To think at a private school, it’s not the teachers that are better...

[Caitlin555]

....it’s just you are less likely to get the bad behaviour, and more likely to have smaller class sizes?

It drives me mad that there’s this perception that the teachers at private schools are so much better than at state. They are not. In fact, you don’t even need a teaching qualification to teach at a private school.

It is obviously easier to get good results and control a class when you’ve got a smaller class of (probably) better behaved, more affluent kids whose parents want them to be there and to not have the social problems that some schools contend with.

I wish parents would just be honest about why they are sending their kids to x private school - it might be the small class sizes, it might be the facilities, it might be that it is super selective - but don’t make it about the teachers as that’s an insult to those amazing teachers who work hard every day to make a difference at state schools.

And no, I’m not a teacher.

I had considered public school for my son at secondary, but I decided against it a while ago.

My boyfriend went to a fairly well known boarding school. I went to a state comprehensive. From our chats and comparing our own experiences I received a better education. After year 9 his classes were self taught, they were told what they needed to learn and were left to do it on their own and only the practical areas were teacher led. Pupils who didn’t score highly in year 10 mock examinations were not entered for their year 11 examinations.

An ex is a maths teacher and a SENDCo, privately educated, he used to say in his experience as a pupil and teacher (who had worked public and state), that generally state students study more areas of a subject compared to public.

No matter the school, we are well aware that the biggest influence on a pupils outcome is how supportive their parents are.

@missyB1 at the school I work at our qualifications and universities we attended are published on the website

Surely there must be some chavvy rich kids though, not everyone with money is a well brought up and nice, these children must be in private schools and not all can be bright and well behaved. There are some very well off but really rough people

Personally I don’t think it’s somehow more acceptable to look down on teachers just because you’re not paying fees.

Also, what about the point of privilege and economic advantage being abused in the state system? It happens everywhere, especially here.

The main reason we went private was because our two “outstanding” state schools were 1) Church schools which demanded 2 years of biweekly church attendance and have a premium of around 20% in property prices just to live in the tiny catchment. The other schools were underperforming (and that’s where people went who DIDNT go to church or who COULDNT afford the catchment fees).

So how do does that genuinely constitute social mobility and inclusivity? I’m damned if any of our school fees are going to support this type of systems. It needs to sort itself out first.

@missyB1

As a pp mentioned at the private school I work in all staff qualifications are freely available for parents to see - I’ve never seen that at a state school. I work in the Nursery department of the pre prep and even nursery assistants have to be a minimum of level 3, no level 2s are employed. And there is a qualified Early Years teacher even in the 2 year olds class. There are good and bad teachers in private and state education. But It’s easier to get rid of poor staff in private schools.

I thought that was fairly standard. Its available at my sons primary school (as are pending qualifications). He had a qualified early years teacher in his nursery and pre-school (attached to a state primary), other staff were also level 3. The staff in nursery and pre-school were all users of makaton and very proficient in it.

The narrower range of abilities they need to teach to, coupled with smaller classes, and possibly more time out of the classroom make their job so much easier.

On paper I look shit in terms of qualifications. Yet I consistently get the best results from our department. Qualifications don't mean a better teacher.

@MsTSwift

Absolutely spot on. You are buying a way out of mixing with chavs and any parent saying otherwise is lying through their teeth.

What funny is the earnest group insistent that their child’s private school is “more diverse” than the state option 😁. Pull the other one. Tbh I would respect them more if they were honest about it.

I suspect they mean more international. The government paid for me to go to boarding school (forces) and there were a lot of rich Kenyans, Nigerians, a few Koreans and lots of bankers’ kids from Hong Kong.

Conifer,

You missed (or more likely ignored) my previous point.

If, as it seems, you view private schooling as purely a business, and nothing to do with the broader community, why on earth should they get charitable status or a VAT rebate?

What I would like say - having experience of both - is that the private sector is way, way more likely to weed out bad teachers.

@ConiferGate

If even a few of these families considered state education it would force government to rethink their approach to education radically

If the government radically rethought their approach to education many more of these families would consider state education.

Also, thinking about it. I think it’s much harder to be a bad teacher in a private schools which probably makes a big difference, ie the ones described by a pp who “don’t give a toss”. You wouldn’t get away with it for long, and not should you get away with it anywhere else. I’m not saying it’s rife elsewhere, I’m just saying that overall that makes a difference.

Many prep schools have closed since Gove’s reforms.

It is well known that some pupils and, especially, parents see private school teachers as an extension of the domestic staff set up.

I think this is true.

There is also greater freedom from the school’s point of view to get rid of a child, and from the parents’ point of view (assuming adequate resources) to move a child.

Qualifications don't mean a better teacher.

Couldn’t agree more. Some of the very best teachers I know came from industry. They have a passion for their subject, an understanding of how it applies to the real world, and a desire to share their love for their field to inspire young people. We need more people to convert from industry into education to bring in new talents, experiences, ways of thinking and to help children see how what they’re learning can make a difference in the world.

My favourite history teacher for example was a former museum curator, and I know a geography teacher who is a trained vulcanologist. Their students love them because they relate and inspire in a totally different way, not because they got a PGCE when they were 20 (although this is good too!).

