Director of Education privately educates their children

[Thattennis]

Recently I met our local councils director of education through a social event. He has 2 children who are primary aged and I know these children are privately educated and his wife also works at this private school. I do know he has worked within several of the schools in our council and he does have a good reputation if a little under experienced/young. His children would have started school after he took on the role.

However something about the director of education choosing to privately educate his own children doesn’t fully sit well with me. If he is supposed to be championing the system for our children then it reads bad to me that he doesn’t even believe in the system enough to place his own children in it? Our council area is massively mixed with some wealthier areas but also an abundance of council estates and economically deprived rural areas. The entire council only has one private school and it’s not particularly large.

AIBU to feel a little uncomfortable that the director of education doesn’t believe in the schools he is responsible for enough to place his own children in them?

I wonder if the council's head of tourism takes holidays abroad.
I wonder if the head of housing lives in a council house.
I wonder if the head of libraries owns any books of their own.
I wonder if the head of public transport drives a car.
I wonder if the children of the head of childrens services live in a council residential home or with foster parents?
I wonder if the head of seniors social services has put their parents in a home.

Just so obvious ... the state schools are good enough for us but not for him. OP is entirely right to be unsettled. And the ' choice' he makes is a choice available only to a very small number of people. He s given his state primaries ( which must include some great, some not) a big fat vote of no confidence.

Yes this is the issue exactly. He also lives in a town with the 4 best primaries in the entire council. All incredible schools that people move to be near. If those schools aren’t good enough for his children what does that say about the rural schools or schools in other towns which don’t have the same stellar reputations?

I dont necessarily feel the same about teachers not sending their children to their school or nurses using private healthcare as the reality is teachers do not have the same level of control over the quality of a school.

The local head of education here sent her children private when my elder two were nearing secondary school.

Her reasons were varied. When she moved here her job was to sort out the absolute shithole our local schools were in. To do that she made some really unpopular decisions. She really cracked down on a lot of staff and a lot of issues locally. Now people think she's wonderful, but in the beginning they did not.

She worried about the impact of her unpopularity on her children, and also on the issues she could have interacting with staff in a school they attended in her role and as a parent combined.

She was also bluntly honest enough to say that she moved her children from an area with very very good schools because she wanted to take the job - she wanted the challenge of making education in our area good from where it was - so the compromise with her ex husband was that the children (who were starting secondary the year after she moved) went to a private school that matched the outcomes of the schools in their old area (as private schools go it wasn't great, but was better at the time than the state schools).

It might just be easier logistically to send the children to the school where their mum works.

Also it might feel quite uncomfortable from the mother’s perspective to see the opportunities afforded to children at the school where you teach and where you could send your children for little cost but not to do so in order to make a public statement related to your husband’s job.

Do you know anything about his circumstances or his children?

i would not judge him. He is an employee of the state. Not a politician. And you have no idea if his kids are severely dyslexic or adopted or have another compelling reason to be in a smaller setting.

Yabu

It's true that there are huge problems with state education in a lot of areas. You surely can't believe that the person holding the job of Director of Education for the council actually has the power to magic these problems away. He doesn't have the budget, he doesn't control the constraints that are set by the government, he has no control over the cultural issues for the segments of the population that don't value education, nor control the demographic distribution of those who he is responsible for. He is doing what is possible with what he has. As a highly experienced professional with oversight across a system employing thousands his salary will be sufficient that he can spend on more than just the basics of existence. He has as much freedom to choose to spend his disposable income on a better quality of education if that's what he wants. Perhaps he would love to be allowed to raise taxes so that every state school receives £20,000 per pupil so that everyone gets a well-resourced education, but he's not allowed to do that. He is allowed to spend that money on his children though, and his children do not deserve to be deprived of that opportunity just because their dad happens to be heading a team with "education" in its remit rather than "health" or "social care" or "housing". If someone else in another job with the same salary is allowed to do it then he should be allowed too.

This happens all over the place. It’s rampant. That or sending DC out of borough for selective. It’s not great not at all surprising

I think you are reading too much into it. Its a job, nothing more. Many senior officials work in different departments or areas, but that doesn't mean that their life choices must be determined by their jobs. A director of local authority housing department will not be living in a council flat, nor would they need to in order to do their job effectively - it doesn't mean that they can't provide strategic leadership for the department.

Oh dear, OP!

You think that those in charge of a service, like state school service in their area should send their children to a state school?

What next? Believing that Labour MPs who abhor selective education, such as grammar schools and private schools will only send their child to the local comprehensive?

No, a lot of Labour MPs and their supporters, when push came to shove, did whatever they could to make sure their little darlings got into the best selective school or private school, not the nearest okay or good comprehensive school that's supposed to be good enough for everyone else.

