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

And now I need to go and have a lie down because I agree with every word of Xenia's last post!

Gosh, I agree with Xenia too...faints...

Miggsie, pissfarterleech I agree too Xenia is correct.......

I am not opposed to Grammar if it is ensured that everyone can get in; Dad had a palce, Nan said no we can't afford it (15 / 16 kids), he didn;t go. He's ever so good especially at maths etc, made it as a MAnager in his field but I am sure would ahve flown if he'd been lifted outside that family for a while.

Until I have faith that Grammars really are accessible, and not just at 11 but by late developers also then I am anti.

My own preferred concept is a campus system where children can access the best education for tehm on one campus- so grammar style calsses for children in the subjects they excel at, Sn support for those who need it, and all in between in a flexible base- we have a dilemma ATM of whether to send asd ds3 to a school that can support his ASD but not delvier the academic curriculum he can cope with, or one that can deliver the curriculum without proper support risking him dropping out anyway. With ds1 it was different- awareness that he can easily meet Grammar style levels with support and we managed to find that for him, but only as we were gifted to live close to one of the few places in the UK that has a specialist ASD Base within a thriving school.

That way every child gets what is right for them, which for many will be a composite, and still gets to mix and be part of a wider community at breaktimes etc.

Peachy - that concept sounds like a good comprehensive to me.

It is what my DD's school is doing right now.

Sadly not all comprehensives deliver this, my own school was a case in point

Absolutely- but a ggold plated excellent one

Very far from what I have experienced which seems to be either semi-ghetto or like the one ds2 will attend a little enclave for people who can afford private mainly but got a decent postacode instead (plus us, as the Social cases (

And that ahs all the worries Boffin mentions.

I like Peachy's model. I don't like fixed selection (ie grammar) because the selection methods are not accurate enough and I doubt that IQ is completely fixed in any case, so grammar ends up being great for those that get in but can be very counter productive for those that don't - especially those that just miss out. I strongly suspect that especially at young ages brain development is elastic enough that average youngsters (ie IQ 100) given the right support, encouragement and most of all self-belief (this is what too often gets stripped away by grammar systems) can far exceed their current expectations (I disagree with Xenia that they shouldn't aspire to RG universites).

Oh, a moment of harmony and idea-building on a thread about private / state education! Wow.

When it comes to getting into uni and applying for jobs, think it does help to have top results from a comprehensive school. It's something that has been raised lots of times as a positive thing when I've had job interviews, so reckon many employers do give brownie points for it.

But despite this, am still convinced that lots of people who were educated where I was could've got much better results elsewhere. I don't think that the main problem is that bright kids aren't applying from comprehensive schools to the good unis (though this is an issue); but rather that not all bright kids get the opportunity to get the necessary grades. Some get de-railed in various ways.

Also suspect that I might have got even better results, or made different choices, at a more academic school. For example, there was no point doing sciences at A-level because it wasn't offered at GCSE as separate subjects and the teaching was shit. No-one could do more than 3 A-levels (plus general studies, which was pointless and compulsory). And when I started work my employer had to teach me proper grammar, which took a long time!

So I'm hoping to do what Xenia suggests and use my qualifications and skills to earn enough cash to have the option to pay for private education, if that seems to be the best option for our DC where we live.

So Xenia what you are saying is a lot of the school marks/successes are down to bright applicants in the first place (probably high levels of tutoring though). So do these schools provide value for money? Eton is very expensive if they only accept the best then it is no reflection on their teaching if students get good grades. If you are not paying for results (which your posts imply you are) what are you paying for.

My sister went to one of the best schools in the country (fully boarding biggest scholarship ever given, won ever prize going....). HATED it, lasted 1 year -very structured, little differentiation and variation, very much an "if it is not broken don't fix it" approach. I actually do not think this works for the very bright. She went to an averagely academic school with small classes .There she got more individual attention and blossomed (Oxbridge, profession etc). Look at Harry were there not issues of cheating/help with coursework everything so spoonfed.

Hi Panic - That actually sounds good. I really hope it has improved enough by the time ours are ready for secondary. I do think if people just said let's send our kids there rather than sending them quite a distance to the grammars (i.e. opting out of 11+) then it would be forced to improve. All the interested parents around here would force it to and that would benefit all the children.

You're right about the catchments around here too - it is a nightmare. I'm sure your DC3 will be OK because of the sibling rule. If my DD gets in the same school I might see you at the school gate

My best friend from primary went to grammar after the 13+ as she was not put into it at 11+. So movement can be done for those that needed a bit more time.

I went to terrible schools, really quite poor, the primary doesn;t even exist nw purely due to rep- half bulldozed and rest renamed. Sensible decision, I am pushing 40 now, the stories of those that were schooled with me are now emerging and they are not good. School, factory, married before 18, babies, maybe divorce, factory, death, never off the estate. Gah. I mena if you choose that fine- don't think my fellows really even realised they ahd a choice to be honest. Senior worse in many ways; fine if you were from the villages (catchment half LA estate half villages) but if not you were written off from day one: I remember Mum asking why I was sat with X and Y in science when i got good grades and they failed everything and I was struggling with group work as a result; teacher said 'oh she chose to sit there'- I said 'no, you put me there' 'oh sdid I? I guess I usually figure same school is same potential'

Ta mate. I had spent all summer excitedly genning up of Chemistry prior to starting: I gave up at that moment.

