Independent education: arguments in favour?

[Notnowcato]

I had a good state education in a single sex grammar school. I wasn't tutored in any way for the 11-plus and so there was no pressure about passing it. I loved learning, the company of my peers, my teachers etc. My husband had a similar experience. Before our children reached school age, we had no thoughts of doing anything other than sending our three children to our catchment-area state schools.

Sadly, after six years of state primary schools, and having visited all of the nearest state secondaries, I am depressed by what is ahead of us if we stay in the state system. The main problems seem to me to be: business managers rather than educationalists leading schools, semi-illiterate communications (head teachers' PowerPoint presentations, web sites, printed material) revealing ill-educated staff, terrible lack of maintenance of the buildings and facilities, poorly equipped classrooms and libraries, ridiculously narrow choices at GCSE and A level, absurd rules about wearing blazers at all times because this 'makes [sic] the children respect their school', the compulsion to take GCSEs in years 9 and 10 as well as 11, the sheer size of the schools ... and so on.

So ... my husband and I are starting to explore the idea of independent schools. Well, I am. My husband keeps asking why anyone would want to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds (we have three children) when education is provided by the state at no cost up to the age of 18. If you had the task of convincing a curmudgeonly old man that the cost would be justified what would you say? What are the main arguments in favour of private schools? Or don't you think there are any, in which case, please relight my enthusiasm for the state sector.

If it helps: DD is highly academic (especially literacy), quiet, well-behaved, cheerful, gets on with life; DS1 is arty, sensitive, bright, definitely not sporty; DS2 is 4 so can't say much except that he is old for his year and seems perfectly normal!

Sorry for the long post.

Herts - Haberdashers girls. Do you count North London Collegiate as London s it's outer?

Newcastle Royal Grammar
Manchester Grammar

In other words the better schools. Those that might otherwise close down have had to merge and many boys' schools take girls just to keep their A level results up. Eg for boarding Eton and Harrow have no girls because they are good enough to manage without whereas lesser places have been forced to take the opposite sex in.Westminster girls in the Sixth form I would except from what I am saying as that is pretty good even without the girls.

Where do girls go in Manchester? Newcastle is mixed. NLCS is definitely London.

• • -Three places outside the M25 with girls and boys Day private schools open question - its not fair to land it all on Xenia

Once outside the M25, how many academically selective private DAY schools are there?
Round here only one of the many is .....

Ah, sorry. It was always single sex, Newcastle Grammar I had not realised it had succumbed....

Okay so we are now outside the M25 and we are looking at day schools.

I have Manchester Grammar so far.
I am not an expert on all schools round the land.

The list of best schools in the country in order

rankings.ft.com/secondary-schools/secondary-schools-2011

I've found Magdalen COllege Oxford - is that day? 4th in the country
Tonbridge Kent boys

Is Hampton outside M25 - Lady Elleanor Holles?

The bottom line is most schools with good resultsin the country are in the SE which is amazing isn't it? It's as if everyone thick lives outside the M25 or SE. Weird. May be we gravitate here. I am frmo the NE but I and my children are all now in London. Are we pooling all the high IQ in the SE and the NOrth, Cornwall, Wales, regions becomes state supported ghettos for the lower paid and those claiming benefits with a flight of talent to the SE?

Oxford High school GPDST 100% girls position 21st in the country.

Withington Girls 32nd (near Manchester).
King Edward VI gbirls birmingham 45th

Ooo Xenia! You'll get some flack from us thick poverty-stricken midlanders and northerns now

Thank you everyone for all your useful and interesting comments. I had planned a longish reply this evening after careful cogitation and discussion with my husband but I have been struck down with a really horrible cold (donated by my lovely youngest) and, having got the children to bed, I am following suit. But I will be back tomorrow! Again, thanks to everyone for their time, comments and advice.

Manchester High School for Girls
Edgbaston High School for Girls
both 2-18years.

Bristol also has single-sex day schools.
If you mean Secondary age only, so do many, many towns and cities. Odd question really!

Ha ha xenia! Think the reason for top achievement in the SE is higher population density and relative strength of economy here, ie the paying selective schools get pupils from a larger population (able-to-pay).

