why did you choose private school at reception?

[mumat39]

Hello

there are so many comments on Mumsnet about the fact that Private school from reception age is unnecessary so I was wondering why those parents that chose the private route did so?

We have a few good state primaries locally but all go to Y2 only. there seem to be fewer junior schools and even fewer secondary.

There is a good private school nearby that goes from reception through to a level, so for a number of reasons that is the one I'm leaning towards. But as there are so many views that inthe early years its not money well spent, i'm windering why this one is still popular and what ultimately are the reasons for parents to choose private over state.

I am genuinely confused so any views would be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks.

You're right Polly, I suspect DH's view is somewhat skewed! He has only worked at one school: the top of the league tables school but in a very "difficult" borough (ie very mixed backgrounds, albeit there are plenty of professional parents who have moved there as they have been property-priced out of the more expensive neighbouring borough). I think his feeling was that the school actually educated the children less (in the broadest sense) by focussing so much on maintiaing their excellent sats results. So while parents thought they were getting a great, "top" school, they were actually getting a stas factory! Also, becasue of the setting and the children, there were other "issues". So, for instance, there were two staff members whose full time jobs were liaising with social services and the police. In his last class, when doing mat time about crime and society etc, EVERY child in the class has witnessed a crime or been connected to a crime (a number of them had seen the same one - a stabbing just near the school at school run time). I acknowledge that a lot of how DH (and I) feel is tied into our choice to move out of London rather than the state system per se. if we had, say, a great little local village school, the choice would be less clear.

Probably rather controversial, but I would ask those of you who go private at yr 3 rather than year R to consider the effect on the state schools. My DDs go to a good, oversubscribed small village school where a significant number of parents do this. In every year there are several children who's parent plan to send them private later in the school system (usually around yr 3). They often have a"foot out the door" attitude to the school as they know their children are not there for long. Each year several children from within catchment who would be staying in the state system do not get into the school, necessitating them leaving friends to go to a school some distance away (we're very rural). When the children leave in year three it is very disruptive to friendship groups as the year groups are so small (around 15 - and it's not unusual for 4 to leave each year).

Obviously it's everyone's right to take up a state place they are entitled to, and make the decision they think best for their children, but going private later than year R can have a very negative effect on other children.

I chose private school after looking round the local primary when we had to make the selection. I had no previous experience of state schools and tbh I was pretty shocked. I convinced my husband to look round a good prep school (took alot of convincing as he was state all the way!) and he was equally surprised at the difference. So, we went private from 3 for all of ours and I would highly recommend it. From my experience they teach 'properly' and at the child's pace as there is no hurry to cover work for SATS. At 4 & 5 my kids have beautiful (for their age!) joined up handwriting, can spell well, read well and their mental maths is very good. My 9 year old is (in my humble opinion) way ahead in the basics compared to our friends kids of the same age that went to that same local school. No, it's not a competition, and I don't intend to make it one - but the difference is quite obvious. My 4 and 5 olds read to a teacher or teachers assistant every day (and me in the evening). It makes a huge difference. It came down to the silliest things, lunch is a very good meal sitting at individual tables, 6 children to 1 teacher and table manners are part of the school report and an important part of their education. For us it meant moving house an hour away in order to send our kids to that prep school that we chose, and we don't use the breakfast or after school clubs. So for us logistics didn't come into it - it was just a better school and came well up the priority list to make sure that those basics were covered in the best way as early as possible, as I was concerned it would have been harder to backtrack further down the line.

Hello everyone.

Thank you all for taking the time to reply.

Some of the things that you've mentioned sound excellent and I'm just wondering whether it was obvious that the schools you chose offered these to start with or whether you were pleasantly surprised as your children progressed through the school.

We have chosen the private school based on location, which is close to home, the fact that they have experience of dealing with children with food allergies, and the 'feel' of the school when we visited. The main thing that impressed us was the 10 year old girl who showed us around and who had been there from Reception. And how well behaved and bright eyed all the children were when we wer shown around the various classrooms.

I feel a bit silly that I don't know too much else about it and now feel I should try and find out. I'm not quite sure how I should do this or what questions to ask so if anyone has any advice the I would be very grateful.

I hope this makes sense.

Many thanks to you all for all your replies and hope you all have a lovely weekend.

ArcticLemming,

Thanks for your reply. I don't think what you've written is controversial at all. I feel the same. I'd rather start DC in the school that they can stay in until at lease 11. Whether this is a local state school or private, I want to make the right decision, so that they can settle in and make friends and get used to the ethos etc. I'd hate to take them away from friends in 2 or 3 years time and disrupt their routine and what they've got used to. I'd also hate to do that to any friends that they've made. I know there's a chance we may change our minds but I would like to get the decision right the first time which is why I posted this question on here.

Take care and have a great weekend.

Could afford it as I earn a lot
I only went to fee paying schools
Easier to stay at your top school at 11 if you got in at 4 than competing with all the state schoolers at 11+
Accents, Class
Nicer grounds, swimming pools, parental events, parent choirs, other parents are more like I am than most state school parents are, more in common with them, schools have lakes, ambience and architecture can be nicer
Very high standard of music (very important to us given family interests, choirs etc)
Latin
Very sporty children - most best sports people in the UK (see Olympic lists) go to fee paying schools
We went for very academic schools in the top 20 in the country of all sectors for A level results starting them as young as possbile as the children are quite bright. I prefer selective education from age 4.
Prefer single sex schooling
If you're clever it's much more fun to be in a class of 6 year olds who are all bright rather than some with under 100 IQ and rather not to bright ones

Xenia Accents? Class?

