bad the local comp is, how extra tuition will be needed for the local grammar etc etc.

The kids are 5/6 years old! Let them be kids!

I'm sure our parents never had all this school angst!

I thought in some parts of the US schooling was even more of a minefield than in the UK from what I've read about the efforts parents make to get children into the right New York nursery school etc.

That's if you choose to bring your children up in New York and buy into the concept that they have to go to private, all white, all rich schools. There are excellent public schools in NYC.
And anyway, nurseries are a completely different issue. You need to put your child on a waiting list (or pull strings) to get into a decent nursery in any major city in the uk or the usa because state/public nurseries are fairly rare and in my experience don't offer the full day coverage that working mothers need.

I think it was like in Central London though, NY, in the articles I read - you need to be in the right nursery to then get into the right prep school to then get into the right school after. Someone paid a big bribe to get a place in NY and it was all over the British prep. Loads of articles about the 3 year olds being coached for the entrance tests etc - worse than London.

Exactly my point. If you choose to buy into the concept that rich white elite schools are where you want your child to be educated, then, yes, that's what it's like. However, there are perfectly good public (state) schools in New York City that will provide a child with an education that can get them into the best universities in the world.
And the same situation exists here in Los Angeles. And in London.

I simply disgaree with your belief that a school like HABS (or any other elite private school) will automatically make your child a better or more interesting person. And if anything, I think it is likely (in my experience) to do the opposite.

When I was 2 I was assessed as having an IQ of an 8 year old. Mum & Dad were encouraged to apply for private scholarships.

They didn't for 2 reasons. 1. What would it do for my self-esteem if I didn't get in?

1. They had no money. Even with a scholarship I would have been the odd one out. What about the extra-curricular clubs they couldn't afford, etc?

I think anyone would want the best chance for their child at school, and ideally, that would mean a school where standards of education are high & disruption minimal.

However, I think it is going to far to specify the social groups that should be excluded for that to be achieved. As for regional accents - what a load of nonsense.

Personally, I would rather my daughter learned that all people have value, and that doing well in school is to do with how much you try (within your limitations), not who is sat next to you.

Incidently, I am a committed Christian, and I am often asked if I will be sending Millie to a Christian School. The answer is a resounding NO.

If Millie chooses to follow the faith that we raise her in, she will need to learn to deal with the fact that not everyone agrees or has the same moral views as we do. She still needs to love and accept them. I want her to learn this when she is young, not to be closeted away until she hits 16 and suddenly faced with 'different people'.

I think the same can be said of Xenia's sentiments. Your children will meet all sorts of people out there. Surely better to grow up with all groups in society than be closeted away in the 'us' group.

But most of teh children from those private schools, the better ones on just about every survey ever done do so hugely hugely better in life, don't they? So why not buy that advantage and they're not snobby schools for rich people at all - they're like the oldfashioned state grammars really. We're not talking about al white boarding schools at all. We're talking about hugely racially mixed schools thousands of children compete for places at where the only criteria for entry is brains (and ability to pay although some schools like Manchester Grammar are working towards being completely income blind)

But xenia, you can't be blind to the fact that the percentage of children who are 'disadvantaged' for whatever reason in those private schools is going to be tiny.

It is not just about raw brain power, it is about the ability to show that brain power under criteria set by the school.

Academically selective schools if you have a bright child may well be best for that child and obvioulsy schools that are so in the state and private sector get better results so Labour wants to hold them back at university entrance level I suppose... but that's different and rather silly game.

Yes, anyone even the family on £10k a year who get a free plaxe and bursary to cover all uniform, travel etc to Manchester Grammar who puts there son in for that schools is, yes, like to value education. So you're right even the very poorest, the families I know at Habs where 4 family wages are going into paying that set of fees etc that child is still advantaged because it has a family bothered about education. But what is the issue - those children will do well as will those at good state grammars. In other words forethought by th eparents at 5 clearly pays off and benefits the child and those at 5 who really can't be bothered are in effect damaging their child or rather not giving it the advantages others might have. Plenty of parents put off having children until theyre 35 rather than 25 so they can afford school fees etc. Loads of people plan these things ahead.

Positive Discrimination has been around for centuries. In the past you were a beneficiary if you were a white male. Someone decided they wanted to see what would happen if you decided to make the beneficiary a black woman for example.

drosophila- that's right; change the rules and the guys who have had and still have the advantage start crying foul. Understandable, I guess.

Xenia- how do we disaggregate the various contributing factors to a child's success? We are reducing our model a one factor model. What I mean is why are we sure that it is the school and not the other influences that are the drivers? Correlation is not causation is the cliche. As I said, I am paying multiple private fees and the children are doing well but I can't say for certain that the state school wouldn't have been good enough.

..besides, even though I REALLY value education, I find the 24/7 parental obsession with multiple extra classes and the rest dull and even counter-productive. Will this generation of children have any imagination, character, self drive given the force feeding and lack of choice that I witness in London suburbian parenting....can't they just do the music lessons for fun without the grading intensity for example?

Isn't it like advertising? You never know which half of it is working so you keep on paying for all of it just in case because if you stopped 50% it might be the 50% that's working? Without doubt a good private school gives most chidlren huge advantages. Arguably it's the easiest thing, as well as loving the children and giving them attention and stability, which helps them.

My oldest is 22. The older I get the more I think their gens play 50% a part and parents should not beat themselves up over their children. You just borrow for a while, do you best and let them go.

How do you/they measure success in life. The rich, educated people I know don't seem to be any happier on average than the poor uneducated people that I know. Most of my HABS friends (all professionals and at a minimum middle class) seem generally pretty miserable most of the time.