OP, if it's the pros of private ed you're after, the independent schools council has lots of propaganda bumph.

In reality you will need to do some hard sums (also factor in longer holidays, any childcare you need etc, adjust for inflation etc) and thoroughly look (together) at all your local options, eg if you can't afford private could sell or rent house out and move to catchment for a v good state secondary, move to an area with grammars or whatever.

QZ
could you name them - the private ones that is
just that having A private girls school and A private boys school in a city does not create true academic selection after all ....

and what about the rest of the country
or are we just yokels who HAVE to settle for state or non selective or boarding (the latter two of which exclude 96% of us)

Bolton has Bolton School for Girls and Bolton school for boys.
Liverpool has Merchant Taylor's. This has a seperate boys and girls school.
Is that what you are after TalkinPeace2?

i really think if you genuinely care about the world and the future you would opt for a normal state education

the world ain't improving - all this great paid for education is just making things worse

Wolverhampton
Oldham

How 'yokelish' do you wish me to go?

ONE of each in one town IS NOT CHOICE
as parents who live in that town have the choice of "the" private school or state
unlike what xenia and many MN posters rattle on about - putting kids in for lots of private school exams

what is the private percentage in YOUR LEA?
In ours (among residents) its around 3%
and we are a rich county !

I moved my children to private school at the ages of 9, 7 and 5. The smaller ones were very happy at the state school, kicked up a huge fuss about moving and took a while to settle.
Coming to the point ..... even my now 9 year old can see the benefits of her private education v's what happened at the outstanding state, the depth of knowledge, the individual attention, the self confidence, facilities, expectations of behaviour.
If you can afford it, I can think of no better gift to your child an education can never be taken from them and lasts a lifetime.

Well actually most people who can afford fee-paying schools have the option to move if they don't like it. They have choice if they wish to exercise it.

People living in areas I named above have the option of applying in many boroughs due to the closeness of boundaries- hence if one lives in Wolverhampton for example, one applies to

State grammars- the Birmingham King Edward VI schools, Sutton Coldfield/Bishop Vesey, Walsall Queen Mary's, possibly Stratford-upon-Avon too.

Independent sector- King Edward VI schools, Edgbaston HSG, Solihull School, Bromsgrove, Wolverhampton Grammars, possibly Warwick, Princethorpe too.

Similar picture in Greater Manchester (as was).

As to percentage privately educated, this is difficult, as it's meaningless really. My LA is an extremely deprived one, so I'm not sure what conclusions you wish to draw from this...

for my LA it is 4.5% and for my region it is 5%, though I think this is heavily influenced by a large number of faith schools in our area, and of course we have a lot of super-selective state-funded grammars.

What swung it for us was a year 5 LEA swimming competiton where the local state primaries (one of which my DC's attended) came up against two local independents. My DC's are very sporty but because they hadn't been 'taught' how to dive in from the side of the pool like all the other state schools, they were compelled to start the races in the water, unlike their independent competitors (presumably due to 'Health and Safety' issues!). This placed them at a huge disadvantage and they were unable to bridge the 'gap' as those children who were allowed to dive into the water had a head start. I felt sad for my DC's and also very angry about this state of affairs as they were effectively swimming with one hand behind their backs.

In a way it did me a favour as it made me realise that this was a metaphor for life. When it came to secondary school we were be fortunate enough to be able to afford to leave state sector and I feel that I am giving my children the best opportunity that I can. They can compete on equal terms and are no longer disadvantaged.

They now attend a day/boarding school and we also have fantastic flexibiltiy around drop off and pick up times which with two full-time working parents is ideal and works extremely well from a practical perspective. This is another factor to consider.

And forgive me, talkinpeace, but I believe for Hampshire the figure is around 8% (15430/186090)
No idea how one would separate out pupils who live within the LA boundaries, perhaps you have a link to the statistics?

QZ
8% of the children on roll in Hampshire may be at private
but Winchester, Downe and dozens of other private schools take kids whose parents do not live here : HCC have the numbers - I'll find them in the morning

link to the 8% please : audited figures

2nd Excel sheet a little elderly to be fair, but the national statistics gateway is a nightmare to navigate at best of times, and tonight is not one of those!

