Not to send my children to private school even though I can afford it

[AdamRyan]

I believe in comprehensive education and think children should all be educated together, to improve social mobility and prevent a "brain drain" where less privileged children go to some schools, and more privileged go to others.
Am I in the minority and being naive?

YANBU - comprehensive schools are the way to go
YABU - I'd send my children private if I could

@Sigmama and @Elfer13 but again, you're just talking about ultimate outcomes and 12 pages in we've established many times over that that isn't many people's priority..it's the day to day experience of having a small tutor group, a study room to go to at break and lunch, over 100 extra curricular activities over the year etc etc. I struggle financially but send mine private because one was getting badly and persistently bullied and the school were unable to effectively deal with it and the other was becoming a shell of herself because if she worked hard, did the homework and put her hand up she was likewise mocked. I don't think for a second that parents who genuinely cannot afford it don't care but if you can afford to lift your child out of that either by moving to a "leafy" Comp or going private, and don't, then I would be very confused.

No, my work colleague's child was a bit dim and just went to a private school with no entrance exam, not everyone that is moneyed has bright DC

Choosing a school for your DC is the hardest decision you make as a parent (that's if you can afford private education). We did a mixture of both. Prep and then an 'outstanding' Academy.
There was a huge number of London incomers into the secondary school and many children with parents in the professions. However not for one minute was this school welcoming to SEN or acknowledged that it was full of bullying kids and teachers. Any issues and you were incouraged to move your child in case you spoilt their results. The head was even photographed in a Chanel jacket (very inclusive, not). Houses in catchment are £850k for a 4 bed. I sent my DD to a different six form in a far more multi cultural town. It was a great success. We also have a famous boarding school on our doorstep but local children are not encouraged to apply for places. I have no idea why.
If you think you are encouraging social mobility my using state schools when you are wealthy you are kidding yourself. Your DC will just gravitate to their tribe. A far better result would be obtained by successful people teaching in schools when the take early retirement. We have a teacher shortage that needs addressing as discussed up thread. Give back that way but expect it to be the hardest job you have ever done.

I agree that the idea you'll run shoulders with "all sorts" at every comp is laughable. Demographics and catchment areas mean most will be dominated by particular "types" and whether it is popular or not, there is a truism (though of course not true in all cases) that home background / demographic will make a difference to behaviour and attitude at school, hence you get poor performance in "poorer" areas. In the large comps with a mix, as a pp said, kids gravitate to their "kind" and distance themselves as much as possible from the "other" . Let's not pretend it's all jolly good fun mucking in together.

I've mentioned before; where I am, there is far more diversity (certainly cultural and ethnic, and even possibly socioeconomic?) in the private sector than in the state sector.

This. My friends whose children attend comprehensives have all gravitated towards very middle class enclaves within their schools: often the children who want to work (understandably) stick together to protect themselves and avoid the inevitable disruption that occurs from the children who aren't interested.

So actually the children from MC backgrounds are usually just rubbing shoulders with other MC children against a different backdrop. Nothing wrong with that, obviously, in the circumstances, but let's not pretend its one big happy melting pot.

Shit, I want my money back. Mine don’t play lacrosse

I wish people would stop this bullshit of "if your child is clever they will thrive at local comp"

If this were true, then why is contextual admissions needed?

Imo their is more fighting, poor behaviour that goes unchecked as unruly kids can't be "managed out", more likely to be in class with kids whose parents don't value education etc.

*there

Kids will THRIVE at local comp IF it's a decent school, but how well kids do is a function of how able is the teacher to actually teach the class or are they spending 90% of their time managing the students' behaviour

This is going back quite a few years...

My now Brother in Law failed 11+ and was due to attend a school dubbed the "worst in England". So FIL worked 6 days a week, they extended their mortgage, borrowed off grandparents etc to get BIL into a private school

They weren't the only ones who did that locally!

I have massive respect for that.

Every week there is a thread like this. Yawn.

@ladykale

more likely to be in class with kids whose parents don't value education etc.

This is the one real tipping point for me which made me decide to go private. I don't think the standard of teaching is necessarily always better in private schools (though it seems to be good in my DD's school).

I couldn't give a shit about her playing lacrosse or rubbing shoulders with investment bankers' kids or going on expensive school trips. The additional enrichment activities are nice but not a dealbreaker. Even the class sizes are a nice to have but not essential.

The thing that really clinched it for me was that I desperately desperately wanted to avoid my DD being educated alongside children who think it isn't cool to be educated. Some of her cohort in (mixed state) primary were starting to develop attitudes like this: boys hanging around outside school trying vaping, girls competing with each other for the attentions of these useless no marks, unpleasantly sexual SM and notes being sent around, truancy and shoplifting. All of this becoming a major social preoccupation for the year group.

It was all relatively innocent at at the point where I had to make a choice (year 6) but I could tell where it was heading and I was having none of it. If I had had to double mortgage my house to avoid her growing up around that I would happily have done so. It's the worst possible environment for a child who wants to work to be in at that age.

