When to go private?

[Vijac]

If money is limited, which stage do you think is most beneficial for a child to have private education? 4-7, 7-11 or secondary? Secondary is obviously where you get all your qualifications etc and where you are most likely to go off the rails and participate in club. But then, if you don't have the best start in education could it set the tone in a child's attitude and would they get into the more academic secondaries? What do people think. Just as an aside, I do know that there are good state schools available too.

Hmm. I do see what you mean, in a way, norude, and obviously you've had lots of negative comments in RL that have been unpleasant.

My children do know they can do as well as children at private school, because they know those children are no better, just their parents have done things a different way. However, I think the obvious answer that a bright child whose parents couldn't afford fees, when told 'oh you can do just as well' would probably be, 'well why does anyone go there, then? ... also mum, I was reading that page you left open on mumsnet and it seems I'm buggered anyway because I missed learning the basics and I'm now going to go off the rails' .

To re-iterate, I think the negative message about going to state school comes far more from other sources (and from many private schools, and some of those who use them) than it does from parents who send their children to state school.

Curlew - if you read my other posts you will realise that I have not ignored those facts.

Sorry, norude- yes you have.

not quite sure why everyone is having a go! We were state school parents for as long as being prep school ones. Maybe not all prep schools are keen on manners, I only know about the one my two went to.

At the Grammar school the teaching was excellent, sporting opportunities less, and a lot of the good things hinged on the teachers who did things in their own time ( like teach subjects not on formal offer or run groups) I didn't like the low key approach to dealing with any bullying and the fact that the teachers did not always prepare well for parents evenings. When DS2 wanted a place on a summer Latin course he needed a head teacher's letter in support. HT wrote that he was from a family where no one had ever been to university! As DH and I both have post graduate qualifications and HT did not ask us about our education I was not impressed.

I think it's a bit vulgar to talk about why you educate your children privately

I would never do it in real life. If people ask me why I always say because of the sport. Lame really.

Alta no one ever asks me about DS school, because it's a fancy pants famous one.

But they do ask about DD's because it's not. In fact it's one many an MNer would be sneery about and declare a waste of money.

If I think they're generally interested, I explain what's on offer. If I think they're just being a twat I say I love the kilts .

Saying 'it's a bit vulgar' sounds a tiny bit like a silencing technique to me! I'm not specially interested in the whys anyway... but am never not going to pound the keyboard when people start making silly statements about when (not even 'if'!) you should 'go private'!

Nothing's a waste if it's what you want, in my opinion. I just get twitchy when what people want entails making silly statements about what they don't want but think they'll get if they don't 'go private'.

My parents sacrificed my education on the altar of their liberal attitudes.

They took us to Europe, art galleries, museums, theatre etc in the holidays.

It didn't stop me getting routinely kicked in at a comprehensive school for wanting to work, to get A'levels, go to university.

I could post on here about my comprehensive education not holding me back academically. But I won't because I was so miserable all I wanted to do was die. And if I hear one more glib 'clever children will do well anywhere', I will cry. If everyone else just wants to tattoo themselves in biro, swear at teachers and disrupt every single lesson for a laugh, and your child is the 'clever cunt' chances are they might not be happy.

But instead I will tell you that I will scrub floors to keep my DC in the private sector because they will have friends who think like they do; they won't have to stick out like sore thumbs; they can do sports they love and not be laughed at for wanting to be healthy.

They will, I hope, have the biggest privilege of all, a happy childhood and an adolescence surrounded by peers with similar aspirations.

Yes, I'm biased and bitter.

But surely nit if someone wants to go private (for whatever personal reasons they have) and can only afford a bit of it, it's a perfectly reasonable question to pose?

Which bit is the best value for money?

People must surely be allowed to discuss these things without the anti-private brigade elbowing in the derail the thread. Every. Bloody. Time.

I agree notagiraffe

"People must surely be allowed to discuss these things without the anti-private brigade elbowing in the derail the thread. Every. Bloody. Time".

Yes of course they should. But why can't they do it without saying awful things about state schools? Every. Bloody.Time.

"If everyone else just wants to tattoo themselves in biro, swear at teachers and disrupt every single lesson for a laugh, and your child is the 'clever cunt' chances are they might not be happy."
Doesn't it cross your mind that you are talking about other mumsnetters children? Or do you genuinely believe that they are all at private school?

Sorry curlew But that's not how the thread went.

OP asks for opinions on an issue that is relevent to lots of parents; they'd like to go privatebut can't afford the whole shebang.

A few posters give opinions based on their experience ie in no way dissing the state sector as a whole. Then whoops, here comes the size tens without fail...what's the point? Complete waste of money! You're buying a peer group because you're afraid of poor people!!!

That was absolutely not how the thread was going!!!!

And whatelse is talking quite obviously about her own experieneces!

And frankly, they sound bloody awful. Why try to criticise her for her own experiences? Why try to make them out as somehow invalid/untrue?

Oh, come on wordfactory, don't be naive - look at the OP. She is asking whether it's better to have a poor (ie state) start and risk not being able to cope with a private secondary or have a good (ie private) start and risk going off the rails at a state secondary!

No wonder she got people's backs up a little. And the posts that followed just confirmed the prejudice.

"And whatelse is talking quite obviously about her own experieneces!"