So should children with SEN be excluded from a private school??

So should children with SEN be excluded from mainstream state school??

If either category school cannot offer the extra educational support needed for these, children, then there is no point in the child being there

If the parents have the financial means to pay school fees, they can presumably pay to source the best way to meet their child's SEN.

@WhentheDealGoesDown1

Surely there must be some chavvy rich kids though, not everyone with money is a well brought up and nice, these children must be in private schools and not all can be bright and well behaved. There are some very well off but really rough people

We get the odd child with behavioural issues (not SEN) whose parents think "send them private to straighten them out". Sometimes we manage to, sometimes problems outside of school lie so deep that there's nothing we can do. They sometimes end up being disruptive or a bully and getting booted out.

Then there's the ones who, in a different setting, would be considered chavs. I was involved in the suspension of a sixth former last year who brought cocaine to the rugby dinner. I myself didn't grow up like these kids did, I can spot a high teenager a mile off (and he forgot to clean it off his nose )

Also approximately 7% of school children in the U.K. are educated privately. This is not the driver of social inequality it is way more basic than that, and in particular stems from state funding of schools were there is never enough funds to properly address the often very significant learning, social and emotional problems of a number of kids particularly in deprived areas, which has a massive knock on impact for the rest of the class. Impacting private schools would only make this worse.

If you are not a teacher it’s really puzzling while you feel so strongly about this.
I have two children one at highly regarded sort after government school and the other at private school. Private school decision was not based on teachers - how well can anyone know if teachers are good or not? We will never see them teach!
I have to say though there are times where I have wondered if I should have put both in private. It’s the class sizes and the lack of attention due to that.

@MsTSwift

Absolutely spot on. You are buying a way out of mixing with chavs and any parent saying otherwise is lying through their teeth.

What funny is the earnest group insistent that their child’s private school is “more diverse” than the state option 😁. Pull the other one. Tbh I would respect them more if they were honest about it.

Except it is true in some cases. My local state school (rural Hampshire affluent area) has a lower number of PP students than we have in our fully funded bursary scheme (which is not just a token gesture but around 8%). The local state school is predominantly white, whilst we don’t have a huge mix there is more and not just Asian doctors!

Are all the children of the overpaid people on the TV and in sport intelligent and well behaved, they all go to private schools, this doesn't seem possible.

Having used both, my experience is that private school teachers are more interested in promoting love of learning & have much more enthusiasm for their subjects. They come across as being enthusiastic educators whereas the state teachers came across as being bureaucrats. That may well of course just reflect the state school my kids went to.

When they moved to a private school I noticed a huge uptick in interest and enthusiasm from the teachers. I don’t think this was because the teachers at the state school had to deal with social and disciplinary problems, because the state school we used had very few pupils in free school meals, and was in a very middle class area with a strong community. We weren’t aware of any bullying or disciplinary problems at all: the teachers just didn’t seem interested in their subjects. Their focus seemed very much on themselves and on jargon and bureaucratic tick boxing. When we moved to private it was a complete cultural change - the teacher enthusiasm was what I noticed most.

And yes, my children are so much happier. They love their school. Their work has really improved as well (they seem so interested in their subjects now) but that isn’t as important to me as the fact that they are happy and flourishing. It’s definitely not a pressure cooker environment- emphasis on flourishing & community and well being.

I’ve never heard anyone say teachers are better in private schools. In a lot of ways their jobs are easier; smaller class sizes, less pupil disruption, more resources, specialist teacher support etc.

Of course parents pay for their child to go to a good school, just like others move house to get their child into a good state school or to tutor their not particularly bright kid into a grammar. Either way you pay, through fees, tutoring or higher house prices for a good catchment. IMO neither is more ethical than the other. You are paying to limit the peripheral crap your child would have to deal with if they went to a badly performing school. Of course it’s possible to do well anywhere if you are bright or work hard enough, but it’s a hell of a lot harder if you have to do it with constant disruption in class and low resources.

I want my kids to have a pleasant experience, not a daily fight for survival. I have worked hard to earn well and can afford it.

It’s definitely not the teaching.
It’s the small class sizes which makes it easier to teach
It’s as simple as that

@larrygrylls no need for that, I didn’t ignore anything. I specifically said that the abuse of privilege and economic advantage which is also widespread in the state system should be addressed before we start redirecting fees from private to state. I think many private schools can offer more to their community in many cases but more to the point before they do:

You haven’t addressed why it’s seemingly acceptable to have outperforming state schools whose success depends on for example religious selection (church schools), academic selection (grammar schools), economic selection (property bubbles in catchment areas) and garner much of their success from the army of stay at home parents who can further advance their kids education because they have the social, cognitive and financial resources to do so.

Private schools can often afford to pay for more experienced teachers. State schools may choose the more inexperienced teacher because they are cheaper and their budgets are tight. Private schools also often have a high number of applications for the teaching positions so have a larger pool to select from. Teachers at private schools have more time to plan and prepare for lessons.

@glassbrightly

This is not the driver of social inequality it is way more basic than that

I completely agree.