It took living with a private school edcuated RG degree holding grad to reakise that bloody hell if he could do it then I was well away: and quite possibly a Dh who beleived in me enough to agree to fund my education. Did Access, got a college record for gardes, applies to universities and was ofered them all- including the RG ones of reference alone. Big hurdle: did I take RG? no, I convinced myself I was not really able. A bit ridiculous when they ahd ASKED me to apply for their Social Policy degree after a chat with the course leaders but it's hard to silence three deacdes of being told you are not good enough.

As it happened long term I think my children benefitted from where we ended up, the degree is not one held in great esteem but the MA I have landed on is, within my field, and I am doing well on that and almost ompleted it now.

My point is though that plenty of the children I was at school with were as able as I am, some more so. I was lucky to meet the right people (I nursed the husband of someone who worked as a Chemist for a major pharma and she left me £ak in her will ONLY for the purposes of education for example), they were not. A system that you hve to get lucky in to stand a chnce (whether it is luck of parentage or emplyrer or dating a well qualified dunce) isn't OK. It's absoluely understandable that those who can will buy private to avoid that, but even then people can still campaign for all kids to get the best start for them (whether that's a quality SN education or academic excellence) and we can hope one day independent will become purely optional and not something they feel they need to buy. A choice for people into lacrosse and extended hours, not just wanting the basics done properly.

Sorry shall climb off soapbox now!

The problem with grammar schools is that they are no more inclusive than private ones. Yes, you don't need to be able to pay but you do need to be very able.

So what many who oppose private education but would like a return to the grammar system are saying is that income shouldn't be allowed to matter but brains should? So the best opportunities are given to the brightest regardless of income which is great but what about those low income kids who are not so academic? I think they get forgotten in the argument. All those intelligent, well-educated people advocating the grammar system seem to forget that thousands of non-academic children were relentlessly failed by that system.

The bottom line is that it doesn't really affect those people arguing the cause because by definition, their children come fromhouseholds which value education and were great emphasis is placed on it from early on. Those are the kids who would get into grammar schools. Average or low ability kids living in households which don't value education are not represented in these debates so are too often forgotten.

Or indeed average or low ability kids living in households that centre on education- I am quite aware of the fact that ds2 is not academic. He's just not. No point in trying to expect him to follow Dh and I into university. Would be far better for him if people would stop seeing academia as the only course worth following and placing value on other paths as well- ds2 is practical, he will probably work with animals but really enjoys the carpentry and electrics that he larns via our hobby Fine, we don't have an issue with that- and I don't know why some people seem to think I should.

The best start is the one that maximises a child's life chances as appropriate to them- whether that ends up with employment as Oxford Don or Labourer.

Peachy, I think your idea of a campus school is excellent. I think you would like the Dutch system, IME far more child focussed than the British system.

One of the things I have found interesting reading through the thread (not all posts though so apologies if this has been mentioned before) is the different concepts of afford it being used.

For me afford it means being able to right a cheque for a year's worth of fees without blinking. It means being absolutely certain that I can afford the following years' fees for all three DCs.

I can see that other people have a very different idea of whether or not they can afford it.

I'm not criticising their decisions just interested in how we all perceive it differently.

Yes, Peachy, I agree but the 'right education for all' argument is used too often by grammar school advocates who actually don't give a damn about what sort of provision or funds would be available to those schools where the 'others' would go.

I'm a big believer in the idea of offering a greater choice at 14yrs to those kids who aren't academic but show a real interest and flare for something practical. Help them get on that course at 14 instead of boring them silly for another 2yrs and allowing their enthusiasm to slide away.

We need to place more emphasis and kudos on practical and technical skills such as carpentry. I fundamentally disagree with the government targets to get 50% of kids to university. It isn't the best place for all children and it shouldn't be seen as the only acceptable route to a good career or fufilling life.

lovingthecoast - the Dutch system is what we need. You take tests at the end of the last two years of primary (which deters coaching). Taking the test scores and teacher recommendations a secondary school level is chosen:

• academic (aiming at the equivalent of RG university in the end)
• professional (aiming at professional vocational training)
• artisanal (vocational school aimed at the trades)

Parents may appeal against the decision and there is a bridge class (first year of secondary) with opportunities for movement between if the selection is found to be wrong.

It is a far more fluid and child centred system than we have in the UK. Holding students back for a year or advancing them is totally normal and very effective especially for those children who are at the extremes of the age for the year (very young or very old in the year).

There are very few private schools in the Netherlands and I believe the system benefits from this.

Gnome - that does sound good - especially if the schools are all expected to be excellent, and properly resourced. The problem with the grammar schools wasn't on the whole with the grammar schools but with (a) to rigid selection and (b) too many poor 2ndary mods about whom no-one gave a damn.

Isn't that how the system used to work though, Grammar for the academic types and comp for the practical skills?

