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?

We've experienced both, kids at what is thought to be the best local primary - great academic results etc. and quite a middle class catchment so lots of interested parents from professional backgrounds, but we've never been happy with it. School leadership is awful, comms with parents awful, school staff seem under a lot of pressure and unhappy and unfortunately this is impacting the kids. Oldest had gone from happy and thriving at nursery/ lower school years to putting in minimal effort and starting to get into trouble, never wanted to go to school, school weren't able to give him challenging work and covid didn't help (they repeated so much work over multiple years), wouldn't recognize there was an issue.

Moved them to a local private (only really option for a change and thought smaller classes/ more attention may help to challenge them) and it's like it's a different child - more sport (state school regularly just cancel one or both of the two pe days because "the hall was booked for someone else"), forest school every week, greater range of academic work to keep it interesting, happy teachers (that have the capacity/support/ environment/security) to be able to be kind and caring, interesting extra curricular activities - mainly they feel happy and supported.

State schools are under so much pressure I can understand it must be nearly impossible to provide adequate provision to over 30 kids, with the combo of a good reputation of this school historically meaning standards have been allowed to slide considerably by poor management, parents told "you're lucky to be here, if you don't like it you can leave" if you raise any concerns at all, no open line of communication. It's awful, primary school should be a lovely happy carefree time. Other kid doesn't want to move but I'm desperate for them to even though it would make things very difficult financially, because the difference is so much greater then I imagined.

Schools need proper funding, sensible education policies crafted by teachers who understand what is needed on the ground, proper social support so that schools can focus on education and other services pickup social care issues, sensible class sizes with adequate provision for SEN so that teaching can become a properly paid and enjoyable profession that retains good teachers. Of course there will be exceptional state schools and poor private schools - but there are so many poor state schools and I do believe the situation is getting worse.

We have a 3 tier system. Her class with 8 is high school.

Some of our first schools are tiny. Less than 30 pupils.

@Willyoujustbequiet you must be very rural but it sounds a lovely school so you are very lucky.

I taught in a state primary for 20 years. My DD started off in a private school (class of 12), but the education was no where as good as the state primary where I taught so we moved her when a place became available at my school into a class of 30. No regrets. PE was netball high fives, tag rugby and hockey with plastic sticks. Music and French were taught by specialists. But the emphasis was on the academic curriculum, good manners and good behaviour. DD was one of 18 children from her class of 30 to go to Grammar school. The following year her brother was one of 14 to go to Grammar.

I now teach at a local prep that is highly regarded, 20 is the maximum class size. The uniform of straw boaters, blazers and kit bags that are bigger than the children are very much part of the school's identity. PE and Games every day in the Prep school, played on extensive school fields with proper kit, wooden hockey sticks, gum shields etc. There is specialist teaching for PE, French, music, forest school and art. Lots of homework etc. But the core academic learning is no where near as rigorous as the state school. This year one out of 20 in Year 6 got a Grammar school place.

If I had my time again, where would I send my children... the state primary. If you want lots of expensive trips, fixtures, balls, enrichment activities, hours of homework each evening... go private. I was happy to do enrichment myself- Brownies, cubs, piano lessons, weekend trips to the fire station open day etc.

I didn’t “tar all comprehensives with the same brush”. And, as I said, I didn’t go private with any of my kids. Read my post again, carefully this time.

🙄

PE 3x a week. Sport every day

That sounds excessive to me. They must waste an awful lot of time just changing clothes.

@Passepartoute at a time when there is an obesity crisis and too many kids do not enough exercise, 4 days of sports at school is good imo. Especially for girls as adolescence is the key time when many girls stop doing any form of exercise. Sport has so many positives especially for mental health.

Thank you.

Yes we are. Accident of birth really and I do feel desperately sad/angry for other families in the state system in areas that don't have the same opportunities.

If you can afford it, a private education will set your kid up for life. State school children will never get the same experience in this country as those at private schools. It will never change. So if you can't beat them, join them. Our number 1 priority is school fees. I would down size our house to pay for fees if it came to it. State schools in the UK are not fit for purpose.

