AIBU to discuss A level success without private school spending?

[Absorbthecost]

Parents/carers who have not spent a penny on Educating their children and they have just received great A level results.

The sacrifices made all the struggle,

I’m interested to discuss families where the child has succeeded without need for private school

https://www.gbnews.com/money/private-school-fees-soar-vat

https://www.ft.com/content/091b214d-231b-414a-8f3e-9ef9fc021926?syn-25a6b1a6=1

Those who did pay,

presumably to secure great results at A level

The same kids off to Uni, placements easier to secure as less international competition. Uni the playing field evens.

And now time to pay for Uni,

https://inews.co.uk/news/education/university-tuition-fees-11000-2030-4705197?srsltid=AfmBOorss52PSHD6xJzisWMdeNxcXDen3IrCGS49nnGH1ZyDnmvTOh_k

A child who did outstanding (without spending a penny) the same result as a family who spent £250k + The above article is a low estimation for a selective U.K. day/ boarding.

The kids holding the same result off to the same Uni, How are families feeling!?…. Did you save to help towards the Uni Fees/accomodation.

Not everyone's sweetheart

They most definitely aren’t all noisy and chaotic.

The very wealthy don't just exist in London and nor do schools that are thriving. But I am not really sure you want other people's experiences or views do you?

We’ve got a bit of noise and chaos

welcome to the real world

you’ve also got £250 k in your savings account. Thank me later…..

The very wealthy don’t stay in UK. That exodus is a matter of fact…. This is more middle/upper middle ….

Oh dear - bless you.

https://www.adamsmith.org/press-releases/number-of-uk-millionaires-at-lowest-level-since-global-financial-crisis

Yes, but they do still exist - and they tend (funnily enough) to cluster around fee-paying schools 🙂OP, I live in a neighbourhood (not in London) where a 'normal' house is a mortgage-free £2m. That's inherited wealth - and the share portfolio that comes from the other chunk of it - pays for school fees easily. Now this is not the experience of many parents paying school fees - some make huge sacrifices - but I am just trying to point out that even this incredibly privileged sector has significant variations of wealth it. And nobody who falls into the incredibly privileged camp is worrying about their children's education right now and whether it delivers 'value for money'.

That's my experience of working in comprehensive schools I'm afraid. Even the ones where leadership is strong and most of the kids are well behaved, the environment can still be very unpredictable and a great deal of teaching time is lost to low-level disruption.

Wealthy don’t like cut backs to provision or anything low budget. Economising. UK independent schools are economising.

wealthy people will not tolerate such they have options.

Great for you though that is a large TAX commitment for you and your rich friends. I believe wealth is slightly different.

This is on the children. The children who put the hours and effort in, often going above and beyond what is expected of them by their teachers at a state school.

there was a poster earlier today who spoke about the work her son had put in to get the grades even though his peers in his class were not working to the same standard. It’s individual, the same was some parents will choose different school for their children based on needs and ability, not because paying more is a flex!

The one by us is run like an army camp. Seems only to be two polar opposite options.

Yes, and unfortunately some children don't cope well with either of those options.

It should be AIBU to send my child to private school when it doesn’t guarantee better a level results than those children at a state school - because that’s the OP’s point!

I dunno, your thinking is a bit skewed here.

Clearly you have made the assumption that all private schools are academically competitive (they're not) and that all parents choose private for grades (they don't).

You also seem to think that all high-achieving kids from comps must feel like they've 'won the lottery', but why? They are likely top set kids who have worked hard and knew from their predicted grades what was possible, plus knew what they had to work towards in order to meet entry requirements for their first choice course/uni.

Unis have been increasingly pro standard secondary education in recent years. Many kids now leave fee paying schools for A-levels to increase their chances of getting into top unis. Oxbridge particularly. We no longer live in a World where private kids snag the best uni places.

At the end of the day, grade boundaries are the same for all and kids are only capable of what they are capable of. Many of the perks seen in private are experienced by top set kids in comps - smaller class sizes, best teachers in exam years etc.

