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.

.

Do old Etonians still literally wear their old school tie or something?

I have absolutely no idea where any of the people I know went to school (unless obviously they were there with me). It just never arises in the conversation. I am amazed at the amount of people who seem to know where all their friends and neighbours go to school.

Or does this just prove I am the wrong sort of person, as the right sort of person would always know

You and me both. I never ask or know unless we went to the same school. Must admit though did help out a colleague recently and some of it may have been because we got talking and found out we went to the same school. I suppose it may just be that old Etonians get talking and find out they went to the same school and may make them help each other me. At my old comp there are less people in power so not as likely to make a difference as knowing somebody who knows somebody who runs the country!

I love Xenia's comment about being in her cleaners network. V. down to earth and tells it as it is. Keep it up Xenia - new leaf?

@cream You work in a university. That's essentially (VCs aside) a fairly meritocratic environment when compared with most.

You work in a university. That's essentially (VCs aside) a fairly meritocratic environment when compared with most

Actually that's not necessarily true. Nepotism is as much an issue within universities as outside, and taken as a whole (it does vary by discipline) there is a big issue with the exclusion of women and minority-ethnic people from top jobs, promotion and permanent contracts. There are no statistics on social class (least not for academics anyway as they all have degrees ), but I would think those from a working-class background possibly experience the same issues.

T&Cs for academics are, even now, beyond the dreams of most people. Especially those for women (DH is an academic as are many of our friends and most of the parents we know- legacy of all our kids attending the university nursery from the earliest of ages). So I don't think that women do have quite the same issues. But, I know that all my academic friends and family think things are just dreadful (because for some of them they used to be much better)

I do agree with you about nepotism though, and there is also the issue of orthodoxy, in some disciplines. But still, except among VCs, I don't think that the livery company types spend much time spreading their tentacles much beyond the London based institutions. And maybe Oxbridge.

If the rich and powerful can come from any country and from any background, does this mean there are NO codes of behaviour for the super rich and powerful any more??? Or do they send their children to Eton partly in order to learn some?

T&Cs for academics are, even now, beyond the dreams of most people

Yes they are great, if you can get them. The biggest problem is the casualisation of the workforce. Many people spend years (if not their whole careers) on short and/or part-time contracts after their PhDs. It is not uncommon, especially in cities for people to working at 2 or 3 different universities to try to make ends meet.

Many of the people desperate to get their DCs into RG unis are often unaware that the person teaching them might be doing the same at the non-RG down the road

The extremely rich can do whatever they want and are to most intents and purposes reasonably well insulated (by their extreme wealth) from the efforts of those in power. But the two groups are not by any means identical (although there is some cross over)

"If the rich and powerful can come from any country and from any background, does this mean there are NO codes of behaviour for the super rich and powerful any more??? Or do they send their children to Eton partly in order to learn some?"
Sending your child to Eton and others is all part of the package.
The code of behaviour? Make more money. Remember these are people surrounded by flunkies etc who never say NO to them.

"You must believe that you are not typical. It is very unusual for 17 year olds to find work experience or go through the university application process without any help"

seeker - while here in the UK, I may not have looked like a typical 17-year-old, all of my friends over there were doing the same things (applying to internships/universities on their own - often without their parents even knowing). My best friend arranged internships at newspapers, a radio station and a TV station - all by herself. Her parents had little to do with the media industry, etc. A friend of my brother has only recently arranged a paid internship in Brussels, meaning being hundreds of miles away from parents,

For some, it was about proving your independence (i.e. that you don't need your parents). But also, most parents weren't much into micro-managing their children. In an environment where most of the people your age were expected to do things by themselves, it is natural that you do it, too. Of course, there were some who needed help, but that was not seen as "normal".

Education is not just about academics - in nature, the the sole aim of "education" is to make the parent's offspring independent. I would be very disappointed if my DCs wouldn't be able to do what I could do without the wonders of modern technology...

What sort of school did you go to, Tasmania?

17 year olds applying for university without their parents knowing? Apart from this being seriously crap parenting somewhere down the line, what were they planning to use for money?

The degree of independence of 17 year olds varies enormously and it is not just dependent on parenting. I would have been delighted if my DSS1, who recently pressed the button on his UCAS application, had been more independent in the process and I know it is possible as every year I discuss UCAS applications with French bac pupils and their degree of autonomy vis-à-vis the process varies very considerably.

