to think that State Schools must be shit. . .

[GraceyDoorknob]

. . .Otherwise people wouldn't pay for Private?

All three of mine go to a private school (one of them weekly boards) paid for by my parents.

Their philosophy was that it was better to invest in their education then leave them the cash and the government get 40% of it in Inheritance Tax.

It wasn't just about the education, as such. It was about the extra-curricula opportunities they would have, and the friends they would make, contacts they would make "general rounding" that private education gives them. Not just about exam results.

Charming - he's not a "bit of a tit". He's laid-back, probably a bit lazy, will always take the easiest route, and cares more about fun than practicalities. What I am saying is that private school encouraged these tendencies and therefore, although he is a lovely man, he wasn't educated in the skills that I was.

Different school set ups suit different children with different temperaments. It can't be generalised that one "type" is better, given that not all private schools are the same and not all state schools are the same.

I'm not totally certain what my views are yet, but maybe private schools are better for some types of children. If your child is particularly academically minded and could cope with a higher level of work than the average level in a state school class, and is bored at state school, then maybe they would be better suited to a private school.

If your child is really good at something and that is the thing they will want to progress in throughout their lives, should you feel you have to hold them back by leaving them in a state school where the teaching has to be at the average level of the abilities in the class? Should you feel you have to do this just to make sure you aren't being a snob?

My children are of an academic standard of average or slightly above, but not high above average, so I don't feel it is a priority to give them opportunities to study at the 'top level' in a class of very academic pupils with no average or below pupils dragging the level down. For me the priority is for them to get a reasonable education and also benefit from learning more about society by mixing with people from lots of different backgrounds, richer, poorer, and different cultures. I don't think children at private schools learn so much of this side of things.

Also, if my kids could only get into a shit state school rather than a good state school, then I would worry about the level of teaching being dragged down too far below average for my average kids. I would also worry about them learning more bad behaviour from more badly behaved kids. I would then consider putting them in a private school.

I agree that the academic level of teaching and the exam results are probably higher in a private school, and probably the discipline is better if 'bad' kids are asked to leave as people have said, but the learning about people and society and real life is probably not as good. If there was a choice between a good state school and a private school I would choose the state school. If there was a choice between a bad state school and a private school, I'm not sure, but I would definitely consider the private school. If my children were super academic 'types' and that was what they were into then I would consider private school so that they could progress quickly in what they love.

I just love the reasons some people give for going private such as, the local schools are shit, my child needs smaller class sizes, the facilities are better etc etc and make out that they have little choice but to go private.

You have a choice because you can afford it. It's as simple as that. For the majority of people it's 'shit' school or Home Ed. That's it. Saying you're forced into going private is like saying you're forced to spend the summer in Italy because Butlins doesn't provide the same facilities. That's the attitude that gets my back up.

Money = choice. Most people will never, no matter how hard they work or how many sacrifices they make or how much scrimping they do, be able to afford private education.

I would add to Ordinary's post that it would depend not only on the child's academic abilities but on their personality. I feel state school was good for me despite not stretching me very much, because I learnt to work on my own and stretch myself and that has been very useful later in life. I was super academic, but learnt early to see "super academe" as part of me rather than something that I had to wait to be offered by other people.

No one's saying that there is no choice, but rather there IS a choice (they choose a school for the reasons you mention) which they would have preferred to not have to make, and wish that the state schools in their area were of similar or higher calibre.

It's unfortunate that there are people who may want to that are unable to make that choice for their children, but that is hardly the fault of those who can and do.

Big Bad Mummy - does private school really offer children an address book full of useful 'contacts' when they leave?

Looking at friends who went to private schools any 'contacts' they had were lost by the time they were at University and didn't particularly offer any advantage or 'leg up' either commercially or socially going forward?

Might be different if we are talking about Eton and similar but generally I am not so sure, thing it's a bit of an outmoded concept?

When I've seen the 'old school tie' network really operate, and I have a few times with 'top tier' contacts, if said person that got the job really isn't it up to it's a matter of time before they are shown the door. Sometimes it takes a couple of years but usually there's a meritocracy operating in the workplace. The days of a very weak person being carried by others because of the 'old school tie' network are long gone I think.

I've taught in both (incredibly posh and expensive with royal connections) private schools and in state schools in incredibly dodgy areas.

This is just my experience mind, but I found the standard of teaching far, far better in the state schools. For a start, you have to be actually qualified to teach in state schools. This is just not the case in private schools. I used to laugh at how they would get me to teach anything despite, at that point, having nothing more than an undergraduate degree and a go getter attitude.

From a professional point of view, I found it just more satisfying to teach in less privilidged areas. The students didn't have the attitude that payment = grades and I nearly cholked at the comment from one poster that private schools don't have a bullying problem. Besides which, what can be more satisfying than seeing a child who has been ground down by low expectations all their life blossom and achieve?

Paying for education doesn't mean that you rule out bullying! You need to take a very close look at the school. If any school tells you that it doesn't have any bullying then I would be very mistrustful. It is complacent-it is something that needs to be constantly monitored and dealt with, human nature is the same whether you have money or not.
I send my DCs to school for the education. I once heard someone say that they sent them there for the contacts, which seeemed weird even when they said it-which was some years ago.