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

I do like the concept of a voucher for education, that could be applied in any school setting for which the pupil is eligible and passes the admission. But I think it would turbo-charge the advantages of the sharp-elbowed, and make social divides even worse.

This probably makes me a bit hypocritical, as we bought private education in the early years because it was cheaper than the full time nanny I needed to keep working. After DC was assessed as having lowest 5% decile visual processing skills, the private school was infinitely more helpful and constructive than the state school which didn't consider his needs sufficient. For me, a basic education voucher to be spent where I wanted DC educated would have been a godsent opportunity. I would have topped it up; instead I paid twice. It's all history now, DC is 24, so I have no skin in the game anymore. For the record, DC was educated in both state and indie schools.

Why on earth shouldn't you choose where to send your children? All I would say is don't judge those who make.different decisions. Every parent is entitled to make the choice they decide is most appropriate for their child.

Think what you want about private education, but it does allow the state system a bit more room to breathe. I still pay taxes that go to the local school, but my kids dont benefit from that as they are both in private. If they were to get rid of private schools, already over subscribed state schools will be evermore so.

You completely miss the point. Oversubscribed state schools would be a thing of the past, as all the schools in the town would be on a par educationally after decent government investment.

They may specialise in sport, or art, or STEM but all schools would get the right amount of funding to deal with the issues their school faces.

I know of head teachers who work hard to make their schools inclusive whilst others in the area don't. No school should be turning away children with moderate SEN, but they do as it affects their data. Making them look better than the school down the road with poor results from the high SEN numbers, purely because those schools rightly believe every child deserves the very best education whether their parents can pay for it or not.

Having private schools as an option means all this is allowed to carry on. If the PM didn't have the option to send their child to a private school, you'd be damn sure he'd be sorting out the state schools.

I find statements like this bizarre. Wherever the PM sends his kids to school, he has a vested interest in the health of the state sector, assuming he wants the great majority of families who rely on it to vote for him.

"all the schools in the town would be on a par educationally after decent government investment."

There will always be differences between state schools based on demographics. I live in a mixed area and the school with a more middle class catchment is always much more sought after than the schools with more working class catchments. Schools actually get extra funding (the pupil premium) for children from lower income families. But I don't think that any amount of investment would eradicate the natural differences created by demographics.

There will always be differences between state schools based on demographics. I live in a mixed area and the school with a more middle class catchment is always much more sought after than the schools with more working class catchments. Schools actually get extra funding (the pupil premium) for children from lower income families. But I don't think that any amount of investment would eradicate the natural differences created by demographics
Anecdotally my experiences are similar.

Previously I thought that the way you fix educational inequality is to fix schools.

Over time I've concluded that there's always going to be some form of educational inequality because parents have different lives, values and make different choices in parenting, and any measure of inequality is likely to be skewed towards middle class markers of a good education.

But if we're serious about raising the bar at the lower end and making sure the basic standard of education for all is more equal across the sector, no government is going to fix educational deprivation unless they fix the issues around children and families (eg low wages, insecure employment, poor quality housing, housing costs, poor health behaviours, intergenerational trauma and behaviour cycles, poverty, postcode lotteries on accessing related services such as SALT and OT when children are younger, fixing the EHCP process etc). What goes on in a school building is small fry compared to these issues, which then play out in schools.

I think your assumption is incorrect.
Lower income families with school age children are less likely to vote for him. Higher income families using private school, wealthier people with no children or older people whose children have flown the nest are more likely to vote for him. A policy to invest into state schools is less likely to appeal to his core voter base.

Our local state 6th form is rated excellent, - one of the best in the country, state or private, and while it gives priority to local kids from the city first when oversubscribed, they can be from private or state schools so long as they live in the postcodes for the city.

more and more private school parents are sending or thinking of sending their kids to it - they think it’ll make their private educated kids look like their from a state background rather than private. It won’t obvs. Plus they save a bit of money.

I’ve heard through work that the college is now considering offering the kids from the town state schools places over those in private schools if the private school is out of the town. Loads of the private secondaries are outside the town, only 3 are actually within the catchment postcodes.

I obvs think it’s a brilliant idea and should go ahead ( in fact it should apply to all the private schools) but it’s really going to put the cat amongst the pigeons with many of our friends who’ve sent their kids private.

I nearly said something the other day while with loads of parents at a school thing, but realised as the messenger I absolutely would get it in the neck!

