To wonder if you are against private schools…

[Unsrr]

Why is this? As in against their existence?

I was brought up in a reasonably poor area and my education was not good. I sometimes went to the nearest private school for swimming lessons and remember being in awe of it. We have one dc now age 7 and can’t afford private but there is maybe a chance we could for secondary. I wouldn’t give it a second thought if we could make it work.

I have never felt private schools should disappear because surely that’s what we should be aspiring to? An education that is excellent (yes I know not all private schools are good and lots of state schools are better), isn’t that what we should aim for?

I feel sad that this country has now made it harder to access this education. What is the reason people are against private schools existing at all? I don’t think it can be jealousy, I think many people are genuinely opposed to it from an ideological perspective and I can’t understand it at all. Just interested really as there’s been so much talk about schools recently.

I may have @‘d the wrong poster. Apologies.

I think state schools would be better if private schools didn't exist, and by the same token the NHS would be better if private healthcare wasn't an option.

I have no strong feelings against individuals who choose to pay for those things though. I don't blame people for paying for stuff if they can.

Being debated on the Moral Maze tonight

Not any better quality of debate than Mumsnet

You'd almost wonder if they look in here for ideas!

Are teachers better paid at independent schools or do they just prefer the smaller class sizes?

It depends on the school. They can sometimes have
Less teaching load (so more planning time)
Longer holidays
Small classes
Free lunch

But can also have greater expectations on running clubs, responding to parents, Saturday work and a worse pension.

Pay is slightly higher, but the main difference is the working conditions - smaller classes, longer school holidays, fewer behavioural issues. Sometimes other perks too - my friend is deputy at a private girls boarding school, and the job came with use of a free house - a huge absolutely beautiful house beyond anything she could ever afford.

To that I would add better behaviour and being able to teach their own subject and to a high standard if the school is academically selective

So a biology teacher will probably get to teach just biology and not physics and chemistry too

A computer science teacher will probably get to teach computer science and maybe a spot of maths rather than having to do imedia and btech IT.

Another perk could be discounted fees for their own children.

@Bushmillsbabe is correct that the pension is normally worse and there are often high expectations around things like helping with extra curricular activities outside school hours, accompanying trips in holidays, responding to parental emails and writing regular detailed reports.

Because frankly those are some of the things parents are expecting when they pay.

I know many state school teachers also help with extra curriculars and trips but in a private school you absolutely have to. State school teachers also have more students so have a high enough work load without the extras.

My children's father started in the state sector and moved over and has stayed in the private sector ever since. Obviously it varies per school but in the state school he said he was a policeman but not in the private sector. That is just an anecdote based on the school he was at. We did only have to pay 15% of school fees from age 4 - 12 for one of our children who was at his prep school for those years which was a good perk.

I agree there are a lot more out of hours things to be done even Saturday school, school trips, evening clubs, morning clubs and all sorts with teachers involved (being a full time working wife of such a teacher when we had 3 children under 4 and both worked full time I certainly remember the out of hours work, late nights etc etc.

I think some people don't realise the advantages that private schools give. It's not really about the quality of the education (which varies, just as it does in State schools), it's about gifting the kids a whole different strand of privilege for the rest of their lives, that wouldn't be replicated if rich kids attended state schools in rich areas. The schools literally teach you that you are a cut above anyone who doesn't attend one and that's a belief you carry for a long time if you don't examine it (and most don't).

My siblings and I went to top/famous public schools and the amount of "nice but dim" individuals who walked straight into Oxbridge/Durham/St Andrews and then straight into jobs in private equity, politics and the arts is ridiculous. This is not in any way based on their intelligence or talents. It's almost entirely based on their accent, their confidence and their connections. To me, that's buying an insane amount of privilege over and above other children and shouldn't be allowed. Those private equity types are the only ones who can afford to buy family homes in central London. Do we really want whole cities/industries to be filled with only one type of person, from one type of background? Politics obviously hands people a lot of power. And the arts is notoriously difficult to break into but Pandora is a top art gallery manager because she has the right accent to speak to investors (who are all working in private equity!).

