To feel I have utterly let down my children by sending then to a state school?

[hibbledibble]

I went to a private school, and achieved very well academically.

My children go to a state school, as I can't afford private school. I will never be able to afford it sadly. They go to the local community school, which has a reputation for not being academic.

My eldest is extremely bright, and tested many years ahead of her age on entering the local primary. Now, she has failed to even get to the second round of the 11+. She has really just coasted at school, as they have not set any appropriate work for her, despite multiple requests. They say they can't offer 'gifted and talented' provision, due to funding.

Her sibling is very behind on learning, as she missed loads of school due to lockdowns, and the school offered very little remote provision throughout most of the time. I have asked for support for her, but am told that nothing is available, again, due to funding. Meanwhile, she is struggling with even the basics.

I do think that both of my children would have done better, had they gone to a school where their individual abilities and learning stage was catered for, and they were helped to achieve their potential. I feel I have let them down by not providing them with a good education, which they could have had if I had the money.

Now it's looking likely my eldest will have to go to the terrible, and rough, local secondary, and the underachieving will continue.

People are really mean here. OP - your kids are lucky to have a parent that loves, cares and wants the best for them. As the public, we are lucky you do a job to help us.

Many People don’t understand the difficulties with childcare at odd hours, limitations on where you live depending on childcare and training programme. Additional work you have to do for training purposes.

There are good and bad state and private schools just as there are good and bad gp surgeries and hospitals. Kids can coast at private school or be bullied or crack under the pressure - so OP the grass may not always be greener.

There is lots of time for help and improvement - tutors, educational YouTube videos, puzzles over the holidays. Do you have any family or support who could help you with this? Consider going part time?

While smaller class sizes & facilities might enable easier learning, I do think it is up to the children to actually sit down and learn.
If a parent thinks a child needs additional learning, they can help when children are young and then either provide help or tutors later. I needed to help 1 of my children in primary and hired tutors in 1 subject for her & another 1 of children for secondary. Their friends in private school also had tutors .
Though the children themselves need to focus on their learning if they want to do well.
I attended a state school where many did not go to college. I knew to study myself. While the teacher's time was taken up with messers and trying to ensure everyone received an acceptable standard of education, most would look to help students who worked.
I was bright and when I moved state secondaries ( granted a long long time along); I ended up skipping a year. This was also because I worked. Being bright only gets you so far.

Not all children are acedemic. My son is a gas fitter and earns very well for any age bracket.

[quote 5329871e]@Theendoftheworldisnigh
The starting salary for a consultant in the NHS is £85K, ffs. That's about 3 times the average UK salary.
For some of the brightest and hardest-working 35+ year olds in the country, do you think that’s a lot? Honestly I can admit feeling a bit hard done by, when friends who didn’t do as well as me at school/uni are on 3 times my salary.[/quote]
Yes, I do think it's a lot. I know a number of very bright Oxbridge educated people who even in middle age earn far less than that. It's difficult to earn a high salary if you're not in London, even as a professional, and not everyone prioritises money above everything. In which case, you pay the price for that.
I agree that a lot of OP's problem is probably that she knows people who earn more than she does. She presumably started medical training late or part time or had children young. In those circumstances you don't expect to have a high salary quickly. She'd do well to stop playing the comparison game - it's toxic. It's perfectly possible to give your children a decent education outside of the private and grammar systems. It can take hard work and imagination on the part of parents, and hard work and enthusiasm on the part of the child.
For what it's worth I'm a single parent and earn less than a "Foundation Doctor Year 1". I have 1 child at Oxbridge and another applying.

Not being horrible but your private school didn’t help you achieve enough money to send them.
They’ll get an education if they want to learn, go to college and uni and do what they want if they have the determination to go after it.

A potential problem for O.Ps DD is if the school is as socially disadvantaged as she says, there are likely to be not that many pupils whose parents are professionals. Therefore, a Doctors daughter is likely to be looked on as POSH! This despite the O.P stating she is not the highest paid Doctor in the world. The O.Ps DD might seek to act up to prove she is the same as them.

However, as a Doctor you could move somewhere with better schools for your DD, also going forwarded will you not get a better salary.

The starting salary for a consultant in the NHS is £85K, ffs. That's about 3 times the average UK salary.

For a qualified doctor with numerous years of experience following lengthy university and medical school training. It’s in no way comparable to an average job on the average wage. What a bizarre assertion.

As for the scepticism about 2 stage 11-plus the grammar near me does this. And it’s not enough to ‘pass’ and there’s your place. You have to be the top 100 of the 1200 kids sitting.

OP I would consider moving to better schools. It’s not state schools as a whole but certainly yours doesn’t sound good. The lack of differentiation speaks to poor practice. It wouldn’t be the norm or acceptable in a good state school.

@KaptanKatanga

"Arguably, any child that needs tutoring to get through the 11+ shouldn't be going to a selective grammar anyway, as they aren't really cut out for it."

So out of touch with reality... 🤣

The 11+ is all about tutoring. It's why it's such a racket. And why grammar schools are no longer for the bright poor; their families simply can't afford that level of tutoring.

If the grammars in these areas only take the top 100 or whatever, aren’t the other schools stuffed full of pupils who passed 11+ but who just didn’t quite make the cut for grammar? Suggesting it’s not the state sector that’s the issue, but the individual state school chosen.

