Would you send your kids to private school if money were no option?

[Beetroot]

and if so why? or why not?

Mine go to a private school. I justyfy it tom myslef becase they are specialist musicanans, they have 'special needs' which would not be fufilled in the state sector (round 'ere anyway)

Was totally against it though, until I fell into it by mistake!

Sorry Bossykate, it wasn't meant to sound incredulous. I just found that in my area parents have very different ideas as to what a "good" or "great" primary school was. The only thing that people seemed to be united on were the 2 or 3 "bad" schools (typically identified by the lower socio-economic intake).

So when people say that their primary is great I'm just wondering how they are making the comparison. At secondary the comparison seems to be by GCSE/A level results and university places. Are the primary league tables a real comparison? Or is it more important that primary children are just happy to be in school, and that the safe pastoral environment is more important than academic progress/learning?

Am now of course intrigued by the "realistic approach to the issues presented by state secondary education in the area". Is this code for "will help cram children for 11+/junior entrance"?

you got it but not just that, a lot of meetings with parents to go over the options. seriously though, we live in a borough where there aren't enough secondary places by quite a large margin - so it is a matter of enormous concern to parents.

i agree that for secondary the results are more meaningful than at primary school level. i know league tables and SATS results are controversial methods for parents to use to assess a school (and indeed we didn't use those measures exclusively when choosing ds's school) - but no-one has yet suggested a better alternative afaik, and as a parent i want as much information as i can get.

Wordsmith you said, 'We cannot change the system for the better by opting out of it!!' and if we had a system that was even half-way fair or even where the 'principles' behind it were, then I would agree with you, but a lot of you who are saying it's so terrible to opt out of the system need to take a good look at what is actually 1) out there and 2) accessible to people who are not rich or not Christian (or who choose not to have their children educated in a faith school).

At the moment there are huge divisions between faith schools, selective schools (and selection can be covert - e.g. I know of one state school that declares itself non-selective but interviews its parents and then goes on to get 97% A-c at GCSE. No selection there then!), state grammar schools (admittedly few and far between but they exist and are funded by our taxes and have a terrible effect on the rest of the schools in the LEA and the vast majority of the children in the LEA who will necessarily fail their 11+) and there are already City Acadmies and this is without getting into the house prices/ catchment issue. These divisions are not accidental and they are not there because of parents they are there because the Government wants them to be or at least has done nothing to get rid of them. Hence league tables, hence 'parental choice', hence more funding for faith schools, hence city academies etc. Also, has anyone been listening to the news? Ruth Kelly and her mate Tone want MORE SELECTION in STATE EDUCATION. So what's this about opting out of the state system? Kelly, Blair and co mean the system itself has already been opted out.

As for not doing anything to change the system, I try to use my vote wisely, I write to my MP, I am a teacher in the state system and so is my partner. I will do a lot to ensure my children get a good education and are not bullied for wanting to learn or allowed to coast because other kids are demanding too much attention and yes, that includes opting out of the system (which I feel less and less guilty about with every news headline about education) but I will not start going to church or send my children to a faith school when I am an atheist and when I see the damage faith schools do to society (think N. Ireland, think Oldham riots). I will not increase my mortgage by far more than private school fees which will put too much of a financial burden on my family when I'm quite happy where I am in a deprived and multi-cultural area so that my kids get to mix with people from different backgrounds and ethnicities. If other people do make these choices or are 'lucky'/ rich enough to live in a nice area with a good school then that's fine but I'd rather they wouldn't criticise my choices.

I haven't read the full thread but in some areas in London it is cheaper to send your children to private school and live in a cack area than move into a nice area where state schools are good.
East end - 2bed flat £200k, wbarnes - 2 bed cottage £500k

think of what £300k could buy you in terms of schooling.

springintheair - I absolutely agree with you re faith schools, and have said so on so many occasions on these boards that I am boring myself, even
I am not criticising anyone's choices - in fact I think you were criticising those whose principles mean they could not countenance a private school education
but I would say this - the private choices we make about schooling DO impact on other children and on society as a whole. and we are kidding ourselves if we think they do not. if the middle classes opt out of state schooling en masse, then we will ALL suffer.

agree that anyone who thinks we don't have selection already is v. naive. it seems as though every day we read in the papers of another report that says the middle class is over-represented in the best performing state schools.

I live in a lovely area but in the catchment araes of one of the worst schools in the county, neighbouring schools not much better as I live in the city. So either I

• pay school fees and stay in the house and area I like
• Move to a bertter catchment area and pay a lot more in mortgage

So money not really the deciding factor!

