Private schools and future privilege

[Potsnpans23]

Need to caveat this that I am foreign and grew up in a country that doesn't really have private schools. Was bored this morning and Google a few people from tele, academics and a few others and realised they've all been to private schools (perhaps with a tiny minority who went to a grammar). Got mr thinking- is it that private schools really propel their students to make a success of themselves or is it just privilege shining through and those same kids would have got ahead anyhow? Like if you send an ordinary kid to a private school would they make such a success of themselves?

It's also the old boys/girls networks that afford privilege. The school I work in (regularly top 5 co-ed public school) has a networking organisation for ex-pupils that means they have connections with contacts all over the world. They host closed social media channels where work experience and internships can be arranged, networking events, posh dinners and parties all over - Asia, Australia, USA.

It's self selection. Those in power appoint and recruit people 'like me' who they feel comfortable with. Takes huge effort and a progressive government to break the cycle

Also exactly why the country is in such a mess. Over the last 20 years the Conservatives have confined themselves to an ever narrower pool in terms of social and political outlook, and of course that went into hyper drive with the Brexit purge of Conservative remainers. When it came time to replace Johnson, the only viable options were all far to the right of Johnson at a time when they needed to pull decisively to the left.

Kids attending private schools already have an advantage as their parents are ambitious for them, want them to achieve good exam results and progress in a career and also have money in the family and live in a good area. So they have advantage in all areas. It's not just the private education

Same as us, if we had access to a really good state school I would not be paying 18k a year.
Although a pp made a good point about the extra curriculars at private school. Ds has got involved in lots of things that he probably wouldn’t have tried at state school.

The ones who do well from other backgrounds are the ones who survive the process, so would probably have that edge wherever they were educated.

I loved my small cosy prep school, but secondary school was a whole different thing. I was bullied relentlessly for being "common".

I wouldn't put my own child through private school.

Another factor is also that people who are prominent in public life are likely to be late 30s and older. My DH is 32, grew up in north londn and he had many friends who went to private school from regular middle class backgrounds. It was expensive, but not as expensive as it is today.

He had a friend whose father was a part time barrister/teacher and mum was a journalist who went. Not sure about the grandparents and if they funded it. They lived in a 2 up 2 down in zone 4 north london. They probably wouldn't be able to afford it today.

If you have a good comprehensive school use it.

If it's honestly really good, sure. Rather than Ofsted good, which means little. I have worked in 'good' comprehensives where parents would be appalled if they could be a fly on the wall. Unfortunately the 'good' school my dc currently attend is one of them.

It's 50/50 OP.
Half is just reflecting the fact that the parents pay attention to their kids and explicitly value education. Imagine what it's like if your parents either set you to doing chores when you get home and never give a stuff if the teacher complains you don't do homework, or worse, if they're barely around at all.

Half is being in an environment where learning is not disrupted by bad classroom behaviour, and where the teacher can go at a faster pace and get more progress because the private school class kids are more or less the upper half or third smartest of the regular state school. It's having the school really motivated to get the kids good exam results and into good unis (and otherwise visibly excel and thrive in SOME way) because they literally will be out of a job otherwise.

If the comp is good with involved parents, good exam results, well mannered kids, no point paying for private school TBH as long as DC is working well and happy there.

I went to state primary and secondary and the good private school in my town after that. Not sure the teachers were any better at the last school BUT the classroom discipline was perfect, the pace of learning was faster, and crucially I got lunchtime tutoring for the Oxbridge entrance exam (as was at the time). I did have still to get up at 6am to practice past papers but the point is I got that support, and I got the place, got the degree to put on my CV, met my DH there.

FWIW my peer went to the good comp and then Cambridge and is a liver consultant so he did ok on the free track!

HOWEVER when I look at my contemporaries who went on to get doctorates it seems (and this is just my finger in the air, not proper science!) a lot more of them went to state schools. So there's that. Arguably not being burned out by an "academic hothouse" (my middle school English teacher's description of my high school - thanks for trying, Mr K!!) and having the earlier experience of needing to motivate and organize your own work have long-term benefits.

