To ask about the advantages of private school?

[longestlurkerever]

This is probably going to come across badly, but I'm interested in hearing people's opinions. I went to a middle of the road state school and then Oxford. I came away with a first class law degree and a training contract at a magic circle law firm. Although I didn't especially enjoy secondary school, I suppose I've always thought that it did the trick and my dds wouldn't lose anything if they had the same education as me. Recently though I've been working through some stuff with the help of a leadership course at work and realise that, even once you bag the job, there are an awful lot of unwritten rules that I am not sure I am fully understand - how to network effectively, how to have authority in senior meetings and just generally how to go through life feeling assured and confident and have been wondering if this is what private schooling is really all about? I still am not sure I'd choose private school for my dds even if it is, and would have to make some tough decisions to afford it anyway, but I am interested in what the benefits are so I can weigh them up.

I had a government and charity funded place at a very expensive boarding schools, for personal family reasons. I'd previously been at a big standard state primary and comprehensive. There were some traditions and formalities that were exclusive to private school, but I've not needed them as an adult. I can tell you my opinion is that the education was certainly not a higher standard. Most of the teachers were actually quite terrible. The reason most pupils do so well is not better teaching or smaller class sizes but because the peer pressure is to be clever rather than cool.

I have no doubt this comes from the need to justify the expense their parents are paying. The pupils who didn't make much effort and had lower grades and wouldn't have done well in state comprehensiveness really buckled up their ideas by gcse year and I'm certain this is because they knew their parents would be wasting thousands otherwise and had pressure directly or subconsciously.

The stats don't reveal anything, as it's not like for like.
I'm sure private schools get better grades, but that's because they kick out (we advise your dc will be better placed elsewhere) anyone who's not going to make good grades, and the kids that go there are also tutored externally.
So, the good grades give no insight whatsoever in to whether the actual teaching is better.

Not all private schools are selective
Not all private school teachers are rubbish-and quite often these days the ones that are are weeded out sharpish because the state system does offer a good alternative
Not all private schools are miserable or dirty, or full of lazy spoiled kids.
My son was at a state school until we whipped him out half way through year 2
From the January term of Year 1 to the time he left
He was pushed down the stairs (twice)
Had his head slammed in a door and was concussed (and told this was his fault he should have stayed away from the child with anger issues, he was on his way to the loo)
Kicked and punched in the playground
Made no progress from year 1- 2 none at all
He was bullied and we were told that he needed to be more robust
He came home one day and said he wanted to kill himself, held a knife to his arm and said he wanted to die.
Not all state schools are like that

Sometimes a private school is just the right school for your child and if you can make it work, because they have been in such a horrible school prior to that then you do, because what you want whether you opt for state or private is for your child to be happy, because it is the emotional intelligence that is going to take your child where you want them to go.

We learned hockey from an ex-hockey international. When it’s subject appropriate, it wouldn’t be a concern for me.

This can also be part of the smoke and mirrors, though, can't it? Because that's what the money is going on. And some (quite a lot?) of the time it's unnecessary and peripheral. The vast majority of kids won't need teaching by an ex-international sports star. And so you are paying over the odds for PE teachers for no good reason. And it goes on....

As my DH said, when your reception aged child has a pottery teacher, you can see the start of the slippery slope.... In fairness, schools vary - but it's definitely worth trying to look through the veneer and see what your child will actually be getting. For example, your school is in 100 acres of parkland? Beautiful. But your child will be sitting in a classroom for most of the time and playing in a tarmac playground otherwise. So she gets a lovely view. But a chunk of your fees will go on leasing that, or maintaining that....amd if roaming in beautiful parkland is what you want, then a National Trust membership would probably serve you better. Think carefully about what you are wanting to get out of it and that will help you make a much more informed choice.

And so you are paying over the odds for PE teachers for no good reason

But who is to decide what is a good reason? For ME it was an absolutely fantastic opportunity ergo that’s a good enough reason.

Think carefully about what you are wanting to get out of it and that will help you make a much more informed choice

What we wanted was a primary education that made our child happy. And we got that. And that is worth the money alone. The extra opportunities she has had in addition is a bonus.

We learned self defence from a Gladiator

Also, the poster above who says they "kick out" those who don't get good grades? No. No they don't.

But who is to decide what is a good reason?

Oh, the parents - absolutely. But my point is that these places use this as a selling point and a lot of people take it as a superficial positive without thinking through the implications of that. At my DC's first school we had a similar thing - the swimming teacher was a former Olympic contender. My response was "what on earth is he doing here teaching a load of 5 year olds?". This clearly wasn't the response they were expecting!

Sure - if your child is absolutely passionate about hockey or swimming, then clearly it's marvellous to have someone like that to teach them. If your child isn't that keen, or is averagely keen, it's either a waste, or st worst a huge disadvantage (because real enthusiasts- in all walks of life - can find it very difficult to empathise with others who don't like and aren't good at their "thing").

