To think State education is really poor?

[Boswelian]

We sent our eldest to a taster day at a private school. He was agog. His school don't allow playing on the grass when it's wet. The private school change them into waterproofs and wellies for break. PE 3x a week. Sport every day. Dedicated specialist teaching in art, DT, languages, sciences etc. 16 in a class instead of 30. The difference in the quality of life between the two school has really blown my mind. The state school is "outstanding". The private school reckon DS is 2 years behind their curriculum. We've been told in state that he's meeting expectations. How is this remotely acceptable?

@Ballsbaill yes, it would seem this way.

My DC always put waterproofs on and splashed around outside in state school so that’s just something particular to the state school your DS is at.

State education has the potential to be every bit as wonderful as private but sadly isn’t given the funding it deserves to flourish.

I agree. I wasn't being snobby about her job. But I don't think you need to spend hundreds of thousands on an education to get it.

So fine if you want to spend that much to privately educate your child. But some people cripple themselves financially to do so and I just think that length of financial sacrifice is nonsensical

I would have thought private schools were more discouraging of taking SEN pupils lest it skews their results data.

It depends on the school. But also, you should educate yourself on the fact that some autistic people (for example) are highly intelligent and do very well in exams, especially when there is less noise and a smaller class size.

Please don't perpetuate a myth about people who are not NT being thick 🙄

Private schools have a market sector. Some only take pupils with SEN, some take mid performers, or target quirky children. They arent all focussed in high achievers. Also some SEN children are very high achievers. Particular presentations of asd for instance will be people who get all 8 and 9s as long as the classrooms are quiet and routine.

Nobody is knocking state school teachers. The fact remains that you shouldn't have to battle against chronic underfunding, lack of SEN support etc. Of course many state school teachers do an outstanding job but you should be able to do your job without all the other issues. Private school teachers simply don't have to deal with the issues you face on a daily basis and have much smaller classes so teaching can be more in depth, go off on tangents/discover links simply because there is the time to do so.
I wish state education was properly funded in order to allow every child those opportunities, sadly it isn't. I also haven't seen the political will from any party to improve state education (apart from the headline grabbing but ultimately risible and futile VAT rise).

Our local private school the reception/year 1 teacher has 10 kids in her class and a huge classroom/outdoor area. When speaking to her for a good hour (teacher to teacher), she used to be in state school and now she's more relaxed than she's ever been.
She also has a TA.

Depends what area you live in. State schools in leafy (rich) middle class areas are as good for the clever kids as privates (which tend to be selective so also only have the clevwr kids). The extra curricular is better in privates though.

I have children in both. I don't pay for the academics, (my eldest is super bright and would get top grades in a state school too). I pay for the convenience, the extra curricular and the pleasant surroundings.

Schools with a more diverse level of parental input (not financial background) are a different kettle of fish. I'm from a working class background (my dad left school at 14) but my parents knew education was the way out of our circumstances and they prioritised that over everything. It is an attitude I see in many immigrant families (as mine was in part) . The biggest step up you can give a child is a supportive home. A private school is lovely but it won't get you better grades on its own.

The grammar school system gave working class children with academic abilities in the top 5% a chance of competing. It did fuck all for the 95% who didn't make the grade, some of whom missed out by a hair.
The remaining 95% were treated to underfunded, poorly administered 'education' because they weren't worth it. Let's not even go into the postcode bias that existed, with far fewer grammar school places available for rural areas than urban ones.
I didn't go through the grammar system, it had been phased out a couple of years before I started secondary, but the idea of giving the best to the ones at the top and not bothering with anyone else persisted. I was in the top set for one subject and the difference between the teaching quality there and what I got in my worst subject, for which I was in set 3 was palpable.
It struck me as odd that so little investment was given to pupils who struggled, that it wasn't considered 'worth' trying with us. I might have achieved more in that (very important) subject if I had had the teachers reserved for the best students.
Then, it wasn't so much of a problem. When I left school, you could still live on a low wage, you didn't have to be a professional to survive.
Today, I am sorry, but we need to be giving all our students access to quality education, not just the cherry picked handful deemed by an arbitrary test to 'deserve' it.

My kids private school has more kids with ASD than average. ASD does obviously range in severity, but chances are the most high achieving pupils in science / maths subjects do have ASD, and it’s nothing to be ashamed of.

I don't think children who are bad at languages should be made to do a language when they might enjoy something else more and have more success in it. I don't think if you have a child who will get a good grade in an extra language but do poorly at history or geography that they should be doing the humanity instead of the language. I don't think children in general should be doing things they don't like or aren't good at when they could use that subject slot for something they are engaged with. Yes, the basics of English and Maths are important for everyone. But the lack of flexibility that the eBacc engenders isn't good for education, IMO.

@BonjourCrisette but the eBacc is 5 subjects. Kids have 4,5 or 6 other slots. One of the things people appear to like about private education is the "roundedness" of it. And what they don't like about state education is the "they all do media studies and "soft" subjects" The eBacc is an attempt to address that- and that's wrong too!

This is absolute nonsense. It’s precisely why many parents choose the private sector; they can choose a school suited to their child. It’s not all about exam results. It’s about each child reaching their full potential; for some this won’t be high academic grades across the board.

Just in our local area, there are schools which are very selective and academic, schools which are “all rounders”, those which are more sporty, some are smaller and more suited to quirky children, some cater for those with learning difficulties where exam results are not the main priority.

It’s great that you’ve got such a good state school.

