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.

.

Mordion- just for the sake of clarity. You seem to be saying that there is no it is just as easy for poor/disadvantaged people to get a good education and get to a good university as it is for not poor/ privileged ones. I find hard to believe you are- but that's what I am reading. I hope I'm wrong!

As I said, I was using the buildings as a sort of shorthand for the sort of tradition and unspoken rules that make things more difficult for those not brought up to them. I wasn't saying that an old building per se was a barrier.

Happy 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?

DD2's best friend is at the junior department of a top 150 posh school. I know it doesn't compare with Winchester but it's as good as it gets where we live. Said best friend - who is lovely - has language lessons. Well, DD2 doesn't, just a bit of french which seems to be mainly singing. She does loads of sport, DD2 just gets standard primary school sport and doesn't do much outside school because although there are clubs after school, she spends all her time doing either music or (mainly) preparing herself to be the next Bernadette Peters or Patti LuPone . Best friend may also have more access to science lessons too. But when it comes to maths or english, DD2 is streets ahead. So, while I think that its probably very true that most posh school primary age kids have access to a broader education in school than that available to state school kids, I don't believe that the brightest state school kids are being held back in any meaningful way. Although the language issue really is A Thing and one which should be addressed - Gove would be much better advised to be revolutionising primary school language teaching than fiddling with the EBacc or whatever he is calling it this week.

Seeker I'm not saying it is just as easy for poor/disadvantaged people to get a good education as posh people. I'm saying that it is not as impossible as some people like to paint it for bright (horrible word but what is the alternative? Intelligent? Brainy?) poor/disadvantaged people to get a good education. I think it is very difficult for the average and below average poor/working class people to get a good and at the same time appropriate education. But my comments have been in relation to the sort of kids who should be applying to Oxbridge (if that's what they want and many wouldn't NOT because they were put off by gowns, but possibly because they wanted to do something artistic/creative which would be better served by following a different route, or because they wanted to go to, say, Imperial. Or Scotland. Or Wales. Or the USA).

The key reason that the very bright working class kids don't get to oxbridge in the numbers they probably should, if we ignore the ones who have a legitimate different life plan (ie not one they have been persuaded into formulating by naysayers) is that they don't apply. The only way to get them to apply is to encourage them. Not discourage.

On the waterstones thing - didn't Tim Waterstone originally want to bring good books to ordinary people? By carrying a much wider range than you could get in Smiths? Back in the day, when he first set them up (before he sold them the first time).

I do think there is much mythology about how far ahead prep school children are. I think some of it is because there is a much, much wider spread of ability in a state school classroom, and if you look at some of the work on display you might not think much of it if you don't realise that it was done by a lower ability child. So yes, there is a massive gap between the bottom tables and a prep school- not so much between a prep and the top tables. My ds was easily on a par with his prep school friends in maths and English when he was in year 6. Streets behind in French, though. And it was difficult to tell in History, for example, because the approach was so different.

As I said, I was using the buildings as a sort of shorthand for the sort of tradition and unspoken rules that make things more difficult for those not brought up to them.

But that should change in a few generations, now that kids have watched/read Harry Potter and want nothing more than be in Hogwarts. Loads of unspoken rules and traditions there!

Although the language issue really is A Thing and one which should be addressed - Gove would be much better advised to be revolutionising primary school language teaching than fiddling with the EBacc or whatever he is calling it this week.

Ditto - about 90% of jobs I got (quite sought-after) was because of my language skills... which apparently not many here in England have.

Oh, Tasmania- would it be very rude of me to ask if you are quite young? You do seem to have a youthfully simplistic view of the world!

The key reason that the very bright working class kids don't get to oxbridge in the numbers they probably should, if we ignore the ones who have a legitimate different life plan (ie not one they have been persuaded into formulating by naysayers) is that they don't apply. The only way to get them to apply is to encourage them. Not discourage.

Well said, Mordion.

I totally agree.