In the case of Tony Blair, Diane Abbot and a lot of other Labour MPs it was a case of do as I say not as I do. Decrying selective education and private schools, when sending their own children to such schools.

Even, Shami Chakrabati, now a Labour peer, who opposed grammar schools on the basis that they were socially divisive and contributed to segregation, sent her own child to a private school.

There is a word for such people. Hypocrites!

Private schools usually offer substantial staff discounts on fees for their own children at the school, and I imagine it's loads easier logistically, than having to get the children to a different school.

There are arguments over whether private schools should exist at all, but given that they do, I don't see the problem with the director of education hearing about how private schools deal with things, and if that knowledge gives him ideas for how to approach issues, it's no bad thing (though probably he's just tearing his hair out about money and how he can't do things in the same way because of that.)

Do you judge someone in a Morrison's uniform buying groceries at another store? Or an NHS doctor providing or using private healthcare? Or a railway worker who uses a car?
I don't understand why people are so judgemental about other families trying to choose the best school for their children. This man's private life is separate from his work and is none of your business.

He's just a public servant who works on implementing government policy regarding schools. He doesn't have to believe in it. Just like whoever is in charge of implementing rent control policies is free to own their own home.

I imagine it's a lot more practical to have his DC go to a school their parent is already working at...especially for school runs etc. Plus it means the mum can probably watch their assemblies/nativities which teachers usually don't get to do.

How long has he been working in the role?

Ultimately, it's a job. My children's educational stability (whether at private or state) is worth more to me than my husband's job. If my husband suggested pulling my kids out of a school they were settled in to further his career aspirations and make himself look good, I would tell him to take a running jump.

I don’t think this type of a job is a mission or vocation or a statement of values - just something he does. So wouldn’t have any bearing on what he does for his own kids.

Its a job ultimately.
DH oversees a lot of schools (for one particular thing) in his job... should we send our children to one of them?

I guess its just a job for him at the end of the day. Probably well paid too.

And where do the Councillors send their kids to school? They are the ones who set the budgets etc.
People frown at MPs sending their children to private schools - the Councillors are the local equivalent, not the Council staff.

Maybe he's not in the catchment of any of the excellent schools. I've never managed it, despite only being a 5 minute walk from one, as it was full of siblings. So..... I had to go private.

I actually agree with this. He is doing what he thinks is in the best interests of his kids. It drives me mad when people say they wouldn't send their kids to private school because of their principles (a poster on here recently wanted to block their ex from sending their kid to a private school because they disagree with the system). I cant imagine sacrificing my kids education for my own personal principles.

By all means send your kid to state school of it's the best you can afford, or the best suited to your child, or it allows you to put more money into extra curricular. But to sacrifice your child's education to further your career would be abhorrent.

I am a primary school teacher and decided to step out of full time teaching for a bit. I have been doing supply in the interim since September. I have always worked in the state system and my children attend state schools. I held quite strong views on private education and felt they shouldn’t exist. However, I have now taught in a private school (I kept being called back to one in particular) and the offer of education is night and day compared to the state system. To begin, the class sizes were a maximum of 18 and for subjects such as music, art, DT, foreign languages etc - the children were split into groups of 9. The day began at 8 and was a ‘soft start’ until 8:30 - the children had an opportunity to talk and get into the mindset for learning. It felt nurturing as a teacher - I could actually have a conversation with the children. I can’t say the planning or teaching resources were better for maths/English compared to state schools - in fact so much emphasis is placed upon state teachers to over plan, differentiate lessons etc. that it causes burn out. The day ended at 4 and some children went off to prep instead of going home at 4. The children were calm, engaged and happy. I haven’t enjoyed teaching so much in a long time… Gove wanted am ambitious curriculum for all children but there isn’t the money or resources to provide it. As a state primary school teacher, I use to buy SO many resources for my classes. I’m talking about things like £30 of fruit for a DT lesson - because in DT the children had been designing a product for an intended user. Not much engagement if you never get to make a product… (smoothie)
The person who holds the title of Director of Education would know how bad it really is - this is why he would not put his children into a broken system. If I could afford to, I wouldn’t either.
If you got to the end - well done! Our children deserve better than this BROKEN EDUCATION SYSTEM

I suspect it has far more to do with the sheer logistics of getting two children to school if one parent is a teacher. How many teachers would drop their children to early morning wrap around care so they could travel onwards to their place of work in another school unnecessarily ?

If they can afford it, why not?
Seems sensible that they attend school with their mother.

The director or Education should believe in the value of investing in education.
He could easily gain some very good ideas from knowing different frameworks of eduactuion too.

I am no fan of private education, but I would never judge any parent for doing what they believe to be in the best interests of their children. I don't think that political or professional concerns on the part of the parents should trump that.