Why is private education so taboo now?

[DoMyBest]

When I was younger I was privately educated as were most of my friends. Now we all have children and almost all of them have decided to send their children to state schools. Whilst for most of them it was a question of money, for others it really wasn't: they believe that every child should have the same educational opportunities and if parents like them start giving their kids exclusive treatment then the system won't work. Some of these parents chose local 'outstanding' state schools, but one couple with enough money to buy every private school in town admirably chose their worst local state school and work hard to improve it.

I listen to these stories with interest, sometimes admiration but mostly respect for their choices & views.

So it's with some alarm, now we have chosen a private school for our son, do discover the hatred this decision engenders. Private education has, it would seem, become taboo.

So here's my question: is it morally right for people to get angry with parents who privately educate their children?

[MarriedDadOneSonOneDaughter]

No sooner did I say it than people posted it.

"Those parents are seeing better outcomes from the school because it has an "entrance exam" not because it has better teaching. In fact, the "better teachers, better facilities" point is incorrect because the "value add" of most private schools is poor to average. They start with a high attaining cohort and mostly get that cohort to where you'd expect them to get. Why would you bother paying for that?"

[TheOriginalSteamingNit]

No sooner had loads of people said it loads of times on loads of similar threads than you posted it more like, marrieddad.

tiny bit patronising!

[RufusTheReindeer]

There are not better teachers in the private sector

There are however, in a lot of private schools, better facilities

[blitzen724]

I have encountered some people with the attitude that private education is wrong or unnecessary, but very rarely. My circle of friends is a real mix, and those with children at state schools have more holidays, newer cars and bigger houses than I do. They don't look down on me for living in a shed any more than I look down on them for sending their children to a school that doesn't have a boat house.

Most people don't give two hoots, although that's not the impression some newspapers like to give...

[gardenfeature]

There was another recent thread on here. The poster said that the "average" DS had done fairly well at private school but not necessarily better than they would have done elsewhere BUT the contacts they had made had been "invaluable" in terms of future career prospects etc.

Reminds me of an article in a newspaper I read where a student's work experience had been "shadowing the Indian Ambassador to the UN". You don't find that at the local secondary.

[MarriedDadOneSonOneDaughter]

TheOriginalSteamingNit massively patronising I think . The point still stands ignored. Perhaps I'm just wrong (highly unlikely as I never am).

[Taz1212]

I have no idea whether the teachers at DS' school are better than the teachers at DD's school but the overall academic experience is better at DS' school. He has access to better facilities (e.g. using the senior school science labs whilst still in the junior school), the school can deviate from the Curriculum for mediocrity Excellence as they see fit and the range of courses on offer is many times that offered at the local school.

[TruffleOil]

I don't think the teaching is better. I think there's quite a lot of good teachers who are philosophically opposed to private schools.

[HanSolo]

I think one thing we should consider before judging others is that in the main, the majority of people in England do not actually have a choice when it comes to schools. Most have to take what they're given (and this year, there's going to be quite a few that don't even get given a place!) and I think that breeds resentment of anyone that does have a choice, be it a choice to send their children to fee-paying schools, to their local outstanding state school, or to their really lovely, nurturing village school.

This is not the reality for many thousands of parents, sadly, they just have to accept a place in a school that is not what they hoped for.

[Martorana]

"This is not the reality for many thousands of parents, sadly, they just have to accept a place in a school that is not what they hoped for."

But will, in the vast majority of cases be absolutely fine.

I agree, though. My hackles rise when people talk about "choosing to go private" or even worse "having no choice but to go private". And don't start me on "making sacrifices to go private"......

[DoMyBest]

So would I be right un summarising the conclusion to my question (and this debate) as being that parents with children in state schools have the moral right to voice their opinion against private schools to those parents who privately educate, that whilst in theory they shouldn't go so far as get angry about it, in practice - given the inequality & lack of choice for most parents - it's acceptable that they do?

[happygardening]

Yes parents with children at state schools do feel they have the moral right to critisise our decisions, to endlessly tell us that their state school is as good as our chosen independent, offering at the vey least the same facilities and opportunities and often better results and always better more imaginative teaching with definitely no spoon feeing. If on the on the other hand parents who chose to send their children to independent schools comment on state schools in any kind of negative way we are immediately jumped upon and told that we are only doing it because we are after the non existent old boy network other nice children for our precious children to mix with, our belief that these schools can get fantastic results from are average children, preferably Oxbridge entry, and that our children will be completely clueless about the real world.

[Martorana]

"So would I be right un summarising the conclusion to my question (and this debate) as being that parents with children in state schools have the moral right to voice their opinion against private schools to those parents who privately educate, that whilst in theory they shouldn't go so far as get angry about it, in practice - given the inequality & lack of choice for most parents - it's acceptable that they do?"

