To choose “poor” state primary over amazing prep?

[Bedsleet]

My children are registered at a well-regarded local prep school. My husband was privately educated and signed them up at birth, because it’s apparently the done thing. I have always presumed we would send them to state school, and sort of viewed this as a back up plan.

Our closest primaries are all a bit of a mixed bag. Two are Ofsted “good” and the closest (which would probably have been our top choice) has just gone from a very old “outstanding” to a mix of “inadequate” and “requires improvement”. We would, especially now, likely be allocated this school.

Prep is expensive. State is free. But will it be a disaster at a “failed” school? Don’t know how much attention to pay to the Ofsted as parents seem to think it’s OK. We can afford prep but it would impact on savings and holidays. I don’t know whether I’m being naive in hoping my children would be fine in the state option, or whether I ought to buy into the private option given that it’s there.

WWYD? Especially keen to hear from parents of primary age kids, or who have made a similar call. Appreciate am fortunate to have these options.

YANBU - state
YABU - prep

It's very difficult, especially for summer born children (I don't know where yours are in the year). A child is assessed when they join the school (the reception baseline). That can set off how they're treated. For children who have just turned 4, it'll be quite different to those turning 5 (it's comparable to getting a 12yo to sit GCSEs or a 15yo to do A Levels).

The first standardised test is the Y1 phonics screening. If they perform well in that, the Y2 teacher will be expected for them to perform well in their SATs (for English, at least). If they don't perform well in the Y1 phonics, the teacher just needs to maintain that in the SATs. If they fail the Y1 phonics then they do that again in Y2.

In KS2, they'll be expected to perform in line with KS1. If someone is slipping below their trajectory then the school will bring them up. If they're on track, they won't be pushed harder. State schools don't have capacity to push those who aren't struggling - they prioritise helping those who are struggling. Ultimately, the "struggling" and "not struggling" could be getting the same marks - but one has performed better before so needs to stay on track.

It's the same idea in secondary. Schools are judged on their Progress 8, which is that trajectory, they have to keep kids on or above the trajectory that started when they were 4. If a child is on track (even if that track is way lower that their potential), a school won't have the resources to prioritise pushing them harder.

@ConfusedSloth "You rarely pay for private just for the academics. It's the behaviour, the small classes, the extra-curriculars and the facilities."

This. As far as academics and sizes of classes there is no difference between my DS1 state secondary and DS2 private secondary. But when it comes to behaviour they are worlds apart. In my DS2 private the pupils are respectful and listen to their teachers whom are therefore able to do their work: teach. In DS1 state the teachers have to spend so much time to deal with disruptive students that they don't have the time to teach everything they are meant to.

The only thing I regret is the lack of diversity in DS2s private school.

What?! There’s money incoming from private parents?!
oh dear. And the rest. I think it’s going on ‘affordable housing’ - whatever that is!

100%. Behaviour and discipline is all. Can you chat to the local parent community to get a feel?

Caveated with it depends on the schools in question...

We moved one of our DC from state to private primary and the difference is huge.

She's got a proper timetable with specialist teachers, better extra curriculars.

The smaller classes and lower level of behavioural issues and extreme SEN (often children who are waiting for an EHCP/special school place) mean that her teachers can pay more attention to her needs. We don't get the usual waffle about mastery in maths and just some tedious written questions that notionally demonstrate mastery - when appropriate she gets her own bespoke work.

No sats and a full range of subjects means that year 6 isn't devoted to cramming the borderline students for sats and boring all of the children.

I almost wish we'd sent both of our DC from reception, but we would have struggled to afford it.

I'd check that any independent school you are considering is financially stable and has enough pupils to remain so.

How far is the prep school OP? Long school days and not seeing local friends as much as we wanted means we are reviewing our prep choice for DD. Already moved DS back into the primary up the road. The shorter commute (5 min walk!) and shorter days are far better for all the family. The larger classes DO impact DS's learning but he is better off socially. We are supplementing with a weekly tutor and local clubs which doesn't fill the gap but helps. We have to be much more motivated at home and have bought a number of workbooks as well.

I'm glad we chose prep for a short time though (year 2, 3, 4) as it helped them enormously with their dyslexia and dyscalcula and at least they ate now meeting expectations in some core subjects which wouldn't have happened at the local school. It's a difficult decision but I do agree with PPs that you have to select a school on a case by case basis.

Im wondering how the 2 schools are academically the same if the private school has more hours for teaching as they aren’t dealing with disruption? Or is this an observation across demographically similar children as opposed to raw averages (ie the not so bright, disruptive kids who do very poorly are separated in state schools from the bright, respectful kids, who fundamentally achieve anywhere?). Not being snide or anything, but we have a similar conundrum for secondary school, ie average state vs private, which would financially stretch us.

With the private schools near us (DS is state, but very good), they do a lot more extra-curricular stuff. A lot more sports, music, drama, forest school, additional languages...

No there isn't, it's going on housing + defence. Starmer stated that.
State schools are getting: teacher strikes, budget cuts + teacher redundancies.

