Why on earth would you go state if you could afford private?

[Schmedz]

This thread is for Maisie and happygardening . I like dares!

I believe you wonderwoman. You can take a horse to water...

Maisiejoe123

I think there are a few girls in lower years (4-7), but after that, it's boys only. So no, you weren't dreaming! We are only looking at going private after infant school from 7+ if things work according to plan (incl. house in catchment area of two fab infant schools).

London isn't actually so far away. I worked there for years, and still have to go there a few times a month. Love the Park and Ride and yes, the great countryside is vital. Oxford is good for restaurants, museums - plus theaters, etc. Haven't found any place like this anywhere. Used to live in Surrey for a bit, and just did not like it. It felt more like "suburbia" and dependent on London.

DH isn't much of a city guy, but this is a nice "in-between". Never thought when living in London, I'd ever move out... but now, I prefer it here, and think London to be a bit of a hassle.

Socareless - what odd comments that you have collated! Yes, there are plenty on here talking about socialism but when it come to their children....

Has anyone here said they are a socialist but not when it comes to their children?

Perhaps William Miller left state school unequipped with good qualifications because he was a bit thick? Just a thought. Going to state school in the 60s 70s and 80s certainly did not automatically mean that one would leave with no good qualifications.

Oxford is very young and hip, the unversity does help of course. And house prices because of weaker links into London reflects that but if you dont need to go into London everyday its ideal.

Surrey, nice but a bit soleless. But I guess fast trains into London is always appealing.

Daily Mail link. His siblings also failed to gain any qualifications at other state schools.

I have a really good degree thanks socareless. Terrible English language skills but maths and sciences top of class.

Never judge a book by its cover or is it kindle now.

' Another aspect that I found a real eye-opener was the inverted snobbery I experienced, not just from the other children, but from the teachers.'

Surely not inverted snobbery from adults . That at least must be a thing of the past ...

maisie Im happy to support you but am a bit tired and not keen on reading my way through 17 pages of what I suspect are the usual comments both pro and anti independent ed made by the usual people.
Can someone do a quick summary?
Anything extra ordinarily outrageous?
I read a few comments about "hooray Henry's and "scrots" being one and the same in terms of level of insult! How are we defining a "hooray Henry" as a brash but dim floppy haired braying youth? Ok not on the surface as offensive as "scrot" but not exactly a complimentary term and I would be offended if someone described my DS as a "hooray Henry". "Scrot" definitely implies something unpleasant.
But primarily it is the stereotyping of anyone that frustrates and offends me.

TOSN I come form a long line of very outspoke left wing activists/intellectuals. Obviously bought up with socialists/communist principles (although only when it suited them) I have no idea where my political affiliations lie any more although no more likely to vote Tory than take up pot holing (I suffer from claustrophobia) and have very strong socialist leanings but not when it comes to educating my DS!!

Dont worry Happy! I can hold the fort!

Someone (cannot remember who!) has stated that private school pupils automatically get A's and A* just because they went to private school. Hasnt come back since.. Not surprising really!

Usual stuff really! Go off and have a nice glass of wine.

RussiansOnTheSpree

I think it is more complex than you think. Whether a school is good depends a lot on location and the individual schools themselves. My once very socialist MIL went to a state school in the 60s/70s. She even was at a grammar school, but the teachers weren't great, and she ended up leaving after what I presume must have been O-levels. Given that she got in, she must have had innate ability, but the teachers wasted it. Apparently, most of those who went to school with her felt the same. Her parents were loving people, if a little over-indulgent, so statistically speaking, she should have gone further.

FIL went to very competitive grammar school, and then went on to Oxbridge. But he had very ambitious parents who were expecting him to go to Oxbridge in a "no other unis need apply" manner.

^^ To add to the above... I think William Miller's parents were more like MIL's parents...

I'm sure it is more complex. Although im sensing that being a bit thick isn't entirely absent from the equation. But the fact is I know people who went to Pimlico in the 60s 70s 80s and even 90s and none of them left without any qualifications. And even if Pimlico was the worst school in the world (it isn't) what one school was like 50 years ago is not really going to tell us anything about what every other school is like today.

"Someone (cannot remember who!) has stated that private school pupils automatically get A's and A* just because they went to private school. Hasnt come back since.. Not surprising really! "

An incredibly stupid remark. By one poster. Not supported by anyone else. So not at all typical of the thread.

Going back to the OP, I think there is a question about risk aversion. My sense is that quite a few people (who can afford it) privately educate their children because the thought of a "disaster" - however unlikely - in state education would bring on horrible feelings of guilt. "Could we have done better for our child/ren?". This would be particularly strong in parents who were privately educated themselves. Some people won't worry about that so much (probably in areas with good state provision) and will back themselves to ensure that a "disaster" won't happen.

Seeker - Its very sad when we have to get down to floor level to determine not wether 'hooray henry' is offensive or name calling but which one is weightier between 'scrotes' and the later. Very sad indeed, and just sums up the whole attitude towards private education on here.

narked, just because, we are not born equal, doesn't mean we all should not strive to achieve it

Grovel I think you are completely wrong, risk averse people won't commit themselves to maybe 25 years of school fees (depending on the gaps between their kids) out of earned income. They just won't. But very few people are genuinely risk averse (Lthough many think they are).

Narked - I wasnt born equal. Single parent after a few years and staunch Labour supporters. Terrible state school education in sec modern (although it was a number of years ago!) and I dont want that for my children. It took me literally years to get where I am now. We live in the GS area so there are options and choice.

We chose the private system for all sorts of reasons and have never regretted it.

Grovel - Yes we felt strongly about the 'risk aversion" you speak of, we are however not privately educated at all, its got nothing to do with privately schooled parents in particular.

Children born to parents who get highly involved in their education will do better than others. You can't make parents do that, so what can you do?

I get what Grovel means by 'risk aversion'. Russian I would rather sink all my hard earned money into my DC's education than have all the money in the world and have DC who feel as Mr Miller does. He lives to tell the tale because of who his father is.

Of course A s and As are earnt but the more interesting question is where are the missing A s and As?

Plenty of children are in state primaries and then go on to private secondaries. Plenty of children go on to state secondaries. Why are DC who are on a par with each other academically in Y6 not getting the same kind of results in Y11?