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.
.
Join the discussion on our Education forum.
Education
If you can afford private education but remain in the state sector cont.
happygardening · 06/01/2013 13:22
I don't think it's unfair that I choose not to go down that route 
, although I take an interest in my emotional reaction to things when I step outside myself, iyswim - I think my emotional response definitely relates to my upbringing and what I was taught to view as important in life. I do think, however, that the whole system in which we all have to operate is intrinsically unfair and am glad that I have actually had choices to make - you can hardly say something is unfair when it is your choice, but you can say it is unfair when it isn't your choice...
There appear to be multiple discussions going on in this thread. I certainly don't have a problem at all with Seeker's thesis that opportunities should be extended beyond those born to them (well, I wouldn't really, would I, in the circumstances! ) For me though, the key issue isn't that oxford and cambridge should change what they are. They should continue to be elite (on the basis of ability) and where tradition works for them then I don't see why they should dump it (although I was careful to apply to the university that was more relaxed about gowns in general and a college that was super relaxed about all that guff, in particular). What absolutely HAS to change is that at present, all the kids who might want to go there, maybe, and who could go there, based on ability, aren't even applying. And that has to change. And, again using myself as an example, continuously focussing on the negative 'you'll never get in, you're too working class, too council flat, too minority heritage, you didn't go to one of a handful of state schools so you will NEVER get in so don't bother' isn't going to help with that. We should always try to be as encouraging as possible, and pointing out all the people like me who did manage it, and who are in no way super duper or magical. That is they way to practically demonstrate to kids that it isn't a pipe dream, it's a genuine thing to go for.
Don’t want to miss threads like this?
Weekly
Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!
Log in to update your newsletter preferences.
You've subscribed!
LaVolcan It was an attitude I never encountered from anyone, from primary school onwards (and to be fair from my parents too) people couldn't have been more encouraging. I was lucky in that respect (although one primary school teacher did tell me that since the 11+ had been abolished in our borough the year before I had no chance of going to the former grammar cos of where I lived. She was wrong. But to be fair in that conversation she opened with 'you'd have walked the 11+. BUT.....' She was actually lovely, she was bemoaning the impact she assumed the abolition of the 11+ would have on those of us at the primary from the wrong side of the tracks (ie the council estate). Most of us were accepted by the former grammar though, so she needn't have worried. AND we got the bus money back off the council too, which was good and wouldn't happen today).
Having not encountered that negative attitude about Cambridge when I was young, imagine how sad it makes me to see it all around me where I live now (where practically everyone I see displaying it is actually rather posher and richer than my family were when I was a kid). And to see it in threads like these. I find it really depressing.
To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.