Be honest - would you send DC private if you could?

[Naptrappedmummy]

If your DC is at a state school and you were offered free places for them at the local indie, would you accept? If so, why? If not, why not?

YANBU - Yes I would send them private
YABU - No I wouldn’t send them private

Me - yes I would, in a heartbeat (DD at state primary).

Yea I’d send them if it was free and guaranteed free place the whole way through their schooling. However I wouldn’t never pay for private school, if I could have the money I’d prefer to set them up with a home deposit etc.

I’m really interested in the ‘abolish private schools’ attitude.

I can sort of see how you might believe that if everyone was invested in state education, it would get better, I guess. But I don’t think that holds up; countless wealthy parents who care about education are already heavily invested in the state system - many of them are in this thread. What is it that the tiny minority of privately-educated families could bring to this push for better state schools?

Secondly, you’re never going to get everyone invested in state schooling anyway; you don’t have to send your child to school as long as you educate them. This is a (fairly) free country, so it follows that you’re free to educate your child at home, choosing which resources/tutors you use? Or are the abolitionists proposing to ban paid tutors too?

So how can any government (except some sort of totalitarian one) ban people from taking that model (paying someone to teach your child something) and making it into a large-scale operation (ie a private school)? Surely our country isn’t the sort of country to ban private enterprise providing it’s a legal activity? And how could teaching a child be an illegal activity?

Of course you could take away the charitable status. But you’re still left with a business that provides a perfectly legal service. Just how could you ‘ban private schools’? Unless you’re going down some mad path of criminalising stuff left right and centre? Where would that leave swimming lessons?

Unless you force all children to attend government-approved classes (no home schooling), there will always be people prepared to pay for tuition, whether that’s at home or in a formal school setting. Our country would have to be very, very different (a communist dictatorship springs to mind) to enable the ‘banning of private schools’.

Well you would because Pandora’s box has been opened and they now exist, to stop existing they would have to close or stop being grammar schools. Therefore their students and prospective students would have this taken from them.

If you truly believe a diverse cohort etc is better for society why wasn’t it better for your DC?

And the top 1% would just send them to overseas boarding schools instead of British boarding schools so Boris et al. still wouldn't care about state education.

No because I think good kids will always do well whichever school they attend. My DH was a good kid, he went to a super expensive private school and got good grades but so did I in a dodgy state school. We both graduated with a first, both have a MA and I have a PhD too.

SIL, on the other hand, also went to the fancy private school and she’s a heroin addict. Make of that what you will.

Yes. State education is an absolute binfire at the moment.

Because we have the grammar system where we live, so the local comprehensive doesn't have a truly diverse cohort. All the brightest kids are creamed off into the grammars. The system I believe in doesn't currently exist.

It's entirely possible to be critical of a system whilst also making practical decisions for my own child's needs.
Few parents when they have one of the best schools in the country within walking distance that their child can comfortably get into are going to send them to a sub standard comprehensive instead are they

Prisoner's dilemma innit.

God yes. In a heartbeat.

But we live in an absolute shithole where all the schools have awful problems caused by the families that live here. Weed smoking parents on the school run, police at the gates, parents fighting in the playground. it’s hell.

For the right school, yes.

I am against private schools in theory. All children should get a well rounded education with smaller class sizes, arts and sport. But they don't.

And I'm shocked at how poor the teaching standard is in an "outstanding" primary school. Uninspiring and an unchallenged bullying culture. I hope the teachers are burnt out as the alternative that they don't care is too horrible.

So yeah, a good Indy for secondary is my hope. Even with the VAT. But I won't vote Tory.

Most people just move to a nice house in a good catchment or tutor for 11+. I'll just spend my money a different way.

But that’s the system you say you want.

I don’t know how many more times I have to spell it out.

If you’re that passionate about removing all forms of school selection and elitism, then you must believe that the benefits of that outweigh the cons. So why didn’t the benefits of a diverse cohort and equal surroundings outweigh the benefits of academic excellence for your child?

It would be really interesting to turn the question on its head.

If your kids are in private ..

If your local state school wasn’t actually an absolute shithole with no teachers and where the kids have been proven to be unsafe to the extent that it has a major impact on their mental health … but instead was a lovely leafy grammar school where everyone got great results … would you take your kids out of private and save £20k per year?

I think the majority of us would say yes.

I often hear this point about tutoring coming up on threads like this and I think it's missing the point entirely.
Abolishing private schools won't make everyone's lives equal. Wealthier children will still have access to tutors and more after school activities and nicer holidays and more help at home. Unless the PP is advocating for some version of stalinist Russia then I doubt she is suggesting abolishing all of that too. And most wealthier children will have the means and the help at home to do well at most schools anyway.

But private schools and grammar schools are a very clear and damaging cause of inequality. They are divisive in a community. Stopping someone being tutored wont benefit anyone else, but making everyone be educated together does benefit others. I'm sick of hearing the standard middle class dilemma of moving areas to access better schools, or paying to go private. The children that are left behind just have to lump it in their local schools, abandoned by all those with money.

Grammar schools are the worst in my opinion. All this pressure at age 10, and if you fail, you instantly have less of a chance of doing well. Parents desperately paying tutors from year 4 to get their kids in. Imagine a country where everyone is invested in the quality of the local schools, everyone is educated amongst a true mix of their local community, and actively learns about the lives of others. Everyone really cares about the quality of their local schools, and outcomes are actually a fair representation of ability rather than just a representation of who paid more for their education. Look at the attitudes of so many government MPs who were educated only amongst their own kind, completely clueless about what living in the real society they represent actually means!