.

I'd be interested to hear from people with experience of both private and state schools, both primary and secondary of the behaviour of the pupils is any different.

We considered private. Those excessive facilities and straw boaters are exactly what put us off, as well as the fact DH teaches many privately schooled kids at undergraduate level and they are far too dependent on being spoon fed with limited capacity for independent thinking. Sparky comp kids fair much better.

DD16 is doing 13 GCSEs at our local, very mixed ability, cross city comp. She’s predicated 9-7 in them all. Two of these - additional maths and triple science - are taught in ‘sixth period’ so on two days school finishes at 4.30pm. Ok not all kids will take these options but the options are there.

There are 14 in her GCSE geography class. in a recent cross City geography quiz day their school team beat all the others, including the privates (of which there are many in our city), with the highest score ever recorded.

Not loads of sports time but we take care of that with extra curriculars, active holidays etc.

I don’t for a second think she’d be a more rounded person as a result of attending the private school. In fact the opposite.

I think it’s too simplistic to say that all state schools are rubbish and all private schools are great. There are certainly some private schools which I wouldn’t spend my money on and which aren’t as good as some of the better state schools.

However, generally, the private sector will be able to provide a better standard of education because they have greater funding and are able to ensure their classes don’t have disruptive pupils (those pupils will be asked to leave pretty quickly).

These threads are always full of parents trying to justify how the state system is better than private. I’m intrigued as to how some state schools can apparently afford specialist teachers, endless extra curricular activities such as horse riding, great sporting opportunities, long school days etc and yet some can apparently barely afford paper. The reality is that the vast majority of state schools do not offer such long days, as many specialist teachers etc as the private sector can.

From the TES magazine:
“this year, the proportion of A* and A grades achieved at private schools was 47.4 per cent, which is up 2.6 percentage points on 2019‘s 44.8 per cent.
This percentage-point rise is larger than the rise in the proportion of A*/A grades achieved by comprehensive secondary state school entries: this figure rose from 20.1 in 2019 to 22 per cent this year.
Meanwhile, 25.4 per cent of academy entries and 39 per cent of selective school entries achieved top grades this year”

The fact is that the private sector, as a whole, achieves better exam results. Of course there will be pupils who get straight As in the state sector, but there is more than double the proportion of top grades in the private sector. They also outperform selective state schools. Why is this? It’s not because private school pupils are inherently more clever.

The gap has probably grown more since covid. Yes, there were some state schools who were excellent in lockdown. There were far too many which weren’t. s an example, our private school provided a full daily timetable of live and recorded lessons, including art and sport for example. The local “good” state primary provided 2 short worksheets per week.

With regard the the OP’s post, I’d be wary of a private school claiming to be 2 years ahead. A decent private school shouldn’t need to make those claims. I’d also query how many places they have available because many private schools don’t have any available space. It would be a red flag to me if a school had several places per year group available.

All children deserve a good education. Unfortunately not all children are given that opportunity. I’m not convinced extra funding will solve all the problems in the state sector. Extra funding isn’t going to magically improve classroom behaviour for example.

I make these comments as parents who were both state educated. Did we do well in exams and end up in very good professional jobs? Yes. Do I think that my children’s private schools provide a better, more pleasant learning environment? Yes.

I don't think it's as simple as state vs private or 'all state schools are bad'.

Private schools have far more funding than state schools. State schools are terribly underfunded at the moment and have been for a number of years.

Recruitment and retention are dire at the moment and those schools in disadvantaged areas are often the worst hit.

My son is at the state village primary where we live and we couldn't be happier with it. He is doing brilliant academically, lots of friends and they do loads: swimming, dance, PE, trips and visits, guests coming in e.g. a travelling theatre, lovely outside space, he has drum lessons. The staff are fantastic and work hard for the pupils.

I teach in a secondary school that serves a very deprived area. For context we are around 40% Pupil premium, many of those are classed as deprivation pupils, so those from the poorest backgrounds. High levels of SEND, high levels of EAL - many of our children do not speak English in the home. Almost 50% of our current Y7s are below chronological reading age.
With all of these challenges, alongside lack of adequate funding and access to external agencies for support, we have to work tirelessly to provide a good education for our children to hopefully enable them to break out of poverty as adults.

