If you can afford it, would you send your children to an independent school?

[Fiona2011231]

This is a hypothetical question, and I would greatly appreciate your insight.

My question is based on this assumption: In England, if you want your children to have a better chance in life (great success, joining the elites, etc), a good independent school is a requirement. Of course, few have enough money to afford it.

But suppose you have enough money, would you send your children to an independent school? Or would a grammar or a comprehensive school be good enough?

Thank you.

Talkinpeace

Dangerous list .... six degrees of separation reduces to 1?

I didn't go to school in the south-east either, btw.

Soul-you're right, only about 20% of is went to uni. But that was a while ago, imagine much higher proportion now. And yes, many/most are probably in semi-skilled jobs. Just not in contact with any of them especially as most left at 16.

...sorry

I am the only person in my huuuuge extended family who stayed at school past 16, including all the younger generation.

Most are in low paid work. Some are on benefits.

The reality remains that most state schools do not send swathes of kids to Oxbridge or into the professions that have the biggest influence on all our lives.

And while people pretend that this is not the case, nothing will ever change.

Being a SAHD, I don't have any friends so have no idea what anyone does ..... (lies through his gin soaked teeth)

Actually one of the reasons I cite to relatives of DP's who clearly think our use of state ed borders on child abuse is that I have a rather better degree from a posher (and arguably better) university than him, or any of his three brothers, all of whom were expensively educated. As an argument it's flawed but it does shut his aunt up

I'm not pretending anything. It's a comprehensive, which means that a substantial number of DD1's contemporaries will not get particularly glowing qualifications. I do, however, have good reason to expect that those who have the ability and the potential will do very well indeed.

Ah but mother I cannot abide that argument!

By that measure everyone in my school should have done as well as me. And somehow they failed!

When the reality is so so much more complex!

The flawed one? I said it's flawed. Or the one about the comp? Well. We'll see. I like it.

MI, aren't you the exception that proves the rule to a certain extent though? Of course the shiniest, most driven (and clever, obviously) will make it through whatever the school within reason. And of course there are some v good comps, but sadly most of them, in my experience, are mediocre and expect far less of the great mass in the middle. The very bottom and the very top will get the attention. I had a teacher who celebrated us passing our A-levels with great satisfaction despite half the class only scraping an E! She thought this was ok.

As I say: I'll wait to see how my daughters, at their sprawling scruffy comp with its high proportion of kids with EAL and FSM, do eventually. So far they seem to be fine.

It would be easy for me to be disdainful of private education and extoll the virtues of our excellent comp...

But the fact is that the catchment area is exclusively areas with nice houses, no estates. 3% FSM. Lots of kids get tutored, most parents help kids with homework etc etc.

It is almost as selective as some private schools, I'd say.

It is all reflected in house prices too.

In a roundabout way, we sort of pay to have our children educated with children of like minded parents.

It is not about state vs private. The real divide is between kids of parents who care about education, and kids of parents who don't.

I agree fiscal cliff

It can work the other way- we lived in rural area so posh that the comp wasn't used by most locals so it's not actually that good. This seems to happen much more in the country than in urban/suburban areas.

Salbertina. That is the case with the comp i went to not so much 30 years ago it was just crap then, but now. The school complain that they have a two pronged attack from private schools and the nearby selective area.
They have a relatively low number of local kids, they seem to bus kids in from
less advantaged areas despite a low Fsm of 7%. So i guess 65% A*-C Eng/Maths is not to bad then.

Interesting, hey? Wonder if this is a rural phenomenon? Plus of course the choice issue- often isn't one in the middle of the countryside!

I would.

Class size for reception is 30 in our local state, vs. 18 in local private school. The smaller the class, the more time spent on each child, I would think.

That can go too far the other way though, FFRD. There's a school near me with 12 in the year and they split into two groups of 6. I think 6 is too small. As a teacher I think to get a good class dynamic you need at least 14-15, and you also want a range of children for your child to make friends with.

But Fiscal - that assumes that its your like-minded wealthy parents that are the ones that care about education?

I'm an Oxbridge graduate but due to various mix of circumstances (divorce, ill health and redundancy - bingo!) we live in an estate area in a mainly w/c area I guess. It's not a bad area though. We certainly care about education, but I guess I'm being written off by the more M/C mothers I meet out and about as not caring about education simply because I'm not wealthy?

Fiscal

"The real divide is between kids of parents who care about education, and kids of parents who don't."

Good point. I imagine every MN poster here is the former not the latter. And what do we guess the ratio of one to the other is?

1 care for every 10 don't cares? Or 1 to every 100?

Yes it could northern but where I live, it does not. The numbers I used are actuals.

........ however we need to be careful how we deal with parents that care but don't have ability, time, etc to do anything to improve their kids education.

Northernshores, I did not say anywhere that you have to be wealthy to care about education. If I implied it, it must be because it is somewhat linked, but not essential.

It is more about the parents own education ( or sometimes lack thereof which makes them determined to do things differently) than their money. It transcends class, race, wealth, religion etc.

Also, personally I don't look up or down on people based on their financial situation.

I do however think that parents who care and put time and effort into their kids education ( whether through private ed, grammar, tutors, helping themselves, reading with their kids, or moving into catchment of a good school) are the biggest factor in determining a child's academic success.

In RL I always assumed the mayority of parents care, on MN education threads about 100%

Muswell hill. You are so right , despite refusing to move me from state schools until it was to late for me. Though oddly my dad wanted me to go to
"Millfield" at 18 despite only having 5Es and a D, it seems one of his mates was sending his 14 yr old DD ,I ended up at the FE college on a Btec First.

It was my families particularly my Dad, most of my (Mothers family are Graduates) who had a distinct lack of interest in education.

soul

I went to the sort of Comp that people wouldn't go out of their way to get their children into. I'm afraid that bog standard sums it up quite well. I eventually ended up in an FE college as the death of one of my parents disrupted my studying. I got decent 'A' levels and went to a good uni. Once you are at uni it's a fresh start.
But...
I am very academically inclined, I loved learning for learning's sake. I saw quite a few people slogging their way through uni because their parents thought it was a good idea or doing my subject (law) because it would lead to a 'good' job even though they hated it.