The wanting to make your child happy? Of course. Everyone wants that. And you know your own child. But I still say it's worth thinking carefully about the granular details of what you're looking for in order to achieve that, rather than just gasping in awe at the "facilities". I've learned from bitter experience; my kids went to a private school that was, by all accounts, fantastic....and it presented itself as such. The reality was very different and the emphasis was on show and keeping the parents happy, to the detriment of the children.

My DD’s Private School is not selective - and they most certainly don’t kick anything me out for lack of academic success, but they most certainly will for behaviour that is tolerated at the 2 local comps ( feedback from parents with dc there). ALL achievement is celebrated, whatever form that takes.
Interestingly despite being non selective their GCSE results are pretty similar to the closest super selective Grammar
People on here can and should ONLY share their experiences of schools they know. To say Private schools are x and State schools are y is rubbish, they are all different and choices should be based on individual children and specific schools

But I still say it's worth thinking carefully about the granular details of what you're looking for in order to achieve that, rather than just gasping in awe at the "facilities"

Oh I agree. DD’s has practically no facilities it is in an old house. They’re lucky to have a games pitch but other than that it’s old and peeling but perfect for DD.

I went to a state school. It was a really good school but in one of the most deprived parts of London. The results in my year were very good and we had a lot go to Oxbridge and other good universities. I went to a good uni and there were a lot of private school people there. I did notice that in general they had a confidence that I just didn't have. Even if their abilities didn't match up to it. I think that sort of confidence is really useful when it comes to getting employed. But they also (again this is generalising) had a lack of self awareness I think, like I said they didn't always seem to realise when they were bad at something, but the confidence seemed to carry them through anyway.

There definitely are advantages to private school (or good ones at least) but then good state schools have advantages of their own. I suppose it depends on the child, and on what your priorities are as a parent.

Valerrie - they do kick dc out/suggest they'd be better placed elsewhere at my local private school. It's happened to half a dozen dc I know. I don't know what they do at other private schools.

I used to work with a guy who had this wonderful confidence detailed by many posters gleaned from private. It worked for him for many years, Oxford, jobs and positions way above his intelligence or work ethic. Then we got a new ceo not part of the set. Guy was fired within a few months. It's basically destroyed him. He has never in his fifty years considered that he is not the best thing since sliced bread, and he can't handle it.

Some private schools do bestow upon their charges a certain polish, confidence and ease of manners that differentiates them from the Great Unwashed. However, such schools are few and far between.
Even amongst the very best public schools, the contingent changes with every passing year as the demand from super rich drives up the fees and your good old home-grown Hons et al are being increasingly squeezed out - unless they are really very clever.
The issue with super rich is that great deal of money doesn't always buy great deal of inherent grace and elegance, therefore the abovementioned continget is somewhat less naturally well-mannered than it used to be. Or so I've been told.
Your common or garden private schools offer smaller classes in general, which has both pros and cons, pros being fairly obvious, cons could be lack of friendship pool and small games teams.
Nothing beats a good nosey around during a regular school day, forget the show/open days.
You know your child and what would suit best, private schools are good for some, not so for others.
There are plenty of good state schools I'm sure.

but that's because they kick out (we advise your dc will be better placed elsewhere) anyone who's not going to make good grades, and the kids that go there are also tutored externally.

That wasn't my experience, though I know it does happen (and indeed at some state schools - as per the St Olave's legal case last summer)

No one left in the middle of sixth form, as was the case in the St Olave's story, but it was known that you were expected to get certain grades to progress into the sixth form, and that you could only study subjects at A-level in which you'd achieved top grades at GCSE. If you had got a B in a given subject at GCSE, I think you'd likely have been advised to choose a different subject, although that's just a guess. Whereas classes were streamed by ability at GCSE (and extra coaching provided by teachers if anyone was struggling) the expectation was that smaller classes in sixth form would go above and beyond the A-level syllabus, and that extra coaching would be more about university exam / interview preparation, or S-level papers (don't know if these still exist?) for more advanced subject material.

For GCSE I don't know of anyone who had external tutoring, but I know teachers definitely did lunchtime lessons for anyone who was struggling. I had them for maths at one point!

I'd say that the two prep schools my kids attended got them to about old 'O' level standard by year six without their breaking a sweat. The children, a boy and a girl, were happy, engaged and had opportunities to do sports (neither did much as they're swotty not sporty), drama, music and a wide range of cultural activities. They had really wonderful educational school trips, and, best of all, both turned into avid readers. Their general knowledge and level of informedness is phenomenal and this began in primary school.

It was the best £far-too-much I ever spent and I'll never regret it.

Of course, there is the 'hobnobbing with rich yahoos' element and the ditsy pony-girls as well as the fact that every other child goes to Barbados for Christmas and Skiing in the Rockies. (One child was given a £40 yoyo when the game was popular.) However, my kids seemed to cope and knew they were going to have to earn their living at the end of it.

My kids are having an assessment day today at their prospective school.
Just wondering if there are any hidden costs - how much are school trips/music lessons in your schools pls? And are school books included in fees? Cannot for the life of me remeber what my parents paid extra for....although I do remember them moaning about it :)