Still would like some clarification on what it is you're concluding from these figures...

I live ina (admittedly commuter belt) rural backwater.

dd2 is 5, and so I have not yet looked into this fully, but off the top of my head there are 3 reachable independent girls' schools she could go to at secondary level. she is currently in a mixed prep.

there are none in my 'town' (I use that word loosely), but then I knew when we moved here that I would be taxi-ing to school (and the 3 Ican list off the top of my head are all in smaller 'towns', and are all closer than dd1's school (16 mile each way commute - again a private SN school, but she would be worse off for a state place - nearest is further away than that))

I am slightly mystified by the controversy about selective versus non-selective fee paying schools. Does that indicate that the benefits of private education are eroded if the school isn't selective? Surely that means that the advantages that come with smaller classes, better facilities, the ability of a school to set its own curriculum (with the concomitant boost to teachers' job satisfaction), and autonomy over the exclusion of disruptive pupils etc etc are all chimera. What that seems to indicate is that 'excellence out' is only a function of 'excellence in'. Or am I misunderstanding?

The benefits of private education IME (regardless of whether a school is selective or non selective) is about the fact that it realises your DC's potential. Some academically intelligent DCs might work better in a selective school whereas others are better in a non selective school. Others have DCs with a variety of abilities and want to have them all in the same school so don't go down the selective route. I have one DC in each type of school and we pay to end up with rounded people with the best qualifications they can individually achieve.

Plus when parents are discussing schools many are quick to say that their DC got into a superselective and etc etc They are not so quick to say that their child got into a non-selective school. So maybe a touch of stealth boasting... At the end of the day the school you choose has to be suitable for your child and no one else's. Simple!

Notnow, not at all bright children do very well in non selective private schools for all the reasons you mention. I think bright childen do very very well in selective schools only educated with the very bright. Both types of c hildren benefit hugely from private education although do realise some private schools are useless and some state schools very good. You need to choose wisely.

Yes, I think realising potential is what a parent really wants. I think the other thing that is clear now is that (and I suppose this is no great surprise) the independent sector is as different and as full of pitfalls as the state sector. On the whole, I think the general thread of argument on this discussion is that the education is better because children can be seen as individuals and helped as individuals. One of the things I really dislike about my local state secondaries is the sheer size of them. (I was horrified to find out that they all have a ten-form intake.) It's not about children not making their own niches and getting along OK, its just that you get the feeling they'd never have a real sense of belonging or a feel for their school community.

So my current plan is to make a few appointments and visit a few independent schools, with hubby in tow: not trying to persuade him in advance but letting the places speak for themselves.

I think, to be honest, the only thing that would hold us back would be the financial side of things. My husband's job is very rarified (professorial level appointment researching a very specialist area which requires hardware only found in one other place in the UK) so moving house to another part of the country is not really an option for us. We could move to the catchment area of a secondary that is supposed to be very good but it would be hard to afford the size house I think we'd need. Clearly sacrifices could be made in that area if we thought the state secondary would be good enough, but if we went the independent route I think we'd be more sure of the education, with the house we know and love, for about the same overall expenditure!

Jabed: home education is definitely something we would consider if the financial side of the independent sector doesn't work out for us. My daughter has a close friend who is home educated and I know the local group is very strong. Philosophically, I lean this way too ? but I am not entirely sure I have the patience! On the other hand, it's something I need to look into in more detail.

southeastastra: I couldn't agree more. I heartily wish independent schools had been abolished after WW2. That would have made a difference. I also think that the reason my local state schools are so bad is because so many involved parents (many of whom can barely afford it) take the independent route. On the other hand, as Jabed says, I am not sure I want my children to be the ones who have to suffer on the front line. (In his reception year DS1 had his head banged repeatedly against a brick wall, had his face and back scratched on more than on occasion, had food emptied over his clothes at lunchtime, was hit with a branch in the face ? and all in the name of inclusion. And he was by no means the only or the most put-upon victim in his class. He still has nightmares two years on. The 'attacks' and the school's response unpicked my idealism irreparably.)