Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Independent education: arguments in favour?

198 replies

Notnowcato · 29/03/2012 21:21

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.

OP posts:
naughtymummy · 02/04/2012 20:40

Which is why I said I am very wary of this observation, because I do not wish to be predujiced. GGT

naughtymummy · 02/04/2012 20:42

Which is why I said I am very wary of this observation, because I do not wish to be predujiced. GGT

Heswall · 02/04/2012 20:45

I went to state and didn't get into medicine with AAB imagine my surprise when I met a GP who'd attended private school and got in with BBB. Same year. I've no regrets my career turned out ok.
I might not agree with the game but I've learnt the rules and will ensure my DC play to their advantage.

naughtymummy · 02/04/2012 20:47

They have all worked hard and deserve to be there of course they do. Not all privately educated students struggle
, most cope well. But some do expect more direction ,because the teaching has been highly didatic. This my current

happygardening · 02/04/2012 20:50

I don't know what motivates you mummytime to send your DS to school but one of my motivations is that they learn things I can't teach them. With pushing 21 weeks holiday a year I've plenty of time to teach cooking washing etc. and when it comes to university boarders are far more prepared than day children. My DS from the age of 7 has learnt to live away from his parents and as part of a community he has has changed his own bedding and put his clothes out to be washed packed his own suitcase all from an early age. He has extensive experience of choosing and finding activities and does not need his friends to be participating in them to try something new he can live with sloths and obsessive types and not let either affect him and he can organise his time/prep without someone breathing down the back of his neck. Ok I doubt he could cook a five course meal but these other life skills are equally important.

naughtymummy · 02/04/2012 21:01

I am sorry happy gardening for the second time.tonoght we will have to agree to disagree. I cannot see the value in sending 7 year olds away (except in unavoidable circumstances)

naughtymummy · 02/04/2012 21:12

Thanks for everyones comments signing off now. I think we haven't found the right school yet, will keep looking

goinggetstough · 02/04/2012 21:18

Good luck with the search naughty It's not easy.....

goinggetstough · 02/04/2012 21:19

Good luck with the search naughty It's not easy.....

mummytime · 02/04/2012 21:46

Happy gardening were you talking to naughty mummy? Because your remarks don't make sense if they were addressed to me?

mumblesmum · 02/04/2012 22:31

happy my ds practised leaving home when he was four (because we didn't understand him). He is now 20. In the interim he has been to state schools that did not require his presence 24/7. He is now very happy to be away from home (as you might expect after 16 years of gearing up to it). He lives with other people amicably, and looks after himself fine.

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 02/04/2012 22:44

Although it has been proved, I think, that state school children do better at universit than their privately educated counterparts.
here

SocietyClowns · 02/04/2012 22:58

So, TheOriginal, does that apply to those educated privately from 3-18, or those privately educated from 7 or 11 or 13 or whatever onwards, or those only going to 6th form? How about those going to prep school and then changing to state? Will my 4 year old be doomed because she is spending her primary years in a private single sex school? I think not.
I don't do statistics.

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 02/04/2012 23:02

It appears to focus on a level results.

I'm sure your daughter won't be disadvantaged, no. I just think its an interesting counter to some of the ideas put forth on this thread, which seem slightly anecdotal, about state school students being clueless and no good at independent life or study.

SocietyClowns · 02/04/2012 23:16

I know, sorry, had one of those days...

Heswall · 02/04/2012 23:19

State children probably do better because only the very determined get to university, it's not a given. Or did I just make that up like 78% of statistics ?

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 02/04/2012 23:27

I don't quite agree with that, actually, because from state sixths I've seen in recent years, it is definitely the norm to go to university. Partly because universities provision is so much greater these days and there just are more universities.

If it were true, though, I wonder whether it's necessarily a good thing for universities to be full of privately educated children who aren't very determined? Something about that seems a bit wrong.

EdithWeston · 03/04/2012 07:40

Between the ages of 16-19, 21% of children are in private schools (been working it out on another thread from raw data sets).

I'm not sure how much attention analyses of university performance take of nature of entire school career as opposed to 6th form only.

mummytime · 03/04/2012 07:47

The problem is between16-19 there area lot of extra kids, who come to the country just to do A'levels.

EdithWeston · 03/04/2012 07:51

Here's further information on the Sutton Trust report linked a few posts above.

What it seems to be showing is that A levels are a poor indicator of degree success: it found that, in a population of 8,000 students with matched GCSE performance and matched class of degree, those from comprehensives had lower A level scores than those from state grammar schools or private schools.

I haven't found how many of those counted as grammar/private moved school/sector for 6th form.

The message here might be that fairer selection could be on GCSE, given the way in which the authors of the research used results there as a baseline. They found that US-style SATs were an ever poorer predictor.

jabed · 03/04/2012 08:37

A long thread . One where if one makes generalisations, they are considered
"sweeping" and therefore invalid, yet, unless one makes such generalisations, it is impossible to answer the OP's question. You have by definition to accept the every one ( school ) is unique situation and cannot therefore state any arguments in favour of independent schools ( by definition a generalisation).

I have taught in university. I have taught in state schools - good and bad - and in independents. My earlier contribution stated simply that you pay for " social exclusion" , to which someone then suggested far more cultural diversity. You cannot win.

I still state it - the main argument in favour of independent schools
(sweeping generalisation coming) is that you pay for social exclusion. Or to be non PC, you pay to have your child educated in a middle class environment with middle class children by middle class teachers especially if you are middle class yourself. It reinforces all your own social and attitude values in a stroke. Middle classness does not know cultural or ethnic boundaries. Whether from Hong Kong or Bejjing , Moldovia or Middlewhich UK , its the same.