And actually many recent studies seem to indicate that coming from a household (regardless of the form that family takes) that regularly eats meals together is that most important factor in "success" and not wealth or education.

Rich, wealthy, educated in rich white schools = paris hilton

Xenia- yes, shld just keep it going if it working. I am obviously not brave enough to test the state vs private theory with my own but I am just saying that we shld accept that we could be wasting our money. AND we shld stop making those who choose not to or can't afford to pay feel like they are missing out because we don't always know for sure. And worse, we pass on our prejudices about schooling to our kids doing damage to the next generation.

But I do like how you sum up your approach to parenting. Behind you Mumsnet role as chief protagonist, I think that you are probably a great mom and role model our girls. Maybe even a siftie in real life.

oops .. the wife is just home from day out. She wouldn't like the fact I have been on MN instead of playing with kids all day.

SA why not buy them a lovely education plus all the other nice bits too though? And it's not true to suggest if you go to a good school you're less likely to be happy.

have only had chance to skim through this thread.

Ds's are only 5 and nearly 3 but I'm already pondering secondary schools. The secondary school that's currently their feeder school is a good one and I'll be relieved and happy if it stays that way and they go there, but there are plans where we are to change the borders and they'll end up going to a tech college with a crap reputation which I wouldn't want. Yes I know it's 6 years away and things could change but I'd be happier with them going to a school that's been good for longer than that.

Dp and I disagree passionately about grammar schools. I went to Manchester High School for Girls - the sister school to Manchester Grammar School - and was glad I went - I was the lowest ability person in the lowest stream class in our year and did spectacularly badly compared to most of the girls in my year (I failed my Maths 'O' level ), but I came out with 7 'O' levels and I hadn't either got on drugs/got pregnant/dropped out, which a lot of my friends where I lived had done. I was glad I had the chance, but when it came to do 'A' levels I chose to go to the comp 6th form college, which was brilliant - had boys for a start and managed to scrape 4 very low grade 'A' levels. Dropped out of music college without a degree but now have a very good job - am bizarrely the highest flyer in the family!

My brother went to Manchester Grammar, stayed there for his 'A' levels, got a degree but now has a crap job which pays him half the national average salary.

Dp's family refused to let her sit the exam for Manchester High even though she's got a brain the size of a planet. She got to Cambridge anyway and when she's finished being a SAHM, although she could be whatever she wants, she's choosing to probably go into being a builder/carpenter.

Sooooo.... If ds's were academically bright and I thought they could get into MGS I'd want them to have a go. We couldn't afford it so they'd have to get scholarships! But dp is against it and wouldn't want it to even be an option.

I think you are who you are and maybe it's true, like dp, that if you're going to achieve academically you'll do that whichever school you go to - she went to the local comp, which happened to be good, but she's the kind of person that would have done well wherever you put her.

I believe I only did well and didn't go off the rails because I was in a good school which kept me more or less on track. I really believe my life would be very different now if I wasn't 'sheltered' at a good school with nicely brought up middle class girls - whether that's right or wrong I don't know - is just my perception.

Sorry - not sure what the point is other than different surroundings will suit different personalities and as a parent, if I can choose at all which surrounding I think my child will do best in, I'd like to do everything possible to try and make sure that's what they've got - whether that's the local comp or grammar school.

Because I don't equate buying things with being good or making happiness.

I was just watching a programme about comics and they were talking about Les Dawson. He was once a vacuum cleaner sales man and then became a poet , writer and comic. It reminded me of your comment of the washing machine man, Xenia. Imagine how lucky you would be to have had Les Dawson sell you a vacuum cleaner.

I do think your most interesting people can come from the most challengung backgrounds. I mentioned before that DS has a friend with a father going to prison. The kid is a sweetie and his mother a character. What would you do?

Oh god I've avoided this thread for days but have now skimmed through it.
Would it help all of you who are so grossly offended by Xenia's comments if I told you, as someone who has met her a couple of times, the following:

a truly "posh" (god I hate that word) person wouldn't remotely consider her as posh either at first glance or when speaks. one would assume, if one could be arsed or interested, "lower middle class done well with a bit of something northern going on in there". not that 99.9% of people would give a shit but if xenia met herself she'd probably look down on herself a bit

it isn't immediately apparent on what all this self-congratulatory stuff is based. in the grand scheme of things in city circles she is moderately well off, a perfectly good workaday lawyer and presentable enough. again, if you could be bothered to think about it. certainly not rich, a superstar in her field or some sort of glamazon sexbeast as one might assume from her postings. If you were feeling tired and a bit unkind you might try to avoid her if she made a beeline for you at a conference cocktail party (or possibly on the sidelines of a school lacrosse match)

as for posting outrageous comments to ensure that all threads lead to xenia... well she has been doing this for YEARS on another legal forum and honestly the reaction to her here is pretty much identical to the reaction to her there, where she is a bit of an exasperating fact of life. Like rain in august. You are pissed off when it starts but accept you can't do anything about it and it doesn't actually hurt anyone.

SO where have you met her then? How well do you know her? Very interesting!

I was beginning to wonder if she was like the Catherine Tate character - 'what a fucking liberty' -in real life and was living a Walter Mitty existence on cyber space.

have fallen over her in a professional capacity a couple of times (negotiated against her once I seem to remember). don't KNOW her at all

well it is sort of walter mitty but not to the extent that it is all a complete fantasy, more to the extent of the vast inflation of her own importance

Walter mitty! I expect theres been a few on here - izzyrubi/modelling springs to mind and she ended up exposed in the sunday times