Take the plunge now or wait until secondary? Tearing my hair out and at loggerheads with DP

[Munneyworries]

Me and DP started saving for DD’s school fees when she was born. She’s due to go to school next September and we should have 100k saved by then. The school we are looking at is 18k a year for prep (including VAT), rising to 24k (including vat) at secondary level (obviously may be more by the time she starts secondary).

DP is adamant that she should start next year and our plan that we use 10k drawn down from savings per year and the rest from income. His argument is that the surplus needed from income equates to the same as the nursery fees per month that we have been paying and things have been fine.

I get where he is coming from but I just don’t feel we have enough buffer yet. I don’t want to put her in and then take her out etc. The local primary school is not good in terms of reputation for teaching etc but it is a nice place and friendly and I don’t think it will cause her harm to go there.

We have been arguing about this constantly since viewing the prep school this last week and DP wanting to basically sign up to it immediately. I feel so stressed and don’t want to make a mistake for dd who realistically won’t know the difference between the two schools regardless of which one she starts at.

It's very hard having to take a happy settled child out of prep school and move to state, because (assuming the prep is selective), they are sliding back academically moving to state. I had kids who went to state primary until age 9 and 11 respectively, then moved to private. The younger one (gifted) really flourished, but 3 years later had to move back to state when her dad decided to stop paying his share of the fees (my older child also moved but was less affected). She moved for year 8 and in year 10 was repeating maths she'd already learnt in year 7. She knew she could have been advancing so much more, but the resources were just not there in a (good) state school.

In their entire school time, my kids were primarily state-educated. Which was fine, and they've both done well at uni. What was really hard was tasting the experience of all the additional resources of a private school, and then moving (back, in their case) to a state school. I would not start something I couldn't guarantee I could see through, again, for that reason.

In your situation I'd hold off till year 3 at least.

So when you fill them with kids that have been coached up to the eyeballs rather than children with a natural ability but from challenging backgrounds then what?

(Cambridge educated, still don't care, there's more to life than policing something that evolves)

Yeah that's fair , you do you, it was just a suggestion 😂 didn't mean to cause offence

Beginning of Year 6 is a good entry point. Before that spend money on hobbies to see if she enjoys horses, dancing, drama , sport etc and start her on a musical instrument where she learns to read music, treble and bass clef if possible. Make sure she can swim well. Also track the learning from the school with extra lessons. You may find, as we did, that the kids who have progressed through the primary school have had lessons in several musical instruments to find a chosen instrument to continue through school. They may well also have started foreign languages which may mean your child may not be able to learn learn French if the school have been having lessons for several years. Also check with your school how many children tend to join at year 7. At our boarding and day school, the international kids might start at any time but the British day pupils tended to start from kindergarten, although a small amount did start at year 7.

We have had DD in prep since reception and our next will go from age 2 so I understand your DH's point of view here. Neither is right or wrong. For us the reasons we were non negotiable on her school are:

• the standard of teaching is so much higher
• the school environment is much calmer and more nurturing than the perfectly fine state school
• the ethos of the other parents etc
• opportunities to learn a wide range of extra curriculars from reception - mandarin, playing the harp

I agree I wouldn't want to move a child, it's disruptive and their friends become very important to them from a young age. We aren't wealthy but we are both on the same page that for us nothing is more important than the school. We drive an old car and live in a comfortable but normal home but personally I feel like we are investing in our daughter's wellbeing and laying foundations for her.

Interestingly a friend of ours moved her DD from a local state after reception, and this bright and neurotypical child is having to have help to catch up with the girls who have been in the prep school since reception, given easier homework and tests etc. so I can imagine it would be quite a lot to catch up on if one were to start in year 3.

@Smallroomtetris then they all get a good grammar school education.

(I doubt it!)

Send her to state schools.

I know my view is very counter to all the others but I agree with your DP. It sounds to me like you can afford it, but are worrying, which I totally understand.

I have a different view of private schools and that actually the primary years are the most important. Before 7 is when our personalities and many of our behaviours and habits firm up.

Private school for my kids gave them a love of learning, taught them study skills -how to research, learn and revise and a real motivation. It gave them self confidence, and ability to speak well in public, the opportunity to try lots of activities and encouraged them to find what they excelled at and loved. It taught them kindness, teamwork, giving back to the local area and looking after the environment.

All of these things can come later but I think are even more beneficial in their formative years and has set them up with Jonny good opportunities but also the ability to be themselves and follow their own dreams.

Private school for my kids gave them a love of learning, taught them study skills -how to research, learn and revise and a real motivation. It gave them self confidence, and ability to speak well in public, the opportunity to try lots of activities and encouraged them to find what they excelled at and loved. It taught them kindness, teamwork, giving back to the local area and looking after the environment.

All good schools do this. Not just private schools.

