If you can afford private education but remain in the state sector...

[TheseJeansHaveShrunk]

It's going to be hard to avoid this becoming another state v private thread, but what I'm interested in is a slightly different take on that debate. It's not "which is better?" but "if you think state school is better even though you could afford private education, then why is that?"

The question is based on the assumptions that the DC in question is/are reasonably bright (so might benefit academically from academically selective education), that the state school is non-selective (as most people don't have access to grammar schools), and that you hope for your DC to go to a good university (to make the £££££ fees worthwhile!)

I've been mulling this over ever since I heard some maths professor from Cambridge talking on the radio about the age-old private v state inequality of Oxbridge admissions. He was all for improving access for state school applicants but said that the simple fact was that for maths, even the best state schools generally teach only to the A-level syllabus, whereas the best private schools take their maths/further maths A-level candidates well beyond the syllabus and so the state school applicants are at a huge disadvantage - they simply don't have the starting level of knowledge required for the course.

This made me wonder: with this sort of unequal playing field, if you have the choice of private education, what reasons might you have not to take it?

Would be interested to hear from those who've made this choice - how it's working out, or if your DC have finished school now, how did it work out? Did they go to good universities/get good jobs, etc? On the other side of things, if you paid for private schooling but now regret it, why?

My DC go to a state school by the way.

.

Yep, nobody at a grammar school has ever read a book. So sad. :(

twisted Im interested to know what you first hand experience is of say the top 20 independent schools. I agree that they are probably not "lovely" a word by the way I was always discouraged from using if I was to write in a coherent fashion but they provide an outstanding education that is in another league from anything provided in the state sector.

Again as Ive already said I can understand you being ideologically opposed to such institutions I can understand the point of view why should a tiny minority receive something that is so much better? But to make sweeping comments about the quality of the literacy skills of their alumni seems to me to be plain old fashioned prejudice.

Happy what is your first hand experience of the top 20 state schools?

I think the title of this thread 'afford' is perhaps misleading.

A small, but substantial, percentage of people can afford private education. That does not make them Roman Abramovich, in that the money is irrelevant.

In fact for nearly all of these people the £100k+ for a private senior education is a very significant sum.

So you could just as well ask 'If you could spend £100k on a nicer house, better holidays, and so on, why do you instead spend it on education when the state offers it for free?'

Lots of people have offered ideological objections in this thread, on the basis that they can afford, but choose not to send their child private, but the reality is that people nearly always rationalise whatever decision they have chosen to make, and obviously there are sound justifications for either.

So the private parents will tell you of superior this and superior that and how it was the best decision they ever made, and the state parents will likewise say that their child is now at Oxford, or learned about the world, or whatever it is, and you learn nothing, because in life everyone attempts to validate their decisions as the best.

I remember going to look at a house on sale in Sevenoaks, and the owner was a very smug woman who said that one child had been to Sevenoaks School (private), and that was wonderful, and that the other went to the grammar school, and that too was wonderful.

So I take all reasoned argument here with a pound of salt....

I have a DS in one if the countries top state comps and have experience of the counties top primary school and we turned down a place at the countries top grammar schools and for over a year I worked in another top grammar school although I am not a teacher. What I have no experience of is poor performing or even moderately performing state schools in areas that are not very middle class. So I don't make sweeping statement about behaviour, teaching exam results etc in these type of schools. I also work with children from all backgrounds including involvement in their education so I do know a little bit about it. Finally I have also as I've just stated been a mature student and in fact was the only mature student in my year and for three years worked and lived along side 50 18-21 yrs olds who who I greatly liked (the feeling was mutual) the vast majority were grammar school educated I can only write what I found and they commented on. I accept that this doesn't apply to all and maybe if I had been studying English for example I hope it would have been different.
What exactly is your experience of the top 20 independent schools e.g. Westminster Winchester St Paul's Boys etc.

Joan happy new year I seem to recall that you were the one who was so surprised by Eton and just how different it was from anything you'd ever experienced in the independent sector, The point I'm trying to make is that many people comment on independent ed and make sweeping statements about it but unless as you discovered one actually experiences it first hand they have no idea what actually goes on.

Well all I can say happy is that judging by their current performance at Oxford my four illiterate and ungrammatical grammar school educated DC are at the very least holding their own with the Wykehamists. How did that happen? I certainly haven't given any of them any extra help myself and absolutely haven't ever purchased outside help either. That was a bit sweeping really, about grammars.

Yellow maybe sweeping but my experience and maybe I was just unlucky and certainly no less sweeping than Twisted assertion that those from independent schools are unable to speak or write in a coherent fashion. I also read somewhere that even at Oxford 1st years studying MFL were being given crash courses in basic grammar for their chosen language as they hadn't learnt it at school; no comment was made as to whether these students were state or independently educated just a reflection/comment on the exam system/curriculum,.

The bottom line is surely that there are good and bad in every sector no one can generalise.

I can't think why so many grammar school students were on your course happy. I can only think of one from our school doing that sort of course in recent years. It's not a mainstream choice. Although admittedly I'm merely making an educated guess as to what the course was.

Happy New Year to you too hg.

I think you are right that most people have very little experience, and take the decision based on irrelevancies.

I have been very pleased with my outcomes from paying for prep school, and could share in this thread how well I feel it compares to what I've seen in the state sector, but I don't see the point really - people who are interested can ask 'where should I send my daughter to school in the Bristol area', and get informed answers, but these kind of threads are perpetual bunfights, and I don't think anyone comes on with any intention other than to validate their own choices. Well maybe one or two, but with 757 messages here, it's just lost in the noise....

