Is private at primary actually worth it ?

[nottoruffle]

I'm not here to ruffle feathers at all. I'm trying to decide what to do with my kids and whether private at primary is the thing for our family.

It's bloody expensive.

Is it worth it, is the million dollar question.

What kind of child tends to flourish at this type of school ? Will they be pushed too hard? or will they have more support as there are fewer pupils than in a states school ?

I'm looking at 3-18 co ed schools as I have a boy and a girl.

Any experience welcome.

You can't polish a turd.

Schools work with what they've got.

A selective prep will take very academically able children. They will "manage out" anyone remotely difficult, behaviourally or academically, leaving an easy to teach group.

They will have parents who can afford enriching activities like music, sport and drama.

An academically able child from similar, comfortably off parents, will thrive and do well in most state primaries.

A less able child, perhaps with learning difficulties, would not come out with high grades from either.

I think the children who can benefit most, are the overlooked middle, for whom the smaller class sizes and absence of disruption can provide a marginal gain. Its not huge and I think you can achieve as much & more supporting your own child at home.

I think people think paying lots of money for something automatically means it will be better. Of course sometimes it is, but in many cases kids will thrive at state schools and wouldn’t have done any better at private. If you’ve money to burn I guess it makes little difference, but otherwise I think it’s a completely unnecessary expense in a huge number of cases.

Yes it is imo. These are foundation years. A good solid foundation, really does shape a child for the later years. I have friends whose kids are in really good state schools, and they openly admit that it doesn't even come close to the private schools that they know of. It's not only about the academic side , it's also about the individual attention they receive when they are so little.

My kids were at private all the way through. But we'd have preferred state fur primary but my eldest didn't get into the four nearest, very good school as they were oversubscribed. He was offered a place on the other side of the borough. I had never heard of it so asked around and it was uniformly considered ok but not desirable if possible to go elsewhere. My son was not academic (though couldn't really tell then) and I'm glad we decided to go private as he would have sunk to the bottom. A bit hyper the school he was at were able to deal with it.
But if your primaries are good send them state and then revisit as they get closer to secondary age.

No one can give you a generic answer as it depends on the school, the child and the combination of the two

Children arent homogeneous beings and neither are schools

You're really speaking a lot of nonsense here. What limited social experience are you referring to?

I think it really depends on your local state primary. If it's got a good reputation and links with the local community then probably not worth it. Save for secondary instead. We've just moved our DS from the local primary (P6/age 10) and in just 2 weeks the difference has been huge. He was in an incredibly disruptive class with multiple children with ASN and he was invisible. DD is having a different experience at the same school although to be honest I'd move her now if I could afford it after seeing the difference in DS. But the plan is to move her for secondary.

My experience too. The teachers also give your child that individual attention and know your child so personally. I love that they also always have time to speak to you about anything. Everyone is just on top of their game.

I know but what kind of children tend to benefit and from what kind of school ?

I tend to find the people that 'get to the top' are generally always privately educated. Guess is depends if you have aspirations for your kids to be Prime Minister/Consultant Surgeon/Vet to the King etc or just like the rest of us mere mortals?

My ds is very academic, however personality wise he is quite introverted and reserved. His selective school has been brilliant in tailoring a plan just for him to really come through in his own way.
I could just see him swallowed up in a state school without that individual attention and the academic side slipping. MN would have you believe that an academic child will shine wherever, and i disagree with that. A child's personality also contributes to their achievements.
So private was the best choice for us.

You're asking the wrong question, OP.

I'd suggest you need to ask
"What are the benefits of my child going to the specific private school that is available to them versus going to the specific state school that is available to them"

and

"Do I think this is worth the money it will cost versus other potential uses for the money?"

For what it's worth, when I asked myself these questions (my DC are now out of school) I decided the private school provided marginal benefits but there were pros and cons both ways, but overwhelmingly it would be better for my children that they went to state school and I saved the money for university/early adulthood/house deposit.

The schools landscape has now changed and your specific schools and priorities may be different to mine .

I'd say that the main one is that not all private schools get better academic outcomes for your DC than a state school would. If you have good state options and your DC doesn't appear to have additional support needs (difficult to judge at age 4), and the local private school is nurturing but not really offering much apart from smaller classes, then you may well decide that the cost isn't worth it.

Unless this is some kind of hypothetical discussion presumably you have your child and a small number of school options. You know what they are and you can't change them so consider the specifics not random anecdata from posters who happen to reply to this thread

OP nobody is going to be able to answer that because nobody knows what the state and private options are like near you, or what your child is like.

Would DS have benefited from an academic hothouse prep? Nope, he’s already an anxious child and although he’s an academic high flyer he would find the pressure hugely stressful. Weekly spelling tests already send him into a panic the night before in case he doesn’t get 10/10. It would have suited me perfectly though.

Would he have benefited from a failing state primary with lots of disruptive kids and no one to one attention? No to that as well.

Has he done well in a primary with smallish class sizes, a very nurturing ethos, and lots of opportunities for enrichment (music, MFL, dance, drama)? Yes. It happens to be a state primary, but if the same school had been private he would still have done well there.