Yeah for sure, that’s a given with private. But I am specifically wondering about the quote ‘As far as academics and sizes of classes there is no difference between my DS1 state secondary and DS2 private secondary’. I’m just wondering what the state school is doing to have academics on a par with a private school despite disruptive behaviour?

so tired of the elephant in the room on these threads; it makes very little difference: "Although attending school is important for children’s learning, the school a child attends has a smaller effect on attainment than parental, family and individual factors." https://natcen.ac.uk/publications/what-factors-impact-attainment-during-primary-school-years

Actually it matters hugely if the teacher is/isn't spending 80% of the lesson time doing behaviour management. That has a huge impact.

Now try reading the research.

I don't know the schools in question. In general, it could be many things ranging from being in an affluent area where lots of the state school students have tutors through to the private school having a lot of SEN or additional needs... And that's without even considering the very many things that either school have any control over.

Oh I was a teacher and have worked in Ed sector for for over 25 years.
Engaged parents teach at home and hire tutors, that's where the home advantage comes in.
I've been in classrooms where teachers have spent all lesson just managing behaviour, no learning taking place.

Indeed. One child state, one private. In my experience in private the lack of disruption buys you an extra 15% marks in exams. It’s just transformational. My local state school would do phenomenally well in results if the teachers didn’t spend an average of 1/4 of each lesson dealing with disruption. That’s 1/3rd more teaching private schools can do.

But hey ‘inclusion’!

That’s not what the website you’ve quoted says. It says that the choice of school has a smaller impact on attainment than both parental and individual factors. But assuming you’ve controlled for those (as is the case in 1 family - same child, same parents) going to a school where the teacher spends more time stopping kids launching chairs around then teaching is going to impact achievement, albeit less than a kid whose got SEND and has parents that don’t care, but happens to go to an Outstanding school.

You're giving it outsized weighting still the way you describe it @SJ198 . If a kid has at least one engaged and interested parent who values learning, and isn't in absolute poverty, they will do fine. Average parents don't want to hear this of course, and of the very rich, they are looking to buy that last bit of advtange regardless. But those advantages are more about getting access to money, whereas the objective should be well rounded kids.

Only you know what’s best for your child. But yes, I probably would choose the state school if I liked it for primary.

My eldest went to a primary that was ‘requires improvement’ through to Y3. We chose that one over the other ‘outstanding’ school. It was a great school and we were very happy with the choice (only left because we moved). My friends who chose the outstanding school had all sorts of issues. Schools go up and they come back down again as funding is moved around. A poorly rated school will likely now have resources made available that a better school does not.

And then private is a whole different ballgame. Some of them are absolute crap. I wouldn’t touch the one near us with a barge pole. Just because it’s expensive doesn’t mean it’s necessarily going to be better. Even that a poorly rated state school, especially for your individual child.

If I loved the state school, I’d go there and plan for private secondary. If money is truly no object and you absolutely love the prep, then of course, the choice is obvious too.

My kids are in a mix of state and private and tbh it depends on the child as to what's best, so noone can really advise. I'm working class and feel a lot of internalised guilt about using the private sector for education whereas my husband sees it as something to be proud of, there are a lot of emotions involved.

Either way, just be prepared for how expensive private education is, and it won't be getting any cheaper under the current government (which I'm not against) so factor that in.

We could comfortably afford private for primary but chose not to because we were ideologically opposed to private education. We sent our child to the local “inadequate” state school and then used our skills and finance to support them and try and help them get better for all of the children. I became chair of PTA (and donated shitloads of money anonymously that way) and child’s dad became a Governor.

DC is super bright so did well at the “inadequate” state primary. We’ve recently moved them to private academically selective secondary (with a 11+ entrance exam) because they had an autism diagnosis and we didn’t think they’d cope in state secondary. Frankly, I threw my ideologies in the bin when my child’s mental health and wellbeing was at stake. I still feel guilty but I think I’d feel worse seeing them crumble at a large school knowing that I could have afforded to send them somewhere small that would better meet their autistic needs.

So glad we sent them to state primary though. They recognise their privilege as they see the difference between their state and private and they therefore don’t take it for granted. They are also near the top of their private school class which just makes me feel like we’ve saved a shitload of money!

So if you can afford it, I’d do state primary and private for secondary.

Oh wow. Thanks. I didn’t realise quite how much the assessments carry along with them throughout schooling. Is there any adjustment for birthday on the reception assessments?

I don't think most people are aware. The statistics (which I won't bore you with unless you're interested) are quite telling. And, no, they don't weight anything based on age. It's a major reason why far more Oxbridge and RG students/grads are autumn born than summer born.

I genuinely find it completely baffling that anyone wouldn’t choose to send their children to the school available to them that would give them the best chance to do well.

If you had two state schools you were choosing from then you would choose the “best” one (for whatever reasons there were for it being the best). Same for two private schools.

Your situation OP, because you can afford the “amazing prep”, is almost equivalent. Why wouldn’t you choose the better school?!

I would be extremely reluctant to a school providing inadequate education. That said I would carefully review the posted report to better understand the context of the comments and understand what the school is doing about it. Are you applying this autumn? You have nothing to lose in initially applying for state and deciding when places give.

That doesn’t necessarily mean prep is the answer. I would look carefully at it and think about whether worth the money. Also investigate whether it would be realistic to get the children later if you started at primary and went badly. You can also look at whether there are other primary options you might be able to get into even if a drive away - with lower birth rates there may be more options than a decade ago.