Really?

My DS is at prep school, chosen purely for the quality of education and sport.

No wonder people have such awful preconceptions about public school parents when some pick a school for "accents" and "class".

Thanks Xenia you have now totally confirmed my hunch that we were right to opt for the local state primary.

because just one poster said it Kerala? How very odd.

I can't talk for other people, but my children being in a school that has a similar phenomenon, ie may parents moving children at Y3/Y4 I can totally see why this happens and I think it is fair enough- I considered doing it too, although I didn't in the end.

The school has disappointed in many ways, the most committed parents are in fact generally the ones who end up moving them at some point as they are very concerned about the quality of their children's education. So it's not the case of not caring.

Also the secondary school is AWFUL so if I think if at any point the children were at risk of not getting in a selective secondary I would pull them out like a shot. And I know many parents have similar views.

I don't think anyone can start at reception saying they will go all the way through. Since being at school my children have had classmates moving for all sorts of reasons; house moves, divorce, moving abroad or simply the parents being dissatisfied with the school for a huge variety of reasons - often being rural or in an oversubscribed catchment means independent is the only option available if one wants a move.

Sometimes you go with what you think it's best at the time and then who knows what makes you change your mind. Children get over it very quickly. If a parent was ecstatic with their children's education I doubt they would consider disrupting them and spending loads of money for the sake of a whim. But I can only speak from my own local experience obviously!

I mentioned a range of factors and happened to add accent/class. I don't say you was, haitch nor drop my ts and I don't want my children to do so and they are less likely to in the fairly broad range ethcnically mixed academic schools to which they go. That will help them get jobs as how you speak does have an impact.

The Times has the start of a new supplement / topic today on how to get your child a private education without paying for it which is worth reading if you subscribe to the Times web site - it's about things you can do with your children (fairly obvious things like take them to the theatre) which might give them some similar chances if you picked such a poor career option as a teenage girl that you cannot afford fees now you are a mother, error you hope your children may not duplicate.

Xenia you are just hopelessly biased. You don't need a private education to be a successful person with a non regional accent.

"which might give them some similar chances if you picked such a poor career option as a teenage girl that you cannot afford fees now you are a mother".

Wow

I have to say Xenia, your posts do concern me with regards to what the other parents at my sons school will be like... I agre I think fee paying schools give children more opportunities but equally I would like my son to have humility and no look down on others, which seems to be an unwanted side effect of private education, IMO.

Oh dear Xenia, you are not a positive example of what private schooling leads to in adulthood. I hope your children come through it more rounded, tolerant and less pompous than you.......

"which might give them some similar chances if you picked such a poor career option as a teenage girl that you cannot afford fees now you are a mother".

Don't you think Xenia that your crusade to encourage women to send their DC to private school, may be a little undermind by your offensive, narrow minded mutterings?

Am pissing my sideslaughing at all the posters using Xenia's comments as absolute corroboration that private schools are all the same, ditto all private school parents.

There was not long ago a poster who opening supported the bnp. She often spoke of the state school her DC attended. Would you draw sych sweeping generalisations about all state schools from that?

Please. Show a little bit more imagination.

For me it was a no-brainer, as the school DD went to was the only local school that offered half days and tiny classes (max 15 children) for the first year.

word there aren't many posters who came to that conclusion about Xenia. I think your rather rude comment may compound their stereotypes further.

I thnk Wordfactory put it rather well actually imho

THere are many reasons we won't be going private which I won't bore you with. How you educate your child is a personal decision. I am not daft enough to make our decision on the basis of one poster of course not. But there is, in some that use private education, that sort of underlying reasoning and I just find it repellent. Of course not all but definitely a sizeable minority - I socialise with some of them and its not for me.

Word - the trouble is there are a huge number of MNers who use comments like that one of Xenia's, to make their own sweeping generalisations about private education - I think you and I have been on many of those threads in the past.

Even if Xenia does think that "naice" accents and a good class of people are reasons for her choosing private education, it is comments like those which are jumped on by the private education bashers who then seem to assume that I must also think like her because my DS is at a Prep school.

I have a very broad Yorkshire accent. It makes me cross that someone would pick a private school so that they don't have to mix with people who talk like me! What about my values and morals and decency? Or are they really not as important as speaking nicely?

The bottom line is there are a heap of the best jobs you are more likely to get if you speak with received pronunciation. Why is wanting that any worse than wantng them to get AAA at A level or have good manners? It's a cold fact. You might not like it but it's true just as being fat makes it harder to get employed too.

What you fail to acknowledge Xenia is that not every parents' ambition is to have their child get AAA or for them to get "the best job"

You have an extreme view of the world and assume everyone else lives like you or aims to have a life like you. You are very narrow minded Xenia.

Melvin Bragg, Alan Bennett, Maureen Lipman and Alan Sugar are just a few of the many people I can think of who have strong regional accents and yet have had successful careers. Xenia's misplaced snobbery about accents never fails to amuse me.