Is there any long term advantage in going private primary onwards vs private secondary only?

[river1]

Hello,
Not wishing to have a state vs private debate here please as I know there are good/bad schools in each sector but would be very grateful for views from those who are going private already at primary or plan to at secondary (and particuarly those who have moved private mid primary)?

DD is in Yr1 at a 'good' small village school (with mixed year groups), is fairly happy there, but I think rather unispired. There is no major nightmare forcing me to move her but I feel pretty underwhelmed (best word for it) by the scope of the curriculum, facilities and general outlook. There are no other viable state options avail to us.

I was educated privately and if money was no object my daughter would be too. But it would involve sacrifice and some stress on jobs. My parents were not well off but they made the choices I suppose i would choose to make too.

I have little doubt that if I were to move DD to the private school locally that I like, she would leave further ahead and with more confidence and self assurance and exposure to a wider non sats based curriculum, with increased focus on art, music, drama, languages etc too.

My question is - will it make any difference to her in the long run if we make the move at Yr2 or if we wait til secondary? Would she be in the same place at 18 either way? May be impossible to answer I know but I would love to hear experiences and thoughts

ps there are no selective state schools near us so educating at prep school to aim for grammer is not an option.
thank you

whoops meant Grammar :-)

No way to generalise. Depends on the schools.

I suppose what I am trying to say is - what is the long term value of a 'better' school at primary if you plan to get your child into a 'better' school (state or primary) at secondary level anyway. Will they just catch up regardless?

shockThis is a bit of a "how long is a piece of string" type of question...

You won't know until you do it. And a lot depends on the child. I know plenty of young people who have really flourished under the private sector, but equally I know plenty who have pissed it all away. And that goes equally for the state sector too.

You also have to really think about the sacrifices you would make for private education and the long-term effects this will have on you as a family. E.g. re-mortgaging your house if necessary, taking on extra jobs/hours/work, future children. I have a friend who, when she graduated from University, received an invoice from her father for 6 years of private school education . And no, he wasn't joking.

Depends on the schools. Private schools vary massively. Her experience at private school may be very different to yours. Fees have also increased massively, the sacrifices your parents made for you might not be enough nowadays.
Advantages of private in primary can be smaller classes and more individual attention, but beware the disadvantages can be fewer TAs and less differentiation.
Advantages onwards can be: easier to get into the senior school, more awareness of seniors schools and the "best fit" for your child (but have known a family have to move their son after a years, as it didn't work, and the father teaches in a Prep), if doing common entrance the curriculum more closely aligns, maybe more French/Latin etc.
I would also look around at your area carefully at both primary and secondary level, as making a judgement call can vary a lot (eg. people who send their kids to Prep and then on to state Grammars, only the less intelligent go to Private secondaries).

Depends very much on the child and on the schools concerned.

In my area, a lot of people move children from state to private between yr3 and yr6 - main aims are to ensure a place at the attached secondary (most of the schools have an entrance exam for yr7 but only fairly relaxed tests for junior school entry, and it is almost unheard of for children to fail to progress to yr7) or to avoid Sats and the rigid adherence to the national curriculum.

I have one DS who moved from state to private at yr7, and the two big downsides for him from not having gone to the private junior school were that he had never done French, so started in the bottom set (but caught up fast and is now in top set), and also had never done any of the team sports, so started in D-team for rugby (and stayed there), and never even got the chance to try cricket. Not that he's bothered, though - not interested in sport.

I moved DD from state to private at yr3 because after DS's experience of the last two years at that junior school, I didn't want her to spend her last two years being bored and unchallenged and subjected to intensive Sats preparation rather than learning new things. She loves the broader curriculum and all the sports etc at her new school, and I think the maths and literacy classes are moving at a much faster pace which suits her better.

I'm not sure if it will make any long term difference (ie GCSE/A-level results) to either of them at what stage they moved, though - I would guess differences in academic starting point even out after a couple of years of secondary. I made my decision based on the difference between the two junior schools.

Been looking visiting schools recently and have learned that it does not have to be Yr 2/3 or Yr 7. One school told me moving for yr6 was common for the reasons exexpat gives above. If it's going to be a financial strain I would leave it a little while if your DD has good friends and is generally happy.

Is there any way you can add value to the state primary yourself with after school activities such as French club, music, ballet, museum trips and so on?

I think its worth it for languages DD does French and Spanish at primary, music (difficult to replicate school choirs and orchestras) and sport - hockey, lacrosse, netball, gym etc... Alot of stuff provided as after school clubs at the school as well.

I decided not to supplement the state primary, its difficult to drag lots of siblings along to all the after school stuff and its not the same as doing it in a school environment where is the norm to do 2 instruments etc...

why do people think state schools don't do stuff?

