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.

Oh yes - educate your children alongside the children of Russian oligarchs and Indian plutocrats. That'll teach them wonderful values of hard work, ruthlessness, holding your money in offshore havens, tax avoidance, crime and corruption. Although maybe the school will get through to the kids and help wash that stain off the next generation (whilst accepting the money earned that way to pay for the school fees...).

Eyeofnewt I can only speak for myself I have never told my DS he's special or better in any way. I have told him he's lucky to have such a unique opportunity and that there others who are equally as bright or brighter than he is who wont have this opportunity but not special or better. I don't personally believe that being exceptionally clever makes you a better person but I do believe that the exceptionally clever need to be in an environment where their needs can be met. Just as I believe those who are physically and mentally disabled need to have their needs met. IME inclusion means that those on the extreme either end of the spectrums needs are not properly met this applies to both the state sector and the independent sector.
My DS is dyslexic by the way.

rabbit I avoid judging the background of the parent at my DS's school just as I avoided (as I hope you do) judging the backgrounds of the parents when my DS was at state school.
Over the years I met some pretty ghastly parents in both sectors and from all different backgrounds and unsurprisingly they often have pretty unpleasant off spring but the vast majority of children I've met from the children of Russian oligarchs and billionaires to the children of local travellers and petty thieves have all been in general decent and polite.

I don't believe you can tell whether someone is genuinely decent on the basis of whether they are polite to you when you talk to them and have good social skills, tbh. There is a difference between genuine decency and understanding how to behave in a public place. People have been happily married to murderers, child abusers, philanderers and embezzlers without realising it. Neighbours have lived next door to all sorts of unpleasant people and thought they were nice, quiet types.

I don't judge children by their parents' backgrounds. If I knew someone's parent were the equivalent of Al Capone, however, I would on the basis of that knowledge, judge the parent. And clearly you do judge parents, niddleclassonbursary, if you have met some "pretty ghastly parents."

There are awful people in all educational sectors and nice ones too. I think some state school parents don't really know what sort of people send children to private schools. The vast bulk tend to be people who aren't millionaires but in fairly well paid jobs 0 the £60k, £20k earning couple, the GP and the teacher etc etc... The elite billionaire types are few and far between as are the aristocracy.

Someone mentioned dyslexia. There are private schools which cater very well for dyslexics. One of my older children is slightly dyslexic and her (fairly academic day school in the private sector) was supportive and she did well (she has graduated now).

I agree there is a lot of ignorance about what kind of people use private education. The newest, blingiest cars and flashiest holidays are without doubt at my dc3's state primary rather than at my older children's private school.

Of course there are awful people and nice people in all educational sectors. I know what sort of people send children to private schools, given that my parents worked in the medical profession and a fair proportion of their peers sent their children to private and public schools; and my dh went to public school; and I went to Oxford. I could hardly avoid having friends whose children are privately educated, really. It's because I know a bit about it that I don't think it advisable to wax lyrical about the private sector, which also has its fair share of issues, thank you very much. That doesn't mean I think the state sector is fantastic, wonderful and blameless, just that I don't think the private sector is something to be held up as shining beacon of virtue.

MuswellHillDad that was a v interesting quote, thank you.

And on the subject of ignorance - I think there is plenty on both sides. I know private school parents who genuinely haven't a clue as to the reality of the kids and families at the local state schools, and vice versa.

Thanks to the mix of my background and my choices, I am now less ignorant. And very keen on promoting community initiatives (eg choir) that mix adults with kids in each sector up, thus further reducing said ignorance. It makes a huge difference, when people start talking.

Well I am not ignorant as my children went to state schools early on and still do clubs with lots of kids from state school. There are lots of lovely kids and families, and they are bright and funny. I still wouldn't choose the state secondary for my dcs though.

Rabbit I have found some parents to be ghastly although I try to be slow to make these judgements but you might be disappointed to know that this is not confined to Russian oligarchs and billionaires or indeed convicts. In fact admittedly only in my experience the most ghastly parents and their children have come from the very affluent middle classes rather than oligarchs and criminals.
You are right we cannot truly know somebody by their social skills but I don't accept that even if you were the DS of Al Capone we have any right to assume that you're going to be a thoroughly bad lot and I am happy to give anyone the benefit of the doubt and assume that those who appears polite and decent our exactly that. Also if I was to cast such unkind aspersions on state educated children many on here would be justified it taking extreme offence.
We need to accept that our DC's as teenagers and even younger have a right to choose their own friends they will at times chose and perhaps even be influenced by those we would not choose in the ideal world but I personally hope that our family standards and beliefs of decency prevail in the end.
My DS full boards I barely know the names of the parents I see when I pick him up let alone their occupations frankly I'm not interested. I'm not naive and am aware that there probably are a small amount of parents who acquired their money in nefarious ways (although we have hardly any Russians) exploit other but let's not forget one mans nefarious is another mans honest and that plenty of the very affluent middle classes are employees of some of our investment banks who've not exactly covered themselves in glory recently.

I am repeating myself, but I think the thread is too, so I'm not bothered.

Strong objectors to independent schools often propose the abolishing of those schools. My prediction is that rather than achieving, any "social mobility utopia/improvement", nothing would change. All the children would continue to absorb and take on the nature of their parents. The fact that some other kids parents are Oligarchs or live on benefits won't make a jot of difference.

On top of that the academic performance of the majority of classes would remain the same (completely unaffected by the introduction of, on average, 1 kids from a private school). It could be argued that the kid that did pass an 11+ may or may not get as much appropriate attention in a comp, but who cares (right?).

