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. :)

Interesting response to Gove's plans FlexyBex
www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/jul/24/children-free-read-for-fun?newsfeed=true

flexy I realise that was not your intention but Gnomedeplume requoted and said that these skills were not much use to a potential plasterer so I was just pointing out that actually they may be.

outtolunchagain - I quoted you out of context for which I apologise.

However, by return you did quote me out of context because I went on to say:

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.

That is not reverse snobbery. It is practical.

If you are leaving school at the age of 16 to start trade training you need an education which will support this. Filling the timetable of a mainstream school with a syllabus designed to get a small number into RG universities is not fair on the majority.

Ok point taken but we are talking about primary school children doing verse speaking so practical training is not especially relevant either.

Sorry meant to say I apologise for quoting you out of context as well

No worries.

I think there is a huge difference between what needs to be in the syllabus in primary school and what needs to be there in secondary.

As we are in agreement, I would guess, context is all!

I think it's a good idea if children do learn poems off my heart even if just once a year. State schools could (and may well already) do that.

(Music is a bit of a side issue but there certainly can be some good music in state schools too. However as I mentioned on another thread before it isn't always that good - the carol thing my children did at Christmas the items from the state schools were ludicrously dreadful in comparison and I dont' know how the teachers allowed them through as acceptable, it was like being in ap arallel universe and I would have loved my prejudices to be overturned by the superiority of the state schools stuff, sadly not. This is fairly local to me:

)

On the more important issue Tesco and others find school leavers often cannot add up, speak properly or fill in forms. So we need to ensure that hte 50% of UK chidlren who are not bright enough to pass 5 good GCSEs (I think that is the stats) can write English, speak properly, learn to look customers in the eye, smile, not snigger (all these things are quite hard for many teenagers actually whatever their IQ), and be able to add sums up and have a rough idea if a total is wrong.

This is not just anecdotal. Tesco has the data to show many of their applicants cannot do these things, nor turn up on time. Sometimes it just needs training. I have a friend who employs young ex prisoners in the factory sometimes. One was amazed he would have to be at work by 9am every day without fail or he would lose his job, that there was an obligation to be there even if he felt like not getting out of bed that day. (Mind you you would have thought school and prison would prepare people for that aspect).

You will insist on using the worst of examples Xenia. All my friends who use state education have DCs who can speak properly, spell, fill in forms, turn up on time etc. They don't get to top universities if they can't! DS's school also won the debating competition - coming above all the private schools.

The one example that I do know from Tesco is a lad who was a bit of a no hoper and got a job stacking shelves - he is now in charge of their graduate training scheme - many years on. He matured.

I do think learning poetry by heart is a good idea, though. Apat

Apart from anything else it gives you something to occupy your mind if you're stuck on a train, or even stranded on a desert island............

I think that poetry has always been learnt in most schools - it isn't a new idea. The choirs will perform well if they have a musician in charge - I can't be bothered but there are any amount of excellent state school choirs around - of course there are the bad too.

Private school supporters always choose the best possible example of private schools and the worst possible example of state school- both actual school and alumnus. They find it hard to accept that there are good state schools and ...average.. private ones . I am also puzzled by the idea that one bad experience of a state school- in some cases 25 years ago- is enough to condemn the entire sector! It's like somebody saying the won't use private schools because their father was flogged at Eton in 1940!

I think it goes both ways seeker. Supporters of state school also insist on the worst description of private school users and all insist that what people pay for exist in the state sector (often using their DC's school as an example).

No one likes been judged especially when it comes to how we CHOOSE to raise/educate our DCs.

Well, if others insist that state schools are all pits of mediocrity at best with no music but tambourines and turn out illiterates then it would seem obvious to point out that not all are that!

I have never found it hard to accept there are poor private schools. I avoiid them like the plague. There are also private schools which are very comprehensive and take all comers and indeed some of those add value very well. I know both sectors well as my children's father has worked in both for 30 years.

The bottom line is most children do better in private schools, then 8% of children in private schools get 50% of the best university places and many/most of the top jobs so clearly for those of us who pay we think it's worth it. I do not mind if people who don't pay think they are right to - much less competition for my children so going to mean they benefit long term the more parents who think state is fine.

Was speaking one on one yesterday to one of the mum's in DS's state school and she was sad we were moving him, but she said if she would do same as us. funny enough a couple of months ago she was amongst a group of mums speaking not very nicely about another mum's decision to send DS to a grammer sch.

We have outgrown our house now and are looking to move to suitable accommodation. I had hate for people on my street to feel that I was elitist or leaving them behind because I wanted a better/bigger house.

Xenia - trotting out statistics comparing all state educated children against all privately educated children doesn't demonstrate anything useful. You need to compare all families who can actually afford private education and who take an interest in their children's education with each other and then see whether those who choose the state education route actually end up worse off.

"i never found it hard to accept there are poor private schools"
Good. Halfway there!

