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.

Oops. Rather long! Sorry!!

southeastastra your comment "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"
I genuinely dont see how my decision to pay to educate my DS is having an impact on the rest of the world or even UK education.

You could reverse the quote and say if you genuinely care about the world and the future they opt for a private school (as the chidlren turn out better and state provision of anything is usually pretty bad so the more we take away from the state the better). The other argument is that the state is saved huge sums by those of us who do not take its resources when we do not need it. There are lots of arguments that it is morally wrong to use state schools if we want to get into that debate.

I think the point is that not everyone can 'opt' for a private school. For the vast majority of the population it is just not an option at all. I rather wish that all the highly educated, motivated, articulate, well-organised and passionate people who use private schools were parents in the state sector. I think that would make for a fairer world with better state schools. It's never going to happen and we must work with what we have ? but surely you can't disagree with southeastastra in essence?

I can disagree I might be highly educated articulate passionate etc but if I opted to send both my DS's to a state school it wouldn't make a jot of difference to the standard of education others receive.

happy
that is where you are wrong
having your DS who is at private in a state school would drag the average IQ (I'm rashly assuming that he's as bright as he must be to be at that school :-) )
of the top set upwards
and in ANY school, having bright kids gets better teachers, which gets better results across the board, which loops round and round upwards....

And parents, especially if they become governors but even if they are just averagely involved parents (attending parents' evenings, asking questions, complaining if they see the need, supporting fundraising, making sure children are punctual and do their homework and behave well etc), really can make a difference to a school. Or so my teacher friends and relatives tell me.

I think this argument about involved parents really would make a difference in, say, London,whereas in our area, the independent my ds will be attending (the only senior for 40 miles) has approx 70 children in each year group (some boarders/choristers). So, if the local pupils (maybe 50?) (and their parents) went to state instead, they might be spread around 25 state schools. 2 per school? Not sure that would have much impact.

I agree with all that TalkinPeace, however, that's a huge responsibility you're placing on the shoulders of that child and his or her parents and if it adds to their stress and workloads and the child and parents don't benefit themselves from being at the school, I think that's making unfair demands of them.

It's different if there's a large group of motivated, bright kids and pushy parents but being one of a handful of kids who wants to learn and may well be bullied because of it and the parent of that child is no fun at all.

All the involvement in the world will not help when children are given the same work sheet twice, can only be heard reading once a week, there aren't enough books to go around and therefore they have to copy out quickly at the expense of handwriting or else they can't complete the work.
Parents cannot influence the behaviour of other pupils, cannot influence the quality and depth of knowledge the teacher has or the creativity or resources available.
I think people kid themselves when they think that they can do that instead of paying for an education, private education a whole different league.

Let's be honest, for most parents on Mums net the choice is not between the worst sink school and private education. Most people on Mumsnet really choose between: moving to the catchment of a good school, private education or home education. Those who can't afford to move on MN almost certainly cannot afford private education either, with the possible exception that their child is bright enough for a huge bursary.

I do have to caution, just because a school has a ten form intake doesn't mean it's pastoral care is less than a smaller school. Some big schools work really hard to ensure kids don't fall through the cracks, even though the Head may not know them all by name, the Head of year might though (and importantly might be with them from years 7/8 to 11). Other smaller schools think they must offer good care because of their size, but actually kids do fall through the cracks (not good or bad, clever or struggling enough to be noticed). Some teachers are also really not interested in the pastoral side, if you have a school full of them, then it MIT not really happen.

" having your DS who is at private in a state school would drag the average IQ of the top set upwards" is there actually any empirical evidence for this?
and in ANY school, having bright kids gets better teachers, which gets better results across the board, which loops round and round upwards....
I am a mother and when the push comes to the shove want as all mothers do the best for my son why should I sacrifice my sons happiness for the sake of others? I know my DS would not be as happy in a state school as an in indie.

Also I have no intention of ever becoming a governor, fund raising or hopefully complaining and its a gross generalisation to assume that only intelligent articulate passionate people want to do these things. Maybe I'm in a minority but I'd rather boil my head than man a teddy bear stall.

