We haven't had a state vs private debate for a while! What did you think of the Fiona Millar programme on schools?

[WideWebWitch]

Well?

I haven't seen the programme and don't know anything about it, and not had chance to read all of this yet. But in response o Dinosaur's question: What is it that those who send their children to private schools think that they will get from those schools that they won't get in the state sector?

Well DD is only 23 months but has had her name down for a private girl's school for the past year to start in September 2006. We did a lot of research into schools last year around her first birthday - state and private, and we visited schools too. We made a decision based on lots of research and what we felt was best for us and our daughter at the time.

Our local state primary school is not an option for us. Whilst it is reasonably good and what it does, what is does well is not suitable for our circumstances. Nearly 2/3 of pupils there do not have english as a first language, therefore the priority for the teacher is to get those basic english skills learnt. By the time DD starts school I am hoping that she will already have developed this - she is already well on her way. The other local state primaries are highly over sibscribed and the chances of getting in whilst being out of the catchment are so remote. So, private was our best option FOR US.

But there are other reasons too:

State schools start and finsih at given times. As a teacher I have to be at work at those times too, so how would I get Dd there and pick her up? Childminder? After school care? All of which needs paying for. DD's planned school includes this care int he fees so it is something I now do not have to think about.

DD's school offeres extra enrichment subjects beyond the National Curriculum, like French, Ballet and Music. If DD wanted to take up these at a state school (maybe not French) I would have to take her to lessons in eveingings or more likely weekends, and again at extra cost. DD' school includes these in their fees - another thing I don't have to worry about. And it isn't cutting into our family weekend time either.

I guess another reason is that we can afford it too. Dh's job allows this to be a choice for us.

State school would have been an option if a suoitable school had been available. It wasn't. DD will follow this pre school with a girl's private secondary school. I think that it would be difficult for her to be expected to go to a state school, without her class mates, after prep school. So we made a long term decision for full privte education for as long as she wannts it and we can afford it. Hopefully till she finished either GCSEs or A-Levels.

Also, I am a teacher in a state secondary school. It is not a good school. It is failing. I would not want DD to go to such a school where classes are disrupted daily, where physical and verbal aggression is the norm, where pupils don't seem to wamnt to learn, where parental support is so limited, where it is deemed okay to abuse teachers, etc. I know not all state schools are llike this - my last teaching job was in a super state school (I would have considered it as an option if local) but too many now are geting like my current school and it isn't a pleasant environent to be in BUT I do teacher in a state school and will continue to do so (not this current one granted but to so extent I will teach) and I think state schools need help and support. But it won't happen quick and it won't happen just because a few people send their child there through principles. Teaching and education is in way too big a crisis for simple solutions like that - the Government need to be addressing that not just parents.

Well, haven't read all this but read the woodhead article linked a few posts down. Must say I think i agree with the fiona miller line he gives - if we all sent our kids to the local schools they would get better. Sending your kids to a private school because 2/3 of the kids at the local one have English as a foreign language sucks imho. Its not just a choice you are making for your child, its a choice you are making for all those children too. You are deciding that they shouldn't have the advantage of more children who speak English as a first language in their class, to learn from and with, for example. Your decision impacts on their future at least as much as on your own childs. So i don't think it should just be our choice - because our choices have consequences for a much wider society.

Go miranda. Like it.

I guess we all have to make the choice that suits us best Miranda. That's what we did. I had to make a decision that was best for MY daughter, not what was best for some one else's child. Yes, another child may benefit but will mine?

Besides I already help make a difference. I teach children at a state school. I already give a hell of a lot of my tme and effort to state schools. I have been physically and verbally abused whilst doing it. Sorry, I am just not prepared to risk that with my daughter (and that is a completely different issue to language I know and completely not related).

By the way, i went to a primary school with a vast no of immigrant children, in outer london suburbs. We celebrated every festival under the sun, and interesting parents were always coming in to tell us about the snakes they kept in the garden shed in their suburban semi's garden, or to help us cook exotic Indian sweetmeats or whatever. Loved it. I got moved up a year for my age, presumably partly because standards were relatively low - but fine, they dealt with it. Didn't do me any harm (got Cambridge degree and Durham phd). I AM in favour of streaming at secondary level - i went to a grammar (we'd moved to lincolnshire by then), dh went to a pretty typical london comp with streaming - we met at Cambridge so must have worked.

Please let's not make this a slagging match AGAIN because people may biot agree with each other. We all have to make our own decisions. I gave my reasons. I don't have a dig at anyone for their choices.

The school DD is going to already has a large number of children with different religions, cultures and backgrounds. We also have these big diferences (and similarities) within my own family. She will not be brought up oblivious to such things.

message withdrawn

Exactly by setiments twiglett.

