Is teaching at private schools better?

[buffertie]

Many a thread and much in the news about just how awful teaching is. Many teachers are leaving the profession. The main reasons I’m heading and reading about are: poor pay, very long hours, badly behaved children, even worse behaved parents, unrealistic expectations, ofsted, too many kids. Many more I’m sure, I’m not an expert on the subject as you can probably tell.

Anyway, my kids go to private primary school and I often look at the teachers and wonder if they’re ok or if it’s any better at private schools ?

I have nothing but praise and respect for all teachers. I certainly could not do it and I am saddened by the poor conditions and quite frankly very worried what will happen, as so many are leaving the profession and many more are probably put off from even joining.

what’s the situation in private schools, generally speaking ? Is it better or actually worse ? Perhaps more pressure ?

It depends. DD's best friend at university was privately educated. She had several different chemistry teachers because they kept leaving, so she needed a tutor to get through her chemistry A level. DD was state educated and had an excellent and inspirational chemistry teacher and achieved an A in chemistry.

I’ve gone from state to private - the pros certainly outweigh any cons!
Pros
The classes are tiny - biggest is 9!
Can actually teach instead of managing behaviour
Budget is better - no begging for prit sticks!
Parents generally on side more
Longer holidays
Breaks are breaks - no break / lunch duty
Free lunch(!)
Many photocopiers

Cons
I teach 08:30-5:15
SLT can still be a bit crap!
Work emails at weekends / holidays

My dc attends a very selective, top London school. Im assuming the pay is better because the staff turnover is so low. Some of the teachers have taught some of the parents of my dc friends, most teachers are there 12+ years, the office staff 20+ years, the teachers are so very lovely and invested in the children.
the pay must be worth it.

I work in a boarding school.

Pros

• class sizes, my max is 23 for a high set, 6 for a foundation set
• fully resourced, if some equipment is broken we can just buy a replacement.
• behaviour is generally better.
• free meals
• my children got a fee discount
• can live on site if wanted
• I teach less than a state teacher
• massive one - I get to teach in my science specialism.

cons

• long hours, 6 days expected
• lots of add ons, trips, evening events, etc….
• high expectations from parents, sometime unrealistic, about their child
• I’ve gained weight from all the free food!

Overall, I wouldn’t go back to state.

It depends, I know people who have been at the same state school for decades & sent their dc there. Some privates have left the TPS.

My older DD is at an independent secondary, she rates some of her teachers, but less so others. But she has a subject specialist for every subject and in a couple of cases where a teacher has been long term sick or a new teacher hasn't worked out, the school has arranged for her class to continue to be taught by subject specialists who are permanent members of staff. This contrasts with the local comp that some of her friends go to. Apparently they didn't have any specialist maths teachers for some time and couldn't recruit for one of their two mfls, so had to stop teaching it to some year groups.

My other DD I in an independent prep. They seem a bit challenged by maternity leaves, but she does have a teacher for every subject. She had some fabulous teachers in her state primary before we moved her and I'm not sure that her current teachers are any better. But they only have to teach 16 in a class, which makes a huge difference.

@buffertie private school parents want your blood!!!!

Typically secondary school teaching is 10 to 12 hours per day you teach, so full time is 50 to 60 hours per week term time.

At least in a private school the behaviour is much better so you can focus on the teaching and not crowd control.

You should see the behaviour at the state schools that is also slipping…!

Typically secondary school teaching is 10 to 12 hours per day you teach, so full time is 50 to 60 hours per week term time.

None of my family or friends do these kind of hours. So much depends on school and SLT

Any organisation is as good as its leadership.

No it’s not. It’s just different. Private schools have high ability children who are generally better engaged so it’s easier but parents are v demanding and they need to know their stuff with the bright kids that need stretch.

state schools have more red tape and a much wider range of abilities and needs with bigger class sizes.

DD 23 is a new teacher. She is at a private day and boarding senior school (13-18). She says the biggest difference is that in State school (all her training was in state schools) 30 to 50% of the lesson was spent on behaviour management and at her private one, she walks in and teaches.

She is also employed to teach her science speciality. State schools were always moving anyone and everyone in to cover Physics.

Her pay is slightly below state but she opted in to TPS and does one or 2 evenings boarding prep to take it above state (does all her lesson prep, marking and reports whilst supervising). Gets free meals whilst on site, free gym, free swimming, free theatre tickets, free gym kit and coat, subsidised electric bike purchase and money claim back health payments.
Her lab is fully funded, her classroom has spare (fully functional) equipment, there are no limits on photocopies or printing.

She feels happy, but is very aware that her continued presence is performance related.

I went to both state and private, taught in state, know people who teach in private.

The one major, unquestionable advantage is that private schools will happily remove disruptive children. Of course they want the school fee, but if three different parents have come to their management to voice concerns about Jimmy Jones and his effect on their child's learning and confidence, then Jimmy will be encouraged to disappear before he causes those three nice kids to leave.

I taught a nice boy who had been in private. He got in a fight which he said he didn't start, lost control of his temper, beat the other kid badly (essentially didn't stop when he was winning) and hospitalised him. Not uncommon with teenage boys who are big enough to seriously hurt each other. That boy was removed from the school despite an otherwise good record. Difficult for him, although he was mature and understood the consequence, but great for the discipline of the school as an entity. There's no guarantee the same would have happened to him in the state system.