While I agree with Seeker that parents failing to know that a kid is even applying for university is a bit poor, the level of neurotic micromanaging that I see discussed on MN all the time is, IMO, just as poor. Or even worse.

On the subject of knowing people's schools: I find that if someone has gone to an Elite school they always find a way of mentioning it

Just like if someone went to Oxbridge. Whilst I would say - for eg- I studied law at university, they would say "I read law " and always mention the uni or college

MordionAgenos, I agree with you but I'm also surprised by how innocent/reticent the young can be in selling themselves. My DS (last year at university) is applying for Graduate Scheme jobs. He was saying yesterday that he couldn't really think of any examples where he had "demonstrated leadership qualities in a position of trust" (or some such HR crapspeak). I could think of several from his holiday jobs/gap year experiences. He just did not equate taking charge of the evacuation of a building (fire in the kitchen) with "leadership". Similarly he didn't see cash handling as particularly "responsible". I don't think he's atypical - he just doesn't know the language of the workplace.

Grovel hardly surprising many area especially in the state sector (not just education) are positively groaning under the weight of incomprehensible crap jargon that changes on a regular basis. No sane perosn would use it in their everyday converations.
The biggest tradgedy is that when you go for an interview you are expected to talk this jargon and failure to use current terms can result in you not getting the job regardless of a persons ability to actually do the job.

Jargon is certainly not restricted to the public sector, I can assure you. I hate jargon, however, at the same time I realise that often one person's 'jargon' or 'managementspeak' (or fluent bollocks as I often call it) is another person's precise, specific, consistent, legally (or regulatarily) accurate terminology. You also have to consider the fact that many businesses, and much regulation, is now global in nature therefore the words we use, in English, here in England, have to be understandable to people all round the world, who may speak very fluent English but who may also either lack our level of nuance or alternatively, introduce their own country specific (and sometimes completely opposite) nuance. So we have to be really careful about the way we express ourselves. Some concepts - especially conditional ones, can flip themselves around 180 degrees between different 'versions' of English. It's a real Thing these days and some people, some lucky luckily people, spend an inrodinate amount of time checking stuff and changing it to try and avoid falling into heffalump traps (now that? Translates perfectly. Mainly because of the power of Disney).

OhDearConfused - I think you'll find if someone from Oxford wanted to make it obvious they'd studied law there, they would tell you they had read Jurisprudence, as that is what the BA is called there.

Oh, and it is a BA, not LLB....

So glad I found this thread!

We are having a real dilemma re DS's secondary education (he's currently in year 5 at a good state primary in St Albans - exceptionally bright and also naturally gifted athletically, musically and also performs on stage; a very confident public speaker and really popular at school).

His dad and I both went to top private schools, more because, at the time, we would not have qualified for a state education. We have both done very well in our careers, largely because of this.

Where we live now, DS is within catchment for 2 top state schools, both top 10% in the country (whether state or private). Also in catchment for an excellent boys only state school.

Perhaps more psychological than anything else but we are still wanting a private education for him! He is currently getting tuition for various entrance exams to very academic private schools in the area (e.g. St Albans' Boys School).

The local grammar is also exceptional but we are out of catchment and therefore unlikely to get in even if he does well in the 11+ and all the musical ability allocation.

I guess it will all depend on what offers he receives in a year's time.

We are not prepared to pay for "snob value" with private school fees but can afford the fees.

What would be devastating is if, by opting for a top state school, he could end up less likely to get into Oxbridge despite exceptional exam results.

Any thoughts very much welcomed.

Interesting and very emotive debate - thank you!

When I started working more 30 years ago personel was called personel, then it became HR, then man power services, then employee services one job I looked at now call themselves empoyee and recruitment services another jobs and manpower department and so it goes on. Can someone tell me what is wrong with personel?

Fitnik it doesnt matter where you send your DS Oxbridge is not guarenteed. I suppose its worth looking at the A level results and % into Oxbridge if the the first are similar but the second completely different it must be worth asking why? It may be all to do with the subject being studied many I know wouldnt dream of doing medicne at Oxbridge prefering Guys Kings St Thomas's for example a friends DS a scholar into a top 10 school went to the Slade,vetinary medicine again can be studied in a variety of universities. UNiversities like IC have an international reputation and of course in some schools a significant minority will of course go abroad.