I am in the process of moving my children to independent schools. Someone in the village I live in queried my choice and said "so long as they are happy and doing well, why would you move them"? She was right - however one child was not happy and one was not doing well.

My son is described by his current state school as "exceptional" and "inspirational". Yet he is no longer inspired by education and is frequently referred to as a nerd or a geek. The indie I am moving him to told him "it's cool here to be clever" and said to me that they can deal with the social problems that ds often faces because they "are used to children like him".

My daughter is quiet and under confident. She has lost her way in numeracy but lacks the confidence in her mixed age class of 33 to speak out. At the all girls school she is going to, she will be in a class of 10 and in a single day there, the teacher was able to get her to come up to the front and talk about her work. She left inspired by numeracy in a way I have never seen from her before.

For me the advantage is in being able to choose a school to suit my children. I have yet to see whether it will work out or not, but frankly we can have lost nothing (except money) by the attempt.

This thread is very interesting to me. I guess we are the opposite. My dh went to public sschool and wads brought up to think all state.schools.were rubbish and full of oiks. However both our dcs are in a state primary and doing well. I went to state secondary and did fine. He is currently trying to convince me it's worth 20k pa post tax income. We have been to see 2 independants and I remain unconvinced tbh.

We are just looking at a private sixth form for dd.

When we went to look around, I realised what we saw was the type of school I went to for free - a grammar school.

Although her current state school is supposed to be good, I can see it's not, and they badly let down the brightest pupils, although those more in the middle probably do best.

They have little ambition or vision for the most able and their results ate masked by the fact that many pupils are tutored privately outside school. So yes, us 'pushy' parents do improve the school...by spending our cash and making their results appear better. It doesn't help bright but poorer pupils at all.

I do think expectations are so poor because they are judged on the magic a*-c grades at Gcse, with the consequence that C is good enough. In real life, C isn't good enough, and the private school dd is considering demand an A for subjects she wants to do at A'level.

However, I know of other state schools that do support their more able pupils much better, so it does depend on where you live...none of them are close to us, so it looks like private is the way dd will go...she is being tutored like mad now to ensure As in her favoured subjects.

I think that's the danger though when we did just fine in state, who wants to be just fine ? If you did ok just think what you might have done given extra help and resources. You've proven the raw material was there. I know a heck of a lot of people who went to private school who are in jobs/careers they would not have achieved without their expensive education. I also know people who are far more intelligent who are working for them, me for example :-(

In my case just fine was AAB at A-level. Might have got the 3rd Aif I'd had extra help

The argument that if the middle classes all opted for state, then state provision would improve, is (a) never supported by evidence and (b) undermined by direct personal experience. I am as middle class and sharp-elbowed as they come, and I have thus far this year, had to threaten my LEA with judicial review on 3 separate occasions to get ds's provision sorted. The state education hierarchy does not listen to parents, whoever they are, because it doesn't have to.

We paid for one child to go to independent school, she absolutely blossomed. Some years later her sibling is in reception at State school, we have given it every chance, it doesn't compare. We are selling our aunties and paying for the next round of independent.

In what way Weedleway ?As I said upthread we have been to see 2 private secondaries and I realy cannot fathom what the fuss is about.

Have you seen 2 state secondaries ? It might all become clearer

For example 1had no decent science labs,a mouldy swimming pool and no way of moving between classrooms.without going outside. The other (more expensive)was betterbut did not set before 14, and had seriously out of date computers. Now I know state schools havee their problems, but if I am going.to pay 4k a term I want bells and whistles

I am perfectly happy to concede that different areas have better/worse schools and I have seen good and bad examples of both. DS is a normal 5 year old, he is right on track for his age and wants to be an ice cream man when he grows up! He is ignored in state school because he is not either in line for a nobel prize or needing to be searched for weapons every morning. In other words he is a nicely behaved, easy going little soul who is getting completely overlooked. The (non selective) independent has more facilities, smaller classes, more staff and genuinely interested children. We aren't that close to our aunts so selling them is no big hardship!

Yes I have seen state secondaries. The only difference that I can see is the.state schools.are operating in this century(and the real world) .Also "normal" class sizes eg ; 30ish. Which for bright motivated kids should be fine.