I have worked in a few private schools and came from the state sector. I'm currently in one which pays well above state sector pay. Classes are smaller and the kids are easier to manage (not nicer, necessarily, just more compliant and want to learn). Most of them do their homework, revise for tests and give their best every day. We are still in the TPS and have lovely facilities, lunches etc. I don't have to do anywhere near as much marking as when I worked in the state sector (because my school recognises that marking Year 8 exercise books is pointless, and you can just get them to write an essay once a half term and mark that). The amount I am expected to teach each week as a proportion of a full timetable is much lower than it was in the state sector. It's mostly though that as a competent teacher, all my lessons involve me interacting positively with the kids and them doing the work I have set them - the behaviour disruption I experienced in the state sector was constant, and really really ground me down. My kids will be eligible for 50% fee remission at the school if they get in.

Cons - we go on a lot of trips, expectations from SLT are really high, still work quite long hours (my contemporaries from university work the same hours but at this point they might be a partner in a law firm and earn x5 my wages!) and the parents.... Ive had a few different jobs which all involved responsibilities and therefore quite a lot of interaction with parents and we really do operate like a business with customers that has to cater to what the parents wants. And they can be absolutely horrible and extremely demanding. And as fees have gone up and up, that has only got worse. The vast majority of them are lovely but a lot treat us basically like skivvies (constantly getting emails from someone's nanny or PA...). There are some schools that will tell parents like this where to go, but in my experience a small number of very prestigious mostly boys schools - the rest need bums on seats now and will agree to most of parents' crazy demands.

Sorry how could you teach 10-12 hours a day? Half hour lessons yes, hours no.

A ‘nice boy’ who hospitalised another boy. Hell fire.

Oh yes I'd forgotten about not being able to photocopy stuff and buying my own books to read to prepare for courses. I literally never do anything like that in the school I work in, if we want a book or pens or to use the photocopier, there is money for this!

My colleagues are also just different to the ones I worked with in the state sector and more motivated and interesting. I don't think you can generalise though - I've worked in very weird and unhappy private school.

10-12 hours of work a day (per day you teach). Usually including 3-5 hours of teaching.

I'm currently teaching in the prep department of a private school (juniors) temporarily after teaching in a state school for 12 years.

Biggest differences

• the demands are still there, but different. Parental demands are huge. Parents are extremely needy and pushy. They expect because they're paying that their kids will suddenly become geniuses.
• Alot of kids with SEN. Many parents think private schools can cater for this better. Not always. See below.
• long days with 6 lessons a day. Teachers do get free periods as kids swap around teachers and departments for different subjects, like secondary really.
• small class sizes. My class has 12 but a very wide range of ability so it might as well be 42 some days.
• Behaviour. Massively better. We had kids openly swearing at teachers at my last school. At this school the worst you'll get is pulling a face at their friend or making a noise. Kids thank me for teaching them after each lesson.

The timetable is so fast paced it can be very tiring for children with SEN. Lessons are shorter and often English/maths taught by different teachers so it's difficult to cater to their needs effectively.

• Lunch is provided and paid for. You do have to eat with the children though.

Overall is it less stressful? No, it's just different. They still have inspections, which are still very like Ofsted. Parents are often more demanding. Behaviour is better but often you're dealing with children who are very far behind or have complex learning needs.

??

10 to 12 hours per day you teach.

You teach up to 5 hours a day. Then there is prep, planning, marking, admin, duties, meetings etc... In total about 10 to 12 hours work for each teaching day.

I taught 5 hours today then 30 mins with my tutor group. I had a lunch time commitment (30 mins). I spent 45 mins before school setting up for lessons. 10 mins of break was clearing up first two lessons then setting up for next two. After school i spent 45 mins doing admin (behaviour issues, parent phoning), then started marking a set of tests whilst my son had a music lesson which I finished this evening.

I reckon a child would likely be excluded in state in that situation. Was a school governor in a secondary academy and sat on a few panels for exclusions. The HT could exclude for a single serious breach of the behaviour policy and that policy set out what that could be. Assaulting another pupil was one of those things. Even if that child had previously not had any previous serious behaviour issues.

Not really if he has SEND or his parents will threaten to sue the school for discrimination. My child was badly beaten at state primary and we had to leave, not the perpetrator

Well, I cannot answer for other schools and obviously I would not know if that had happened at ours if no exclusion happened, but schools have a duty to safeguard all pupils, SEND or not. Difficult to generalise but school will have a section on SEND in their behaviour policy and decided on a case by case basis. If the pupil does it and is considered a risk of doing it again, they would have to take steps to ensure they don’t hurt other pupils. Personally in that situation, I would have complained to the chair of governors. Guessing the main issue is so many pupils end up in schools that are not appropriate for them but the LA can’t or won’t provide a place for them in a specialised setting. Certainly that is a big issue in the area where I live at both primary and secondary level.

However, state school pupils can be excluded for assaulting another pupil or a member of staff. I have been on panels where this happened. One parent even turned up to a panel, mainly to support the decision to exclude and to apologise for the child’s behaviour. So it’s impossible to generalise about all schools, all parents and all children. The school where I was a governor has this clearly within their behaviour policy and states they exclude if that pupil remaining in school harms the education of welfare of others as well as persistent or serious breaches of the behaviour policy.

Hmm not always. I work in a large state post 16 college. A large number of my colleagues tutor to top up their wages, often in a subject thats likely to have just the one specialist in a school.. and most of the students are privately educated, often at expensive London schools. Its scarey that at A level parents are paying a premium for substandard teaching and then having to top up with more spending on experienced state staff.

If you read what I wrote I said the pay at OUR LOCAL private schools is higher but THEY (ie our local private schools) are academically selective.

Of course like all state schools some private are good and some less so. The market in private will determine the teachers' pay. The better ones can afford to pay their teachers well.