to ask if you can afford a 'private' school in the UK but have chosen to send your child/children to a state school why?

[Foreverexhausted]

My three year old DD has just started a nursery attached to a fee paying school. I chose the nursery because it is by far the best nursery in the area but unfortunately we can't afford to send her to the school itself as fees are £15k per year per child and we have two children.

We have friends who could afford private schooling but their children are in state schools and then others who can't afford it but are just scraping by because they like the status of children attending a private school.

@BertrandRussell please read my posts. most people in urban areas like mine. not mist people all over the uk. and yes, it is the case. i know parents, real estate agents and teachers in these schools. average distance of parents to school is ovee 2 miles, intake every yeear is under 100 m.

As usual it depends. if you are fortunate (and in sime areas richh enough to get access to an amazing state school and are time -rich (so can organize tons of activities), state is a great option.
If any of these are not the case and you can afford it, private makes more sense. There are loads if areas where decent state schools are rare and hard to get into. And not everybody wants to be a sahp to supplement school. Tbe sad thing is that kids who have time poor and cash poor parents loose out. and that is the real scandal. The system relies on cash richer parents to choose private in some areas as there are simply not enough school places, not to mention decent ones (of privately educated kids‘ parents pay for state schools as well!). THIS is thecreal problem.

It's so easy to supplement a state school with all of the "extras"

TBH I never really understand it when people say things like this.

My Y4 DS plays around 9-10hrs of sport in school a week including a match against another school at least once a week. He also has a weekly drama lesson with a specialist drama teacher, is in a show at least once a year and has class music lessons taught by a specialist music teacher and termly opportunities to perform in form of an audience. He has to do ESB speaking board prep and exams. He goes to an extra curricular weekly Science club that does experiments in the school labs (just his choice out of the many clubs). He also has weekly DT lessons in the workshop using machines, the 3D printer etc.

Out of school I already take him to 5 hrs of training for his particular sport and a 3hr session for the new sport we have just picked up. I have a full time job- which I love and I definitely do not want to be a SAHP.

I definitely could not recreate all the exercise and take him to weekly drama, music, science club and DT club to supplement what state schools can do on their limited budgets with non-specialist staff (I say this as a KS2 teacher). I also would not want him to do all of that 'after hours' because he needs time to play out and have down time.

Of course private school provides lots of extras. It’s what people pay for. I still remember a poster on here talking about the fantastic drama club at their child’s private school and how fantastic it was that it was free......

My Y4 DS plays around 9-10hrs of sport in school a week including a match against another school at least once a week. He also has a weekly drama lesson with a specialist drama teacher, is in a show at least once a year and has class music lessons taught by a specialist music teacher and termly opportunities to perform in form of an audience. He has to do ESB speaking board prep and exams. He goes to an extra curricular weekly Science club that does experiments in the school labs (just his choice out of the many clubs). He also has weekly DT lessons in the workshop using machines, the 3D printer etc.

Frankly, it sounds like he is way over-committed for his age, but I know plenty of similarly over-committed kids in the state sector. There is lots of specialist tuition in music/drama etc and many kids are involved in sport at a high level. And even our local primary offers an extra-curricular science club for a small fee after school. True, there is no 3D printer in school, but again, there are opportunities to use this kind of equipment in the local community if you so choose.

And it really isn't necessary to be a sahp to facilitate stuff like this. I have always worked FT, you just have to be organised.

I haven’t read all the posts so excuse me if this has already been mentioned.
Going back to the original post;
We had great state schools in our area, both DCs did well and made fantastic life long friends.
Not spending on private education meant that they could have extra activities out of school music, sports, sailing, travel etc.
Also gave us the opportunity to pay ( I realise not everyone can do this, but I’m answering the original post ) for their time at University, so they left completely debt free.
Money well spent, in my opinion.

I'm moving one of my dds from state to private in year 9.

Shes been state all the way and it's been fine, but the private school results are loads better, the sport is exceptional and she will be expected to speak to adults articulately and with intelligence. I'm looking forward to it and so is she.

I don't think private schools are fair or morally right. I don't see why my children should be advantaged (if they are) just because their parents have more money than other children. I refuse to reinforce this unfair and morally corrupt system. And as for why private schools have charitable status. Well.

So I've gone state.

My kids are flourishing. One at university, one applying to do medicine at the top universities. I don't regret it at all. My children mix with children in all schools in our area (the secondary children all socialise together) and are happy with my decision.

Locally - and I can only talk locally - the private v state extracurricular balance is one of 'convenience of a one stop shop' vs 'highest quality in each area'.

So the private schools offer a very convenient 'one stop shop' solution for children to get a 'pretty good' menu of standard extracurricular activities, with particularly good provision for a few mainstream sports such as rugby. Non-school-based providers, accessed by pupils from all schools, often give better quality provision in each specific area (especially anything that is not mainstream sport) but there is the inconvenience of having to assemble the portfolio of activities yourself as a family.

It is interesting that in the interests that my own DCs access at the highest level, pupils from local private schools also attend, often very inconveniently for them, because the provision for them in school is 'OK but not excellent'.

And yes, you can do plenty of sports out of school, but we are rural, some clubs aren't great, and its lovely and more fun to run/swim/play hockey etc with your schoolmates in a team. Particularly from year 9 when you are having to juggle gcses around sport and wnen so many girls give up.

Small point but I think it’s a common misconception all private schools have charitable status. The one my DD attended didn’t.

It is interesting that in the interests that my own DCs access at the highest level, pupils from local private schools also attend, often very inconveniently for them, because the provision for them in school is 'OK but not excellent'.

