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

[happygardening]

Thought I repost the OP although the debate has moved on a little .
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.

.

All medical schools interview Tas and Durham will interview in other subjects for mature applicants etc. Given that a huge percentage of both Oxford and Cambridge applicants also apply to Durham, it simply wouldn't be feasible to interview. When it did interview, Durham left the interviews until January to make sure it didn't waste time and resources on Oxford and Cambridge offerees.

Being able to take on board and enjoy interesting architecture ("old buildings") is part of being a developed, educated person. Being intimated by "old buildings" is a failure of education.

I'm not sure how, in the UK, where there is quite so much emphasis on our built heritage, how anyone can be intimated by it. How can the BBC and the National Trust pass anyone by? And that is just for starters.

I checked this schools position in the league tables ( I have to be a little vague to protect the anonymity of the child as this was a very unique situation) but this school is in the top twentyish state schools in the UK and in the top 6ish in the county its "value added" score is also exceedingly high higher than the schools above it on the league tables. The school regularly out performed (although interestingly not for Oxbridge entry) a famous selective independent school in the same location and was proud of this fact.
The parents believed it was a good school and I think by any measure there belief was probably correct. One of the points here is that we as parents do not know exactly what goes on in a classroom, we only think we know I just happened to observe first hand what went on. As I've said the teaching was generally good although one hot summer afternoon in a science lesson we all fell asleep including the teacher becasue the blinds were down as we were watching a film!!

happy with respect I might be an OFSTED inspector. It sounds a poor school, teaching wise - no question.

I hate to descend to anecdotage, but some on here will have heard already the story of the mother of a friend of my dd's, who was so intimidated by a branch of Waterstone's that she felt unable to ask the person behind the counter for what she wanted. I am fairly sure that without significant support from outside his family, there is no way her very bright child would even think of a "top" university.

I suspect that some people on here (please note the use of "some') have no idea at all about the lives many other people live.

Bonsoir, you are descending into self parody now. You may need to rein in the personality you have created- there is a limit to the credulity of even a mumsnet audience. Well done, though, this is the first false step.

Ofstead inspection = outstanding. I'm very sceptical about these things in both the state and independent sectors so didn't bother to mention it. Maybe its me and I have incorrect and unrealistic expectations of what I think should be happening in lessons.

I share your expectations then happy. That teaching wouldn't score an 'outstanding', not as you characterise it at least.

seeker - your patronising attitude towards those you consider "less privileged" than yourself and your own children is repugnant. Think about it.

Thought. Nope, can't see it. Explain.

No, you cannot see it - that much is clear, or you wouldn't carry on and on banging your "seeker to the rescue to those poor people who don't have access to civilisation" drum.

@seeker better to descend to anecdote than quote misleading data

Sorry that should have been 'data'. Mums netting from a phone in an overcrowded departure lounge full of irate delayed would be travellers isn't ideal.

Seeker - the old buildings comment was a bit silly. Yes, I'm not as posh as you. But most people growing up in England will see old buildings every day. Unless you are growing up in Milton Keynes I suppose. Even cities which were smashed by beidecker raids in the war still have some old buildings.

You mean those people charmingly described on here as "scrotes at the local comp?" The ones you step over on the way to the opera?

mordion- I did assume "old buildings" was a sort of shorthand!

seeker - do not ascribe to me positions I do not have and have never adopted on MN in riposte to critiques of positions you adopt on here continually. It makes you look very silly.

