Areas where state schools are better than private?

[Narrie]

Does anyone live in an area where the state schools are really better than the private ones? I picked this up elsewhere but am afraid to comment there.

I have lived and worked in the Midlands where there are few private schools to choose but the state schools are not very good. I have lived in Nottingham, where again I felt the state schools were poor.

Even in London there were some awful schools and private was best.

I currently live in Cornwall having got here working in Exeter, Plymouth and Barnstaple. None of the state schools were good there.

Just wondered where the good state provision is. Is it just odd schools within a mass of poor provision or are there really whole areas where state schools are better?

Thanks.

(PS I have my own DC in a boarding school partly because of the state schooling and partly because we move around so much)

Xenia, I have 2 brothers.

1 of us was educated 11-18 at a private school.
1 from 11-16 state (ex secondary modern comp), 16-18 private.
1 from 11-18 state (ex secondary modern comp, 6th form college).

All of us went to Oxbridge, all got 2:1s or 1sts.

All of us speak the same way (accent is largely a function of home life, not school).

All of us do 'socially useful / creative' work (again, I would suggest that this is due to the value system instilled in us by our parents, rather than due to our education).

None of us regard what we earn as a measure of our success, and partly as a result our relative and absoute earnings have hugely varied over the years. At the moment, I suspect one brother (the state eucated one) is marginally better paid than the other two of us, but I was the best paid for some time, and my other brorther has boom years and less boom years due to his line of work [he is, however, the only one of us who is nationally known in his field].

All of us have, at some point, been SAHPs or had SAHPs as partners (again, a value system instilled in us by our early life - that early education is crucial) and all of our children are academically able and look likely to follow similar 'life paths' to us. All of us are, and remain, happily married (again, an early value system based on the very happy, extremely equal, partnership of our parents).

Apologies if we don't fit your neat pigeonholes. The greatest influence on children's success seems to be NOT buying education or not buying education - it is a set of values and a support system provided by family background from the earliest years.

"@honora Basically, anyone who says they have a state school which is better than their local private schools (or in my case, better than the vast majority of private schools in the country) gets told their particular example doesn't count, either because it's a grammar or they live in a particular (non counting) place or for some other madey-uppy reason. Then they get insulted. It's how this thread works..... "

But I wasn't insulting anyone- I was making a very mild joke based on Honoria's name. I wrongly assumed that anyone calling herself "honoriaglossop" was a PG Wodehouse fan.

Yes, but teacher the 8% at private schools do massively better than the state school pupils whether or not your family is different. Anyway there is no problem =- some parents are really happy with state schools and some parents with privates to each to their own, we are all happy and that's that,.

end of conversation.
we are back at the one we had in 2010

@seeker - I know you weren't insulting anyone. I very often disagree with you about the WOH and SAH dichotomy and about selective schools but I am pretty sure I have never seen you be anything but polite on MN But you are in the minority in this thread (and another poster did get arsey with her, which she commented on. :( )

I suppose it must be quite difficult for people who have gone to private schools but only done middlingly well academically to understand that it is possible for someone to go to a state school and do really well, and then have a better career than most privately educated people. It's easier for those of us who have succeeded, to, you know, understand how straightforward it really is. But as mentioned upthread -each to their own. Privately educated people with limited horizons will bestow more of the same on the world. It seems a shame but also, inevitable.

The privsate schools educate 8% of children and the children get 50% of the best university places, comprise 70% +_ of judges, lots of the cabinet etc etc. So arguably there is nothing better on which you can spend your money as a prviate school place but if people are happy with their state schools that is great too.

Since it got them all the first choice of career, it worked well. Had I paid thousands out over the years they would still have done the same. Thankfully none of them wanted to be in the cabinet-although I would have supported them if they wanted it-it takes over your life and isn't something that I would want.