If OTOH the "good comp" turns out to be a stabby nightmare of a place where your kid cowers in the corner from the rival drug gangs... Yeah money well spent getting them somewhere peaceful!

In terms of a good comprehensive - how good is good?

I think the difference between state and selective private is behaviour and expectations. DS is at a super selective private school in London and as pp said a 7 is considered low. There is no tolerance of bad behaviour or class disruption and pupils are politely asked to look at other schools if rules are breached.

Compare this to friends and relatives at comprehensive school where working hard and wanting to do well is not "cool", if homework isn't done it's not a problem, and the only expectation is to pass maths and English GCSE.

I think sometimes those from very wealthy families are willing to take more of a risk because they have family money to fall back on if needs be. Those from poorer backgrounds are more risk averse because there’s no safety net.

There is also the time and resources they have.
DD was on track for an 8 at GCSE in a particular subject. The teacher really pushed her to get a 9 but he had a class of just 6 DC. I don’t see how (or even why) a teacher would do that with a class of 30 with very mixed abilities

The "good" comps stream.

So the 20-30 in the top stream will be expected to get 9. And there is competition within the class to get the highest mark.

There is also no bullying for being in the top class(es).

It is if your child is in the middle they miss out and where sending them to a private school would help them.

My DH's sister was kicked out of her comprehensive for having Aspergers and refusing to seek treatment (this translated to stereotypical 'bad behavior if you didn't understand her condition). That school is ranked in the top 10 comprehensives in the country based on latest ranking (faith school). The older sisters who all got straight As at A level sailed through the same school.

It happens in all 'good' schools i think.

This is not a universal truth. My children go to an outstanding state comp with GCSE options including astronomy and classics among others. They regularly out perform the local private school in GCSE results.

Extra curricular activities include over 30 different clubs and societies including cookery, engineering, all major spots, movie making etc.

which just leaves “the chance to make useful contacts”. Which is the privilege they will have in later life.

I think so. A lot of my adult friends went to private school and a lot of them have jobs from connections alone. I also have friends from state comps who have excelled in prestigious careers. (And all strongly believe it makes no difference.) The difference I noticed in my early 20s was that for the most part the private school lot expected success. They felt entitled to a glamorous career and set their sights accordingly. The idea that they wouldn't have one was never a consideration. At the time I found it rather entitled but actually as a mindset did them more favours tbf.

For balance I've several friends who left private schools for state where they were happier but none of those have gone on to high profile careers, although two have vocations they're very happy in which is all that matters.

In my experience it’s all to do with connections you make so the majority of private school pupils will be fairly average but those reaching high professions are of a higher proportion than state school.

The other factors are confidence and financial security - if you have money or family money, you can take a risk, start a business, knowing it’ll be fine if it fails.

I went to public school (girls boarding school UK) and the contacts have been invaluable. I got a job at Vogue, friends for life easily as you fit into a 'club' and generally really helps you out. I didn't go to Oxbridge but I went to a top university in the north of the UK and I know my private education helped. It's helped with with everything. Not boasting just answering the q. Merry Christmas x

Hi OP. As others have pointed out, talking about 'private schools' as if they are all one and the same, is extremely misleading. Some private schools are excellent. Some are frankly atrocious.

The 'private v state' issue is also highly regionally specific.

I am not in Dulwich (I'm SW London), but I know a little about the independent schools in Dulwich. For a boy, I think the more selective ones would be Dulwich College or Alleyns?

Those schools are academically selective, but not so much as the more Central London ones such as Westminster, St Paul's (Girls and Boys), Godolphin and Latymer, Latymer Upper, CLGS, etc. So there are kids going for those schools who may live in South London (or reasonable transport connections to SE London) who may apply for Alleyns or Dulwich College as a slightly 'safer' option (in terms of whether they are likely to get in or not). So, it may be worth your son having a go?