Many privately schooled kids are self-driven, self-motivated and resourceful too. Our local private is a boarder and whilst those kids are getting a great education they are not experiencing the privilege of an invested, loving family supporting them every day.

You just seem a bit, well, salty? Sneery?

I'm really not sure it's necessary but let me tell you, as a parent of a child who did well on the 11+ and got a place at grammar, I have experience of your attitude.

I know for a fact that when GCSE/A level results come out the parents of his primary cohort will be VERY invested in his grades and GLEEFUL should he be seen to have failed. Why? because their kids didn't get in and they are perpetually pissed about it.

Fair? No. Why? Because kids are kids. Private kids may be getting an arguably better education but they still experience life - illness, death, mental health struggles, abuse.

There's really no need for the boasting, IMO.

You must have had bad luck in the 5(?) schools you worked in. Of course there are bad schools. Just like there are bad anything else-including private schools- but I don’t judge private schools by the one where my godson was mercilessly bullied. It baffles me that it seems to be OK to judge all state schools by the few rubbish ones.

I don't even understand this latest post. I do pay lots of tax - obviously. I don't struggle to pay school fees due to inherited wealth on both sides of the family and nor is my children's school in any way affected in terms of the quality of the provision that it is currently delivering. Not all fee-paying schools are the same or aimed at the same market. The sector is experiencing some disruption, no doubt about it, but it's not affecting the narrow group of parents that you are describing in your latest posts.

Can you please give specific examples of schools?

The private schools in the area I used to live are not national top 100 schools, and they look the same from the outside, the swimming pools and sports grounds still very much open. The parents of the children I am friends with have not reported any changes.

These schools are not in the south of England and are still heavily attended by international students, eg children of government ministers and similar from Asian countries, who could choose any school worldwide, as well as local children. Oxbridge rates still above average.

It’s a very sweeping statement to make that ALL schools are broke. (And yes, I have read about private school finances and the increased rate of closures)

Are we saying that these 2 schools are the same proposition, if student outcomes are the same?

That should be apparent from the number of times OP quotes themself.

The OP keeps replying to herself and arguing with what she herself is saying.

Very little of what she is saying makes sense, and alot of it is frankly bizarre. She;s paying 'full sticker price' and resents it. (Plus as previously pointed out, keeps trotting out trite little phrases like they are a gotcha). But seems to think by not making the choice to move when her kid is 10 she is being scammed and everyone else is to blame.

It's just a whole load of nonsense, and tbh if the poster is real then I think she sounds like she is on something.

I’m not at this stage either, but we talk about the future a lot. I’m not sure what we will do yet.

I wouldn’t pay for the grades themselves (we are fortunate enough to have genuinely outstanding state education where I live). However, I do worry that they will miss out on opportunities, confidence and self-esteem building etc if we don’t do private….I'm not sure though. Mind not made up. I went to state, did very well academically and loved being at school.

I know a private school nurse and they may have fencing, lacrosse and chinese GCSE but they also have plenty of health challenges like disordered eating, alcohol abuse drugs etc.

The private system has loads of problems too which people rarely talk about.

So this does depend on your local state schools. Our state schools were/are wonderful - I’d guess possibly less bullying than private from what I hear. However, I’d love to see the data post-university. I worry that if I send my children to state, will they end up with the self belief to propel them forwards after university???

I assume that whatever you quote from has asked every pupil about 1:1 tuition as well, or does that not count? Most kids at state here have tutors, as well as the grammar lot.

As for more from state get top grades, I can't find anything supporting that, unless you mean by sheer volume of numbers rather than %
https://www.ft.com/content/c8b5605f-209c-4513-9111-1ccc00f3a07e?syn-25a6b1a6=1

You appear to be the big fish in the small pond here in Uk,

observation is you would be a very small fish elsewhere.

It is choice but UK is definitely not value for money.

wealthy seek quality and value for money they won’t make-do with economising.

The comparison is UK value for money very sorry but I can guarantee your private school will be economising. Fact.