Exactly, exotic - we do what we want to, and what we would have done however we had been educated..... and I bring my (state educated) children up the same way, to believe that they will succeed and will be able to do whatever they set their hearts on. I don't need a school to do that for me.

middleclassonabursary are you so at the cutting edge of state school policy that you know for sure that only the indies are enlightened? I bet not. Well, it isn't so actually, so you can't be.

Xenia what is this guff now about 'soft skills*? How you backtrack and cling on to straws! State school girlies are well up to getting into Oxford or Cambridge for the seriously competitive subjects armed with and honing soft skills all the while. No need to downshift to Bristol to practice an accent and 'networking' to succeed. Just take the high road all the time :) (If you have the talent, that is).

The daughters of four of my friends are currently at Oxford

• French and History
• Physics
• Maths
• Biochemistry

all four went to non selective state schools right through

but Hey! what do I know

And forget these stats about 8% of judges etc because judges are old. Take a rain check in five or ten years time.

If only my girls could have regional accents, they might then be even more successful than they already are. Oh the millstone of a middle class voice!

@yellow Lack of soft skills was certainly never a problem for me. I think Xenia genuinely believes state school oiks like me (and our kids) just spend our time....I don't know. Chewing straws if in the country, sharpening knives if in the inner city. That sort of thing.

As a matter of interest - your school was aware of my school, right? Did you guys think we were all knuckle dragging yokels destined for grub street poly? I work with someone who went to the boys posh school down the road from my school (T) (under the same deal as you went to your school - superlative performance in the 11+) and he tells me (don't know if it's true) that in his day they considered my school their equal. But then, he wouldn't want to rile me. so maybe he's vaselining the lens through which he observes history, a bit....

I don't think he is Mordion. These schools like T etc. were really good melting pots at a particular place at a particular time. Exemplars of proper equality based on merit, not soft skills or accents or any of this up yourself guff. That's what's deluded and complacent I think. There are only a tiny weeny number of independent schools out there which seem to me to be worth the money. But each of those is so selective and with such a good bursary system that they only replicate the best states. It really isn't about fee/ no fee - far more complex than that.

I know, I know - that only deals with the top set.

I think the thing that slightly annoys me - and I know I shouldn't let it, but there you go - is the repeated implication - not even an implication but a clear statement - that those of us happy with our state schools don't know any better. This would probably be annoying even if I hadn't had the education I did have, and if I didn't have the career I now have. In the circumstances I find it somewhat inappropriate. While I am very aware that their comments stem from an inferiority complex on the part of the people making them, it is still a little bit annoying. Funny too, obviously. But a little bit annoying.

Mordion
well my private school education, Russell Group degree and post graduate qualification left me too thick to realise that round here State schools cannot the best option, just because all the other privately educated people choose to use them too.
The non selective private school is rather nouveau to be honest
and the selective one is just a hothouse for pushy parents

Northern Ireland has numerous excellent grammar schools, who regularly out perform private schools.

I think the comic aspect has to outweigh the irritant though Mordion. And I think the irritant comes mainly from the fact that the poor suckers have to repeat their manifesto so often. And they have to repeat it so often because it's the only way to give it bulk.

But I think the point a lot of people on this thread are missing is that it is in many instances really hard to access a decent state comprehensive school, let alone grammar school.

Where we are there are no grammar schools. This would lead you to believe that the state secondaries are truly comprehensive, but this is absolutely not the case.

There are only 3 decent state comprehensives - 2 are faith and very very strictly so - the other one has a very tiny catchment where houses are so prohibitively expensive, only the very rich or people who were lucky enough to live there 20 years ago can afford it.

Our local secondary school is a sink, it hasn't sent anyone to a Russell Group for a long time let alone Oxbridge, results are diabolical and surpsingly looking at the stats on low/mid/high achievers plus free school meals their catchment isn't too bad, they just do a really bad job. They have always been satisfactory, I am surprised they are not in special measures as their value add is so poor.