Anyone competing at regional level will be attending camps out of school. The difference is for us that the private school will take her there, bring her back, pay for it and ensure all work missed is covered and mastered.

Of course its possible to do good quality stuff out of school and that's what dd has done for years with great success.

However, I'd be lying if I didn't admit I am looking forward to her being mentored and guided by professionals and surrounded by other high achieving girls.

most people rent for a year to fet in a good state school"
"Most" people? What utter rubbish.

Quite! I know oodles of state school families in all kinds of areas and not one has ever done this. Most! That's funny.
Look this thread is asking state school parents why they made the decision to go down that route even if they can afford the alternative. Inevitably that will touch a few nerves. But It's not about private parents justifying their position or dissing state schoolers for sticking to their guns.
My advice, based on my own experience (of an at best average state school) is to have faith in your children, see how it goes, see if they pick friends wisely and do well. And if doesn't live up to expectations then switch in Y8 or 9. There'll always be a private school ready to take your money.
I think that's sensible. Good luck x

So the private schools offer a very convenient 'one stop shop' solution for children to get a 'pretty good' menu of standard extracurricular activities, with particularly good provision for a few mainstream sports such as rugby. Non-school-based providers, accessed by pupils from all schools, often give better quality provision in each specific area (especially anything that is not mainstream sport) but there is the inconvenience of having to assemble the portfolio of activities yourself as a family.

That's a pretty good summary of how things are here, too, cantkeep. And yes, the private school kids who want to do these activities seriously tend to end up in the same external provision as the state sector kids - certainly, that's the case for dd's activities now she is getting older. I guess it depends on how "specialist" you want to go. I can see the convenience of having it all in one place if you just want to try a broad range of different activities - state school parents do have to work a little bit harder to make that happen.

extras are only a valuable part of private school life if your child is interested in taking part in them.

My 12 year old DD, like many 12 year olds, doesn't want to do any extra-curricular activities, she wants to hang out with her friends.

Both of my children would have hated 9-10 hours of compulsory sport at school - they like sports, but not the ones that are generally taught in private school (football/rugby/netball/hockey).

DS actually does several extra curricular activities - but most of them are ones that would be available at a private school.

Value of private school extras to us ... not very much.

I don't think it's worth it. I think it's more important to have nice holidays and other things we can enjoy together as a family.

Many parents scrimp and save in order to be able to go private, so it's not like they're all extremely well off at all private schools, but I'd still prefer DD to have a wider variety of school friends. That another reason.

It's not just extras though is it? The gcse results are a lot better.

I'm not criticising state education, they do what they can, get really excellent results from the most academic kids.

But some of the attitudes on here are really disengenous.

But the GCSE results are not always a lot better. And when you take into account the selective nature of most private schools it is often the case that thry get good results because of the children and families they start with rather than because of their value added. This is why progress 8 is a better measure than exam results for better comparison.

Of course the results are better in private schools. How on earth could they be otherwise with such a self-selected group of parents or children?

The question is surely not whether they get better results, as it would be very worrying if they didn't. The question is, is there more "value added" than state. Personally, I don't think so, and I believe that we will get far more "value" from using the money that we could have spent on school fees to enrich dd's education and experiences in other ways. I get that others feel differently, and that's their prerogative.

It depends on local schools rather than state or private, as well as what suits your child. I do think private schools are generally better at providing a classical education though. With the exception of the grammars, many state schools have sadly dropped Greek and Latin, with the knock on effect that Classics teachers are now few and far between.

The results I am comparing are very different. But I understand that there are plenty of private schools that aren't that great.

We planned this and have saved for years, so the financial impact won't be huge.

Exactly. There are plenty of private schools that aren't that great and plenty of state schools that are. My dc school gets better results than all but 1 of the private schools in the area and that's based on end results not on progress 8. The progress 8 is even more compelling.

Rather conveniently for private schools, it isn't generally possible to compare like for like progress against the state sector. I suspect that most of the schools are very happy to keep things this way.

FWIW, I do think that private schools add value for a certain type of child - typically, a child who is of average academic ability and somewhat lacking in self-motivation will probably do better in the private sector as they need that kind of pushing. However, for kids who are naturally bright and intrinsically motivated, I think it's a total waste of money.

Because tbh I don't think school makes a huge difference to your ability and motivation to learn after a certain threshold - I believe that is set and maintained by your parents, your horizons and your home life (although a good school or teacher can be the saving of a neglected child or a child with SEN).

The people I know who have done well in education aren't necessarily the ones who were hothoused through private school; but hey are (by and large) the ones whose parents had a deep respect for and love of learning, who grew up surrounded by books, were read to and read for pleasure, who had their curiosity encouraged, who were spoken to and listened to as if their opinions mattered. So rather than work all the hours God sends so we can afford private fees, DP and I will work shorter hours, closer to home, and spend that time engaging with our daughter. We'll spend our spare money buying extra annual leave and taking her on interesting holidays; when she's older we'll use it to pay for English lessons or language lessons or outdoor activities or whatever floats her boat intellectually... And we'll do what any parent can do and read to her at every opportunity. I genuinely believe that will be of far more value than private school.

Also I disagree with them morally but that is a happy coincidence - if I thought it was what's best for my daughter I'd rob a bank so shrugs

private primary in particular seems bonkers to me unless your child needs particular attention and support due to SEN. They're really just playing at that age and figuring things out, or should be. And they're far more likely to get a rounded view of the world and the people in it at a state primary.