Not trying to make it a slanging match hb!
I think we can probably seperate what individuals have actually done in particular circs, and not comment on that judgementally, whilst still debating with all due seriousness the issues at stake?

With that in mind, and NOT making an attack on you, i would like to take issue with the doing right for our children and not by others idea. I can totally understand the reasoning and emotion behind this, but is it how we want our society to be structured? I mean, we vote to pay taxes so that the least advantaged members of our societies have a safety net in terms of health system, education, dole if necessary etc. This is because it is generally agreed that we should all sacrifice a bit of our personal gain for the common good. Shouldn't the same apply to our children? Wouldn't it be a good thing for us to have to take into account the impact of our actions on others? The logical conclusion of 'I have to make the best decision for MY daughter' is 'I'm all right jack, the rest of you losers can look out for yourselves'. (Debating point, not personal attack).

And how is it fair for those of us/you who can afford the choice to have it, and those who can't not to have it?

i agree, twiglett. we know a lot of people who say "i did ok" or "our local schools are good" - invariably from affluent suburbs or well to do semi rural locations who have literally no idea what secondary schools near where we live are like. if all state secondaries were like suedonim's there wouldn't be a problem.

Miranda2-not arguing but really how would it help for more english speaking children to go to school such as hmb described, if the makeup of the catchement area is such that 2/3 of pupils do not speak english, surely things cant change in that way.
What about positive action-seperate extensive english tuition for these children before trying to integrate them into the national curriculum. Keeping children down a year if their language skills are not up to following the class. Smaller class sizes, more teaching assistants, more disciplinary backing for teachers, more money. If all the children currently in private education went into the state system surely class sizes would go up and money for pupil would go down?

message withdrawn

Yes, but twiglett, if we all just say 'oh its rubbish, might as well join in and grab what we can for ourselves' its all going to get worse isn't it? Maybe I'm just hopelessly idealistic, I don't know, but I'd rather try to make a difference. Look at the Jubilee 2000 campaign - people do still care, lots of them, and can make a real impact. Just because we get shown a shitty, low-budget don't-care society on TV doesn't mean we have to live down to it.

Only just come back to this. I don't know why comprehensive failed me, but it did. It also failed a lot of my peers. Ours was an experimental one in the first wave of comprehensivisation (is that a word?). They effectively combined 5 different schools (with 5 different ways of doing things) in the buildings that had housed 2.

We were not streamed until the 4th year (Y10). By that time, those of us who weren't self confident had learned that to avoid the bullies who had come from the girls secondary modern (and there were a good number of them) we had to slack off and not be seen to be creepy. I went to school with a minor celeb who has written at great length about how some of these girls affected her. Some kids can cope with it. Some bow under peer pressure (DD does- DS1 doesn't).

I can also remember the boredom of lessons where we waited while the slowest caught up. It is the best way to have kids start to mess about. We weren't encouraged to work together- another failing of the school.

I was predicted 9 good O level grades at 11. I came out with just 5, having failed 2 (including maths) and dropped 2. As a child, it was not a pleasant experience. As a mother, I wouldn't want my child to go through it.

Our school was the best one in the area as a grammar. Now its results are 15% for 5 A-C grades, as a supposedly wide-ability school. My DS1's High School (selective system- brightest kids at grammar & high level of SEN) gets at least 22%. Something's gone wrong somewhere.

I would not want my child at a school where most of the other kids didn't speak English, unless we were the foreigners in another country. Sorry if that isn't pc but that is my opinion. You all will probably disagree & that is your prerogative.

cwoor twiglet tthat was impressive kinda like the antithesis of the martin luther king speech!

Tallulah- Hope you don't mind me asking this - but do you feel there are any issues for your ds1 about being the only one of your kids not to go to the grammar? I must say that part of the reason I'm quite strongly against selective schooling is that I think some kids (and their parents?) must feel utterly crushed at not passing the 11+. I'm already having a few twinges of worry about keeping both of my twin sons feeling good about themselves in the context of quite different areas of strengths and weaknesses so far at school. (It's a bit exacerbated as they're both in the same class and keep close tabs on each other's progress.) I think they and I would find it very hard indeed if I put them both in for a selective exam and only one passed. I do think my feelings are intensified because they're twins but I'd be interested in hearing more on this from you. (I do understand that this is a bit of a personal question so please don't answer if you don't want to.)

Btw hulababy, my kids are an ethnic minority in their school (they're white British) and it seems a very positive thing for them. For example, they are genuinely fascinated by different countries and ask lots of questions about that because kids in their class talk about their countries of origin a lot. At four they've got first hand info about different languages and cultures in the form of getting to know the other kids in the school. Also, everyone looks out for them because they stand out as slightly different and they enjoy the attention, I think. Other aspects of their education are progressing just fine too. It's a great school. They're lucky to be there.

