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.

.

creamteas - fair point, that.

I have to say, I don't see much scope for swapping between schools if the schools in question are so different that they operate on a different curriculum from day 1 and if they don't, then why do they need to be separate? Surely you are quite quickly trapped in the system you have been allocated to?

It is, after all, also the argument used by parents who withdraw their children from the state sector before they've even reached 11-years old - that the private sector, particularly the selective private sector, has already accelerated off beyond the scope of state schools... personally, I don't think that is remotely true for truly bright kids, but it's the mythology that counts more than the reality, sometimes.

And if - in the German system - it is up to the parents (or an incisive teacher) to ask for the mover for a "late developer", again won't the disadvantaged (in terms of lack of "supportive" parents without the knowledge/ambition/etc) not then be able to make use of the facility. It strikes me (and I do know some Germans in the system over there that its a facility that is very little made use of.

The system is very different - children can re-sit entire years for eg, as i understand it.

Of course, you can appeal an 11 plus failure in the UK, too, for all the good it usually does you! Then you get into the whole argument over whether it's fair to have a system so badly organised that it doesn't even offer as many places as it has exam passes (and doesn't even have enough primary school places to fit demand in many areas...).

And if - in the German system - it is up to the parents (or an incisive teacher) to ask for the mover for a "late developer", again won't the disadvantaged (in terms of lack of "supportive" parents without the knowledge/ambition/etc) not then be able to make use of the facility.

IMHO - a lot of German kids are more resourceful / a little bit more mature than here in the UK. They get brought up to be quite independent early on - which even DH (who is British) has a hard time comprehending. While it helps to have motivated parents - it's actually a lot of the kids who take matters into their own hands. Some people who "moved over" to my school finished the equivalent of GCSEs in their previous school, and just enquired themselves. If they had the right grades, it was fairly straightforward.

I mean - I told my DH that I applied to go to uni in the UK around the age of 17/18 prior to the internet becoming an everyday phenomenon. I went to the city library where they had brochures of unis abroad, wrote (snail mail) to the British Council, got books on how to fill in the UCAS form... all without my parents or teachers guiding me. They were absolutely clueless about it all. Still got offers from all the unis (all RG), and I ended up going to Durham. DH who was at school here in the UK had his teachers and his Oxbridge dad guiding him which made me a bit. And I wasn't the only one...

Oh... the main difference between the German grammar school and the one below used to be languages (not sure how it is now... this is probably outdated!). The grammar school required you to study two foreign languages (on top of German) up to GCSEs. If you go to the one below, you had the option to study another language besides English (usually). Most of those who "jumped across" did do that, but didn't have to as a lot of grammar school students would drop a language after GCSEs. What may happen though is that someone who did this could have been the best in his/her school previously, but find themselves more in the middle at the grammar school. However, getting straight As in Germany is so inherently hard that often, if you do, you'd be in the newspaper. So having a B average isn't seen as bad (still good, actually). Even a C average is seen as "OK". And university is sort of open to anyone regardless of grades, as the system works differently again.

When it comes to the "lowest" school though - that's different. Almost impossible to get to the grammar school, although there are calls for the two lower schools to be combined now, so that there will be an option to do so in the future.

^^ The elder sister of a friend of mine even applied to Cambridge and got through to interviews without help of parents / teachers. So there must be some sort of cultural difference going on here. She didn't get a place, but studied in Switzerland and Canada instead - again, applied all on her own.

Just out of fun... this is a catholic school in Austria that charges ?88 a month in tuition fee (paid 10x a year). Quite affordable, because it is regarded as a "state school".

Don't think you'd feel out of place at Oxford after studying in this building! Just watch the video a little...

www.stiftsgymnasium-melk.org/Schule/#prettyPhoto/0/

Of course there are always incredibly motivated self starters who don't let anything stand in their way. There always have been.The issue is that if you are one of the privileged you don't have to be an incredibly motivated self starter. And there isn't much standing in your way.

If you are poor/ from a disadvantaged background you have to be an order of magnitude better than if you're not.

"It is, after all, also the argument used by parents who withdraw their children from the state sector before they've even reached 11-years old - that the private sector, particularly the selective private sector, has already accelerated off beyond the scope of state schools... personally, I don't think that is remotely true for truly bright kids,"
rabbit I guess I'm being a bit thick I've read the above three times are you saying that children in prep schools especially selective ones are not ahead of their state counterparts?

No, I'm saying that they are not so far ahead that a bright child can't catch up fairly easily on joining them at age 11... I think they'd have to be super bright to catch up without an awful lot of assistance at age 14 though, tbh, particularly if they are required to do Latin for any entrance exam!!!!!

