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.

What I don't get is why private schools are classed as charities, and so get charity-style tax breaks.
@Arkestra it's European law. ECHR Article 2 protects parents right to choose how they educate their kids (and by extension governments are banned from taxing it lest they use taxation as a way to circumvent that law).

My children all went to state Grammar Schools and I can say that absolutely no money could have given them a better chance.

What I don't get is why private schools are classed as charities, and so get charity-style tax breaks.

The school I work in received a lot of donations from alumni for bursaries, meaning we can give children from low earning families the education they want. The tax breaks make a difference

@ GlummyMcGlummerson do you seriously believe that the school acts as an equaliser in terms of social opportunity?

@DgraigGoch Michael Gove disagrees with you.

www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/private-schools-pay-tax-michael-gove-vat-boost-state-education-charity-status-funding-mic-a7597126.html

@Arkestra

@ GlummyMcGlummerson do you seriously believe that the school acts as an equaliser in terms of social opportunity?

Not an equaliser, because it's not 50% bursary pupils, but bursaries hugely benefit those who take them up.

Totally agree with you as the same is frequent about private hospitals when in fact it’s the surroundings that make the difference.

You’re basically just paying to cut all dickhead kids with dickhead parents from the class are you not? That’s what it comes down to. And music lessons. Wish I could afford to!

They are better teachers. They attract better conditions, better salaries, better class sizes. If you were a teacher, wouldn’t you want a better deal?

@Doliv63

My children all went to state Grammar Schools and I can say that absolutely no money could have given them a better chance.

Grammar schools are with the children who got in, and like many of my friends who paid for their kids private tuition to make sure that they got into the local grammar, it is a fairly exclusive club too.

@Bananasinpyjamas20

They are better teachers. They attract better conditions, better salaries, better class sizes. If you were a teacher, wouldn’t you want a better deal?

My PRU does have small class sizes...

I don't think it's anything to do with the teachers. It's more to do with affluent, often well educated families who push themselves. Rather than a class of chavs who's parents probably don't give a damn. Both my kids go to private school, it's well worth the money. (I'm not hating on state schools btw, they do an amazing job and a lot of successful people went there, including my lovely DH, i'd just rather give my kids a kickstart in life wherever possible, education is so important these days)

I think it's quite widely known that you'll not necessarily get better teachers. I have taught for many years in state and private and what you do get is the following:
Smaller classes
Better behaviour
Better pastoral care
Facilities
Extra curricular
Parent community offers great work experiences
In secondary, maths and science teachers who all have a degree in their subject or something highly relevant.

It's not complicated to understand why people who can afford it choose it.

@Susannahmoody

Let's face it, as a teacher, if you've got a great degree and a choice between a rough comp and an elite private school, you'll pick the private one

Just not true!

I think people can choose where to teach for personal reasons, so people who are very similar on paper can make completely opposite choices.

I know a female physics teacher who chooses to work in girls' schools, because she wants to show as many girls as possible that you can be 5'1, blonde and have a Masters in theoretical physics.

Someone else might decide that they want to teach in mixed schools, so boys "get used" to the idea of women also being good at physics, as well as demonstrating to the girls they can do it.

Neither is wrong, so it's really difficult to generalise.

It may well depend on the quality of the private school itself - not all of them are academically pushy.

I went to one that was (one of the ones in Rose's list) and it was and still is one of the top performing schools. Most of the teachers were good, a few weren't - but the ones that weren't didn't last very long, as I remember it. The behaviour at the school was better than at my siblings' comprehensive but it didn't mean it was all great! And our class sizes weren't tiny either - 29 in my class.

Some of the private schools charitable status is historic - they were set up as charity schools by bequest or by benevolent patrons, and that's just continued. I agree that it seems ridiculous, but most of them do offer bursaries (or used to) to children who have the academic standard but parents can't afford the fees. And if they didn't have charitable status, I can imagine that the fees would be much higher.