I'm getting you Harpsichord - it would be a terrible thing if the middle classes all suddenly decided to educate their children privately and it's terrible that many parents(but remember a disproportionate no. on this site) feel they can't trust the state system already but you have to admit that the middle classes are already choosing or forced into particular schools in the state sector which means the good schools get better and the bad schools get worse or stay the same. I really don't think that if the 12% of kids who are educated privately suddenly moved into the state system things would get better. Partly because this is a minority (and always will be unless Blair and co continue to dismantle the state system) but also because their parents would do what everyone else on this site says they do - either move to a nicer catchment area or go to a faith school. How would this help the non-faith, non-selective school or kids in less well-off areas?

If the Govt would get rid of the inequalities that already exist in the state system and which they are actively encouraging and commit to spending money on it so that class sizes were reduced (to the level or private schools) etc etc instead of spending money on bombing other countries then my children would be first in the queue to their local school. As things stand, though, I'd feel much more compromised by sending my kids to MacDonald's Inner City Academy where business or sport might be prioritised over everything else as a subject or Creationists R Us or whatever or by moving to a twee entirely white, middle-class neighbourhood than I will do about sending them to a private school which is open about its selection policies, its aims and where its money is coming from.

We will be sending both of ours to private school from 7 - up until then the state preschool nursery and primary (infants) are outstanding. It will be a real struggle though.

What concerns me is the standard of education - if grammar schools were still around I'd NEVER consider private education. But I think there are so many types of private education it is difficult to generalise. I went to an independent sch which was just made indep when I joined ie was a grammar and the pupils were all so "normal". Now however it's full of people I wouldn't like to mix with.

The opportunities espe extra curricular at the private sch which is also the nearest to us, are fabulous and who wouldn't want to expose their children to that?

FWIW one of my main reasons for going private was to opt out of National curriculum/SATs/ random initiatives that are the Education Minister's latest good idea.

State school teachers are excellent. But I have less faith in the system of management.

I haven't read all the thread due to time etc (two year old ransacking my house ) but thought I would add my piece ...
I taught in the private sector for 10 years in the (good schools, great teachers in the main) and both DH and I were educated at private schools.
When DS was coming up to school age my MIL offered to pay for private school ... AND WE TURNED HER DOWN!
There were various reasons for this:
a) We live in New Zealand ... state schools are good here (had we lived in the UK we may have thought differently but I don't think so)
b) We have a DD ... and we both thought that it wouldn't be right for one to go to private and one not
c) IME paying money for private school DOES NOT guarantee a better quality or standard of teaching. Often teachers in state schools are more dedicated to their jobs (or else why would they stay there?) I have a friend who worked in Tower Hamlets and the teachers there were incredible, inspirational, exceptional teachers. As much as I believe I was a good teacher I know I didn't make that much of a difference in kids' lives as these teachers did.
d) Having had all those years working in private schools the last thing I see myself as is a private school 'mother' ... god no ... I'd rather stick pins in my eyes than be one of them ... (no offence to MN private school mums ... that is just from my experience)
e) Pressure ... academic and peer pressure ... if you know what I know you would understand ... there is so much pressure in private education ...
f) Private schools won't stop kids 'going off the rails' ... We felt that we would really struggle with MIL if DS ended up a wild teenager when she has spent all that money on him ... My DH had a few problems at his expensive public school and it took him years to come to terms with the fact that his mother couldn't forgive him for 'letting her down' when they had spent all that money ... we don't want to repeat history.
g) I have a friend whose husband works in a prestigious Auckland private school. He won't send his kids there. He says that the drug problem in private schools is worse than in state schools as the children have more money to spend ... this links in with the peer pressure bit too ... mobile phones, cars blah blah blah.

None of this is in any order ... and is just my personal views on the subject ...

Am off to see what DD has flooded/wrecked/trashed etc then will come back and read the thread ...

Just out of interest why did MIL offer to fund ds and not dd, ghosty? Was it because she put more value on ds's education?

No I wouldn't send them for much the same reasons as Wordsmith. We do live in an area reasonably endowed with good schools.
This whole thread is so removed from rl as I know it. I know a couple of people paying for local private primary education which is crap in comparison with the best state schools locally.
as a bit of an aside, my acquaintance chose her son's school on the basis that she felt she would be more comfortable standing on that playground... At least she is honest about her motives....

A word re private education at secondary level: lots (most/all?) of private secondary schools have private feeder prep schools which tutor and enter their pupils into the scholarship exams for the chosen secondary. Just a point to bear in mind when considering private at secondary level but not at primary level. Places may be limited and scholarships hard to come by if you are outside the system.