I think it's up to those objectors to private schools, selective schools and grammar schools to show how society would be better off as a whole without them. I think the only people who would be better off are the wealthy parents who would save £250k+ on fees or could save similar on buying a house (as high value catchment areas would presumably disappear too).

Perhaps the objectors are secretly in the pay of Russian oligarchs hoping to get out of paying school fees .......

I've never believed that abolishing independent schools is a workable proposition and the anti independent education mob are deluding themselves if they think that all these children are just going to be transfer into the state sector and that their parents are all going to become staunch members of school PTA's and campaign tirelessly for improved academic standards and more extra curricular activities. These parents will simply find viable alternatives elsewhere.

I don't think high catchment value areas would disappear at all. I think they'd be rather worse. If independent schools were abolished tomorrow there's still no way I'd be sending my children to our catchment high school. We are in a very tiny tiny minority of parents who go private in this catchment so there would be maybe another 1-2 kids max per year group. That's not going to make any sort of difference to the education provided by the school (and the required numbers needed to increase the number of course offering has been documented by the Council).

My one requirement is that my children receive an education equivalent to the one (State) education that I received. If independent schools were abolished we'd be moving to Linlithgow and I suspect most of the other West Lothian private parents would be as well- what would only be a couple of additional kids for one school would be a significant number when spread across the region and prices in Linlithgow would be even higher than they already are.

I want to bring this piece in the Manchester Evening News, to your attention of an incident that took place last Wednesday/Thursday at Hyde community College in Tameside.

School Children tried to hide behind each other after a fellow pupil went around the playground firing a BB gun. One 12 year old girl was shot in the leg after she says the boy walked around the school firing the weapon over two days. Jamie Leigh parker was left with an injury to her right leg after being hit with a pellet. Teachers failed to find the weapon and it is believed
he returned the next day shooting at pupils at break and lunchtime.

Jamie Leigh Parkers Grandad said "some people may say its only a BB gun its not serious but what if Jamie Leigh had been shot in the eye" and how can a boy come in to school with a firearm.

The playing down of the seriousness of the incident is not surprising, when you consider the school is less than two miles away from where Dale Cregan assassinated two women police officers.

Its ok for the mostly University educated middle class people to advocate
comprehensive education in their nice middle class environments, but for many pupils in less salubrious areas these, incidents could happen at any time. This incident shows why bright kids need to be separated from those types of pupils that are more prevalent in urban areas like Hyde.

The boy who did that might be very bright - intelligence doesn't stop you being anti-social.

Why was this allowed to continue for 2 days?

soul2000, awful story but what on earth relevance does your reference to "bright kids" have to a safety issue?

And can you please stop insisting that the only reason anyone middle-class and university educated might like comps is that their only experience is of middle-class comps?

Bright kids can't learn in these types of schools for obvious reasons , they are brought down to the average or below average of the school in this case
50% A-C 27.4% FSM . God knows what goes on everyday in the classroom there. If this incident had happened to a child to a parent on this site,Every single parent would demanding the Head resign, and that the local authority
move their child to a new school. Sadly all the schools in that area are just as bad even worse. They might look alright with 50% A-C but in reality they are places with serious behaviour problems. Chazs I bet you the child who shot the gun was not Oxbridge potential or even capable of 1 C. The kid is liable to be related to the "scum" that have made Tameside a dangerous place to live and operate a business, as i found out to my own families cost.

But soul average and below average kids can't learn in these environments either. We know that not having maths and English GCSE has a massive impact on your ability to get any kind of job let alone go to university. No child should be in this situation, all children should receive a free high quality education regardless of intelligence background race.

hear hear happygardening
Why should the state only throw funds at bright kids?
Rich people throw money at average kids to get them a good education.
Why should poor average kids not get treated properly?

In fact in this day and age of austerity and we're told difficult choices have to be made I believe more should be done for the average/below average child to get them up to an acceptable standard so that they stand a chance of getting any job, research shows that if your parents work then yoor child is less likely to grow up and be dependent on the state we must take the long view. Independent schools prove time and time again that these children can achieve beyond their perceived academic ability.
Sadly bursaries etc in less selective independent schools are aimed at the bright I actually believe they should be for the struggling less academic child who might achieve more in the independent sector.

Talkinpeace

"Why should the state only throw funds at bright kids?"

Funnily enough, I was talking with the PTA at our state primary about finding ways of helping G&T kids and the clear answer was that there would be no money for that at all - it all goes to the low end and SEN services.

For what it's worth, half the school seems to trot off to the local Explore Learning centre. My idea was to get the school to provide the same service on-site. I'm sure they would make money off those that can pay and then be able to offer it to those that couldn't. Obviously, in my school it's just not going to happen as its a complex and risk laden project and if you already have an "Outstanding" rating, why take any risks?

soul2000, who on earth learns well in a state of fear?

I grew up in a similar area to Tameside and I know crime has been getting worse and worse. The police where I grew up ignored the hard-core troublemakers for years and drugs have now taken hold very deeply. I went to a comprehensive and although the education wasn't great it wasn't unsafe at that point (the eighties, smackheads were just appearing but gun crime was unheard of.)

I do wish there was selective education so we could get the best out of pupils with academic potential from all backgrounds. But the crime issue for all citizens needs to be separated out from that argument.

MuswellHillDad there was no money for the genuinely gifted and talented child in 2005 when we were advised by the school to put our very able to DS into independent ed! There was also no money in 2010 when again we considered state ed and were given the same advise (different state school) so God knows what the situation is now when there is no money for any one. But I still think those who are average/below average should be the priority we have to get all up to a basic minimum standard.