To use a comprehensive school?

[StatisticallyLow]

I work in a private school. It is very stressful (I only did a short spell in state whilst training, so can't easily compare).

My ds is due to move to secondary this September. There is a very good teacher discount at my school for fees (50%). However I am considering sending him to our local (rated 'good' Ofsted) comprehensive, which we are certain to get a place at in March. His friends are going to many schools, so no obvious choice there.

I think people are a bit surprised by this, especially due to my job. However I am hoping that as a bright and studious child he will be just fine? I know the private school may get better results, but it is academically selective so that skews the results. I may not stay in my job forever, but I could afford the fees as DH happy to pay. I think the assumption of friends/colleagues was that he'd go to the private school.

To note - he is in state primary.

All private schools are not great, academically speaking. Some are very selective, via exam and (often) interview - others will take virtually anyone whose parents can pay the fees.
There is often stiff competition for places at the academically excellent ones. Though I suspect that it’s slightly less since fees are relatively so much less affordable than they were a few decades ago.

Op it's got better results because it's selective but also what else happens ar? ound that?

How does a child enter a selection school, they don't do it off their own backs?

There will be parents who value eduction behind them.
That counts for so much more than it being just a selective school..

I think it's a no brainer to send him private and I don't know why your thinking of anything else.

Yes, I would have thought this was the obvious answer. And a 50% fee reduction would still mean finding 50% of fees. You’ve mentioned that DH would be happy to pay, so would you even be able to afford it if DH wasn’t on a decent salary?

I mean, send him wherever you want, but personally I'd jump at a 50% discount on a private school. You say you can afford it even if you left the job and lost the discount, so it sounds like paying the half price fees wouldn't be an issue for you.

So I'm not sure why you wouldn't. But you know the schools and it's entirely up to you. Not much anyone else can say, really.

I would treat this just like any school selection - look at facilities, class sizes, results, ethos, behaviour, leadership, (insert own criteria) and any co-curricular or learning support provision you want and choose the best school for your child. If it's a close call and you don't want the fees go with the state school, use the money "saved" for enhancing the life of the whole family. If you don't think you will be staying there for the rest of your child's education and would lose the fee rebate, that sheds a different light on it.

I went to the school my dad worked in and hated it. It might work for you and your child but it might not. I’d say that would be the biggest thing for me - do you want them where you work and do they want to be where you work? If the option you choose doesn’t work out, which would be the easier to get a place at later?

My DD is at a state comprehensive. We are not in a grammar area. The school is good, and DD is happy there, she’s doing well and taking advantage of lots of opportunities. A number of teachers there send their own children there including SLT, which gives me considerable confidence. She only complains of disruption in one subject where they have a mat cover, but her assessment marks are still good, so they’re still learning regardless. You know both schools, are parents happy with the comprehensive? Are the pupils happy? What opportunities are on offer? Sometimes it’s not worth paying for private, sometimes it is!

I think it's more about finding the right school for your DC.

I work in a private school which offers a fee reduction, but my DC go to a different private school, one which is better suited to them pastorally, academically and socially.

How easy would it be for you to get him into the school you work at if things didn't work out as you'd hoped at the comprehensive?
I'm guessing that you would be more likely to be able to make the move in that direction than you would be to guarantee your choice of comprehensive if you wanted to move mid year - unless the comprehensive is significantly under subscribed? If that's the case I would definitely start with the comprehensive.
I think there are potential downsides for a child to going to the school where a parent works, even if they are not taught by them, so you are definitely not unreasonable to look at alternatives.

What does your son want or think? Would he be likely to have friends living nearby at both the private and comp? A lit depends on the child and where they feel they would be happiest.

Other things to consider are the convenience of having school holidays at the same time and the shorter days at state - many people in my old town used private as extra ‘child care’ as their children were out for a few more hours and they could continue with their careers. But there’s sometimes issues of being a child of a teacher at school. And if you work in a state in future rather than private then there’s the issue of longer holidays at private too. And if it goes wrong for either of you then it’s difficult for the other.
Personally if you have not bought into the school ethos and don’t see yourself there for at least 8 years I would go with state. You are taking a bit wage cut for endorsing your current employer otherwise.

I really disagree with this. Especially the “better quality teaching” comment. Do you think that teachers in state schools are second class teachers? That they are there because they couldn’t get jobs in private schools.? They are there because they want to work in a state school and with non-privileged children.

Teaching standards are very high in state schools and teachers are under constant scrutiny - through performance management, lesson observations, book scrutinies and results analysis. Training is constant, even for experienced teachers.

Quality of teaching is definitely not better in private schools. What makes the difference is the culture of behaviour / aspirations of the children, and depending on the school, opportunities for extra curricular activities.

The teachers are the same across state and private schools. It's not better quality teaching. It's more likely
Self selection from pupils
Picking the brightest more engaged pupils
Parents being more engaged
Teachers able to control classes better / exclude disrupters without parents threatening them

I think that state school teachers often have a much harder job that requires quite a skill set on top of teaching.