There was an interesting article in Tuesday's Education Guardian about Canon Slade school in Bolton which is doing brilliantly but admitting children from 87 different primary schools and over a quarter of its pupils aren't even from Bolton. Only 3 children admitted to the school came from the school's 2 closest primary schools. The Head 'sees no reason why local people should be given privileged access to their local school.' The school is 'almost completely white in an area with a large black and Asian population' and 'less than 6% of the population has special needs where in Bolton as a whole the figure is 27%'. 'Faith schools such as Canon Slade account for 18% of all secondary schools, but 42% of the top 200 comps.' And Ruth Kelly wants more of this, 'What the education bill will do is allow far more schools to follow Canon Slade's example, tkaing charge of their own admissions and effectively choosing the children they wish to take.' One local parent said,'We can't go to that school. It's not for the likes of us' Nice to know that 'equality of opportunity' is alive and well in our state education system then!!

If you add schools which select according to ability and aptitude to the 18% of faith schools in the country it makes you wonder just how many schools are left which are genuinely accessible to all and that's without even considering house prices?

But that also works the other way Cam . In grammar school areas you find people paying for primary education to get their kids places at State Grammar and High schools by working specifically towards them passing 11/12+.

DH's school make allowances for entrance examination papers completed by state school pupils.

Oh I know LIZS, but those grammar schools have to still take all the other things into account eg. catchment area, siblings, etc, its not just based on passing the 11 plus.

our school takes lods of kids form state schools at secondary. The school feeds from the junior schoool, home schooled and state scholed for the main. Obvioulsy often musicians looking for more intensive teaching

Finally people are thinking about the entrance requirements!! Even if you have shedloads of cash, it won't guarantee your child a place at a good independent school.

Several people in my class had siblings who failed the entrance test and had to either attend their local state school or a less selective private school. How do you explain that one to your children?

As an aside, am I right in thinking that up until recently many private schools in England didn't require their teaching staff to necessarily have a teaching qualification? I knew a girl who did a gap year immediately after school ('94) and was teaching English classes unchaperoned at a respected boarding school in Bath and was not a CA.

The rules in Scotland have always been more stringent I think.

Also please try to distinguish b/w public schools like Eton and Harrow which seem to rely on networking and cash for entrance (apart from the scholars obviously) and independent schools which are increasingly the domain of the middle classes.

In Glasgow (City) certainly there are so many independent schools that it seeems that most middle class parents send their child to one if possible. That could be unique to Glasgow though. Or they pay over the odds for a house in the Jordanhill catchment (Scotland's only grant maintained school.)

MaggieT ... I think she does think that DS' education is more important actually and I really disagree with that. DS is bright and at the time that she offered DD was still only 6 months old and when I said that I couldn't have my children having different types of educations she said that she wouldn't be paying for DD so it would be up to us if we wanted her to go private. I think she is of the old fashioned mind that boys will be the earners ...

Wordsworth / those who think the reason state schools are crap because middle class parents keep leaving, Just have to say that I sooo disagree with you....

I live in a town where there are no private schools. The nearest secondary private school is a 45 min drive away (excluding one 23k a year public school, which no-one can afford anyway!) yet we have the very worst schools in England with one school only having a GCSE pass rate of 9%. Even the average for the town is only 45%, well below the national average. The LEA itself has been in special measures as have practically every secondary school in the town in recent years. Quite frankly it is diabolical. Yet, there are no private schools to blame it all on...as very few children get shipped out to private schools, instead the middle class mums scrap over getting their kids into the few decent schools. I think it is a mistake to think that getting rid of private schools will solve the problem, as I think the problem runs much deeper than that - rather we have got to think how we view education as a society and what value we place on it... blaming the problems on private schools, ime, is just a cop out and stops us facing up to what the real problems are.

Not saying that I have the answers mind, but just I don't think we can blame private schools for the problems.

Definitely. My children go to a very good village school at the moment. If they don't pass the 11+ the state secondary they would have to go to is awful. With 3 children my husbands salary will not cover private school. We will pay for private tuition to help with the 11+ (if they show potential). If that fails we will move!

Class sizes are my main concern at the moment.
However I am not sure if, as a family, we would fit into the 'typical' private school role.

Sorry I had a nappy to change so cut my message short.

As some people have mentionned,. the pressure that goes with private school is immense. Some of my friends children go to private school. At a 6 year old girls party that my son went to recently, I overheard 6 girls comparing their PRADA shoes! They were laughing at another girl from their (private school) class who was wearing traniers. To her credit she just told them that as the party was at a gym her trainers were much more practical than their 'special shoes'.
I couldn't and wouldn't want to keep up with this. But my children may have other ideas.
So whilst we cannot afford it I don't have to make the decision as to whether the education is worth the baggage that comes too!

I guess 'definitely' was the wrong choice when I think about it.

Where I live people blame the poor secondary schools on the fact that there are still grammer schools here. Actually only 3 children each year go from each of the primary schools. The other 30 odd go to the bad secondary school.
So where's the logic in that. All of the primary schools have good reputations.
There are alot of private schools here too but most children go to them from the start so have no impact on the primary sector.
Sorry I'm waffling now.