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.

.

Rabbit lots of gothic building as well so he wont feel in awe at his uni interview.

To add to the above - a lot of the people in my school didn't come from the posh side of town, but when I look at what they are doing now... a lot of them achieved more than a lot of "posh" people I know over here.

Of course, there were a few that were so posh that they were pretty much groomed to marry into nobility (which it turns out some did), but in terms of achievement, it's almost the same as everybody else long as people worked hard. The main difference between the two countries seem to be the school system. One has the grammar school system perfectly in place EVERYWHERE, while the other doesn't, making it easier to move up the social strata. Neither is the grammar school system rigid - if you got really good grades from a "lesser" school at GCSE (and in this case we really mean "lesser" as there are hardly any comps that go to the equivalent of A-levels - all the other schools stop at GCSE), you can jump up to a grammar school.

My school seems to have churned out neurologists, lawyers, managers... you name it. One guy a few years above me became quite a big film director - and I was discussing this with DH the other day that it's quite weird that the independent sector is not just overwhelmingly represented in things like politics or business/finance. BUT entertainment and music, too!!! The likes of Chris Martin (Sherborne), Radiohead (Abingdon), and don't even get me started on actors. My Indian friends used to tell me that over there, most of the "posh" people wouldn't even want their kids to go into Bollywood. Apparently, that's normally an area where the "poorer" people can make it. But here in the UK, everything is so god-damn focussed on class and which school you went to, it's mad!!

A huge amount of immigration to the UK hasn't been voluntary. My father had no desire at all to leave his home for good as a child with just a suitcase in hand. No money, no welfare society, huge prejudice against foreigners having jobs. What did people such as him do? It's not surprising that so many children of such immigrants have done fairly well.

The overwhelming majority do peterenas and Durham most certainly does. I'm not sure what your point is really. Very peripheral anyhow.

Read the first and last paragraph of this...

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/feb/11/britain-earnings-mobility-oecd

It sort of says that having grammar schools doesn't do Germany's social mobility any harm, does it (despite segregation at age 10)??? And the UK got rid of them. Bad, bad move.

Let me try it again with link...

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/feb/11/britain-earnings-mobility-oecd

"BUT entertainment and music, too"
Theres a very simple reason for this; opportunity. At my DS's schools 4-5 plays are staged every term and over 30 concerts every term. Its the same reason why more Olympic athletes came from the independent sector than the state sector opportunity. Most children in boarding schools are doing sport 4-5 times a week and many can carry on with their chosen sport often at weekends and evenings.
As a gold medal winning German Olympic dressage rider once said when an gushing fan commented on his "talent": "Its (it's sorry rabbit) funny the more i practice the more talented I become."

seeker the interview helpers are selected by their colleges and won't abandon a nervous interviewee in the face of a braying Buller-wannabe mob.

You do love caricature.

I thought all interview for medicine in the hope of ensuring good people skills. Maybe this explains a lot!

Regardless of any other objections, ds1 is not the type of child who would respond well to being sent to boarding school a long way from home, happygardening. That only suits a certain type of child. My dh was happy with such an arrangement, but he has a very different personality from my ds1. And ds2 is another kettle of fish altogether. I am glad to hear, for the benefit of other children, however, that bursaries to top private schools are not limited to children entirely free of learning disabilities.

The only ways I can see to change the status quo involve unacceptable state interference in family life (if introduced by Labour) or patronising paternalism if introduced by the Conservatives.
We are hamstrung by political perceptions.

So grovel does this mean that you think we as a nation are stuck with the current system?

The worry is that if this government continues with its policies the losers wont just be those in poor areas it will be those in wealthy areas as well.

happy - that's what DH told me, i.e.: "Well, if you want to be like Chris Martin, it helps if you are good in music. If you want to be an actor, it helps, if you can act. The more you practice, the better you get." And then, someone else added that a lot of kids in the private sector do leave school with exactly that - a lot of extracurricular activities (big grounds for sports, afternoon music lessons and drama from early age, not to mention foreign languages much earlier on), and to a standard well above average. While when you send your kids to a state school, parents have to push a lot more for it (registering kids at drama school, driving them to music lessons and sports, etc. rather than all that happening in one place which would be a lot less stressful for both parents and kids.