For my school, apart from the academic drive, the main "edge" over the comprehensive schools was the facilities we had. And having those better facilities widened our opportunities. I'm talking a few decades ago - but I know that the school still has excellent facilities and opportunities now, I just don't know if they're that much better than the state schools.

But as to the OP's point about the teachers - well like I said, if a teacher isn't getting the results that an academically-driven school requires, then that teacher isn't going to last long.

@TheFallenMadonna. I can totally see the attraction of a PRU. As you said, small class sizes and a chance to really make a huge impact on the children you teach with something close to the appropriate resources for the task in hand.

The poorly performing school the ex worked at for a while had lots of children who would have really benefited from that. But the reality was that the system/poor school leadership/shear volume of difficult children meant that wasn't an option. That school was in no way reflective of the average state school either. I am state educated as are my children and it is miles away from our experiences.

He worked really hard for the children who did want to learn there but the reality was that no one was learning unless you were successful at keeping your self safe. That often involved removing/diffusing the poor, often violent, behaviour on your own in a reasonably large class. A good teacher in that situation is not the same skillset as a good teacher in a private school.

DS private school has great teachers but I’m sure there are lots of great teachers in the state sector too.
We chose the school for smaller classes, good facilities and a warm and friendly feel. We’re very happy with the school and they were great during lockdown.
I can’t think of anything that I would rather spend money on than a good education for my only child.

You get good teachers in state school, you get good teachers in private school. It's much rarer to get bad teachers in private school though.

So if people comment on the teaching being better in private I imagine they're not seeking to denigrate the many good teachers in state, but to acknowledge that bad teachers exist and aren't that uncommon, but are less likely to end up in a private school.

My DC are in private and the class sizes are the main reason, a good state school teacher can only do so much with a class of 30 kids.

But I do like all the other stuff, no discipline problems, they eat a really decent lunch so less need for me to worry at dinner, usually extra curricular activities (but none now because of covid), better facilities and specialist teachers even in primary. Wrap around care is much better as well so working parents can actually work without having a nightmare with childcare.

I went to private school and then to a state college in a fairly rough but trendy bit of London. I naively expected the teaching to be worse (I was young) and was surprised at how good it was.

Worked in a private selective school for 12 years and now in a state school for 5. Teaching absolutely not better in private. I'd deem them as equal in terms of teaching . Some excellent, some weak teachers in both. You most definitely are not paying for better teachers in private but all the advantages if small classes, social engineering etc.
In some cases you are also paying for teachers to practically write coursework in ways that seem legal but are not.

I imagine teaching to be a lot easier in private school so the teachers probably look more cool, calm and collected...

I don't think teachers in private schools are better or worse necessarily. However, it does make my blood boil when selective schools crow on about their amazing exam results. They cream off the brightest kids so what do they expect!? My dog could probably teach them and they'd get A's.

Private teachers are not better.

A local private school by us went state academy... once the new cohort of kids joined, the teachers who were used to just standing at the front of the room and talk while the kids wrote notes, had literally no idea how to teach.

They had to come to our school and watch us teach ‘normal’ classes.

Teaching a group of 10 high achievers is very different to 34 kids, 8 with behavioural needs, 2 with autism, 3 high achievers, 2 in care, 8 that don’t so each any English etc

Both I would think, but mostly class sizes and facilities. Its a lot easier to be a good teacher if you have ressources.
But equally, good private schools have loads of applications for each position, so they can be much pickier than a deprived school with a bad reputation.
Also, many private schools put a lot less pressure on the kids(no SATS etc), making for a much more pleasant environment.
My kids are at private school for several reasons: small classes, very few disruptive children, learning is seen as cool, SENDs support exists in a meaningful way, motivated and empowered teachers, and no constant exam stress (my friend’s 6 year old had nightmares and cried daily because of KS1 SATs - i know many schools don’t make them as stressful as hers, but you have no choice at state level).