Seeker - because often they don't? Or at least not as part of the daily curriculum.

I know not all schools are the same, but the primary my two were at ('outstanding' school) only had very limited sports and only as optional (paid for) after school activities, and couldn't really do things like rugby, hockey or cricket as they didn't have access to playing fields. PE seemed to be minimal. Art was every other half term, for one session a week. Languages were also after-school clubs, or an occasional session (once or twice a term) with a teacher coming in from another school. They do all that stuff and loads more during curriculum hours at DD's private school.

Can only give you my experience, which is obviously limited!

I went to state primary, the most local schools, and did well. Then to private girls' school. I am very glad I did - I believe I had a less rarefied attitude than some of the girls who had been at the private primary as well.
I think from a social point of view, mixing it up is better - and I wasn't disadvantaged in any way (educationally) by coming from the state sector. A good percentage of the girls in my class were from the state sector, a few from my own school.

But I'm talking a long time ago now - 30+ years. My junior school offered extra curricular activities; music lessons were on offer; we had good PE facilities and even went to the nearest indoor swimming pool for lessons; and we had school trips in our final year. I don't know how much state primaries would be able to offer in those areas now.

In the end though, you do what is best for your child; but don't be fooled into thinking that just because you're paying for it, the private school will always be better - that's not necessarily true.

I went state primary and private secondary and did ok. When dd came along I would have loved to send her private all through but finances didn't allow. She went to an ok state school but because she was one of the brighter kids in the class she coasted and wasn't pushed in the slightest. She is also a child with little self motivation and always just did enough to pass (didn't want to be known as a geek!). She was so quiet in class that I am sure the teachers didn't always know she was there.

However when we were looking for secondary school the local one was really useless and so we looked at private, finances were less of an issue (and bursaries were available). Fortunately she got in, but has struggled at times because most of the other kids have been there through primary school where they were always pushed and not allowed to hide. It isn't just the learning, but how to learn & organisation. Her primary school set only a little homework because "most of the kids don't do it".

Hindsight is a wonderful thing and if I could turn the clock back I think I might have made more of an effort to send her private in primary. However having said that I think this year she might have turned the corner and with exams next summer it is just in time. Ask me at the end of her time in school and I might have a different answer.

We moved DS2 to prep in yr 3 because was bored stiff in his sweet village primary school. We had planned to do it anyway in yr 4/5 because we wanted him prepared for CE in yr 8. What is your plan for secondary? Grammar independent senior at yr 6 or yr 8 maybe back into state ed if you have or maybe are thinking of moving to an area with a good comp.
The other thing I will say is that there may not be as many marvellous opportunities in a prep as you might think. Lots of prep schools do have good facilities but they often come with big price tags but many small ones don't especially in London. Many will admit that the language teaching is still pretty basic a friends DC's at a London prep only got 1 35 minute lesson a week less probably than you'd get at a French club. Yes there are art/dt depts. and sports halls etc but find out how much the children actually use them many will cheerfully testify not as much as you would think for the money your paying!

Most independent secondary schools round here take over half their kids from the state sector, there is no way that those kids are all behind the prep school kids. In these selective schools they are all taught together, no streaming, which wouldn't work if the kids were behind as a result of coming from state primaries. In yr8 they set for maths and mfl - the top sets are not dominated by the prep school kids.

it depends on so much. i'm trying to decide between a large private primary or a small village primary. both outstanding, in fact i think the state school is slightly higher on sats scores but the state primary does mixed year groups so class sizes of 30 which puts me off, but they get outstanding results so whatever they are doing is obviously working. even though it's small it also seems to have as many extra curricular activities as the large private school. i would expect the private school to push my kids a lot more across a broader range of stuff but the state kids get into very good secondary schools.

a lot of what i read on MN seems to say private primary is not neccessary unless you have really bad state primaries in your catchment area.

My view is that private for primary is for rich people, or those who have one child and for whom they need good quality wraparound care (having been used to paying pre-school nanny/nursery fees).

If you are worrying about the money, then save it for senior school, or perhaps Y5 upwards.

Prep schools offer a fantastic experience but it is a luxury.

not rich, have more than one child and don't need wraparound care and both DC are/will private prep

I went to an outstanding primary school - basics of writing and reading taught badly IMO and many of my friends have pulled out their kids from state primary for similar reasons if they could afford it. I went to private secondary but I felt I always the lack of a prep school education.

We are scrimping to send them but worth it for us.

Like seeker, I am a little surprised by the 'state schools don't do stuff' statement as it is not my experience as a teacher or as a parent.