Many have pointed to how children in indipendents "speak better" - are more appropriately behaved etc. Yes. But its not because we have better standards of discipline its because the children arrive with certain values already in place. We just reinforce them.

We have smaller classes. That means that the odd rogue behaviour is picked up on and dealt with quickly. The fact there is very little poor behaviour also means we have more time to teach. That itself feeds into higher achievements. Further in most independents there is an ethos for doing well, for being academic ( or sporty, or arty etc) but there is an ethos of appreciation. No one will find themselves being targetted or cold shouldered for being different or being good at something. You cannot under estimate the power of social conformity and peer group conformity in this regard. I have found it to be a major basic difference between state schools ( antoher generalisation there) and independent ones. In state schools kids conform by being the same. Being clever is not " cool", so if you are clever, the tendency is to hold or pull vack. That in the end becomes an ethic which becomes instilled and affects final achievements.

If you take an educational aspirational child, one with middle class values and put them in state schools, with best will in the world, they gravitate away from that culture to the more common ( I mean majority) one. I myself went to state bog standard school because my mother had priciples ( socialist ones!) back in the 1960's) . It is my greatest regret she did. I was a middle class fish out of water . I was bombarded on all sides with comments. I was even sent to Coventry for three years for being " too clever" and refusing to pull my EXAM PERFORMACE TO ALOW SOMEONE ELSE TO GET FIRST PLACE AND THUS FORM PRIZE . Yes, thats how it was. To fit in I had to " go home to tea" ( we had dinner) . I had to " mess around" I had been taught to get my head down and stay out of trouble - My brother got a private school education , mother having figured her mistake with me! You think this doesnt happen now? Think again.

The language skills so natural to children in independents are great boost in achievement anyway - especially in exams. The social networking does have an effect in later life, no one can deny it ( OK , so its not fair) but above that, the one thing I have seen which cannot be equalled in even a grammar school education from the 1950's is the effortless ease with which those who are educated in independent schools tackle all and any situation. Their social skills and confidence Its part of the parcel.

First ime buyers into the independent system are often aspirational. But their kids either fit in or they leave. If they fit in, it will be because they adopt quickly to the cultural values. I have taught some children who do not fit into this middle class value. They have proven disruptive even for us. Yet in state schools they have often been described as quiet and hard working later.

There are differences in the way teaching is done. In most state schools a lot of teaching is behaviour management ( another generalisation but true nonetheless). Children in such schools have been subject to every whim of educational research and much of it is pop psychology that simply doesnt work. They are one giant ongoing experiment.

If you think there are no behaviour problems in sixth form in state schools - think again. Certainly many kids in state schools, because they havent got the attitude and cultual valeus and most importanly language skills do not have appropriate skills for A level .

In independents there are no behaviour problems at all , or minor disruption is shot shrt quickly. Throughout the school.
Similarly we tend not to adopt policies of inclusion. We do expel students.
Thats what you pay for.

I know there is a view that bright children will do well anywhere. Thats probably true. However, because of the recent recession a number ( first time buyers and boarderline) of chidren from my independent school have completed sixth form in state schools or in FE Colleges. True to form, these children have been hailed as " OUR star students" They do not tell you that said students came from the local independent.

As for whether the teachers are different in the two schools? I dont know. I have been in all . When I went back to teaching and went into my current school I spoke to a friend ( old grammar school educated and from Oxbridge). He said to count the number of Oxbridge graduates on the staff role and then add how many Ph.D's were on staff . In most state schools you will not find that. In fact, having worked in a state school, I have also found my Ph.D snarled at and sniped about and often not used at all ( ignored). Or you get the culture which has to ask why you are called "DR" when you arent one ( ie a medical Dr.) or why you teaching and not doing medicine! Trying to explain is almost impossible. They have no culture for it.

In independent schools the pupils call me "Dr Jabed" . They dont bat an eyelid at it. They understand it. I have occassionally been asked what my specialism was ( by sixth formers) . I never had that in a state school.

OK, thats all from me.

jabed · 03/04/2012 08:48

There has never been a good correlation between good examination results at A level or GCSE ( or even O and old A level) and university degree awarded.
Why that is has never been established. Of course Oxbridge only take AAA candidates generally ( or unusual types sometimes), so trying to link degree hons to that is difficult anyway.

One theory has been that those with poor grades who fail to get tinto thier first choice university work harder to get their degree and it shows in hons awarded.

Alternatively it could be other factors like motivation, work ethic, social skill, management of time, ability to cope with life generally. Which might also explain why adult returners to university also do far better than the average 21 year old.

GooseyLoosey · 03/04/2012 09:17

The thing I agree with most in Jabed's post is that it is "cool to be clever" at many indy schools. Whereas in the state primary my children have just left it was seen as "nerdy" to want to stay behind after a lesson and finish listening to what the teacher had to say.

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 03/04/2012 09:43

In state schools kids conform by being the same. Being clever is not " cool", so if you are clever, the tendency is to hold or pull vack. That in the end becomes an ethic which becomes instilled and affects final achievements.

Not as far as I have seen. Some kids might - and these would be the ones who wouldn't be allowed through the doors of private school anyway - but it's by no means universal.

EdithWeston · 03/04/2012 09:50

There is quite a lot of commentary on the "being clever is not cool", especially in relation to underachievement by inner city boys. I had always understood it to be underpinned by research. Is that not the case?