Asking for advice on private school

[loonnie]

My DD is not school age yet, but soon we will need to start applying and I'm not sure where to start really.

Ideally I would like her to go to a private school.

For state schools, there is ofsted. There is also some kind of body for private schools I think. Basically how can I find out if a private school I am looking for is actually good or not ? Is the independent school body that rates private schools to be trusted ?

There are some outstanding state primaries in my area, so I am not against potentially sending her there. I'm trying to compare these to the private schools in the area.

I went to private secondary school and state primary. I had no issues as I was bright when I was in primary school and as a toddler. Not so much later on, but that's another topic haha.

My DD is average for her age in terms of development at the moment. I want her to have the best chance to have a good start at school with a lot of support and attentive teachers. Would it be safest to send her to a private primary ? Or can an outstanding state primary also provide this ?

I'm not anti state schools in any way. I'm just trying to potentially give my child the best start in whichever way I can. I'm just starting my research, so totally clueless, as you can tell.

Many thanks and really not meaning to offend anyone with this post.

I did state primary and my daughter is now at a private school. If I could do it again, and money was no object, I’d still do state for primary. The state option where we live was dire and focused on technical qualifications / BTEC. Only a handful of students do A levels each year which limits the subjects massively. This wasn’t ideal since DD wants to do medicine at uni and needs particular subjects which may or may not have been available. In many ways I felt I had no choice …

I selected the secondary school based on researching the school, visiting, speaking to the staff & students. We then applied to those we liked. All were competitive entry so while DD received offers from all I know this isn’t always the case. DD was fortunate that she could choose the school she liked best and since it was my preference too 😁 that’s where she now is. She’s thrived so much, it’s unbelievable. The progress she’s made has surpassed any thing I imagined .. Best of all she isn’t bullied & mocked for wanting to learn! Makes me think the old system of grammar schools & secondary moderns made a lot of sense.

Acknowledge universities & employers are leaning towards state school students. Shame if you ask me, both should be on merit & I say that as someone with numerous family members who went to state schools & oxbridge for university. It’s also sad that students from very difficult backgrounds who go to independents will face yet more hurdles. I often think of the children at DDs school (on full fee bursary) who are in foster care due to atrocities in their lives..

This isn’t the case. I’m surprised so many people are unaware of contextualised recruitment

ComtessedeSpair so do candidates have to put the school they went to on their application form? Presumably they do otherwise the employers won’t know to whom contextualised recruitment should apply?

With my current role and the last time I applied for a role with KPMG yes, there was a question about whether you were state or privately educated; they also asked a range of questions about social background and parental occupations.

Mine started off at local state primary and after a few years I had to pull them out and put them in the local private school. (Other local state primaries were full and they were miserable where they were and learning nothing.) It’s been a different world, DC are so happy at prep. I’m not looking ahead to exams or universities/careers, I just wanted them to have the happiest childhood and our local state primary was crap.

It is tricky working out which prep especially as they all seem to be rated outstanding. I talked to a lot of different parents, some of them strangers I found on Facebook (searching local mums groups for mentions of that school and then I messaged privately). I managed to discover that, of our local preps, which all look pretty similar on their websites:

• One aims at the ‘sensitive boys’ market, does little sport, has great staff and tiny classes (reception was 6 children per class I think) but poor facilities and classes disrupted by lots of SEN issues.
• One aims to feed kids to a top 10 school and even 5 yr olds are pressured to hit ridiculous milestones. Those who can’t keep up are politely pressured to move elsewhere.
• One is super religious and focuses a lot on the respect and development of the child’s character, but still has ok academics and medium amount of sport.
• One has great academics and is obsessed with sport, it generates ‘alpha male’ asshole types who often end up as bankers. Lots of bullying problems at this school.

We picked the super religious school (despite being atheist) and are thrilled with it. Lovely staff, lovely kids.

So what I’m saying is you need to work out what the school’s priorities/values are, and find a place that matches your children’s strengths. A child who struggles with maths but adores sport needs a different type of prep from an academic child who loathes PE. Visit schools, take private tours with the head teachers, google the schools lots, read Muddy Stilettos reviews, read good schools guide, and get as much local gossip as you can from places like Facebook (but don’t assume it’s all accurate).

It also massively depends what your local state options are like. But, if I did it all again, I’d buy a smaller house and go private from preschool, my DC were crushed by the state system but thrive with quieter smaller classes etc.

Good luck!

If you are confident you want private secondary it is worth assessing if goi g to a private primary will make it significantly easier to get into the private secondary from a private primary. All depends on where you are and how selective/competitive your private secondary are

We’re considering private when the time comes. A consideration for us is wraparound care, as not all the local primaries offer it and it’s of varying quality.

There are many factors that go into choosing a school, and as with state, choosing one school over the other doesn’t mean the other is rubbish. It just depends on what’s right for you and your family at that particular time.

I have taught in private and secondary. There really is no difference in quality.

There is more poor behaviour on secondary state schools. We can't just get rid like you can in private.

I would send to state at primary level and then check out the standard of the state high schools when the time comes

You were doing quite well until you spouted this as a reason and basically showed your own bias.

