To send my child to private school at age 4?

[confusedaboutworkingandparenting]

Wise Mumsnetters, please talk to me about private school in the UK. Or public school? What is the difference? As you have probably gathered already, DH and I went to comprehensive schools and have no experience of education options in London or the independent school system in the UK. Other children is unlikely to be a factor here so we could probably afford to pay for one to go, although of course it would involve some sacrifices. We have some good private schools nearby to us and none of the "local" state primary schools are actually that convenient, so all options involve a bit of a trek. So talk to me about private school? Is it worth it? Is it really that different to state school? When is the best time to send them? If you could afford it, would you do it? And why? And will I inadvertently turn my beloved child into a posh tw*t?! Also the holidays are so long! What do you do with them then! Thanks in advance for sharing your experiences and wisdom.

"Not true. I know many people who could afford private education, but choose not to because they believe in equality. I’ve actually taught the children of three people who you would definitely know the name of, and the children of someone who owns an international business. All in state schools"

I wonder if their belief in equality has stopped them from buying in a leafy catchment or investing in sport and music, both of which would not be possible on a lower income and could be deemed as unequal?

Maybe this is where the difference between the Scottish and English systems lie - we only have non selective state schools or private schools, no academies, no grammars, nothing. You go to your nearest school or you go private.

Definitely! My children went from year three and was best decision. Now set up for a life loving education and appreciating what a school day is about. Can converse with adults, hold conversations with adults etc. Any low level behaviour snubbed right out.

Ended primary with a very different attitude to the kids he spent Reception to year two with. Don't regret the spend for a minute. Shouldn't have to be so but here we are.

No one is saying all affluent families will choose to educate privately, @Girlswithgoodbodieslikeboyswithferarris , any more than they do now.

But if private schools were scrapped tomorrow, affluent families wouldn’t meekly accept Crap St Academy.

Going to your nearest school seems more of a way of dividing affluent and not so affluent, in England anyway. I suppose in Scotland some areas are quite remote so you get more of a mix.

Not leafy catchments - one in particular is semi rural and I’d actually consider it deprived (of course the parents home was not actually in one of the deprived parts) - other ones are truly comprehensive - and actually take half their pupils from an extremely deprived area.

Music tuition is free for all pupils in Scotland.

To echo what others have said, it is impossible to sort schools neatly into "state" and "private" boxes. There are truly excellent state schools and dire private ones. It depends on the child and the school so you really do have to do some research and take each school on its merits (and speak to parents).

From my own personal experience, my DD was state educated to the age of 11 and has been private from year 7. This was a difficult decision (in part because the idea of private education sits a little bit uncomfortably with me for ideological reasons) but the particular school she has gone to was by far the best choice for her needs and I consider it worth the investment.

My DD is bright (not extremely so but she does well academically) but sensitive and anxious. She didn't like being educated with boys at all and found their presence at primary intimidating and off-putting and I knew she had to go single sex to bring out the best in her. She also struggled in environments with rowdy, extrovert kids and with disruption and I worried that she would get lost in a large co-ed comprehensive (which would have been the option for her had she stayed in the state system).

If she had been a more robust, extrovert child I would not have sent her private. I have friends whose children have thrived in comprehensives and for those children, in those schools, a private education would have been a waste of money.

You really can't generalise.

You don’t have any religious secondary schools in Scotland?

@Thepeopleversuswork one of my dds v similar and really struggled in co ed state primary. There isn't enough choice in state schools in Scotland and I certainly can think of several with incredibly well heeled catchments.

Ha ha ha ha ha. Quite.

Just in case that was a serious question- most towns have a Catholic school and all the Catholic children go to it.

Thus perpetuating the rampant sectarianism across all levels of Scottish society.

The poster was so adamant all Scottish children just went to their local school that I thought I’d missed something all these years!
So they don’t all go to same local school as I thought.

To be fair there are probably fewer Catholic schools north of the Central belt, perhaps she lives in Inverness or something and forgot.

According to that poster the reason is that they are less ethnically diverse (so I guess have less people to be racist to) or something about nice manners - they weren't entirely clear coherent

No, she said they were MORE ethnically diverse.

You have to do the comparison between
specific schools, not at a sector level.

