If you could afford to send your kids to a private school, would you?

[juicychops]

or would you choose for them to go to a 'normal' state school?

just curious what your responses will be

90% L4 and above is quite high for a state primary. And 50% L5 is also very high. As for the maths, it just means that 90% of the kids reached at least L4 with 50% of them actually reaching L5. Ive taught in primaries where nobody reached L5.

Yes lovingthecoast I know what you mean, I also have 4 children and they are all very very different. My DS1 sounds very much like your DD1, except he is the second born! He wears me down constantly......he's ok at his state school though so far nobody has tried to push him yet. They seem very surprised and enthusiastic about him though as he is such a little tich that you expect him to still make baby noises!!!

I happen to believe she would be miserable if she ended up hothoused.

And I don't think you'll find many children just starting their 2nd year at school reading Dickens! I have an A at Alevel in English and an English degree from an RG university and I couldn't have coped with Dickens before 11. I certainly couldn't have read and understood Roald Dahl in my Reception class! But, I'm not defending it. If you don't think it's that unusual that's fine. You obviously know a lot of very bright kids.

Oh and Quirrelquarrel I would worry about her in the state system because I believe she would be pushed too hard not the other way around.

LovetheHarp, DD1 is also my 2nd born. She also has 2 younger siblings. DS2 is too young to judge yet but the other three are so very differnt it amazes me.

too

Someone mentioned rural situations. We are rural, or were until we moved into what can only be described as a rural town. Here it's a case of the local school which can often involve transport or private. People are very unlikely to say I don't like the school thats 4 miles away lets send them to the next one. The council will pay for tansport to the school they allocate you but not to any others. It tends to mean any second choice is private. There just aren't the same options.

I actually had a thread the other day because my children didn't get into the local primary and now have to be bussed to the hext school out.

I certainly wasn't saying that I know any six year olds who read Dickens! I was talking about it being normal in another era. Just that it wasn't impressive reading over 100 years ago like it would be today and just saying that standards have definitely changed- that was my point all along.
I was a precocious reader- but my parents didn't think much of it at all, they were raised in bookish families in another time. I did read Dickens quite early, but so did my dad at the same age. He wasn't scared that I'd be pushed too hard, he wanted me to read the classics as soon as I theoretically could, and he's not the archetypal pushy parent at all. Just someone who found the English school system a shock, and not in a good way. Parents' upbringings reflect themselves in their own children, it's a fact.

Agree to disagree then

Can and will for both for prep and then see what type of education DD1 and DS2 need as to whether they would benefit from private/grammar/state for senior school. I was privately educated at all girls from 5-18 and DH was state school. He was the keenest to send kids to prep so go figure! Smaller class sizes (although i agree private doesnt necessarily mean teaching standard is better) and better facilities in & around school were main attractions for our choice. If money isnt the big decider then why even spend time thinking about it?

Fee paying prep school up to 11 was good for my sons, plenty of discipline, small classes and enforced prep each evening coupled with lots of sport really helped them understand about hard work and effort bringing just rewards. They have gone on to grammar school at 11 and both done really well. I think it is better to invest early on, because the regime in state school infant/primary level is so lax and they seem to get away with anything behaviour wise.

Yes , if i had had the money when my DD 20 yrs was at school , I would have sent her and her brother to the best private school.
I think they would have had a better education, better behaved children to mix with and have gained more confidence.
My youngest Ds is 11 yrs , in yr 6 , and been at private school since yr 3.
It has done him the power of good. His behaviour has improved immensely with the discipline, and small classes.
There is no bullying and all the children are always happy and smiley. I wish he could stay there forever, but at least he is staying till the end of yr 8.

No.
Mind you, we don't live in the UK anymore and to be honest here in Italy private schools aren't better than state schools.

There is of course a number of International schools here where we live, which we half heartedly considered when we moved back from the UK, but I didn't think they were right for our children.

Late to the debate, but no, I do not and would not send my ds to a private school. It goes against what I believe in completely.

My niece goes to a private girls school and the PTA just held a ball that raised £18k. One night and they raise £18k. That is more than my ds's school raise in many years.

Of course people are entitled to a choice, but because of this the state system suffers.

Another thing that bothers me about private schools here in Italy (apart from my principles) is that the teachers are paid less that the teachers who work for state schools and have far less rights.

Yes, that's probably true about what and how children learned in past generations. However, as a good education was very dependent upon how much money parents had (pre war) then I wouldn't like to go back to those times. I probably could have read Dickens at a younger age but certainly not understood what I was reading.

DD1 just has a very advanced brain when it comes to learning but on an emotional and social level she is stiull a girl who has just turned 6. It's not that I don't enjoy here it's that I worry because she is so far ahead of her peers and of many Y5s and Y6s I have taught. I know from my teaching experience that these gaps just get wider. I don't think that's a good thing for a child so I've made my decision on her schooling to try and address that balance.

I guess what I see as hothousing other parents may see as gently pushing a child to reach their absolute potential. I just think she has many years of adulthood to stretch herself if that's what she wants.

Dr Northerner, the local state primary where we used to live raised an average of 20k pa. At the time, I taught in another primary with similar numbers on roll who raised an average £500 pa! Hence my belief that the state educated kids where we were are no less advantaged than my privately educated kids.

It was one form entry too!

Perhaps someone can help me out here. DD has just gone up to year 3. One of her friends has started at the local private school after 3 years of state school. Why would someone do that? Surely if they had enough money they'd have just sent her there in year R?

i reallydon't know, in a way i think they are horrid places that put far far too much pressure on children

but on the other hand if dd doesn;t get into the local outstanding state school, i would consider it.

although i worry a private education, would land my dd with a whole host of other problems, such as if she has children, she migth feel she has to privately educate them, they way people that have been privately educated often do.

i wonder what sort of stress that could set her up for in life

it's easier in soome ways if you don't have the choice, you just have to get on with it and make the best of it.but when you could just about afford it, you feel responsible for making the right choice and its not an easy one at all

MrsFruitcake, it's very common for children to transfer in Y3. DS1 is Y3 and has had 3 extra children join each of the 3 classes in his year so 9 altogether.

Carrie, I don't think you need to worry about that as long as you bring her up to be a sensible young woman. If you do that, she will make the decisions which best fit her family and her circumstances when the time comes regardless of the choices made by you for her.

And it's funny because IMO, the 'far too much pressure' was coming from the local state 'outstanding' school.

No.
I have been to both a private and a very good comprehensive myself. I think that if the child is relatively bright, and more importantly, if the parents care, any child will be fine anywhere.

like most of these threads it is far to broad a question for me to give a yes/no answer.

it depends on the state and primary schools available in the area and also depends on the individual child's personality, aptitudes, weaknesses and needs.

Silly, IMO, to say one is better than another everywhere for everyone!

I would like to have the money to have the CHOICE. I cannot say if I would choose it or not without knowing what child/private/state schools are being considered!

Also matters IMO whether you sure you can maintain private school if you start it. If we could scrape by we probably wouldn't because there'd be a very good chance we'ld have to make our child change school if we had a slight change in circumstance. If we had enough money to be pretty sure we could maintain it then yes we would CONSIDER the private schools in our area, along side the state ones

Sorry but I disagree. Someone who is bright but in an environment where enthusiasm for learning is laughable/unfashionable/to be bullied for, will not be fine. At least that's what happened to me (I was fine and doing well until this happened).

"I think that if the child is relatively bright, and more importantly, if the parents care, any child will be fine anywhere."

(that was at a comprehensive BTW)