If I was in a grammar area without the funds to go private I’d move to a fully comprehensive area.

I dont think people are being mean, especially considering the post is about how she has let her children down by sending them to a state school, much like everybody else on mumsnet except a small minority.
Are people expected to say "there there, I let my children down too"?
Sending your children to state school isnt letting them down in the slightest. We have some brilliant state schools. The kids have obviously got to put the work in themselves though. You can take a horse to water but you cant make it drink

For those saying bright children do well anywhere, I'd question what facts / evidence you're drawing on. I recall my sister having to switch from a private school to a state school agred about 7. Her new state school form tutor told my mother you could tell my sister had come from a private school as she was used to having a discussion with the teacher about the topics learnt that day. There just simply wasn't time for that with the much larger class sizes in the state school - each child naturally got less teacher attention. Scale that across all the years of junior and senior school and that's a hugely significant difference in teaching time. It's not just the academic impact, it's also the impact on pupils' confidence in discussion and debate that's impacted.

Why can't you just move house to a better catchment area? Can't doctors work anywhere in the country?!

@Branleuse

I dont think people are being mean, especially considering the post is about how she has let her children down by sending them to a state school, much like everybody else on mumsnet except a small minority. Are people expected to say "there there, I let my children down too"? Sending your children to state school isnt letting them down in the slightest. We have some brilliant state schools. The kids have obviously got to put the work in themselves though. You can take a horse to water but you cant make it drink

‘Some’ brilliant state schools. Not a lot and it depends on the luck of the draw. Mos

Ajl46

My friend's child: expensive private, Chemisty 30 to a class.

My child: state, Chemistry 17 to a class.

My school I work in: Support for learning for pupils who need extra help: 2/6/12 to a class depending on need.

Friend's child's expensive private: no support for learning provision.

Ajil46, weird how my state school kids have had many discussions with teachers about topics taught that day, or maybe it's because I've brought them up to be confident and curious

*posted too soon. Most of the primaries here are good, secondaries are not. One of my colleagues lives in a leafy suburb where all schools are good and there are grammars and private options too. The rest of the general area is very pot luck but far more mediocre/bad options.

A friend of ours has a lovely child .They were on pupil premium and lived in a Council Estate .Worked hard and got into Uni .Now a secondary School Teacher! My own DD physics degree .Had some private tuition . We are not poor by any means ,however couldnt consider private school at all.You have not let down your DC .Only about 7% of all children have a private education.I dont think the other 93% have all failed !

Not all private school are great and they aren't an automatic ticket to the good life.

I say this as someone who has experienced both sectors - I sent my 2 x DC to private prep school and I don't regret it. From my perspective, that prep provided them with a great foundation in education, a thirst for knowledge and a great work ethic. They have a strong sense that they can achieve whatever they want in life.

But when it came time for secondary school, we looked at all the options. The independent secondaries in our areas are OK but not great. They focus on their flashy facilities (sports grounds, theatres etc) and the parental social opportunities but they come with a massive price tag and only so-so exam results.

So we opted to send both to a local state option instead. I will admit it's a really great state school (comprehensive not grammar) and understand that not all are lucky enough to have such a good state option.

Now DD has just started at a top flight RG uni having done really well at both GCSE and in the IB. What's really interesting is that her peers (as in the small group of girls that she was on par with academically) from prep who stayed in the local private sector haven't done nearly as well. Still off to Uni but noticeably less prestigious, lower entry requirement versions say this that accept CCC rather than the AAA+ that DD needed.

Sorry for such a long list, what I'm trying to say is that private isn't always best. I don't regret sending mine to state secondary at all.

I also assume that you either had children early or started medical training late.

And where's the dad in all this

@RobinPenguins

If the grammars in these areas only take the top 100 or whatever, aren’t the other schools stuffed full of pupils who passed 11+ but who just didn’t quite make the cut for grammar? Suggesting it’s not the state sector that’s the issue, but the individual state school chosen.

If I was in a grammar area without the funds to go private I’d move to a fully comprehensive area.

I live and teach in an area with a couple of super-selectives. They have no geographical catchments so students travel a long way to attend, meaning that in my outstanding non-selective school we still have a fully comprehensive intake of local children. Higher ability students do very well and many go on to the grammars for sixth form, where I am told they easily keep up.

As pp have said, primary schools rarely do 11+ preparation (although a few around here do group sessions as an extra-curricular activity). Interestingly I've recently come across a few very bright students in my school who have a twin attending the grammar. I must admit that as far as parenting decisions go I find this unfathomable.

@HaveringWavering

No

My older dc had about 5 weeks of extra lessons in maths once

Maybe just maybe your children aren’t as academically gifted as you were?! Plenty of kids have done well and got into RG universities from state schools. I think you’re putting all the blame on the schools and are being unrealistic about private school. Not all private schools are great, not all state schools are rubbish.
If you are that worried, move them to a state school that has good statistics and a good OFSTED report.

And she didn't like it but it was one hour a week our of her mostly free time.

Other dc has to have weekly tutors.. So two hours extra a week and all the other rest of her time is hers usually spent on roblox or mine craft!!

Maybe they aren't as bright as you think.

Arghhhhhhh it keeps posting sorry and for dc 2 it's massively boosted her self esteem, the tutors give her special bespoke teaching totally dedicated to her and where she is and needs to work. It's massive boosted her self esteem as well.