Of course there are always incredibly motivated self starters who don't let anything stand in their way.

Thing is - I find a lot more people who fit the above description over there than here! And yes, especially from poorer backgrounds...

It MUST be cultural... can't find any other reason otherwise.

The higher you go up the system, the greater the disparity between excellent and poor standards of education and the more work any child is going to do to "catch up". That's kind of inevitable. Quite a few children who move from state primaries to preps will be in very supportive homes anyway, probably doing all sorts of activities that enrich their experience of life, so their own catching up won't necessarily be an accurate measure of the difference between the schools.

Have not read the whole thread, but very interested in the contributors re education in other countries. I have dc who have been in both state and indie in the uk, and am familiar with the French, Italian and Japanese systems having taught in those countries, and would love to know more about others (maybe will start a thread

Yes, Tasmania - haven't you ever seen the sketch (was it The Two Ronnies???) where the working class man says "I know my place"???? I don't think you'd ever find a German saying that, would you?

Tasmania Schloss Salem alumni would not be intimidated by Oxbridge either. Perhaps for my DS. At 33,000 euros a year cheaper than Eton (at current forex) ....

I'm to say that I know quite a lot about Steiner. Those who follow it through will start formal education later but it is generally accepted that by 13 will have caught up with their contemporaries in state ed in fact some will have passed them. My DS1 didn't learn to read till yr 2 by then end of the year he was a better reader than most in is horrible little "crammer for the grammar" pushy prep.

Rabbit that is one of my favorites. It is from the (I use it in teaching)

rabbit - nah... Germans are too confident to say things like that to be honest. That confidence is easily seen at a shoot-out in international football matches (when compared to the UK). When they do lose, it looks like they didn't even contemplate losing! Also, too serious... until all of a sudden you see the most serious guy you've ever come across standing in Lederhosen in front of you and his wife in one of those cleavage-revealing Dirndls (happened in my professional life). Couldn't keep a straight face.

Bonsoir - that is true. I think there is a massive difference between someone working at a level 4 in their SATs and what a private selective school would be expecting and that, whilst my children are very bright, they do also have the undeniable advantage of having parents who just enjoy the sort of activities and skills that have great currency in schools, so who have encouraged them in pretty much everything we do with them. They do work at well above the level of the other children in their classes at a very mixed ability primary school.

But it is also very noticeable that the children with the smaller vocabularies find it harder to demonstrate their intelligence at school and the size of ones vocabulary at a young age is directly linked to ones parents.

Vocabulary/expression is a huge issue, I agree, rabbitstew. And, sadly, teachers all too readily pay far too much attention to vocabulary/expression when "assessing" intelligence/potential when, as you so rightly say, vocabulary/expression are much more strongly correlated to experience/exposure than to brain power.

"Yes, Tasmania - haven't you ever seen the sketch (was it The Two Ronnies???) where the working class man says "I know my place"???? I don't think you'd ever find a German saying that, would you? "

No- but you would find a lot of English people who think that's how life is, and it's perfectly acceptable. And who sing the second verse of "All Things Bright and Beautiful" without a wince.

Seeker: If you are poor/ from a disadvantaged background you have to be an order of magnitude better than if you're not.

I don't think that's true. It would be very nice if it was, for me - but I don't believe it is.

One of the key differences between working class people and silver spoon types is being prepared to just get on with it. That might explain why we tend to do well at university (if we get there). That is why we should be encouraged not dissauded by the world and his wife telling us it's absolutely impossible and until the old buildings are razed to the ground and all the gowns are turned into curtains, we shouldn't both trying.

And, although I know it was a while ago but obviously I've been incommunicado, I grew up in a very utilitarian council flat and was schooled mainly in a porta cabin but I have never been overawed by old buildings. Because I grew up in London and even in my well known for its vile architecture borough, we had old buildings everywhere. Maybe Kent is different. But old buildings really aren't unusual in most of England.

OhDearConfused - that IS Eton's equivalent over there. The Duke of Edinburgh is an "alumni", so to say... he started boarding there a looong time ago, and the man who founded it (Kurt Hahn) actually had the guts to voice his opinion of the Nazis... so was exiled to Britain where he founded Gordonstoun. Several of the students (incl. the one above) then transferred over there.

The other "posh" German boarding school is Louisenlund. From what I know though, Schloss Salem is a lot more academic, while Louisenlund caters for the slightly more cocooned/spoilt clients.

There are obviously other good ones, but the ones above are the best-known ones. While the very, very wealthy do send their kids there (or the UK... or even a step above all of this - socially - Swiss boarding schools like Aiglon / Le Rosey), most middle class people wouldn't because you don't quite get the same "return on your investment" as here in the UK, assuming the kids stay in Germany.