There are areas in London where an astonishingly high amount of people go private. People basically either go private or leave the area, leaving sink schools there noone wants their precious children to attend, it totally divides a community.

The best option in my mind is a lottery system. Everyone in an area gets allocated a local school, not done by distance so there is no rugby scrum to live on the school gates, but children are educated amongst people from the whole borough, no private no grammar. There are parts of the country where this lottery system is already in place (although still a few independents around). There would be a huge drive to improve the state education system by ALL involved, not the wealthiest abandoning it, or moving round the country into little middle class bubbles leaving all the problems behind for the poor less privileged folk to live with.

I actually went to one of these schools that people run away from. I narrowly missed the catchment of the school my parents hoped for and did absolutely fine, so I'm no hypocrite and I won't be putting my kids in private or grammar schools even if there was an option.

It would depend on how they can need the needs of neurodiverse children who don’t have an EHCP as they don’t have a learning disability. They do, however require a bit of TLC and understanding and reasonable adjustments. Depends also what extra curricululars they offer. For us it would need to be the arts and not sport. Not sure of many private offer career pathways for those wanting to pursue musical theatre.

And finally no. Because the nearest one to where we live would require a longer commute than the state school. Although o have seen their mini bus after school so suspect they do some pick ups.

Another big issue for me would be the social expectations. I have a friend who did get his child to sit the entrance exam and interview but wasn’t offered a place. They were hoping for a scholarship. The conversation we had the expectations of of the friendship groups who often the go skiing over the summer or other similar expensive trips which we could never afford. Being able to keep up with friends of a different social class can be difficult. That’s if they even made friends.

Yes I would, absolutely. And I work in a state school.

Yes I would as my son is autistic and tried to get him into a non selective secondary school. Unfortunately they didn’t have places but if I could get him in there I absolutely would.

Fee paying private schools don’t just take the bright kids. They wake anyone willing to pay. Only bright kids can get the scholarships of the can’t afford. Where I used to live there is a state grammar. Free. 11+ required to get in. They do only take the brightest kids. Although o believe they also have some private students from out of area but could be wrong. Where I work currently is next door to a private school. A colleague has got a teacher training position to start in September. They have a sendco and an actual send department of specialists who can likely support those students who have some kind of learning need. They also have smaller classes which also help. Bit I’ve a child who is not interested in a career that’s academic. She wants to be in the theatre. She’s ok academically but won’t get 9s but is hoping for 6/7s but is suspect they would be trying to push her more academically than on her chosen career path.

Yes! I'm not so keen on state school educated people ......

I’d carry on home educating

The state secondaries near us are going down hill (naice area, SE) Lots of substitute teachers, work not marked, low morale from everyone and more and more disruption. It's not like the state education my dh and I had in the 90s (and DH went to the school our DS is at currently). We're putting both dc in private from September. Didn't think we would, but what we're experiencing from state secondary isn't good enough in our opinion (state primary was excellent). So in answer to the OP, yes definitely (especially if it were free)

The majority of people I know who went to private school don't give me a good impression of it.

Yes I would. I have a very clever child who has been sidelined in both primary and secondary because the focus is on the kids who have behavioral issues.

Teachers have no time to teach because they are busy dealing with kids who probably shouldn't be in mainstream (or ones who are just little twats)

I feel guilty about the fact that I can't afford to do that for them.

@Elizadomuchly

Imagine a country where everyone is invested in the quality of the local schools, everyone is educated amongst a true mix of their local community, and actively learns about the lives of others. Everyone really cares about the quality of their local schools, and outcomes are actually a fair representation of ability rather than just a representation of who paid more for their education. Look at the attitudes of so many government MPs who were educated only amongst their own kind, completely clueless about what living in the real society they represent actually means!

A couple of things.

Firstly, you’re never going to get everyone caring about the quality of the local schools. Some will home-school. Some will send abroad. Currently we’ve already got most parents caring about local schools. Why would it be significantly better if you add in the tiny proportion of families that currently pay private? It wouldn’t. It would be essentially the same.

Those currently in comprehensives can actively learn about each other’s lives! Why can’t they, just because a tiny proportion of kids are elsewhere?

I think you’re dreaming of a utopia that a British government has never shown any sign of being able to deliver (Tory or Labour). Sure, it’s a nice idea, but its lack of realisation so far has nothing to do with the existence of private schools and everything to do with the limits of government and the various messes society throws up.

Finally, people keep bringing up the clowns from Eton that we see in government as if they’re representative of private school kids! Most independent schools are absolutely nothing like those old public schools! They are worlds apart!

Are you being deliberately obtuse or do you genuinely not understand?

The system I want doesn't exist. Me sending DD to the local comprehensive whilst grammar schools still exist wouldn't change anything. Me being a one man crusade wouldn't remove selection and elitism.

And as I said, it isn't a diverse cohort at the comps because the brightest kids aren't there. They're not there because they're at the grammar schools which STILL EXIST.

This also carries social ramifications especially for a child like DD who is autistic. It was important to know that she would fit in at a school. Sending her to a school where she was alone academically wouldn't have been fair. My number one priority will always be my child and no matter what you post, you won't make me feel bad about doing the best for her in the system we have.

At the moment, our kids are in a fantastic small primary school where they are absolutely thriving, the behaviour expectations are very high and the extra curricular offering is really well balanced. The secondary schools aren’t anywhere near the same - the one that’s currently being highly praised is so rough with some of the most awful discipline you could imagine.

A friend went to private school and then taught in a state school and said that the stark difference was that in a state school, it’s cool not to try hard to succeed but in a private school you’re the odd one out if you’re not trying your best. That hasn’t ever left my mind but I most certainly couldn’t afford to send my kids to a private school.