So my example above illustrates really that there are good state schools out there but they are just not within reach. Ironically if you are on an average income and have one child you might just be able to afford private but would never be able to buy in the catchment of the good state comprehensive as it would be the equivalent of sending 3 or 4 children to private if that makes sense. So either way if you are not well off and you have 2 children you are well and truly disadvantaged. Where's the social justice in that?? Everyone should have access to a decent education...

I don't usually enter into these argument state versus independent because it completely pointless and I don't know how I got drawn in this time. I usually restrict most of comments to questions about bursaries.
Mordion firstly I am not anti state ed but when detailing the exam results of four independent schools I looked at for my DC who now attends one of them I was picking up on your comment on 29/10 "According to the BBC there was't a school in the country did better than Colchester Royal Grammar school on A level results, in 2011" I not disputing that its probably an excellent school but as you then pointed out last night "9 private schools got a better A*/A percentage than CRGS" If you read what I posted after detailing these exam results not once did I say that this was because they were vastly superior to any state school in terms of teaching because I know and maybe you do that the picture is significantly more complex than that.
With regard to my link with India Russia which you seem to regard as spurious the company my DH works has in these recessionary times has successfully turned the the international market and now works extensively with the richest Indians and Russians in the world both her and at home. As child I led a nomad life style half in the city have in the countryside. In the city I brought up with and surrounded by Indians my mothers partner is Indian, my class mates were Indian. I have passion for all things to do with India. With mixed success I've walked two career paths at the same time and as an undergraduate my particular interest was India and the rise of the middle classes but also its economy, music farming history in particular partition politics, Mahatma Ghandi, and Neru and his daughter and grand son, the creation of Pakistan and its religions. I am not an expert on India by any stretch of the imagination but the general consensus from my lecturers when I was at university was that I was and still am pretty knowledgeable and certainly more knowledgeable than you average man in in the street. We personally have links with Delhi and are due back next year.

I am not trying to say that state ed is crap and independent ed is perfect but as a mother of a child in a well regarded 6th form college and from reading many comments on mumsnet and also the frequently mentioned Sutton Trust report re the number of pupils from 4 independent schools going to Oxbridge outnumbering 2000 state schools I genuinely feel that state ed is not moving with the times. The top independent schools are evolving because they have no choice their parents wish for there children to attend top RG universities Oxbridge and of course increasingly the Ivy League as the saying goes he who pays the piper calls the tunes. Even the parents of children at what are generally considered less selective schools are demanding more it is no longer acceptable for their DC to go off to the RAC to study estate management they too want RG universities Oxbridge/The Ivy League. The government can try and make it easier for children from state schools to get into top universities but these independent schools are not going to roll over and oh fine we're send our pupils to third rate universities because like all businesses and lets face it thats what they are they know that to be successful they have to give the customer what the customer wants so they are going to change and evolve to keep their edge.
At a recent lecture at our local exceedingly successful comp I was shocked by how unaware/unconcerned the head/governors were by the rise in students applying to universities from abroad caused by the lifting of travel restrictions the rise of the wealthy middle classes etc, the fact that more and more children are being educated and prepared for our universities in independent schools as I've already said our children will be increasingly competing for jobs university places against some of the best and able brains from all over the world. I am all in favour of competition but worry that that state ed is not preparing our children for this competition in the same way as many independent schools are. Education is not just about exam results it should be about enabling our children to function successfully in the world after they leave school I personally remain unconvinced that state ed has grasped that the world is a rapidly changing place. Im sure many of you are very happy with your state school and thats great but from reading many if the comments on MN I get the impression that many are not, no topic on the education section of MN creates so many diametrically opposed and often acrimonious posting, many so obviously feel that independent ed is unfair as it offers a small % of children a "privileged education" bought by money. I have to assume that those who feel like this believe that this education is better because logically you would feel so strongly about it if you felt it was inferior to state ed. I don't read many comments on the unfairness of those who choose to pay for Steiner ed because most sane people don't think it is superior. My view is that you are right to be angry, I understand why you think its unfair and that unless state ed wakes up the report published by the Sutton Trust re Oxbridge entry will be published again in ten years time and this time it will show the situation is worsening. Im not opposed to state ed and accept that it many cases its doing a good job but as parents we cant afford to complacent. All Im trying to say is that as parents we cant afford to think that our little village primary school offers as good as an education as a top prep or that their is little difference between our outstanding local comp and Westminster St Pauls girls/boys. This government is gong to increasingly reduce funding to our schools this is going to have a significant impact on the teachers building and ultimately the standard of education children receive I don't know what the solution perhaps thats a separate thread.
You may think Im talking rubbish thats fine we are all entitled to our own views I think Ill go back to answering questions on bursaries now!