I think if you have a good state school, go for it. I am state educated as was my daughter. We both did very well in the state system (straight As/A*s).
And I genuinely think going to state school gives you a well-rounded sense of the world (you are not in a privileged bubble).

Has your DS visited both the good comprehensive and the school where you teach? Which would he prefer to attend? That’s a big consideration.

It’s not all about GCSE results. Breadth of curriculum, extra curricular activities, sports/music/technology facilities, peer group, quality of pastoral care, bullying policies. All these things matter hugely. I am not at all saying your local state school won’t provide all this, but you have not really given much to go on.

What is your reason for not sending your DS to your school - is it not actually very good, do you fear for his independence if he attends where his mum teaches, is even 50 per cent of the fees a stretch?

Why do you want him to go to the comprehensive?

Taking yourself, and colleagues/friends, comments out of the equation.

Which school would your son be happiest at? Which would he do best at academically, which school would he do best in as a person, which school would be the best launch pad for 18+?

If he went to your school would he be ok with you being there? Would it be beneficial, neutral or a hindrance?

As a minor issue - transport, times and holidays.

You’re a teacher yourself, but you can’t work this one out without mumsnet? 🧐
A group of people who don’t have direct experience of one of the choices and surely at least anecdotal of the other?

While the better results may be mostly down to selection for bright kids selection does have benefits in itself. The school can work at the pace of the students they have which means those children are stretched. I went to a highly selective girls school. We worked way above the curriculum and expanded on it and I covered a lot of undergraduate material once I had finished my A level syllabus. Just as an example in modern languages most students were conversational by around gcse standard. We read around the English syllabus for gcse so e.g if we were studying 1984 we’d also read Brave New World and another dystopian novel. It was a lot of work and high pressure but I think it would be very hard to teach like that if some children in the class were struggling to get passing grades. I might have got the same grades at state school but wouldn’t have been as well educated.

I went to a supposedly good state school before that until I was 14 and even the top set standard was nothing like the private school and huge amounts of lesson time went on behaviour management.

being rated "good" doesn't make any promises. a lot if the ofsted ranking is about having the right bureaucracy and policies, the teaching quality can still be patchy, and serious underfunding can have a massive detrimental effect

you are right that a bright and studious child can thrive in a comprehensive.

In 5 years at a comprehensive, one child in my wider family had a proper teacher for English for just 2 of those years. The rest of the time there were supply teachers and stand-ins. I remember in her year 10, she was incredibly frustrated because they were doing nothing but wordsearches and other basic puzzles in English lessons for weeks on end, and were getting absolutely no work that would be helpful for GCSE. her parents ended up getting a tutor for her. That's just one example, but unfilled vacancies are a serious issue at some schools. go to an open day at the good comprehensive and ask the pupils showing you around about how often they have a supply teacher or other stop-gap arrangement when there isn't an actual teacher of that subject available.

it's also about aspirations as much as grades. if you can access the data, look at the number of people who get at least AAB at A level at each school and calculate of that number what fraction are going to oxbridge and to Russell Group universities - are the bright kids at the comp being encouraged to stretch their wings?

Try to attend an open day at your own school asking people to pretend they don't recognise you as you are trying to get a feel for the school as a prospective parent. or if that's too hard get DH to attend. see if you can find a year 11-13 who was from a state primary and ask them what it was like for them coming in from a very different school.

you aren't unreasonable to give serious consideration to the comprehensive but you need to look at both individual schools very carefully.

If you can, go private. We've done both and the two are incomparable. 'Good' state secondary is an impersonal institution that's getting by on a bare minimum offering. Culture is devoid of aspiration, teachers preoccupied with disciplining disruptive kids, anyone quiet and well behaved gets ignored. Kids bare minimum in terms of exercise or extracurricular enrichment. Kids disengaged. So depressing.

50% of private fees is still a huge commitment. You know from the inside whether it's the right school. You have made a decision. End of

If you want assurance that state schools can be good, my DCs went to state and it’s been good for both of them in different ways. They have both done well, one is at uni and one doing well in sixth form. There were loads of opportunities for them to do good quality music, sports, art, drama, etc as well as being academically stretching. And personally I like it that they have mixed with a wider variety of people than they would likely have done in private.

I don't recognise what you describe. This is not mine or my daughter's experience in the state sector at all.

Between them, my 2 children got 5Astars and an A at A Level at the local comprehensive school. Both exam-taking years. No extra tutoring.

I would say theirs was a good school, and the teaching was much better than the public school I went to. I did not get such good results. The sirs at my old (boarding and day) school were mostly Oxbridge educated but had no teaching qualifications afterwards so didn’t teach to syllabus (handy to at least teach the right topics), or control the class well.

I am an ex-teacher and have mainly taught in state schools. I had lots of angst too about what to do. So many variables. At the end of the day chose where you think they will be happiest.

I'll send my children to state schools because I think it's better for them to be with a diverse spectrum of children, not just the most privileged or academic.