In a town I am familiar with (5 large private primaries / preps and 1 small; 4 private secondaries; 5 state secondaries; 10+ state primaries):

It is worth paying for 1 of the private primaries for a bright child, and a further 1 if you live in the catchments of 3 of the primaries. It is possibly worth paying for 1 of the others at a push if your have a child who is low average and you want them to go to private secondary, as they dodge the secondary entrance exams.

It is not worth paying for any of the private primaries if your child has SEN.

It is worth paying for 1 of the secondaries, especially if you are not in the catchment for the best 2 state schools.

It is possibly worth paying for another of the secondaries if you are in the catchment of 1 of the secondaries, depending on your views on extensive sport vs excellent value add but a challenging cohort.

The rest of the private provision? No, not really worth it. Several of the state options have better results.

Mine didn't go to school until they were 8, tested when they started school and I was told the test only went up to 14 so they couldn't give me an age.

Sorry Devoutspoken, I was agree kids from all sorts of backgrounds and education types can be above the reading age just like yours and mine did. When I read it back I wasn't sure that was how it came across.

It is possibly worth paying for 1 of the others at a push if your have a child who is low average and you want them to go to private secondary, as they dodge the secondary entrance exams.

Why would a school accept a child who was already identifiable at age 4 as “(be)low average” if it meant that child could get into the highly competitive senior school without doing exams? What is in it for the school?

There are lots of reasons to try to avoid entrance exams even if your child is bright, and plenty of bright kids applying for 4+ places at straight through schools. What you say makes no sense.

The thing that makes comparison really challenging is that the private schools’ budget for advertising etc is infinitely greater than that for state schools. It’s really hard to glean detailed enough information to make sensible and fair comparisons across sectors, especially at primary.

I would certainly ask about the qualifications of every member of staff (including so called associates/ tutors / assistants, often used to allow claims that ‘all teachers are highly qualified’, while obscuring the fact that the teacher teaches the parallel class, while the ‘associate’ teaches yours) in the private schools you are interested in, as well as enquiring about the numbers and destination of children leaving ‘along the way - many private primary schools actively manage out children with SEN to local state primaries to boost their exit stats.

Futurethoughts · Today 18:11
No one is saying all affluent families will choose to educate privately, @Girlswithgoodbodieslikeboyswithferarris , any more than they do now.

But if private schools were scrapped tomorrow, affluent families wouldn’t meekly accept Crap St Academy.

Isn’t easy to change a school your child is at. The minute you aren’t meek you are ‘that parent’ and you worry it will affect your child.

Lots of parents might decide to make groups with private tutors if there were no choice.

Having seen some London private schools I would never send a child there even if you paid me. Some of the things I saw:

• kids afraid of the water in a swimming lesson being forced into the water and screaming
• reception art work being 90% done by staff so it 'looks good for the parents'
• a nursery teacher who thinks 'play is a waste of time' and has the children (age 3 and 4) stand in lines chanting shit that means absolutely nothing to them like the continents of the world. To the parents / on the surface kids from this class appear smarter than state kids because wow they're only 3 and they can name the continents of the world! But scratch beneath the surface and they have no concept of what a continent is because they're too young and in fact they've not been learning in a way that's meaningful to them so it's all smoke and mirrors.
• same teacher as above "girls tend to be nurses and men tend to be doctors" (yes, really)

I could go on and that's not really having spent that much time covering private. The vast amount of experience I had was in state primary schools but I'd seen enough to feel really uncomfortable. State all the way for my kids.

We have Catholic state schools which are non selective, you don’t even need to be Catholic.

We have non denominational schools which have Christian input - these are generally seen as “Protestant” schools, but that’s not actually true.

Generally speaking, the catchments for the catholic school are the exact same as for the non denominational school. Strictly speaking anyone can go to either of them though.

We also have faith based private schools for whatever faiths are prevalent in a particular area.

Why would a school accept a child who was already identifiable at age 4 as “(be)low average” if it meant that child could get into the highly competitive senior school without doing exams? What is in it for the school?

The schools with attached primary / prep depts are not, in any real sense other than in publicity, ‘selective’ for anything other than wealth and non-SEN. (The parents don’t understand this at 4, and by the time they realise it, are already within the system, and are unlikely to leave it.) The schools involved are the most expensive and socially ‘posh’.

The school which is genuinely selective doesn’t have linked preps - I agree there is nothing in it for it to become all through or facilitate secondary transfer.