I’m on team DH. Sounds like you can afford it and you’re just a bit worried. If you’ve saved £25k a year from earned income and have £100k saved already I think it’s a no brainer

You’ve described the state school as not having a great teaching reputation and it ‘won’t cause her harm’ to go. Surely you want more for your child than this, given it’s an option.

31 children aged 4-7, that’s an incredible load for a teacher to carry. At 7 a child is reading fluently from chapter books, they’re playing specialist sports, having music lessons, doing science experiments, building things in DT etc etc. At 4 they’re still learning to hold a pencil and remember the alphabet.

I agree all schools should do this but it’s not my experience of many schools in our area unfortunately.

There’s a private school near me, long history and well known, that has such tiny numbers in its prep section that they have offered free places to try to boost numbers. They’re trying all sorts but I suspect they will end up closing the prep. The senior school continues but the new head has made it clear they don’t want SEN kids so people are leaving for other privates and state options, including at prep stage. Eight kids a year is not much more than they have.

Some of the prep kids are coming to our fabulous state primary. I don’t know exactly how it compares to private, no doubt it falls short, but it offers languages, instrument tuition (my child learns two instruments), breakfast and after school club, a wide variety of clubs at lunchtime and after school, and is ferociously and passionately inclusive of children with SEN and ESL.

I agree all schools should do this but it’s not my experience of many schools in our area unfortunately.

But tbf, you haven't experienced them if you didn't use them?

Which has pushed out more deserving children and extends inequalities further

(Doubt what? All is true )

Starting now will minimise disturbance to her. She will make friends excited by their secondary and she won't be going, journos she likely to maintain the friendships. Sending her at Primary means she will be on the same footing as her friends going to secondary and have the same background in terms of doing the same clubs and having teachers amd shared experiences in common.

And if you have a shortfall... remortgage, get an extra job?

@Smallroomtetris well that's life! It's never been fair and never will be. Maybe it's best to decide case by case and not by a general rule.

(Yes I'm sure it is! Of course!)

I have both family and close friends that have. Their children have all been different and had experiences but consistently have found 30 in a class with one teacher (compared to 18 with a teacher and TA) has meant less personal attention, more difficult to address bullying or SEN along with less trips, extra curriculars and different amenities.

Most of the children have still gone on to be happy, well rounded and many done brilliantly so I’m not saying they are awful at all, but none have had the time taken to be able to explore wider than the national curriculum for example.

My point is if you are ok with the concept of sending your children privately I think the early years as if not more important.

Not necessarily. A local village primary is likely to consist mainly of kids whose parents have always lived there and known each other. At least 10% are probably related in some way. Yes they will be plebs (that's presumably what you want your child to experience at a state school) but they won't be socially varied. My experience of state secondary was similar - most people had no interest in the world outside their own small town.
There is likely to be a mix of backgrounds and ethnicities in a private school. They will all have money though.

'Plebs'????? @DinosaurMunch Is this how you refer to people irl?

As for 'at least 10 per cent will probably be related in some way' - this sounds like your experience of village life comes from The Archers. I went to a village school - there were the normal sibling relationships but that was it

What is the plan for uni? Are you saving for that separately? I assume that if you're paying for private your expectation is for good GCSEs and A-levels and then onto a good uni?

Personally, I'd pick funding uni and a house deposit over a private primary but if you can do all of it then fill your boots.

Tongue in cheek as my own kids are attending the local primary with its "social diversity" that the posh kids can benefit from by attending for a few years, of course their parents will whisk them away to a better establishment well before they can pick up any nasty habits. Not sure what this "social experience" is supposed to teach them - that they're better than the other kids who continue in state till 18?
These are the people they need to try not to be like in life?
I mean honestly it's a terrible, snobbish attitude. Private schools should be banned.

If you want your kids to experience social diversity how about make some socially diverse friends yourself and expose them that way. Or is it beneath you to mix with people who don't have a degree/professional career/own their own home etc?

On the "socially mixed" point - There are at least 2 or 3 related kids in every year of my kids primary - class sizes are under 20.

Send her to state school and buy her a house. Save for university.

I know a mixture of people who went to state and private and hands down, the state school people are doing better for themselves in life.
Education can be what you make of it wherever you attend school. Having the stability of owning your own home in today's climate is what I'd be wanting to achieve for my children if I had the choice.

Thank you, I have family members who are teachers in state schools with very good results

Sorry, @DinosaurMunch , I missed the tongue-in-cheek aspect. And I entirely agree with your post. A (now-former) friend of mine was completely explicit about his reasons for sending his kids to private school: he didn't want them mixing with the hoi-polloi. I can tell you, his kids would have benefited greatly from less entitlement and more contact with reality!

Does your DD struggle academiaclly such that she needs the smaller class sizes and individual focus provided by a private primary school? Or does she have a particular skill/interest (e.g., music, sport) that a private school can progress because of special facilties? If not, what's the point? The vast majority of state schools will provide an equally good acdemic foundation, with the addtiional advantage of a demographically diverse environment facilitatiing the skills necessary to be an understanding and empathetic member of society.