My two are at private secondary but went to state primary. We have had to make big sacrifices to pay the fees so we wouldn’t have done it for primary. Our state primary options were excellent however but our state secondary is not great which is why we made the private choice for secondary. My only concern was when my DD joined in year 7 80% of her year had come up from the attached private primary and I was worried it might be cliquey and hard to make friends but that wasn’t the case, she has had a lovely group of friends since the start and is now starting year 10.

The main advice I would give to anyone considering private is make sure you can afford it and then some. I didn’t take into account quite how tough our sacrifices would be and if I m brutally honest I m miserable and if I could have my time again I would have sent them to state and used the 3k a month on extra curriculars, amazing holidays etc but I can’t undo it now.

I have also heard this is true for universities. Apparently no-one from our local private school got offered a place to study medicine last year whereas quite a few from the six form college did. Could be coincidental of course.

yes, there was a question about whether you were state or privately educated; they also asked a range of questions about social background and parental occupations

Thank you for answering my question, Comtesse. Do those applying know they are going to be asked these questions in advance? If so, there doesn’t seem to be much point in privately educated, or candidates from well-off backgrounds bothering to apply.

@JS87 one of my husband's work colleagues said something similar. Her children are in private sixth form and quite a few of their cohort did not get their first choice places to Cambridge (the local university so the default place to apply for many local kids) whereas friends with children in state sixth form and who got the same grades did.

All anecdata of course but something to bear in mind.

Yes, universities are certainly trying to move away from the old system which enabled wealthy parents to buy their kids' way into elite institutions. We still have a way to go before the playing field is truly leveled, but we are moving in the right direction, as evidenced by all the recent handwringing from middle class parents who believe that their children are being disadvantaged by the fact that they no longer have the same degree of privilege to which a private education previously would have entitled them.

All these contextual offers from universities and employers don't bode well for the c.20 Ukrainian refugees DC's school have given places to on full bursaries, alongside funded uniform/sports equipment etc. That seems a shame.

‘yes, there was a question about whether you were state or privately educated; they also asked a range of questions about social background and parental occupations’

while HR ask they’ve questions as part of recruitment, we interviewers are unaware of the answers. If the candidate hadn’t named dropped their exclusive boarding school ( presumably in an attempt to impress) the 3 of us wouldn’t have known. and presumably he got through that first sift

where our HR people look at applications and forward the ones they think meet enough criteria to the hiring managers.

The social mobility question from our HR people is along the lines of what was the main occupation of the chief earner in your household as a child, along with we’re you eligible for free school meals.

Our DD starts at a state primary in September. It's a good school and parents locally speak highly of it. We don't see the immediate need for private.

However, secondary we will be going down the private route based on exam results.

It’s a little more nuanced that that. Obviously, the older and more senior you get in your field, the more your professional experience and reputation is what carries you: nobody is really going to place too much emphasis on what school you went to or your A level grades when you’re 46 and one of the top performers at your last firm. Likewise, if you are an incredibly bright, talented and insightful 22-year-old and that shines through on your application (and at interview), you’re going to get through the selection process and likely be successful, you won’t be “marked down” as such for being privately educated.

However, what it does mean is that younger people heading into their first or second job are no longer able to bank on being pick of the crop simply because they got excellent academic results from an excellent independent school; or that their First will automatically be valued higher than the 2:1 achieved by a candidate from a much less privileged background; or that they can name drop their prestigious school as an “in.” Which is what levels the playing field to being more about your capacity for achieving and performing.

Ah, so not 'levelling the playing field' but tipping the playing field in one direction so that the better candidate is judged more harshly based on criteria outside their control. Nice.

This is going to be a boon for other companies out there who still have their heads screwed on.

ESG and EDI measures are becoming of increasing importance (and in some cases, reporting is mandated) to regulators and professional standards bodies, so we’ll see more companies striving to attract and appoint diverse candidates.

‘Ah, so not 'levelling the playing field' but tipping the playing field in one direction so that the better candidate is judged more harshly based on criteria outside their control. Nice.’

’better’ candidate? So the 50% of Oxbridge students coming from7% of the education system are inherently ‘better’ somehow than the kids from working class and MC families?
Indont think so.
buying privilege doesn’t make you ‘ better’ it just makes you privileged

Strange that if it's so good for business you'd think these companies would implement this without having to have it mandated.🤔

Most of us are women here and, unless everyone thinking of sending or sending their DC to independent school has the financial means to do so purely because they married a wealthy man, will be more than aware of how women are underrepresented at senior level across the board in many industries and have been traditionally discriminated against at all levels of the recruitment and appointment process; and how important adopting different recruitment practices has been in getting more women into law, trading, broking, insurance, STEM and other traditionally very male fields. It isn’t because women are simply less clever or business minded that they are underrepresented, and it took mandated targets in some cases to force companies to accept that. That it’s now time for employers to apply the same considerations in increasing representation in their workforce of talented people from less privileged backgrounds shouldn’t come as a surprise or a gripe.

Do you have zero regard for education? News flash: It is possible to become a better candidate through more or better education.

I can't believe you think that all the privately educated candidates are just the same standard as state school candidates and the imbalance must be some bug in the system.

That's not comparable. Women weren't/aren't less well educated than men overall.

We judge candidates based on their expected competency. Education directly impacts a person's competency. By tipping the playing field against those who have received a better education, you will be picking less competent candidates (on average).