It's just not fair and perpetuates generational wealth divides. It's the same reason that I'm not against inheritance tax (again, people don't understand how rich you really need to be before inheritance tax hits you. Doris and Bill who saved all their lives to pass their £400k house on to their kids are not impacted by it).

Yes, for the top/elite private schools yes it brings that type of privilege. But not for your standard local Indie. My brother attended one of these due to unmet ND need and bullying in state. He got in on a partial scholarship, I think my parents had to pay about 1k per term.
That school didn't bring any privilege beyond smaller classes and him feeling safe. He is now in a minimum wage job, but his mental health and confidence was boosted.

My dcs went to two good private schools and this idea that they teach the children that they are better than others is certainly not something that we ever encountered. In fact dc3 is going out tonight with a bunch of mates from the local state 6th form, they all seem good friends with each other.

Some rich parents DO like to perpetuate this idea, it's true. But the schools try hard not to do it.

My DC went to private on scholarships, they learnt confidence. They are very articulate, but they have never got jobs or opportunities based on their school history. The kids that did had parents already in those social and professional circles. If those kids were in a state school, it would change nothing. Nepotism is rife.

Paul McCartneys kids went to state schools, doors opened for them based on their parents, not the school.

@Feelinadequate23 that's really not the case now at all and it's certainly not true for the hundreds of private schools that are not in top echelons. I really wish this outdated nonsense would stop being pedalled..it's really harmful to those of us trying to represent the reality of most schools which simply do not confer any kind of fast track to uni or these mythical "contacts". As for confidence or self assurance..it's not about kids thinking they are "better" but being happy in their skin and not feeling like the world is against them. Is that so terrible?

I think that's so true, they encourage children to be proud of their achievements, to be confident to talk to anyone. They don't teach them they are better than others, they teach them that they are equal to anyone, that they don't need to be intimidated by those in power. So they feel able to talk to and show their knowledge to people with the power to promote them, rather than being too scared that they will look like 'showing off' or that 'they aren't good enough'.

Sometimes in state schools children who are very bright, or very good at sports etc, are held back to 'not make others feel bad', and gradually it becomes a bad thing to do well, something to be kept quiet in case it upsets anyone, and gradually their confidence shrinks.

‘Paul McCartneys kids went to state schools, doors opened for them based on their parents, not the school.’

fuck me Sideways. If ever there was an exception to the rule kids of a Beatle would be it 😅😅 pretty sure it wouldn’t have made much difference which school they went to, path would have been the same…

@Bushmillsbabe ok yes it’s fine to paint it in that positive light of it teaching kids to be confident in themselves etc. but the point is that only 7% of kids get taught this, the rest don’t, so those 7% then do so much better in the workplace, because of the confidence their parents bought them. How is that fair? Doesn’t make them any smarter or harder working than the state school kids.

Maybe if these private school kids were in the state system their parents would demand the state schools teach this ethic and then everyone could benefit.

@Feelinadequate23 what is preventing state schools from teaching this ethic at the moment? And how would having a small number of slightly more affluent pupils joining the class make it more possible for a school to do this?

Just on the confidence issue, the teachers at private schools are so much nicer to the students and engage them in conversations about different topics. This means they are always having conversations with different adults. Their tutor, subject teachers, sports coaches, the teacher that runs politics society etc. I think this builds confidence and the ability to talk to adults.

Honestly at my son's state school (allegedly a good one) many of the teachers seem to treat both parents and children with utter contempt. My son would be more likely to be avoiding eye contact with his head of year than having a chat about the results of the American election in case he got yet another detention for having some dirt on his blazor or an impromptu bag search.

Lots of independent schools are really good. I think we should be celebrating the fact that at least some kids in the country are having a good education (got to be good for the economy right?) and trying to make state schools better for everyone else.

We need to start by funding state schools better. That is the number one issue. But there are other problems too. Students aren't always being taught an appropriate curriculum. If they leave primary without solid foundations instead of learning lots of English and maths skilIs they end up in many different lessons. The gcse grade boundaries are a zero sum game and mean that many students will fail no matter how hard they work.

I know the current government wants to address the curriculum. My fear looking at discussions around my own subject is that it will be at the expense of academic rigor for those who can do it.

I also have a feeling that private schools are better because they are paid for. This means there is more mutual respect between parents, the school and students.