I can hand on heart say, as a staff team, we are absolutely driven and committed to providing the best we can. Not just curriculums but extra opportunities we provide such as extra curricular clubs, events we put on in school, competitions that we support our pupils to enter, making sure we discuss their reports with them. Supporting families as well - I can't tell you how many hours I spend on the phone as a form tutor, all on top of teaching a full timetable and managing a core department.

The local private schools probably do provide more than we do in terms of facilities and extras but please remember that those of us who work in state schools, especially disadvantaged schools, do so because we genuinely want the best for those kids and we do it on very limited resources.

I don't even know what that means: "a private education will set you up for life". In what sense? Career? Connections? Not necessarily. Two of my closest friends went to private schools. One is a teacher, the other works for a teaching union doing admin work. Both good jobs but no reason to spend £100,000 plus on their educations to achieve this. I don't think either have made lasting connections from school. One loved her school because she's very sporty. The other hated it and the "rich bitch" mentality (her words).
I know plenty of state educated people who are lawyers, doctors, barristers. A friend of mine is a barrister who married another barrister. Both state educated and both rolling in it. My state educated DH was one the youngest people to be a professor at one point.
We could just about afford private school but would have to make sacrifices. I've never wanted my children to go to private schools. I want them to mix with children from all backgrounds. That is part of their education. That gives them a greater understanding of the world and prepares them for the real world.

Some of the private schools near us get atrocious exam results so I wouldn't generalise about them academically.

“A child willing to learn will likely get the same results regardless of what school they attend”

This isn’t true. A school with mean or uninspiring teachers can take a bright eager child and turn them into someone who hates learning.

Anyway OP it’s a silly post because obviously some state schools are excellent and some are awful.

Agreed.

I wouldn't financially cripple myself to educate a child privately.

My nail technician had an expensive private education. (I mean she seems happy and does beautiful nails but I am not sure her education "set her up for life" as she still lives with her parents at 30)

My best friends include surgeons and barristers and bankers etc who were all educated in state schools.

And some private schools are great and others are awful

And we don't have to be dependent on school for everything.

Mine do lots of extra curriculars outside of school and we use tutors as needed plus of course spend time with them travelling, playing games, having conversations.

Both state educated and both rolling in it.

Many people don’t just measure achievement on salary though. Surely it’s more important to find a job you are suited to and which you enjoy?

Two of my closest friends went to private schools. One is a teacher

I don’t understand your point. Why would privately educated people be disappointed in becoming a teacher? Do you think the only reason to go to private school is to end up in a high paying job, that if you don’t it means that the money spent on education was wasted?

I know plenty of state educated people who are lawyers, doctors, barristers.

I’m state educated and ended up in that type of profession, but I can still see the advantages of a private education. You are also missing the point that state schools have changed dramatically over the last few years. Anyone qualified in those professions left school a fair few years ago. The state system is not what it was a generation ago.

The snobbery on this thread is astounding. Why are people looking down on certain jobs? This is precisely what is wrong with the education system. There’s an obsession with everyone getting great academic results and going to university, rather than people valuing more vocational jobs and trying to find a job that suits each individual.

I mean she seems happy
Surely that’s a better definition of success than the size of your pay packet?

I think it's a bit harsh to suggest that people in 'ordinary ' jobs who were privately educated have wasted their education or it was a waste of money.

My two kids currently are at a private school. We don't choose to send them there so they will get a good job. We sent them there because our eldest has SEN and the smaller class sizes appealed to us.

The facilities are lovely and the opportunities that they get both in and out of the classroom exceed those at our local schools.

Having said that recently the school have shown that they aren't that clued up on SEN and it is making us look elsewhere for options.

How well children do (according to research) is directly influenced by parental income, education and how well the children are supported at home.

I have experience of state and private schools and I would say that private school is only truly worth it if you won't miss the money.

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

Yes. Because nobody who is state educated makes anything of their lives. What bollocks.