I send my child to private school because....?

[jabed]

Well, I don?t actually, I just work in one. But it seems to be a constant source of questioning on MN and given the current news articles (I have been reading the DM and Tory graph online) about how many of our left wing leaders hypocritically claim to be egalitarian and socialist whilst buying education for their children , or have had education paid for by their own parents. I just wondered, what is it we expect from education, and why is it some of us are willing to pay for whatever that is and how they see that as worthy of their money.

There you go. :)

I think that it probably says more about the size of the school than the type of school. I'm not at all sure that a small and charming prep school would have fared any better. Sometimes it is better to go larger with more resources.
It is also the philosophy of the school. I know a boy that is gifted at Maths (really gifted as in way beyond his peers) When he was coming up to 11 his parents looked into state secondary schools. The grammar school were very dismissive saying 'all our boys are clever' so they chose the comprehensive which looked to the individual and were prepared to treat him as a special case.

I agree, gnome. In fact, I'm not sure Gove even realises that less clever people than him exist.

I thought this was interesting (from the thread morethan started about was dcs do at private school):

There is also a lot of music ,roughly 80% learn an instrument plus the whole of year 4.Lots of choirs ,music groups etc.They also do lots of verse speaking ,ESB,prose reading etc

Now where have I heard that suggested recently?

Rabbitstew.
I don't blame parents for doing this at all. I was in the same position myself and if I thought a private education would benefit my dd I would do the same. However, I don't see our experiences as being the problem of all state education as I stated my friend with a dc g&t in same school was supported. I know other state schools which do this too. I also know of some indies that support and extend and others that don't. I don't have a preference for either and whilst I can't really afford private, even if I could I wouldn't choose it. That doesn't mean I don't see the benefits for many people.

Flexy

'There is also a lot of music ,roughly 80% learn an instrument plus the whole of year 4.Lots of choirs ,music groups etc.They also do lots of verse speaking ,ESB,prose reading etc'

Yes, I can see that being really helpful for an aspiring plasterer!

Obviously plasterers may want to think about such things just as much as the next man but somehow I dont see them as being helpful as a major element of education for someone starting a practical trade training course at the age of 16.

Likewise, potatoprints. My dss' state school has worked incredibly hard to meet my dss' needs and abilities and has done so very well. They have an excellent relationship with the local secondary school and get advice or tuition from teachers there, where necessary, for the most able children (or child, as the case may be!).

I've never said you cannot get a good lot of what I listed in the state sector. I was just asked when I chose to pay school fees. I'm very happy with it and lots of state school parents are happy too. I am a free market libertarian. I want parents to be able to choose to sit around doing nothing and thus not be able to afford fees, to work hard and pay fees, to pick a church or secular or music school, an Eton or an inner city comp or home education. I want to live in a country with variety.

I was slightly misquoted over sport. My point was if 50% of Olympians come from the 8% of children at private schools that suggests private school sport may be quite good.However many state school children enjoy sport too.

We were being asked why we educate children privately not whether it is better or worse than state schools.

There are obviously moral issues. As private is to much better you make a bad moral choice and deliberately damage your children if you go for state schools.

Xenia, your implication that people who can't afford fees all sit around doing nothing is infuriating. But you've been told that many times before.

I was nodding away agreeing with you Xenia - it seemed a very sensible post ....................until I got to the end.

Yes, but there is a correlation between hard work and earnings surely? I have taken 2 weeks off each time to have 5 babies in and gone back full to work and worked for nearly 30 y ears. That is one reason I earn quite a lot. Huge numbers of women give up work to have a baby, go back a few hours a week and believe it or not then never really earn enough to pay school fees.

Xenia seems a bit damaged by her private education, tbh.

Not everybody has had your opportunities nor feels that it is only material things that make the world go round. There are a lot of very important fulfilling careers that don't pay a great deal. There is not always a correlation between hard work and earnings at all.

Personally, I would not have wanted to leave my babies at 2 weeks (I went back to work soon enough) and as life would have it, had to take some time off my career to focus on special needs of my DC. Even so, I would not have gone the private route. I wouldn't want my DC to grow up thinking that your values are the right values in life anyway.

Xenia also appears to believe that only work which brings in maximum profit is moral if you have children - as other work won't pay the school fees. Mind you, it might solve the world's over population problem, if only people who can afford school fees actually have children in the first place. However, it might also cause a huge undersupply of essential workers.

I don't think Mother Teresa thought there was a correlation between hard work and earnings. Earning a lot and paying for private education has b*gger all to do with morality of any sort.

^XeniaSat 28-Jul-12 18:28:45
Yes, but there is a correlation between hard work and earnings surely?^

Not if you work in the sciences (and I mean are an actual scientist not a manager).

My DB is a scientist (with a PhD 'n everything). He has had two proper original ideas in his career (most of us have none for perspective). He earns little more than a store manager. Career satisfaction? Massive. Financial return? Bit crap. Would he change a thing? No!

Money isnt everything.

Xenia, I don't understand why you think Privately educated people do better
At what are they better?
Who is the judge of what is better?
For whom is it better?

I am asking you this as countless times you imply, suggest or state the above. It seems your only answer to any question relating to private education.
I think this is a shame because I don't mind admitting that you could enlighten me and others on here and believe you have alot to offer on the subject.
However, I can understand that you do need to justify your decision the same as we all do and indeed inverted snobbery exists too.