(As a state school educated ex-Oxbridge person who was dissuaded from applying by my school but encouraged by my boyfriend at the time, who tutored me so that I could pass the exam.) Without him, no one would ever have suggested Oxbridge. I had mixed feelings about it in my twenties, because I was a bit of a misfit, but overall it was a brilliant experience that I'm so grateful to have had.

Oh, Tasmania- would it be very rude of me to ask if you are quite young? You do seem to have a youthfully simplistic view of the world!

Not that young. But in my heart I am... be a bit more lighthearted, seeker. Not everything in the world has to be grim.

I save my lightheartedness for lighthearted issues. I don't think this is one. sorry.

I'm with Mordion, too.

If people keep on moaning about how difficult it is to get into these places if you haven't been privately educated, then no one will apply! Killing a dream before it has even started...

They aren't applying now! The whole point is to try to identify what's stopping them and change it!

Seeker - from my experience with kids/teenagers when you are too serious about something, you make them anxious. Whether that be teaching them maths or helping out with uni applications. I know kids who were afraid to apply to RG unis [not all of them are difficult to get into, by the way] because they thought they stood no chance. With a bit more lightheartedness and a "give-it-a-go" attitude (plus, they had the aptitude), they applied, got into the better ones from that list of RG unis... and they are now absolutely fine. A few even got in via clearing (!!!). So, yeah - lightheartedness does work wonders.

But the people on this thread aren't teenagers. I'm not teaching any of them or helping any of them with their application forms. We are, I thought, discussing the wider issues of education and society. So cheerleader mode not required!

Your whole point is to deny the existence of real people, it seems. Many apply, and get in. More should. Pretending that the ones who do apply and get in don't exist so that you can continue to patronise an entire swathe of our society isn't helping anyone. Nobody wants to be the trail blazer (well, I suppose some people do, but lots don't). If we don't hide the fact that the trail has already been blazed, its there and people just have to follow it now, the heavy lifting has been done, then that will be a huge step towards stopping this constant discouragement.

Seeker, you are very quick to accuse others of having no empathy. And sometimes I agree with you, and sometimes I don't. But I think that you yourself find it impossible to imagine what it is like to be a very bright council flat dwelling working class kid. Many of your comments indicate that you really have no idea of reality. Perhaps it's another Kent thing, or it might be a posh thing. Or an age thing. I don't know. But it's clearly a problem for you which is a shame because your heart is so achingly obviously in completely the right place. But I think your tactics for achieving what everyone wants are off. However, if they are restricted to posts on this board and not conversations with real living working class kids then I suppose it's less of a problem. Although we still have the issue of one of the most prominent supporters of state schooling on mumsnet saying loudly and often that it's easier to do well if you go to posh school. Which isn't untrue. But it would be more helpful to be saying loudly and often that its perfectly possible to do well if you go to a state school. That's the message I'd like to hear from you more. It's a message all of us who support state schools should be giving out. Because it's the truth.

Working-class kids are less likely to apply for top universities for complex reasons - they need both encouragement and the barriers remove. This is not an easy problem to solve. It is also likely to get worse as there is a growing trend towards staying at home rather than moving away to university, because of the cost.

But when they do apply (with similar grades) they are less likely to be offered places, and this is a problem within the universities, and it is more common where interviews are used.

I would like to join the commiseration, but wouldn't the ideal solution be to stop making it look impossible for state school students to get into these good unis? Maybe that will change things? You can't change the buildings, nor the traditions. Teach people to embrace them instead.

Apart from teaching, what really marks public school kids is the confidence they have. Like they were born to walk through the cloisters of Oxford. Maybe it's about time state school students were given that feeling. Make it seem to them that it's their natural destination based on their merit?!? Because obviously, you have to have AT LEAST that to get in. I think the UNIQ summer schools help...

I agree about the wider spread of sets in a state primary and not being a huge difference between a top set and a prep. HOWEVER, for example whilst my DS1 is happy as larry in his top set with his small group of friends, and doesn't seem phased/daunted by what's happening around him, for my DD1 is a totally different story.