Actually you can't really compare because you will never know how a particular child would have been I. A different school.As my dh is fond of saying " it's a leap of faith". You can't go back and reperform your child's education so you just have to feel confident that you did the best you could.

I think as well that many of the reasons people choose independent schools are not necessarily measurable ,I my experience(outside London)it is rarely just exam results,it's a host of things;smaller tutor groups,more extra curriculars,the confidence that comes from an education that focuses on achieving not on just getting you through the exams,and a freedom from those blasted pernicious "levels"!

Of course all of these are available in the state sector but not uniformly and to suggest they are is ridiculous in the same way that to suggest the private sector is always better is ridiculous.

I think that you have to compare like with like. My friend has recently been to her DS's graduation from Bristol- with a first. He did it from the comprehensive- would there have been any advantage of paying thousands for the same? He wanted to go to Bristol. Her DD got a first in English from York-she has a high flying job in London so I think that we can safely say that she could have filled in a form with the correct spelling and turned up on time had she had a Saturday job in Tesco at 15yrs!
All you want for your DCs is to have every door open so that they can have a free choice and are not held back. Mine are all doing their first choice so had they gone to Eton they would still be doing it. They may have missed a few things that the private school did better, but we then had the cash to do them ourselves, or as extras through the school. Had we been paying school fees for 3 DCs then we couldn't have afforded the school trips to Russia, Canada etc and we couldn't have afforded skiing holidays etc. I appreciate that other people do things differently and would give it all up for the school fees and other people earn enough to do both. Our way suited us.

My friend's DCs are in no way unusual from their school.

I have always realised that there are private schools that Xenia wouldn't touch with a barge pole which is heartening. She doesn't think private = good, a mistake that a lot of people make.

outtolunch - of course you can't really compare, but if Xenia is going to trot out statistics about which children get into which universities and who become High Court judges, then that sort of "comparing" can be done.

And it's the bit of private education that cannot be measured that people argue most about - there are bits of private education which cannot be measured which some people view to be harmful and others as good (eg to what extent someone becomes arrogant and self-important, for example, versus healthily self-confident; self-entitlement versus recognition of privilege).

I would send DC2 to be privately educated if we could afford it. In order to do my job, a job I care passionately about we have to live in an area where many of the state schools are so swamped ( some 80 or 90%) with non-english speaking children that most of what they do is try to get the children who are often refugees who have had terrible experiences and who come from families who do not value literacy up to speed linguistically.

The other children are left to cope on their own. They do not have the budget or resources to encourage averagely able children to perform to the best of their abilities, they are being failed. They become bored, disruptive and disillusioned with the educational process.

As my job involves visiting many of the sure start children's centres which are invariably part of these schools, I have first hand experience of the ethos therein, the desperation of the teachers and the bafflement of the parents.

There are a couple of very well regarded primaries in our area, but I cannot afford to live in the catchment areas for them on my salary, there is no chance that DS2 would get into them otherwise, and I am not prepared to sacrifice his education on the altar of my job satisfaction.

It's a no-brainer. I will have to home educate if I can't afford the fees.

Outtolunch.

I'm sorry I have to disagree about not knowing how well a child would have done in a different school.
My ds1 was/ is not the brightest button, bless him he tried his best and gained 10 GCSE's all c's, in his really bad state school. If he had been taught anywhere else by anybody else he would not have done any better. He reached his full potential for learning and no amount of money paid for his education would change this. Ds2, went to good/outstanding faith state secondary, never reached potential got c's and b's, was capable of b's /A's, and would have/could have done better in a different school. I know this because I know my children. Our dd is in between the two, slightly above average in some things. I would never go for a super selective as she hasn't got it in her. That's nothing to do with money but practicalities.

I don't know what the problem is. I feel I have had huge added value at the private schools our 5 have been at, Habs, NLCS etc adn I am very pleased at the £1m I will have spent. Happy me. If I am living in a fool's paradise, so what? Plenty of parents ilke I am send their children to out of borough grammars and those children do well too. Lots of people use comprehensives ni leafy suburbs and are happy and 50% of children will never get 5 good GCSEs anyway although I woudl argue those are just the ones who might benefit most from having the otehr skills of contacts, accent, confidence and hobbies which might ensure they do okay anyway which they may get at a private school.

Either way if you're happy with your choice that's all fine. it's the fact there is choice I like and that we are not a communist state with just one school. We were asked for reasons we pay fees. I gave my list. If people think they can get all that without paying then that's fine, let them spend the money on shoes or whatever, their choice. All I can say is I'm very pleased. I also enjoyed the experience of being a parent at one of these schools too, liked the parents, enjoyed the social stuff to an extent which went with them so I was buying not just a pleasurable experience for the 5 children but also things I have enjoyed now for over 25 years I have been a private school parent.

Most of us will want healthy happy children and we all know that having enough money seems to go with health in the UK ( poor equals bad diet and fat and not happy etc) so we might find when our children are say 35 we do the best comparison, just just with how they are at 21 when graduating but how they are doing generally at 35 in terms of health, income, success etc.