Argh did a huge post and MN blipped AGIN.

Dh would have thrived in professional- dyslexic which of course didn;t exist in the seventies but bright, selling programs for computer mags at 14. Into electronics, mainly. Was given a place at uni but for ICT which MIL regarded as insufficienlty academic so she withdrew support emaning he ahd to work FT from 15 to pay market value rent AND study FT (plus being woken 3 times a night to drive her about for ehr cleaning job- grr nut anyway). In the end of course got ill, and left study. Decent enough career but redundancy 2 years ago and now he finally feels he ahs found his aplce- a degree in an engineering area, where his gardes are hailed in the manner of 'see what people can do if they can try', a small but growing bsuiness is his specialism... just a shme he's 40 now and didn;t have that chance 22 years ago (his actual degree is called stage lighting wich gets sneered at on here, in fact it is a variant of a highly regarded branch of control electronics- yes the basics can be done by apprenticeships but DH desgns the circuitry, as sopposed to lights the theatres). Anyway .

Dutch system still has a big issue for me: I think if we want people to value each other's pathways and stop all this only a degree counts / academics are people whoc an;t really do crap, then we ahve to bring people togeterh. yes to teaching those areas- hugely so and I like the professional bit as that si what was missing before- but with lots of chances to ineract togeterh regardless of pathway, eat together daily, even (as happens in ds3's Base) do subjects like PE together. And indeed where kids ahve special talents fly into other sections on the campus- ds1 is artistic for example and had he gone to oure MS he'd not ahve been able to combine top set art with bottom set Welsh. But where he is he can, becuase they get that some people have different levels of ability for differenta reas, and his chances are better. At school I was bottom set for maths and top for English- meaning that at comp I was top set for both or bottome set for both to allow for timetabling (top, in fact I am fine at maths but ahd to relearn at 18 as basically missed all comp maths and was left to make paper palces in a corner). that's just sillya dn lets down people with specific talents. DS1 wants to be a jewlerry designer,a lready sells to people. A specific talent is essential for that, and should not be a hindrance.

And now have to run hide Christmas pressies before school run LOL.

No - the selection process was a one-off 11+, and the altenative to GS wasn't a 'comp', it was an all-too-often undervalued 'secondary modern'.

Abolishing GSs was not a good solution to the problems - adopting something akin to the Dutch model would have been much better.

Someone asked if I was paying for results and if not what am I paying for. It's a huge huge range of things. One point that is coming out of this thread is how important in the workplace good English is in so many different industries. In my own profession you can divide CVs up into those who can spell and use capital letters and proper grammar and those who cannot. Someone said the state grammars were better than the private schools for this. I do not agree but mostly because most of the country has no grammar schools. In my own area as a child they were abolished in 1970 so they are an irrelevance except in a few areas. It also marks out non English speakers too and if you don't speak English at home one way really to help children is ensure they do learn to speak and write English properly as even if they are AAA in everything if they write badly employers will put the CV into the bin.

I don't think some state schools are rigorous enough about grammar and spelling and some of the teachers may not even speak correctly (of course this is quite a generalisation).

So what did I buy, what do I buy? All sorts of things. I quite like the segregation of the clever from the rest. I like the segregation of disruptive from those very engaged with work. I like the segregation from parents with whom I might have nothing in common. I've enjoyed singing difficult choral music at various schools and I am not saying the parents at a comp cannot sight sing to the right standard but those local schools seem to have less a parent might enjoy on offer. I've enjoyed schools largely without graffiti and litter. I like fields and lakes. I don't like boarding schools and would not use one. So I am buying separation in a sense just as the parent who buys near a comp for the rich in Surrey is buying segregation by house price but they are not honest enough to admit it in many cases.

I am buying the chance for my chidlren to study in a meritocracy as they will have to do in the world of work where you compete like anything to get in and then seek to hold your own when you are there.

I buy a chance to work beyond the syllabus for a rounded education free of the national curriculum. I buy a place where children might be treated in a way some of the supposed protections of state system and strictures might not appyl. I buy more chance for them to take pysical risk. I buy more chance they may be hurt in difficult dangerous activities.

I buy that boys can be educated a boys' schools and girls their own. In other words I buy segregation by sex.

I buy an entry on their CV which might be remarked upon even when they are in their 20s as people would say gosh that school, it's really hard to get in there, they must be quite bright.

An important thing I buy for teenagers is a peer group where everyone has very very high expectations , where not working is not the done thing. I buy the chance for 12 year old boys to sing chuch music in latin without being teased by their peers.

I buy a massive range of hobbies available to them so that in later life they pick those things about which they are enthused. I want them to have chances and opportunties.

I hope I can also buy an environment where the teachers and others do not have particularly bad English.

I buy the chance to be a customer/consumer with all the free market advantages that usually bestows on the organisation concerned.

Lots more but I'm trying to earn a crust and it's quite busy.

See Is suepct you would like our local comp; we might not have a lake but we do have an Amphitheatre which is pretty rare

I don't like it for ds1 but think ds2 will enjoy it, and I think education that is enjoyable is easier to succeed in.