"I remember going to look at a house on sale in Sevenoaks, and the owner was a very smug woman who said that one child had been to Sevenoaks School (private), and that was wonderful, and that the other went to the grammar school, and that too was wonderful."

She was right. The schools in and around Sevenoaks, both state and private, are really excellent.

Yes, there was an article in the Telegraph earlier this year but wasn't it based on a handful of the poorest exam scripts or something like that? Anyhow, I understood it to be evidentially flawed. Perhaps we're thinking of different articles though.

Do you really think that the sneery denigrating phrase Penelope used below is going to encourage Y12 and Y13 pupils who must write a personal statement in order to apply through UCAS - and it is often a long and painful process to do so, especially for those from less advantaged educational establishments/backgrounds - to have faith in the process?

First it was not sneery, and second any Y12 or Y13 pupil that comes to our open days will be clearly told that for most subjects the PS doesn't matter that much it is grades and predictions that we are interested in.

At my uni, the PS does matter for applications to health professional roles (we don't do vet medicine which is probably the other subject that is still interested). It is a single application form, so everyone has to fill it in.

We never take work experience or extra curricular activities into account because this would mean choosing applicants on the basis of their social position not their academic potential.

The only people who seem to complain about this are the parents of children who have paid for lots of 'extras'.

G&T registers are relative to the ability levels within the school so a person considered to be super gifted in English at one school may well be considered to be profoundly average at another. These registers are essentially meaningless and are a sop to parents as very little tends to happen for these children even after they have been identified (in my experience).

There is a world of difference between "for most subjects the PS doesn't matter that much" (= it is one of many factors taken into consideration when looking at applications) and "sorry to disappointment (sic) but we rarely read them" (= your particular circumstances, which the PS gives you an opportunity to develop if necessary, do not interest us and the hours you spent crafting the PS were just a waste of time).

I think the personal statement can be very useful in a negative way cream teas. And also to indicate real interest in a subject, which tutors should really want to see, in addition to aptitude.

yellow Its a very main stream subject up there with maths and English I was the first mature student they'd ever had. Probably 70% grammar the rest a mixture of independent and state comps and one old crock. Best three years of my life your "educated guess" is probably way off as I currently and very sadly don't use it (well I do because its effected everything I do but I have no need for it in my current profession) but one day I intend to .....

@yellow We obviously have a superior quality of crayons down here.

Happy, I'm a Cambridge graduate. I work in a senior position in the city. Many of my contemporaries at university went to those schools (especially St Pauls) and many of my colleagues and professional contacts also went to those schools and/or have kids at those schools (again, with an emphasis on St Paul's). I also knew people who had attended the grammars in both colchester and Chelmsford and they were articulate, literate and quite bereft of crayons.

I find it interesting that apparently everything you have ever had contact with was 'top'. How lovely for you (incidentally - as a much published writer I can confirm that lovely is fine if used in the right context).

Bonsoir actually in my world (where we receive 1000s of UCAS applications) we barely read them because they don't matter.

For subjects such as medicine or vet science they do make a difference, but some schools and parents have taken the angst over this and transferred it to all subjects and it is not warranted. Especially now that applications are falling.

I'll tell dd about grammar school pupils not reading books. Shame. She was enjoying working her way through the huge pile of required reading...........

Not lovely for me just life. How do you define top?
Both grammars I was mentioned are in the top 10 nationally I personally wasn't overly impressed with either. The comp according to our county league tables comes top and is one of the countries top performing comps I am not overly impressed with it. The primary I mentioned people virtually murdered their neighbours children to get into it again I want overly impressed. Twisted asked me what experience I had of top state schools I told her. The schools are spread over three counties by the way. Im no expert but I was plainly asked what my experience was . Many assume that you are either in one camp (the independent sector) or the other (state) I have I believe fairly unusually experience of both.
Finally lovely may be an acceptable word but not one I think most would use to describe a school unless your a describing children playing happily in the gardens of at a Steiner school (which by the way I also have over 2 years experience of).

Yellow at my uni, the admissions tutors don't see the majority of the UCAS applications as they are dealt with by the admin staff. So providing they are not completely contradictory (eg a PS showing interest in engineering when applying for politics) it doesn't make any difference.

The only ones that make it to my desk is if they are non-standard (eg change of direction, severe disability, mature students with no recent qualifications).

creamteas - do you not think that it is important that universities admissions departments uphold the UCAS system and not denigrate it? If it is not fit for purpose, then it should change, but until it has done so it is unprofessional for universities to undermine it publicly.

I also think that PSs have value. Anecdotally, a few years ago I, my DP and my two DSSs attended an interview with the admissions director of a very high-performing Paris school, for which a PS (from the parents) was part of a cumbersome applications package. My DSSs' life circumstances could not be captured by the administrative/bureaucratic part of the application (the form filling, photocopies of reports etc) and so we had used the PS to develop those. When we attended the interview it quickly become clear that the admissions director had not read our PS and was basing her assessment purely on the form. She made an abject fool of herself, first being very rude to my DP and then back-peddling furiously as she tried to sell her school to our DSS2. Needless to say, DSS2 (who is very clever and no fool) didn't want any of it and refused to countenance the offer of a place...

Bonsoir I have no idea what you mean by denigrating UCAS.

The UCAS form needs to suit all subjects and all universities. Parts of it are more relevant to some subjects than others. As far as I know, UCAS doesn't ask applicants to agonise over the PS, or that it should take them hours.

For non-standard applications, they can be useful. But for most Year 13 applications they make no difference at all (nor to the references largely, but that is another thread)