I have children at both independent and state. I have also taught at both albeit quite briefly at state.

The teachers at my son's state school don't even reply to my emails. Not sure how I am going to get them to change their ethos?

His school does get good results due to its middle class intake however. This is related to the fact that every parent I speak to seems to have hired at least a maths tutor for their child (including me) or are teaching them themselves.

@Feelinadequate23 as pp have said, having private school kids in state is not somehow magically going to improve them. Its really bloody insulting to the state parents to suggest that they are failing to do something a few extra parents could. Your posts are acknowledging that PS kids get something "better" but instead of thinking about Ways to emulate that you want to take it away from everyone? Honestly, having taught in both the biggest difference apart from parental attitude is small classes. I have 12 kids in my form. They come and sit on a sofa in the common room and chat to me. We do pizza and film nights..just Tesco pizza that I pay for. It wouldn't be possible with thirty. Two if my y8 kids came to see me during our hour long lunch to chat through some homework they needed help with. They and I have time to do that. It's not about "posh" and it's not about facilities, just space and time. A massive massive drive is needed to cut schools in half and bring people back to the professional. I love my job. It's busy but not stressful or overwhelming. If you could create that in state schools there'd little no need for anyone to pay.

It has always been a complicated issue. It is 20% of children at fee paying schools at sixth form level not 7% and the percentage generally is higher in London than elsewhere. The academic day and private schools reject loads of rich children because the children are not bright enough to pass the exam - in a sense the school chooses not the parent. Then there are schools boarding and day in the private sector where you can get in if you are not so bright.

I agree with the comment above that teachers can have a bit more time to chat to pupils almost as equals in the private sector (although I am sure some state school teachers have time to have interesting conversations with pupils too).

I didn't actually pick day private schools for my 5 for smaller class sizes. I wanted single sex schools (getting hard these days to find even in the private state sector) and also schools where it was fairly hard to pass to get into (a bit like the state grammar schools where my parents went in the 1940s). I think you need about 20 children + to get idea going and debates in the classroom amongst teenagers as some will be shy and silent and too small a class is not always that good an idea.

I suppose there are just a myriad of reasons people choose particular schools. I don't think anyone has ever told my day private school children they are better than everyone else as perhaps one post above implies.

LiceoDolce, I agree whereas where you are a paying customer you can in a sense politely demand attention otherwise you will take your valuable business elsewhere as it were. However I have always tried to minimise contact and let the schools get on with it as I know how busy teachers in both sectors are (having been married to one).

Some state schools do teach this, my daughters very mixed intake primary had a huge focus on Oracy skills. Children are all expected to greet the head and deputies with eye contact, a 'good morning Mrs ....' and to ask them a question about themself and to in return clearly answer a question when asked. No looking away, no ums or errs. As they move through the school you can see the impact in how they talk to adults, my daughters friends will talk to me clearly, politely and confidently, and in our village you can pick out just by talking to them which school a child attends by how articulate they are.
But this doesn't have to come from school, it comes from the experiences they take part in, and how we teach them to think about themselves - we socialise with a wide group of adults and children of all ages and backgrounds and my girls are used to speaking with all of these and are not fazed by them, we teach them that the only limit on what they can acheive is the barriers they chose to accept or not put the effort to climb over, that they are equal to anyone and the authors of their story. There is far to much 'I'm hard done by' 'why do they have X when I can't, that's not fair' and not enough 'well if I don't like X then it's on me to do something about it for myself'.

If you want to influence the direction of your child's school, get involved. Become a governor, or offer to support with fundraising to get a greater variety of confidence building activities included. Don't expect the 'private school parents' to do it for you.

I think if you do opt for state you need to do more work yourself. Ours are at single sex state it has good academic results but manners / morals / extra sports / social skills - we’ve done all that ourselves.

Agree social skills and confidence are crucial remember eye rolling when I was 13 at my mother teaching us (she went to a girls public school herself we were at state) but most valuable skills ever.

Just thinking out loud here,
do you think it would make a difference to parents involvement in schools/education if their taxes allocated for education went straight to the schools their kids attended? So the mindset becomes that the parents are paying directly for their child's state education rather than thinking it was "free"?
just a thought.