I've no illusions that every prep would have helped and also frequently acknowledge that not all independent schools are all their cracked up to be but and as rabbit put it the top one have been taken to an extreme far removed from anything the state sector can ever offer. Rembember I've got a foot in both camps so unlike many am actually speaking from genuine experience.

There is also a lot of music ,roughly 80% learn an instrument plus the whole of year 4.Lots of choirs ,music groups etc.They also do lots of verse speaking ,ESB,prose reading etc'

Actually I think that quote is from me on another thread;one of my children has SPld and he is at an independent specialist school,it is crucial that he is able to comunicate verbally and as confidently as he is able because it may be the difference between him getting a job and not .Skills like verse speaking and reading aloud (very difficult for him)have really helped his confidence .

Yes, I can see that being really helpful for an aspiring plasterer! Actually he would like to be a gardener or a painter and decorator,he will have to speak to customers and communicate clearly to get work so yes it will be helpful .Plus why should he not have a chance to read poetry ,he also learns a musical instrument and has gained enormous amounts of joy and pleasure from it,I suppose you think he shouldn't have a chance to do that either

The attitude that these skills are irrelevant and elitist is inverted snobbery of the worst kind and one reason why my children are independently educated.We should not be "training children" we should be "educating them"Why should education just be about what you need it shoudl also be about broadening minds as well

Well, of course becoming a High Court judge, journalist, politician, doctor, FTSE 100 director etc, is better, because then you get yourself into the sort of position where you dictate to everyone what "better" means... "Better" means more powerful and influential, whether justifiably so or unjustifiably so.

I agree, outtolunchagain, I think there is a bit of inverted snobbery against people learning musical instruments, verse speaking and reading aloud. It isn't the be all and end all of a good education, but it certainly has its place. I wouldn't want primary school children already pigeon holing themselves as plasterers, anyway.

My state-educated DC are fantastic readers and are growing up in a house full of books, other forms of written and electronic communication, stimulating conversation and musical instruments. These things and 'educating the mind' aren't the sole preserve of the privately educated.

Better is a much more interesting topic to talk about than mothers' reasons to choose private schools. I would hope whether at state or private school children will be healthy and happy and able to form lasting loving emotional relationships and lead worthwhile lives. If you can do that as a woman whilst also earning a lot and loving your career that's even better so aspire to have both.

As for whether classical music and elocution are pointless and above the lower classes who should be working at their plumbing... well I don't agree. I don't see why children in average primaries cannot put in the hours to learn to sing Allegri Misereri well as boy trebles. Things which are difficult to do make chdilren feel very good when they accomplish them. Hitting a tamborine whilst singing kum by ah is low expectations Olympic opening lowest kind of denominator stuff.

My state educated DTs are also excellent readers. They are starting to learn to play the piano (they are 6 so no rush. The also "play" recorders), enjoy going to the theatre, are members of a gymnastics club, attend swimming lessons and are starting a youth theatre group in September. There is nothing that they are missing out on.

Anecdotally, one of their friends, who is the same age as them, goes to a local prep school. She does gymnastics and swimming as well, but at school. I actually think it's better for children to do some, if not all, of their extra-curricular activities out of school, as it widens their social circle and, IMO, develops confidence in a variety of situations. The little girl's mother didn't want her daughter to do ballet, but the school told her that ALL the girls in the class were doing ballet, and it was a shame for her DD to miss out, so it would be added to the bill The ballet teacher was actually from the same ballet school which my DTDs attended, so they were getting exactly the same tuition.

I really agree about the inverted snobbery, especially regarding music.

My dd is a really talented musician and enjoys dancing. I pay for alot of lessons although we are not rich and I don't work. I know the dancing will make way for music in a few years and we will pay more for music.

Some people judge and make comments about how rich we must be.
Others are surprised that dd has these activities and doesn't go to an indie, because "our dds do that".

She doesn't do it to be posh, but because she loves it. She announced as a 3 year old she would be a professional musician and hasn't budged once.

We are giving her the opportunity to do this and also know she means it.

outtolunch I was actually quoting you because our inspired leader Gove has just suggested that there should be more prose reading and poetry recitation in state schools. I was using it as an example that Gove is just taking private school ideas to use in state schools because that is where his experience lies. It wasn't a comment on whether or not it benefitted the children.

Xenia, 'I want parents to be able to choose to sit around doing nothing and thus not be able to afford fees, to work hard and pay fees, to pick a church or secular or music school, an Eton or an inner city comp or home education. '

The average wage in this country is £21500. I bet your cleaner works her butt off, plus the person who takes away your rubbish every week. Not to mention the people who tend to you if you happen to crash your car, or even people who wait on you and cook your meals in those very expensive restaurants you frequent. I hope this comment was a wind up.

'I don't see why children in average primaries cannot put in the hours to learn to sing Allegri Misereri '
Would love to, but our school day is short and we have to do choir and orchestra in our lunch times. However, our orchestra did play some Mozart and Susato among other pieces last term, so we're a bit further up the cultural scale than you think. Where on earth did you get the idea about Kum By Ah with a tambourine?? State schools have moved on.......

"I don't do dependency very well, others like the nanny STATE and trust the state education thats fine too. To each his own. " what does this mean?