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.

Yes we can afford it.

No we didn't send them to a private school because our local comp schools are good and suited our kids.
So far the eldest ones are doing exactly what they want at top Uni's so no regrets. The younger ones are also doing well and turned down places at a grammar school 45 mins away to go to the local comp which is 5 minutes walk.

We love the fact that we have saved hundreds of thousands of pounds and our kids are still doing medicine etc.

However, we would have sent them to a private school if they needed it or if our local schools were not good. We have absolutely no desire to join 'the elites'. . .

Can afford it but chose not to . Goodish local state school did the job well and dd both ga

Both gained from rounded education on offer and mixing with a good range of people from different backgrounds . Dd just gone to red brick univ to study medicine - worked for her

soul2000 are you on some sort of crusade ?

not sure
but having seen the number of deleted messages on the locked thread, MNHQ had their work cut out stopping bored public school boys and their potty mouths posting

Not necessarily. Depends on the school and the child.
There are pros and cons, with my child (very bright, but easily led) I suppose I would if money were no object, I wouldn't stretch myself to send him though.

A woman at work overheard me talk about DC and how he was off school because half term starts early at private schools. I got the lecture about how they could afford it but don't out of principle.

The woman lives in a predominantly upper MC part of Kent where her 4 bed cost a million plus and a highly ranked state secondary is round the corner. God save us from people who buy their way into an expensive catchment area and then lecture others about how people like me shouldnt be allowed to buy a better education for their kids by going private.

We couldn't and wouldn't even if we could, because we are utter lefties and both come from countries where there isn't much private education. I know that isn't reasonable in the UK context but it's just how strongly we feel about it - however, we do have the cultural capital to give our DDs what they need.

I'd home educate if our local schools were dire, but they're not - DD1 is in the local comp which is very good at differentiating - she is in a group which is aiming at RG universities at least, getting lots of extension work but not being pushed into early GCSEs.

Yes, house prices need sorting out, too...

Talkinpeace, I bet your grandmother's hat that they weren't schoolboys posting !

Ecuador
it appears that they were - as they found the thread through an FB page linked to the school and named the pupil - sadly for him people have screenshots of the bragging which will have been emailed to the school already.

IMO your average state school would be very similar to the average private school if:

they removed the 15 lowest achievers in each class and replaced them with 3 to 5 high achieving children.

they removed most of the children with special needs, particularly those whose special needs include intellectual impairment and significant behavioural problems. Bright children with dyslexia, high functioning ASD or Aspergers could stay.

they spent an extra £1000 on enrichment activities for the children.

Other than that most private schools haven't got much to distinguish them from state schools. Most of their teachers are trained in the state sector and gain their experience there.

Primarily you're paying to educate your children separately from poor children who don't have any intellectual gifts which would make them bursary material, most children with a diagnosed special needs, and the children who generally slow down the rate of learning in a class by claiming more of the teacher's attention than a brighter and more able child would.

Those posters who say they could afford private but won't have presumably already bought their way into a catchment area for a good school, so their kids still get a good education due to parental wealth.

Not all adequate schools are in wealthy areas, nosleeptillbedtime. I suspect, however, that those posters are not living in areas where the state schools are awful.

nosleep
Nope, I live in a shitty area in the catchment of an utterly dire school but was lucky enough to get my kids into a decent school.
Others at the school live in council flats within the catchment (which is miles across)
There are pockets of deprivation all over - the Stanmore Estate in Winchester is Council houses and less than lovely (Peter White off the radio grew up there) but feeds into fantastic schools.
Please do not equate "good schools" with "wealthy areas" - they do not always tally (especially outside London)

But they often do talkin

I have over the years bought BTL flats, and the very best returns come from properties in catchments for good schools where so many simply cannot afford to live!

wordfactory
Is that in selective areas or non selective?
Just that round here the only school that has that effect is Thornden and the people moving out of Cantell catchment tend not to have a problem renting their own houses to University students!

No.
There is one school in this city which does have a sought after catchment - estate agents put it on listings etc, and it does seem to add a few quid. That said, it's one of eight or nine schools here, and not particularly far ahead of the others in terms of results - and when I went to look at its sixth form, I wasn't impressed at all.

It shouldn't ever be the case that catchments are all expensive or that families are priced out of schools, but obviously sometimes it happens that way, and I bemoan it. I don't think it's half the inevitability that MN would have you believe, though.

Absolutely,our nearest secondary schools are either in special measures or heading that way.It is bizarre because all the primaries that feed into these schools are classed as outstanding.I don't understand why things have gone so wrong with the secondaries here.

Both talkin.

But tbh my very best investments have been in non selective areas near the outstanding comps and faith schools. There's one where people will sell all their internal organs to get in and the catchment is tiny and eye bogglingly expensive. The properties are expensive (more than I woulkd usually wish to pay) but the captial appreciation is excellent, and there is a non-ending stream of tenants.

Where I live the best schools are in the most expensive areas. We live in a good area, but not in the top tier of costs. The utterly dire secondary school pulls house prices down. We can't afford to move to the areas with the best schools. And I do live outside London tally. Affluent families here do buy the best education, whether through private school or where they live.

Well maybe you could stop doing BTL in such areas, if you worry about exclusive catchments!

We all have to make a dime, I suppose.

Yes I would / will in the absence of outstanding state schools, which I will be unlikely to find / get them in to in central London.

It does concern me that by sending my children to independent schools they are likely going to be exposed to a relatively limited cross section of society which is not representative of this country as a whole. I think my children will miss out on certain social aspects as a result of this. I am not sure how to address this (though they are 2 and 7 weeks so have some time to think about it!).

I was state school educated but was very lucky to attend an outstanding primary and secondary and went on to Oxbridge where I met my husband who was at boarding school from age 7 and then went to Eton.

Despite the fact both my schools were amazing, I have been staggered over the years to learn of the chasm between state and independent in most cases.

"Please do not equate "good schools" with "wealthy areas" - they do not always tally"

When middle-class parents start to flock together like sheep at certain schools, results appear to miraculously improve.

This has happened at a local secondary which 2 years ago was labelled 'the best state school in the country' because of its OFSTED - outstanding in ALL areas.

Parents describe it as a 'great school' and 'it's the best school in the area' because it ranks very highly in the local league tables. The fact that its average GCSE grade for high achievers (who make up 70% of the student body) is lower than at a scruffy community school half a mile down the road seems to pass by the middle-class community who fight like wolves to get their children in there.

People think the school is good for 2 reasons: because it's high in the local league tables (because it's full of high achieving kids) and because it's full of middle-class kids.

Meanwhile there are other local schools which have a much lower staff turnover, much better value-added, and where kids are happy, settled and achieving. Local middle class parents reject these schools as 'bad' because they are low in the league tables (primarily because of their intake) because they want social selection above all else. Which is what parents with their children at private schools want too: an education away from the oiks.

"I don't understand why things have gone so wrong with the secondaries here."

Occasionally it's down to poor management.

Often it's because our system allowing educated and middle class people to access private education, grammar schools, faith schools, and selection by postcode has resulted in a hideous social polarisation in the secondary sector, whereby all the most disadvantaged, difficult to teach and underachieving children are clumped together in certain schools, making these schools difficult places to teach and to learn.

We have the worst sort of polarisation in our school system here, and everything that middle-class parents do to give their children an educational advantage over poorer children by clustering them with similar peers in socially and academically exclusive schools perpetuates this. It's incredibly damaging and unfair, and it saddens me that so many people support it.