DD16 is doing 13 GCSEs at our local, very mixed ability, cross city comp.

This is not the norm though. In 2022, only 500 pupils (out of over 600,000) sat more than 12 GCSEs. There will always be exceptions, but the vast majority of state schools do not offer this opportunity. In fact, even at the most highly performing schools in our area, pupils take a maximum of 10.

I think many people who believe private school will ‘set kids up for life’ are often the kind who ship kids off thinking ‘job done, they’ll be a success’ and forget they actually need good support at home too. When I worked in a private school you’d be surprised how many safeguarding referrals were made too, even for neglect. Yea you can neglect a child whilst throwing money at their education.

I agree with most of your points:

1. Absolutely important to find a job you're well suited to. It's not just about salary. I'm in a job I love that doesn't pay a great deal.
2. There is no reason to be disappointed in someone being a teacher. It's a great profession. I'm just saying that some parents who send their children to private schools will hope their investment will result in a high status career for their kids. Note, I'm emphasising some parents. The post I was responding to said "If you send your child to private school you'll set them up for life". I asked for clarification. What does that mean? They'll go on to have great careers? They'll develop confidence? They'll make rich connections? How are they being set up for life? My friend sent her sons to private schools and told me the main reason was because of the connections they'll make. This seriously winds me up for so many different reasons!!
3. Not sure that I agree that state education has recently declined. I went to a very deprived comprehensive in late 80s/early 90s. The school was almost closed down at one point. Still, many of my friends went on to have quite brilliant careers. My daughter is now at a state secondary school and receiving a far superior education to the one I received.

Well, I can only speak from my own experience and preferences but I don't think 6 other slots is the norm in state schools, or even 4. Eng Lang, Lit, Maths, three sciences, a language and a humanity is 7 slots. There are plenty of schools that only take 9 GCSEs per child. Some do 8. That wouldn't have worked for us. There is no option to do even three languages and some don't offer the option to do two. Doing triple science means using up a slot generally and I don't think that's particularly helpful either. Doing more than one creative subject seems hard to find in the state sector, too.

If you are going to do well in Media Studies and enjoy it, I absolutely think you should do it instead of history or whatever. I think flexibility is really important.

Personally don’t want to pay higher taxes and quite happy with state education my 5 children have received/are receiving, so what if a private school offers all bells and whistles, that’s why you pay extra for it

Incidentally-I really don't think doing loads of GCSEs is a mark of a good school. One of my children went to a high performing grammar school where they did a maximum of 9 unless they had a very good reason to do more. The idea was that it freed up time for non exam stuff-performance, volunteering, more sport or music....

I agree with this. Even the most academic schools around here “only” tend to do 11 which I think is more than enough.

I don't think it's necessarily the mark of a good school either. But as I said, I'm only talking about what worked for us and I picked the school I did because I could see it would work for us in a way that almost any other school would not have done. Lots of slots meant DD had as many as she wanted for creative subjects - and I do actually think lots of creative opportunities is the mark of a good school. She had plenty of time for extra-curricular opportunities too including music and performance, though none of the extra-curricular stuff was sport because she hates it.

In fact, I also think that if you have a child who may struggle to achieve pass grades in English and Maths which are the passport to the next step why make them do 8 subjects? Why not do your best six or whatever and concentrate on doing well in them? Or do them in a more staggered way that means you don't have to be struggling with lots of them all at once? But you can't because Progress 8 etc and eBacc.

I don't think the one size fits all model serves anyone particularly well, tbh. And so flexibility was one of the things that informed our choice.

Agreed. I'm very academically inclined and have A very academic career but everyone should have a broader education than just GCSES.

It's why we spend a lot on extra curriculars for our children

Can't speak to the academic argument on state vs private beyond opinion, but I CAN speak on first hand experience with the two groups over many years.

My job (food service) means I interact with the full spectrum of class & let me tell you - there's a wild, WILD difference between state & private school kids. There is a week before holiday season kicks off when it's just the private school families that are here & it's the worst week of the whole season. The kids tend to be incredibly rude & demanding if they deign to talk to you at all, even into their teens they'll often not look at you when you talk to them & will talk through their parents. They are FAR more likely to have 'allergies', specific food requirements, need to change menus or make up dishes entirely. They leave the most amount of mess, chairs strewn around, rubbish & food on the floor. Those families are the least patient & most likely to get agressive & nasty if things go awry with the dads being the worst.

If it's not the above then it's children being ignored by the parents whilst they get drunk/treat themselves & the kids brushed off - sometimes with the nanny they've brought with them who is similarly ignored.

There's an arrogance & aloofness that state kids just do not tend to have &, frankly, the private school kids just aren't as happy in that family setting.

Prior to my 20yrs in this part of the world & this industry I'd never have imagined this to have been the case. I'd have assumed the opposite & it absolutely informed my decision to use the state system.

(for clarity, this is not just my experience, it's across the board in this industry for staff EVEN those who were privately educated themselves!)

@Caerulea the counter sweeping generalisation of your point is that whenever state schools break up around here the low level anti-social behaviour ramps up as do as the number of kids hanging around Mcdonald's vaping.
Both statements are prejudiced and snobby, yours is inverse snobbery.
How do you that "the private school kids just aren't as happy in that family setting?". Have you actual evidence for theory unhappiness, that is a ridiculous thing to say.

@Caerulea I can't say I'm not surprised at this as the kids at my sons school are lovely, polite kids. As are the kids at their clubs and their other friends who are from state school.