It depends on what the state provision is like in your area and your financial state. Personally, I do not think private primary is worth it. You can take the extra money and provide extra curricular activities for your child or put the money away for secondary fees, uni, buying a car or a house deposit.

Private secondary on the other hand is a different ball game.

Depends on the school and the child I think.
ours were state till 11+ and tutored in final year for exam prep etc and it worked well

It depends entirely on the school in question. DD1 went to a private primary until we moved somewhere with good schools.

Academically it was brilliant- but when she got to the state primary she was indeed about two years ahead. So she spent the next few years pretty bored.

Reporting-wise it was good. They did the (Durham-?) test each year so you got an accurate picture of where your child was as against other children across the country who took the test. State has always been less informative IME.

Socially it wasn’t great, as the small class size combined with the presence of an evil little madam in her class who revelled in playing off kids against each other and excluding those who didn’t toe the line.

Extracurricular were decent, but there were limited spaces and many cost extra. State was actually much, much better in that regard.

Additional costs were better at state. Uniform for one thing costs a fortune at private and I still don’t consider there to be any need for a 6 year old to have a blazer.

SEN was seemingly good (about half the class struggled with dyslexia, dsypraxia or had issues stemming from trauma).

Ethnic diversity (though not class based diversity) was good, completely unlike the local state schools in that area at the time. But when we moved both ethnic and class diversity was better at the new state school.

Music lesson provision was far better at private (as compared to both the local state schools and the new state we moved to). Private allows for longer lessons, the teachers don’t chop and change, and there was much more musical emphasis overall.

TLDR - depends on where you are, the child’s interests, and what the local competitors are like.

My DCs did Reception at the local Outstanding infants school in a leafy suburbia. It was as good as a state education could be I think. In 1 academic year the teacher changed 5 times!! When I asked for a higher level biff/chip reading book, I was told not to worry and that they were planning to get every pupil to the same level by the end of year 2. No desire to support improvement. They were very busy though. 2 of the class (NT) were not toilet trained by age 5 and more than a handful of kids didn’t have enough food or adequate clothing. The teachers were battling against some inadequate parenting before they could think of teaching. I felt huge sympathy for the poor TA who stayed the course and was very lovely.

We switched to prep school from year 1. The difference is considerable. The facilities and pastoral care is outstanding. The ratio of teachers to pupils is excellent and maths and English are taught in sets from year 1. There is additional support for children who are struggling and extra stretch lessons for more capable pupils.

My 8 year old plays the violin, speaks passable French, plays hockey to a high standard, has just finished reading The Hobbit and has beautiful penmanship (better than DH in fact 😂). They’re both settled and happy.

I’m pleased with the school’s support to enable each child to thrive based on their abilities and interests. That’s what we pay for essentially. It’s a mixed group socially (from the local butcher, lots of builders and plumbers to a millionaire entrepreneur and big mix in between). Not sure where the idea of elite social circles comes from.

As said above though, every school is different. You need to make the decision based on your child and feel from each school you visit. It’s a value judgement that only you can make.

Despite my kids going to a really brilliant primary where they are thriving. If money were no object I'd send my kids private. I think generally behaviour is better so there is more focus, I think there are more extra curricular things. I don't think the teachers are any better and may be worse in places but I think they have a much easier job with smaller classes and more focused families.

If you can't afford alll through I think prep is worth it if you are trying to get into grammar, but if there are a lack of good secondaries then I'd say the old state unitl eight rings true.

Depends on the child depends on the schools.
my eldest went to private prep and with ND and SLD it was the right decision for him. My youngest will be fine in state, provided our local state keeps up its current amazing provision.

It depends on the quality of the SLT and the quality of teaching.
It depends how much value you place on smaller classes.
It depends how much value you place on social status.
It depends whether it is a school, private or state that caters well for children with additional needs, either behavioural, academic, or exceptionally able or talented.
It depends on what extra curricular activities are possible in either private or state.

Ultimately, it depends on the best fit for your child, if you can afford private. Dont assume it’s always better and don’t assume state is always worse.

• For ages 4-7 the most important factor influencing outcomes is NOT the school, but how much engagement the child gets with reading and number practice outside of school with their parents, plus number of books in the house and the amount of time the child sees their parents choosing to read for pleasure (not just reading bedtime stories or doing school reading practice). A child who gets all these things will thrive even at a not particularly great school. A child who doesn't get these things

That's interesting. I was advanced at ages 4-7 and had excellent grades. My parents never had many books in the house and I didn't see them read a lot. They read a bit in bed at night I think, that's it... they read to me sometimes, but not constantly.

They definitely helped with the rest of the things you mention, but not overly.

My siblings and I did very well at school.

My parents weren't rich or academic. They were business people.

State til 8 deffo. Esp if you have a good Primary near you. It all changes from Year 3. Up until that point not worth it in my opinion.

In some areas getting into private at 11 involves 2y of tutoring and a lot of stress, private from primary at a through school avoids this