I'm not saying that this doesn't happen in private school. Private schools are not a panacea: there are bad and damaged kids at private school for sure, there is bullying (occasionally pretty bad bullying) and kids drop out and vape in the toilets and all the rest of it. But private schools, by and large, don't allow a cohort of kids who want to disrupt or belittle other kids to stop them learning to become dominant in a class or year group.

I'm really sorry that this is what's happened to comprehensive education in Britain. But it has, certainly where I live. I was extremely lucky to be able to pay to avoid this and not a day goes by when I don't feel ambivalent and guilty about this as I realise most people don't have that option.

I'm quite sure there are lots of kids in comprehensive schools who thrive despite this. But the bottom line for me is that I didn't want my (vulnerable, shy and anxious) daughter to be permanently in fight or flight mode, having to constantly try to be her best self despite an environment which incentivises her not to. I want the environment, as far as possible, to work in her favour and a big urban comprehensive would not have worked in her favour.

Imo it's immoral to be taking up space in a state school when you can afford to provide for your own DCs education.

Your choice means other DCs have more crowded classes, less teacher attention etc.

Also there's a high chance that if you are well off enough to have multiple DCs in private you live in a nice area so will be taking up a place at a sought after state school. That place could go to an out of area child from a deprived estate.

Both lazy tropes.

Cream won’t rise if it’s prevented from doing so, and kids who have great potential to achieve can absolutely be held back by environment. Similarly, if it’s financial stress that’s blighting your life and making you unhappy, then money certainly can buy an escape from that.

An escape from unhappiness isn’t the same thing as intelligence. 🙄

Who said it was? I was responding to ‘money can’t buy happiness’.

Your dcs will end up hanging out with other kids of the same demographic. If there's noone like them at their school they'll be miserable. Only you know the answer to that.

I think this sums it up for me!

This is where people fail in the discourse between public vs private school. They think in terms of academics only.

But the truth is most private school kids who go to co-ed schools develop excellent anxiety management strategies, they play sports, they learn how to present, they learn how to network, they get encouraged into special interewte. So it doesn’t really matter where they graduate from (or even if they do) - they will, 5-10 years after graduation, still be more likely to be working in high status jobs than people who went to State.

If you add SEN to the mix - state schools almost all fail SEN kids universally regardless of their Ofsted rating. Even kids with mild to moderate Autism who in other countries may be expected to live a full life end up so riddled by anxieties when they go to State primaries / secondaries they can’t work / go to uni / follow their interests. That isn’t inevitable when you send your SEN child to private as they often allow parents to pay for extra support.

My DD has ASD and was non-verbal and in nappies when she started State School, was bullied, teachers were pushing me to send her to a special needs college but it was oversubscribed. I went to local privates in desperation. They all offered immediate support - the school we eventually chose brought in a SEN teacher while we were considering the offer so she could start with DD early. They started an ASD specific programme, used alumni and parent networks to get her ASD treatment unavailable in the UK, and by the time she was 8 she was a different child - top of the class, eleqent (if not talkative), she had friends, and she was winning sports days in her fields, and it all combined to make her so happy. By 10 she learned that biking / running helped with anxiety and now she’s killing it academically and socially in their secondary.

Personally, I think naturally intelligent children can & do thrive at state school & learn good life skills about resilience & social skills.

To be fair, I think the kids who do sometimes struggle at state schools are kids in the middle who could potentially be pushed to excel in a school with smaller class sizes etc but who can get lost in a big, busy state school where the focus is often on the top & the bottom.

Have a look at the University destinations of private schools, most go to a mid ranking, some would say rubbish, establishment

Not in my experience, quite the opposite.

I do know bright kids who've done very well at our local state. Anecdotally the ones who've done best are teacher's kids!

It does irritate me when one of our friends jibes about his dc going to Durham and all the money they've saved when they personally taught their dcs their specialist subject in the evening and weekends, or maybe I'm just jealous they have such compliant teens (mine hate me teaching them anything)

Whether a child will do well - you’ve got to look at the specific school

A state school can absolutely get dc to Cambridge or whatever, as is the case with Ds’ school. Although obviously the cohort that attends hasn’t been selected (beyond house price linked to the area) so they will not match the selective private school that tests on entry.

It’s an excellent school though, but I can see that house price is part of that anyway. No moral superiority there.

Another state school might be a different experience where a clever child does not thrive so well - idk other posters might have more experience of those schools

Both lazy tropes.

Absolutely agree. An intelligent child bullied relentlessly in a too-big comprehensive will not thrive. Speaking from family experience.

State Schools don’t have transparent ways to describe someone ‘intelligent’ - it is all dependant on teachers. Eg my nephew got 100% in every test, exam he has ever had, but he’s bored, he’s argumentative, and he is challenging - so the teachers didn’t include him in any G&T programme when another State primary might have. His parents couldn’t afford private but I encouraged them to meet the HT at my DC’s school and after a 30min conversation he was offered a 110% bursary. A year later he got 100% in his entrance exam and he is finally motivated .He is still argumentative, still challenging, but the teachers like that - they hone it, make him debate his point, and he’s loving school.