Yellow some more anecdotal experience so beloved/hated on MN. Many years ago I had an excellent job the standards of were I believed high the staff generally hard working and conscientious. Even in those days outcomes were being measure and we were not under performing I think most staff went home at night believing they had tried hard with the restrictions of resources (read money)and facilities we had available to us most of the staff had only worked in this environment or others very similar which I have to say predominate. Being a restless nomadic type by nature after five years I got the same job (still state sector) but in anther location. This was a flagship deportment for the UK what went on their if proven to be successful would be eventually rolled out across the UK, should money ever be found, here the sky was the limit (we unfortunately have since indulged in two pointless wars so that money is now not available but thats another story). I felt like it transferred to another country it was unbelievable. when I told my friends from the other job they couldn't believe it "you mean you can do X in an hour?" How many staff did you say they were?" "Did I understand you right you don't have to waste hours doing photocopying they actually employ someone just to that?" and soon and so on. What I'm trying to say is that most people have no current experience of what goes in those top five they do not send their children to these schools so how can they really know. They like my colleagues and I think they know and probably like my colleagues and I think that the difference is not that great but I think if you actually had an opportunity to experience the reality you would be completely amazed at how different this small group and a few other actually is. This combined with other factors especially expectation is why they get so many into Oxbridge and other leading universities. You may be interested to know by the way that inevitably the measured outcomes for the "better" department were the highest in the UK they also had one of the most deprived catchment areas in the UK it was only when I went there that I really understood what "rough" meant.

Indeed, happygardening, free flowing resources on tap for year and years undoubtedly help the best pupils do even better. The state (and even less well endowed private schools) are never, ever going to match that kind of educational support. Is that a reason for denying resources to the few à la française?

happy you seem pretty peaceable so with that caveat: gosh, you're patronising! I have a clear idea of what goes on in top schools in both sectors as a matter of fact. The fact remains that the school you describe sounds as if it has teachers whose teaching style is DULL. Therefore I wouldn't want my kids to attend. There are plenty of dull grammars around and I wouldn't measure excellence purely on the external tick box report.

The numbers going to Oxford and Cambridge (as opposed to the relative successs rate - different thing) is a separate issue from workaday teaching of course.

Off anywhere decent Mordion?

Im not trying to be patronising at all and Im not justifying the situation either in my professional experience or experience of school but so many say (ok maybe not you) "what goes on at the likes of Eton and others is no different to that which goes on in their excellent state school be it selective or non selective. Of course my child has the same opportunities whether in or out of the classroom." I think many out there have no idea what these children have if we as a nation are going to broaden access to top universities then we need to stop being complacent we need to see these schools as "flagships" instead of just bastions of privilege what they do works the stats show us that and just like in my job some of it could not be replicated much of it could.

Bonsoir- right back atcha!

I do think you're right, happy, in that for the vast majority, the reality of what's available at places like Eton is just so far outside their experience that they can't imagine it.

I have two children in two different schools with very different intakes and "mission statements", and the difference in what's available and expected at these two state schools a couple of miles apart is staggering. I am sure that the difference between them and Eton is more than staggering.

All the more reason to think of ways of narrowing the gap in availability and and expectation. You can't make a horse drink- but you can, surely, make sure that it has equal access to the water?

I'm absolutely sure that these top schools in both sectors have a great deal to offer beyond the confines of their walls - and they do try to be fair. But it's an unbelievably vast job and there's no getting away from the fact that they're almost all highly selective, with all the advantage in terms of teaching that that entails.

Yes seeker make the water equal and also learn from those who are succeeding. Just like in my job we need these flagships they showed me and others what is possible incidentally much of their approach was created because their catchment was so deprived and therefore they had to think outside of the box. It must be possible to overcome peoples gown/old building/meaningless ritual phobia (ok maybe not the latter) even if they are "scrots" (what a truly hideous term) living in social housing in the most deprived areas in the UK. Even those at the very bottom of the pile given the right assistance will engage.

happygardening - have you sat in on your ds's lessons? You make lots of negative comments about the grammar school, but you haven't ever said whether you have a similar experience of sitting through lessons at Winchester, or Eton, or any of the other big public schools. Or are you one of those contented parents who assumes the teaching is all phenomenal?
Also, I know it's picky, but you frequently type there instead of their, its instead of it's and theres instead of there's. It wouldn't normally grate, except that you talk so much about low standards. If you are going to comment about others' low standards, it is beholden upon you to retain very high standards of your own, imo.