Ridiculous - the difference between state and private sector. That's one of the reasons I would really push for independent schools with my kids (no need to convince DH about that - he feels stronger about it than I do, again probably because he's British, and he is more tuned in to the difference it can make to someone's life over here). So might be back here with suggestions for school in a few years time... unless we move out of the country.

You call that ?peripheral?, Yellow? ?Interview? or ?no interview? can often mean the difference between the making or breaking of a (medical) career!

You seem to be very hot in giving correct information to MNers (when it suited you) but what you said categorically that all medical schools interview was clearly untrue. Nothing whatsoever to do with Durham here. You either know or don?t know your medical schools, that?s my point.

Tasmania, the better-off in the UK have adapted to the comprehensive system by either moving into the catchment area of the higher-achieving schools or going private. Most people with influence are happy enough with the status quo. (There are no mainstream political parties who would dream of proposing selective education along German lines.) The losers have been academic pupils in poor areas.. and maybe the country overall.

Pity - because the German system seems to work well. While primary and middle schools are limited to the catchment area in Germany, secondary schools in Germany are not. So someone from the "poorer" side of town is well in their rights to go to the one in the "posh" side of town. As long as you got the grammar school recommendation, it's first come, first served. Some schools will still be oversubscribed, but I don't think distance makes much of an impact. Someone in my year commuted 2 hours each way (!!!) to go to school because she lived in a tiny village, and she thought the grammar school there wasn't the most "worldly" one.

Tas Im (sorry I'm) rural I would have to drive my DS 30 miles one way three time a week for him to play his chosen sport at the level he's playing it at school. Even if I wasn't working to pay fees and therefore sitting around with nothing to do it would be considerable inconvenience especially as my other DS isn't interested. .

"Tasmania, the better-off in the UK have adapted to the comprehensive system by either moving into the catchment area of the higher-achieving schools or going private."

The issue of the better-off and/or savvier parents moving into the catchment of better schools, creating a virtuous circle for some and sink schools elsewhere is an inevitability of the comprehensive/catchment system. It has happened in France too - in fact, it happened a long time ago and more recently there has been huge flight to private schools.

As a gold medal winning German Olympic dressage rider once said when an gushing fan commented on his "talent": "Its (it's sorry rabbit) funny the more i practice the more talented I become.

Haha! Riding is one of those other things that gets classed as "posh" here. The best rider in my year at school in Germany was not actually posh - her dad was a tram conductor. It's just that riding is so much cheaper over there than here (at my old riding school, it is ?14 per hour. Here, it's like £25 per hour - and that school isn't even that great, so you go for one that's more around £35+). DCs will go on riding holidays there - which will be cheaper than a child minder over here!

I think the UK is a very difficult place to actually live in!!!

seeker - do you know what the original Waterstone's strategy was? Can you describe its marketing concept?

Germany have for many years lead the world in the dressage arena and in show jumping and eventing as well. They have a fantastic mega organised breeding program and horses are rigourously tested we have learnt a lot from them hence our success in the dressage at the Olympics. I know little about German schools but perhaps we can learn from that as well?

holiday - Completely understandable. It's not so bad where we are, but you'd still have to drive around like a lunatic to get all that in. Plus, because they are not organised from one central place, things will inevitably clash at some point.

All the Germans I know are deeply anxious about their schools! I know plenty of Germans both in Germany and outside and they are never content. It's a very inegalitarian system - the correlation between academic success and a SAHM is one of the highest in the world.

Aren't a lot of Germans unhappy with their education system, though? Maybe it's the norm for European countries to be unhappy with their own education systems and looking to change them?...

I have to admit, my ds2 would be in 7th heaven to be surrounded by intelligent, like-minded individuals and to have lots going on of a high quality all the time.