I said we are all happy. How can that be construed as my saying state school parents are living in a fool's paradise?

There are a range of reason private school pupils on the whole do so massively well in the UK and obviously the much better results compared with how many of them 8% are in private schools is a big area. I think there are other advantages too but that doesn't mean state parents don't see advantages in their own choices.

"Our local secondary school is a sink, it hasn't sent anyone to a Russell Group for a long time let alone Oxbridge, results are diabolical and surpsingly looking at the stats on low/mid/high achievers plus free school meals their catchment isn't too bad, they just do a really bad job."

Sadly, all the evidence points to the fact that there are some truly incompetent schools out there that are failing to take pupils to their full potential.

"Sadly, all the evidence points to the fact that there are some truly incompetent schools out there that are failing to take pupils to their full potential. "

Absolutely - and those of us who argue vehemently that there ARE good state schools would be equally vehement in stating that there are poor ones too (just that sometimes the ones 'believed to be poor' aren't really the worst ones - there are plenty of schools with very poor catchments which do brilliant work [but aren't at the top of league tables] though there are also schools with no catchment excuse which are genuinely poor).

Equally, there are private schools which should be doing better, given their intake...

True, Bonsoir - and in both sectors. However, the incompetent privates will fail due to parents taking their children out and putting them into other schools. However, the parents of the incompetent state school probably won't have such luxury.

@Orange We aren't missing your point (although you are wrong in your comparison between mortgage costs and the costs of private schooling) sadly. I think everybody knows there are some atrocious state schools out there and some people live in areas with very very little choice. You are right, there is no social justice there. It's one of the reasons I support more grammar schools and completely oppose selection by depth of pocket which is what rigorously enforced catchment area policies really boil down to.

I have also said several times in this thread and many others that there are of course some superb private schools. I didn't actually realise that CRGS was 3rd in the FT table, I thought it was probably about 10th or something. What the private school fanclub seem unable to grasp is that the really excellent private schools are few in number too, and that there are an awful lot of middling private schools which confer little advantage other than snob value. Especially outside London. And some of the people in this thread happen to live in areas where those are the only private schools you can get (the best private school in Devon is 50 places below the best state school in the FT table for example). So it's not surprising that we have said 'I live in an area where state schools are better than private schools'.

Mom, I'm not quite so sure as you are about the incompetent privates failing... or at least not over a short time frame.

I know of a couple of genuinely poor private schools near where I teach. They have excellent sports facilities, lovely grounds, 'nice' intake, fancy uniforms. Classrooms have desks and blackboards, all teaching is chalk and talk, lots of tradition. Very forceful heads, who tell parents from day 1 how far ahead their children will be compared with local state schools, how lucky they are to be there .... classic 'demonise the other side' stuff.

The last child I taught who came from one of those schools - with a mum who genuinely still believed how far ahead her DD was, wanting her to be accelerated a year in a state school, devastated that she could no longer afford the fees - went straight onto our SEN register because she was SO far behind.

Particularly at primary - which is the age range I know best - parents do not always have the information they need to compare schools accurately, and many do fall for the 'whole package' of well-scrubbed children in beautiful grounds rather than looking at actual attainment and progress.

One of the schools I mention is, gradually, shrinking in size. However, its relative academic failure is very, very longstanding from all the information I have, and so the link between this and parents taking children out is very slow and indirect.