@whodawhodaeho would that be in Cambridge by any chance? I’ve heard similar things about one of the well-regarded state 6th Forms there. Apparently it’s one of the biggest feeders into Oxbridge, after Eton and Westminster.

@whodawhodaehowould that be in Cambridge by any chance? I’ve heard similar things about one of the well-regarded state 6th Forms there. Apparently it’s one of the biggest feeders into Oxbridge, after Eton and Westminster.'

No actually, a much less affluent not an Oxbridge town. It also a non selective school, so that buying grades at private school doesn't guarantee you a place either. It's genuinely a brilliant, state school that is hugely diverse socio-economic background and doesn't give a damn about whether or not you've been to Africa to build wells, played country cricket, or sail or whatever.

They want to know you're good enough at the subjects you're choosing to study, have a good work ethic, can work independently and have lived in town for the required number of years. And according to teachers there, the private school children are the ones who struggle most with the freedom there, and the need to be independent around learning. They're used to being managed, coached, tutored that it's a big jump for them to go to class for a few hours a day and be expected to do the rest themselves. Whereas the State school kids have much less hand-holding during GCSEs

Anyway - I'm pretty sure Cambridge has more than 3 private senior schools!

I literally don’t know what to say to this post. It’s stunned me.
maybe some basic maths? 100 minus 7 is by my reckoning 93. That’s 93% of children educated in the state sector.
I think it’s in the PMs political interest to try and make sure they’re reasonably satisfied.

I nearly said something the other day while with loads of parents at a school thing, but realised as the messenger I absolutely would get it in the neck!

Whodaw I thought your dc went to state school? Presumably then the ‘school thing’ you mention took place in a state school?
In that case, why would the other parents care if the state schools in the area were given priority over private school? Presumably, like you, they’d be pleased about it.

'I nearly said something the other day while with loads of parents at a school thing, but realised as the messenger I absolutely would get it in the neck!

Whodaw I thought your dc went to state school? Presumably then the ‘school thing’ you mention took place in a state school?'

They do. But about 30% or so of the parents we know at the primary have and are sending their kids private for secondary school.

It's not that hard to fathom that someone has friends from all different socio-economic backgrounds, is it?

Conservative party track record suggests otherwise. I can't remember when I last heard anything from the Conservatives on education - apart from Rishi's "maths to 18" policy. They have nothing to say about how they are going to improve schooling.

Its not surprising really as their core voter base is older, home owners. They are most focussed on keeping those voters happy.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/#:~:text=Age%20was%20a%20strong%20predictor,voters%20aged%2065%20and%20above.

'In that case, why would the other parents care if the state schools in the area were given priority over private school? Presumably, like you, they’d be pleased about it.'

The ones with older children in private senior schools do care, the ones who are sending their kids to private school in Sept care, the people at the event from the neighbourhood ( it was open to all) who'd children are in private prep schools would care ( I'm presuming)

We don't live in some bubble where all our friends are from one background, we live in a very diverse city, and use state education which - like most given 93% of primary kids are actually educated in state schools - is very mixed.

this demonising of state schools that many private parents like to do to justify their choices, is all smoke and mirrors. the majority of us use state schools - and they're good. Sometimes very, very good.

They do. But about 30% or so of the parents we know at the primary have and are sending their kids private for secondary school.

Now I understand. I thought this was at a secondary school.

Absolutely.

So the improvement in uk children’s reading attainment - driven by the focus of successive Tory governments - has completely passed you by?
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/england-moves-to-fourth-in-international-rankings-for-reading
likewise the fact that the proportion of schools rated inadequate has fallen by more than half since 2010?
youre right about one thing. We don’t hear enough from the Tories on this. Time they trumpeted it a bit louder. We know where all this will go under labour, and forcing some kids currently in the independent sector to share the misery won’t help.

Shame it failed to mention that England was third in the PIRI ratings in 2006.

We have still seen substantial improvement in childhood literacy, thanks to the focus of successive Tory governments on promotion of phonics. Are you seriously denying this?

And are you also denying that the actions listed as having been taken by successive governments in this area have been taken? The argument, remember, is that the Tories don’t care about state education because they themselves don’t use it. It’s also argued that the fact that most children in this country are state educated is political irrelevant to them. Don’t we need some evidence for these surprising suggestions?

I’m saying the country’s position in the PIRI rankings has worsened since 2006. What does that tell you? Because I know what conclusion I draw from it.

I also think they’re a bit meaningfully as they’re based on 325k children globally.