Custardo.

sorry- just realised it was twiglett who was worried about kids being in an ethnic minority within a school, not hulababy.

I don't buy the argument that it is "middle classes deserting the state sector" that is the cause of the crap state of our state schools. There are, broadly, two types of people who buy private education. The type who have always bought private education and who always will. They generally contribute the most handsomely, through taxes, to the cost of running the state school sector and provide no drain on their resources. We can put them to one side because they are not going to change, and so can be seen as a net benefit to the state school sector in a way. Or at least neutral.
The other type are people who buy private school education because they feel that they have no choice. They would be perfectly happy (in fact probably more comfortable, politically and morally) with a state education, but the state education has failed them. There are a lot of people on this thread like that. Of COURSE all of these people would be happier ensuring a good education for free for their children, instead of having to pay a fortune for it.

Lets look at what the problems with state education are. Colossal underfunding by successive governments resulting in: enormous class sizes (inability to give individual attention, discipline problems); decaying fabric of buildings and assets (overcrowding/out of date facilities/playing fields sold to property developers); staff shortages and a serious staff morale problem (overworked and underpaid, and fed up with a large part of their jobs involving crowd control); anyone want to continue this list? we could all go on.
How is ANY of this meant to be resolved by the addition into the pupil roll of a load of middle-class children? (Apart from the fact that the immediate effect would be a vast increase in pupil numbers into a system which is bursting at the seams in any event). Because a lot of middle-class mothers will hector government more effectively? Why the hell does the government need hectoring? Because a lot of middle-class mothers will organise cake-sales and fund-raising events to keep the school afloat? How is this different from paying from education? Far better to be honest about it and send each parent an invoice, means tested if necessary, and admit that the UK can't provide state funded education for its children. Because the mere presence of middle-class children will act as an inspiration to lift the other children/parents out of their slough of despond? Patronising bullshit, and rather Victorian really.

And for anyone who thinks that we should all be willing to "sacrifice" our children's education for this "ideal" (hmmm, more overcrowding, no more money I think it can be summed up as).... well I'll give you one guess as to what I think of that!

What we need is someone who knows his/her arse from his/her elbow sorting the system out from the bottom up. Cutting out waste (most of the bureaucracy and targets for start), getting rid of crap teachers and headteachers (yes, there ARE some, definitely in the minority but we've all suffered under them!), seriously increasing teachers pay to bring it even vaguely near where it should be, etc etc. I'd suggest David James but he seems to be sorting out whitehall at the moment. Wish he'd do schools first.

I don't think it's so clear cut that your category 1 are no drain to the system, pph. It's arguable that their persistant and unquestioning pattern of educational segregation is perpetuating our unequal, polarised society in a quite fundamental and unpalatable way.

persistEnt, I meant.

Scummymummy - I have to respond to your comment re: 11+ with twins. I am a twin and I was top of our school year every single year and my twin sister was in the bottom 10 or so. The head suggested I sat for King Edwards as he thought I would pass and would benefit from such a school. "Okay" said my parents to the head. "If you pass the KE exam, you can't go" said my parents to me "it won't be fair on your sister". "Boll to my sister" thought I "I'd really like to go". Anyway to cut a long story short my mum always maintained she never knew if I'd passed and I went to the local comp. My daughter has just sat (and failed by 6 points) the KE exam and I still have a yearning to know whether I passed. Please don't just feel sorry for the one who might not pass, feel sorry for the one who might pass and won't get the chance to go to the appropriate school.

By way of a general comment - a school (private or state) can only be classed as good if it suits the child. Many of our secondary schools have "specialist" status, ie. sports college, IT college etc. What in the heck is the point of this if you don't have a choice which one you go to. My catchment secondary is a sports college and my daughter is no sportswoman so I applied for a school (usually very oversubscribed) and she got in!! However, the crap I'm getting from friends at primary school because of it is unbelievable. I want what's best for my children because I know them and I do not wish for them to go to a school which cannot cater for their needs. If we had been given our catchment school, my daughter would have gone to private! There I've said it.

Jampot, there was a discussion about this not that long ago, there is no point. The only real benefit is that the school can get an injection of cash if they become a specialist school.

I realise that everyone makes their own decision on this one, and I know that discussions have got heated in the past. I agree with what hulababy had said, and for the same reasons. And before anyone has a go at me for deserting the state sector I also teach in it. I spend all my workinghours trying to imorven the education of children in the state sector.....and quite a few of my none working ones as well. I don't feel that I have to sacrifice my kids education, I'm doing my bit for the education of the next generation, thanks. And Hulababy is too. And yes I get paid, and yes it is my choice, and yes I love my job and I could earn a lot more money elsewhere.