The school I teach in - small village school, challenging intake, rural - offers:

• Weekly swimming for half each year.
• Weekly football lessons from a proper football coach, for a term for each year group - the next term they do tennis with a tennis coach.
• Weekly tag rugby sessions for a term each year for the older children.
• Gym / dance / athletics as weekly lessons.
• The chance for all the older children to learn 2 intruments, each for a term, as a whole class for free.
• Tri-golf and football as after school clubs, other clubs are a bit more variable as they depend on what we as staff choose to offer. Have done choir, an instrument, art, science, table tennis, etc - all weekly and free.
• 3 school trips each year for every child, highly subsidised or free.

My children's school - larger, less challenging intake, more urban - offers, frankly, so much that I can't be bothered to write it down. Both learn an instrument, both take part in very high-quality drama productions every year, both play sport to a high standard (DS has competed for the school in athletics, cross-country, football and cricket, DD so far only in athletics but she's only lower KS2), both swim weekly for a term every year etc etc

seeker and teacherwith2kids - I know I have had this sort of discussion before and seeker was that the Primary my DS was at had banned all sorts of "normal" playground activities, didn't offer much in the way of enhancing the curriculum and used older children within the school to help bring along the younger ones, instead of using TA's etc.

Perhaps you two are lucky to have had good experiences / first-hand knowledge of state primaries, but I assure you, this is not universal.

And MindtheGappp - we are not rich or living a luxurious lifestyle by any means, but have done Prep for DS and he will be going to one of the outstanding state secondaries in the town in a couple of years - the private uppers are in no way better where I live so I can't see any point in spending my money at them.

Teacherwith2kids - yes, your schools sound great - and nothing like the primary my two DCs went to.

Possibly because it was a smallish primary on a small site (very little outdoor space, certainly not enough for most sports) in a prosperous central suburb of a city. Maybe they just expected that children would be doing lots of things outside school. Or maybe because of their relatively middle class intake they did not get the funds for more enrichment activities.

There was no timetabled sport apart from PE once a week, and swimming for one or two terms in year 5. Instrument lessons were available, paid for, in small groups, but certainly no whole-class opportunities to learn an instrument (to be fair, DD's private school doesn't do that either). After-school clubs were very limited.

Unfortunately not all schools are the same.

Here some parents do private for primary and then join my DC at State comp. Others go through my DCs state primary and then go to private schools. So do private all the way through.
Some kids from whichever pattern (including state all the way through) go to Oxbridge or become doctors, some become primary school teachers, others become beauticians. But no on says that when you go for your private school assessment at 3.

river1,
we are in the same boat and have been agonizing over this choice - we seem to change our minds every day!
My main worry is that if I leave it until Y7 she won't get in the selective independents as they competition is pretty tough and children get tutored since Y4.Y5. Do I really want to put her through all that stress?
Equally she seems very jaded with her education.
If I was to do it it wouldn't necessarily be for the extras but more for the quality of education which I think she would receive.
There isn't a right way though is there? And like you say it is hard to move a child when there isn't anything going terribly wrong as it is disruptive in a way. Good luck with your choice and let us know what you decide!

In my experience if they are able then they catch up pretty quickly at secondary. I don't know what it is like in your area but where I am the prep schools are very different from the state schools, especially in the social context. I tend to see that as an advantage as the kids get a wider experience of life and its why both I and my dc have gone the state primary route followed by indie/grammar.

If your child is just average and the indies you are hoping for are very selective and its fiercely competitive to get in, then you would be better off coming from the private system but its still no guarantee. I have a number of friends who have spent £££ on prep schools and still found their dc were only offered places by the less academic indies - they were very fed up and felt let down by the prep school...as if spending their money on fees was a guarantee of acceptance or an entitlement to the "best" schools. It isn't and should never be seen as such.
I believe the best route is to look very carefully at your individual childs needs, what they would get from the state primary (not just academically) and what it would take in y5 to tutor them to get into the indie you think best suited to them.

Its not easy but equally private schooling is no guarantee of success or happiness. Just talk to parents of 18+ year olds who have spend thousands on private schooling, there's a whole range of outcomes and its quite an eye opener.
Good luck!

Having spent over ten years paying for independent ed. I don't think you should assume that the "quality of education" you DC will receive will necessarily be better. There are good and bad teachers in both and the fundamental need is for the ethos of the school whether state or primary to suit your child. When you get that right your child will thrive. Although having said this I do believe that if independent works for you individual DC then it will always be better than state ed.
I currently have DS1 in a top comp who is doing a million times better than he ever did in his stuffy conservative prep and DS2 in the most academically selective boys boarding school in the UK who is blissfully happy and doing really well. The problem we have as parents is working out what is the best for our children. In retrospect I kept DS1 at his prep to long I should have moved him at yr 6 instead of yr 8 but it is so hard to take that jump into the unknown.