Yes she is. But she is extrapolating from her experience (which sound awful) to all state schools, which is why, 20 years later, she would "scrub floors" not to let her children go to one.

Sorry I don't buy it.

At no point does the OP say that. She simply poses the notion that these things can happen. And they certainly can.

Kids do have a poor start in some primaries. Kids can go off the rails at secondary. This is hardly contentious. Surely?

She even goes so far as to say she knows there are good state schools.

The posts that follow the OP simply talk about their experiences in a fairly measured way, and why those expereiences have impacts on their opinions.

I feel I have to clarify what I said way back at the begining do the thread.

I never said my DDs school was economically diverse, that would be plain madness (as far as I am aware it doesn't offer any real burseries, just short term ones to those current pupils experiencing a short term issue). I meant ethnically diverse as you can tell by the examples I gave. Also at no point did I say this was my reason for choosing the school, as it wasn't. In fact in the post previous to that I specifically said that I would be shocked by a parent chosing a school due to the peer group and that would include "because the peer group is diverse".

I do not feel any need to justify my reasons for chosing either of my children's schools (one state, one private) or any they may attend in the futur. I would repeat what someone above said about you having no knowledge as to who anyone's children associate with outside of school and what we, as a family, value in the people we are friends with but, as sure as hell, money doesn't even enter the equation

I felt the op was making assumptions about state schools which are quite hard to miss. And similar assumptions repeat throughout. Nobody actually said 'don't do it all, you twat' or anything unpleasant or jumping brigade-ish. But many, like me, had a problem with the assumptions abounding about state schooling.

Let's imagine a thread called 'when to go state?' which assumes a bit of state is a good thing.

Op asks, should I make sure he goes to state until 11 to make sure he is well rounded and sensitive and doesn't get a sense of entitlement at a young age, because after 11 he might be more susceptible to feelings of superiority, more at risk of becoming very materialistic and snobby... Or do I send him state at 16, to make sure that as a young adult he is fully integrated in the real world, gets rid of any arrogance before uni etc, and learns to work hard in different kinds of atmosphere.

Would the private school parents (or the 'anti state brigade' if I were to echo the defensive language) not wish to counter some of those implicit assumptions? Would they not want to argue that none of those things are intrinsic to private education?

Cos I reckon there's a pretty strong chance they would not be at all happy about those casual a priori assumptions, to be honest.

And whatelese is entitled to feel very aggrieved by what happened to her. In the same way that if someobne was bullied shitless in boarding school they're perfectly entitled to say they would walk over hot coals than send their own DC boarding.

The reality is that on these boards, as in life, we private school users are small in number. The main noise being made against state schooling comes from within the sector. From upset parents. From pissed off teachers. From univeristy lecturers. From employers.

But quite a few of us said we went state for many years and had bad experiences. We also said, that we have other children in state. We therefore advised that starting in state is a good thing and then see how it goes.

But some of you seemed to have conveniently missed it for the sake of making a point.

I had the reverse experience of many of you. I felt stressed every time I set out in the town that is home to my old Public School. None of the teachers I had were qualified. We managed to get the Maths teacher out but he got replaced by the rugby teacher who was equally as bad. The Biology teacher was fiddling with girls. Eventually, several years later and with a new head, they finally got rid of him. The chemistry teacher was new to teaching in his forties and when bright red when girls talked to him and couldn't look them in the eye. Made everyone uncomfortable as you couldn't ask questions. Yours all for £10000 as a day pupil in the late 80s. I flunked my A Levels and scraped into uni.

I became a teacher (after 2 degrees and a PGCE) in the state sector and my kids are going through the state sector. We will have enough money for them to go through Uni without debts and maybe a small deposit for a house.

My friend had a rotten time in the state sector and has sent her child to the local private school.

We discussed Year 7 experiences the other day. There are a lot more Asian children at the private school (possibly due to families pooling together money to send children there - her words). There are cool bitchy girls in both schools. These are not the ones that are hard working. Also the children that were accepted only just scrapped Level 4 as I think there weren't so many applying to the private school. The teachers at the private school (I spoke to one) are now finding it more challenging teaching these children that don't respond so well to their usual teaching style.

The private school does set very rigidly which would have benefitted my bright children. The comp they go to only sets in maths and languages from Year 8.

My children also have a thicker local accent now and her friend at private is speaking very rp! Very funny.

It is such a difficult choice. If there were no private schools and no choice and schools setted well then it would be a much fairer system.

Sorry above it should have read 'some' children only scraped Level 4. Can't cook and type at same time.

nit the vast majority of parents who use private school are not remotrely anti-state.

They just aren't usuing it.

They still have an interest in it of course and wish it to be the best it can be (mabny would after all much prefer to be usuing it).

That reverse cannot be said for you or the ther anti priavet brigade can it? You would wish to close them down, refuse the choice? You have no wish to see them be the best they can be, in truth?

You're simply nt comparing apples with apples.

But here's the thing. You may wish to jump into every thread abot private school and derail it, and you're free to do that, but where the real disaffection is coming from is on all those other threads started day in day out by state school parents. The posters at the end of their tether with poroblems they're experiencing. Why not pop along to those and tellthem how wrong they are?

IMVHO you're looking the wrong way.