The teachers don't tend to stretch her that much, she finds the disruption of lower groups upsetting, and recently has trouble with motivation. Moving her to a prep school, which I am considering, with more children working at her level, I think would help her, although the jury is still out. As I said, this is not an issue for my DS1 (who is even more ahead of her) so it does boil down to personality.

One thing I do really like about prep schools is the teaching of separate subjects, ie history, geography etc as I am a bit old fashioned. Also the fact that many sports etc are done at school as I am finding that we have less and less time to do stuff out of school with the amount of interests they all have (there's 4 of them).

I think sacking the privately educated journalists who love at every opportunity to write articles about how you have to be privately educated to get anywhere in life these days might be a good start.

The top independent schools try to help (though it may be pissing in the wind). Eton (about which I am not completely objective) provide the following:

The Universities Summer School provides 120 Sixth Form boys and girls of high calibre from maintained schools in Britain with a teaching and tutorial programme designed to promote interest in university studies. As in previous years a number of Oxbridge dons sit on a panel to answer questions about applying to Oxbridge. Students are also given interview practice and help on how to write a UCAS statement. The courses are very popular and attract a high number of applicants each year.

The Brent-Eton Summer School offers up to 50 boys and girls from the London Borough of Brent a week-long programme designed to bridge the gap between GCSE and A-levels and to encourage them to stay on in the Sixth Form with a view to continuing their education at university or higher education establishments. Each year the students create their own website chronicling their activities. Plans are being developed to create a similar course for boys and girls from Tower Hamlets.

sacking the privately educated journalists who love at every opportunity to write articles about how you have to be privately educated to get anywhere in life these days might be a good start

can we also sack all the journalists that write off the working class as 'benefit scrounging chav scum' and promote middle-class values as the only ones worth having.

"My ds was easily on a par with his prep school friends in maths and English when he was in year 6."
So much depends on the school and what exams they are being prepared for in yr 8. My DS2 in at the end of yr 6 was doing the same work as my DS was starting in yr 9 of his "high performing academy."
But there are plenty of not very bright children in prep schools who obviously are not this far ahead.
But seeker you are right about the languages 4-5 MFL lessons a week is definitely a good thing and becasue of the way that science is taught in many prep schools specialised teachers in specialised labs often 5-6 lessons a week and separate lessons for chem, physics and biol from yr 5 then again prep school children may have a more in depth knowledge than their state counterparts. The other three significant difference is that often art and music are again taught by specialised teachers in purpose built classrooms and of course games again at least four times a week in boarding preps with extra curricular sports in spare time and I know in the summer at my DS's prep the cricket coach was on the field every night informally coaching the children (unsurprisingly quite a few alumni were famous cricketers) great if you love cricket my DS's didn't!
But I'm not convinced that this cant be replicated in the state sector. We have very interesting primary school in a well know town near us. It called a community centre not a school and has over 700 children the award winning head is amongst other things trying to get teachers to teach their own degree subjects from yr 3 as well as opening a GP surgery in the school building, a job centre, an adult education centre and an NHS dentist. Many children are refugees or from deprived backgrounds and the head believes correctly that education health and employment of the parents and children are intrinsically linked.

grovel these initiatives can help, but if they are anything like the ones run at my university, they are unlikely to attract the right candidates.

I'm not involved now but when I was our summer schools were open to schools in deprived areas, and students on FSM from wealthier areas. But they still tended to fill up with basically the children from middle-class families (albeit ones that are down on their luck!)

" But it would be more helpful to be saying loudly and often that its perfectly possible to do well if you go to a state school. That's the message I'd like to hear from you more. It's a message all of us who support state schools should be giving out. Because it's the truth."

Of course it is! But I thought that this thread was about why particular types of "doing well" seem to come easier to people from "posh schools" as you put it. Isn't that what we're talking about? Trying to identify and reduce the obstacles? Happy to blow the state school trumpet- I do it all the time. But it is undeniable that the movers and shakers are predominately from a very narrow band. And we won't change that by ignoring the facts.

"But there are plenty of not very bright children in prep schools who obviously are not this far ahead. "

so more about the level of state school children then?????