Where you live, there is marked degrees of wealth and marked degrees of deprivation existing side by side, as I'm sure you know.

The comprehensive school may be 'outstanding' - but have a look at the results. Excellent comprehensives in more wealthy areas may achieve 30% 9-7 at GCSE (higher than the national average). But at somewhere like Dulwich College, probably over 80% will be achieving those grades. That is the difference in a selective school. The pace is faster. The 'accepted norms' in terms of academics, focus and behaviour are higher. Not just in the classroom, it translates into peer groups and consequently out of school. Children get carried along by each other basically. Teachers are less stressed because they're not having to think about 'extension work' for the most able, while supporting others to scrape a pass. Also, class sizes tend to be around 20 (often smaller) rather than the standard 30.

I don't know the independent school you are considering for your son, but a starting point would be to compare the GCSE and A-level results between this school and the comprehensive.

I live in south London and my DCs go to one of the private schools in Dulwich. We never intended that…. Went to primary school and then (long story) ended up going private. It’s worked well for the kids and other than the horrendous expense I don’t have regrets. Interestingly I know 4 kids from DCs primary school (class of 30) who are trying Oxbridge this year. The others go to different state schools in s London and are all flying. There are some great state schools round here. Don’t discount them.

Are you sure it's just 30%? I looked at my DC's comp and it's just over 50% above grade 7 for GCSE english and maths. Definitely lower than the selective school for sure.

I don't think people are just paying school fees for GCSE and A level results however. It's the connections and extra cirriculars. A PP mentioned about a 'face that fits' too.

Its a combination of things,

All motivated,largely academically inclined parents, You don't find any parents who care little for education at a private school, and all that goes with that at home, conversation, news, debate, etc.
State schools are not generally pushy, eg the guidance for state schools in the Pandemic as reported on here by teachers was to 'take care of the pupils well being' Lack of computers at many homes, took weeks or months, to get any lessons online, no follow up or marking in many cases. Of course some state schools did brilliantly just not all.

The message from my Dcs Independent schools was, 'under no circumstance let your grades slip, work just as hard from your home computer on teams'
Full school day 8.30 till 4pm no excuses, up and running in a week. Every set lesson marked, parents contacted for EVERY missed lesson. Total follow up as if in school. Assumed in the trenches, just make the best of it and crack on, attitude.

Of course that is just a couple of examples, but l have seen many similar having had Dcs in both.

Even small Independents have (imo) higher expectations and aspiration, of all their children. Much less mollycoddling, zilch woke attitude. Robust attitude to sorting out problems and standing on your own two feet.

Of course this is made possible by the absence of problem families, lack of commitment to education, smaller class sizes, etc.

There are good and bad Private and State schools and no one size fits all for children.

My DD is academic and flourishes in a strict,, no nonsense high achieving school with like minded pupils. Probably with excellent 'contacts' She loves her school.

My DS is flourishing in a non selective small gentle school which achieves good grades but has great pastoral care. Probably no future contacts. He loves his school.

Of course this is made possible by the absence of problem families, lack of commitment to education, smaller class sizes, etc
I haven’t heard the phrase ‘problem families’ for quite a few decades.

There's private schools and private schools. Some are selling themselves as offering smaller classes, sports, music, after school activities, but ultimately, it is attended by average to above average income families who like the idea that they kids get a private education.

You then have the very prestigious ones that only the very rich can afford by famies who are already in the business anyway and their kids follow on their parents or get help from friends parents.

They are not multitude of the latter but many smaller private schools that don't offer that much more than other schools but for better pastoral care.

What the private school/decent state school then guarantees is the excellent peer/influence group

The kids at the 'outstanding' state school where I work buy their drugs from kids at the private school down the road. They also connect with kids from other schools (state and private) on social media. I don't think any school "guarantees" that your child won't be exposed to negative peer influences anymore, although this does seem to be what many parents believe about private education. I went to a private school where drugs, bullying, casual sex and sexual harassment were all rife but the kids were either clever enough to not get caught or, if they did it was very much brushed under the carpet.