No, it's not acceptable to be angry with somebody simply because they choose to privately educate. However, some people for whatever reason feel the need to justify that choice by denigrating state schools, pupils, teachers and parents. So "My children are privately educated because that is what I want to do" is absolutely fine, and anyone who got angry with that would be completely out of order. However (and these are genuine example from Mumsnet) "I privately educate because I've seen what goes on is state schools " and "I wouldn't throw him to the wolves" and "I don't want him educated with the dregs"- well, I think it would be justified to be a bit angry with those statements, don't you?

I don't know why you have had an angry response, OP- but I have to say that your disinclination to say on here why you chose private school for yours does make me think that just possibly you might have expressed reasons that might have upset people a bit?

[Minifingers]

Inequality and the undermining of the meritocracy - which is perpetuated by the private school system - makes me angry.

I try to keep these feelings out of my interactions with friends and acquaintances who have their children in private schools as it makes life socially awkward.

[Martorana]

"to endlessly tell us that their state school is as good as our chosen independent, offering at the vey least the same facilities and opportunities and often better results"

Who on earth would say that a state school could offer the same facilities as a fee paying school? That would just be stupid.
There are plenty of state schools that get better results than plenty of privates, though.

[Minifingers]

Martor - being completely honest though, people only generally fork out huge sums for private education because they think the state sector ISN'T GOOD ENOUGH for their child.

So either they think it's not good enough for your child either (in which case they observe your family with a mixture of pity and superiority) or they think it is good enough for your child, but not theirs, usually because they see their child as more sensitive/academic/talented and therefore more needful of a socially exclusive provision which doesn't accommodate ordinary kids. though the bursary system which is there for decidedly not ordinary extremely clever and hard working poor kids gets waved around as proof of the social inclusiveness of private schools by parents who feel a bit guilty about it

[Martorana]

I know, minifingers. But I know people who manage to go private without actually saying that. It's not an easy thing to do, though. Which is perhaps why sometimes private school parents don't understand why people get cross. And why it's sometimes very hard not to be slightly pleased when the money turns out not to be as well spent as they thought. I'm not talking about schools like HG's son's- nobody could deny that is money well spent. But when my neighbour's DIL had to double check with us where ds went to school after an outing "because he has such lovely manners and is so good at conversation" it was very hard to suppress a grin. It's the any private school is automatically better than any state school attitude that really riles me.

[DoMyBest]

Thanks for all these views, really interesting - especially as even those of you with the strongest views against private education seem to agree that its wrong to get angry with parents who can/do go private.
I'm quite shocked by some of the incensitive quotes from the 'privates' against the 'states': Martorana I've never said stuff like that and I never will (if I don't want to go into why we're going 'private' it's because I don't want to detract from this debate, on whether it's morally acceptable to get angry with parents who do/can go private, because I think it's an important issue which hasn't been addressed).
But it goes both ways: attacking independent schools, or parents with means to go private but choose to try to improve their local state school, doesn't help anyone.
I hope that this discussion will, at the very least, make all parents - no matter their means, views or circumstances - think twice before criticising others. I know I will.

[RufusTheReindeer]

happy

I am more than happy to believe that people have a go at parents who send their children to private school and morally criticise as you state

I also believe that people have a go at parents who send their children to state school

You see it all the time on these types of threads and it seems to be pretty much even

I have friends whose children go to private school and I would consider it for mine but we can't comfortably send all three.

I think that the facilities are better in most private schools, I don't believe that the teaching is any better but I think that smaller class sizes, parents who want their children to do well and picking and choosing who goes to your school makes a huge difference.

[Martorana]

"But it goes both ways: attacking independent schools, or parents with means to go private but choose to try to improve their local state school, doesn't help anyone."

Attacking the idea of independent schools is a different thing. I am politically opposed to private education, and will argue against their existence until the cows come home. If private school parents choose to take that as a personal attack that is, I am afraid, their problem. I am perfectly prepared to accept that private schools benefit individuals but they are bad for society as a whole. And the more people speak out against them the better. So while at an individual level it should be live and let live, in a wider political context it can't really be. IMHO.

[TheOriginalSteamingNit]

No married, not ignored, it's just been said a lot of times before so you didn't get a pat on the back for it!

I don't think it's wrong to get angry with parents who go private, if you disagree with it. I think it's wrong to be horrible, but not to feel frustrated and angry at a decision you feel is morally wrong. The personal is political! It would be rude to actually, I dunno, start ranting at someone for doing it, but not wrong to feel angry.

[Martorana]

Any selective school does better than any non selective one. Whether it selects on academics, wealth or faith. Or on any madey-uppy criterion you care to come up with.

[Minifingers]

"I am perfectly prepared to accept that private schools benefit individuals but they are bad for society as a whole. And the more people speak out against them the better. So while at an individual level it should be live and let live, in a wider political context it can't really be. IMHO."

Ay ay to this ^

[Martorana]

"
Not if you are measuring value added.

Value added is very important. A selective school getting 95% brilliant results is probably doing no more than it should given its very easy intake. It might even possibly be failing 5% of its pupils if the selection procedures really did accurately assess their original ability."

Most people ignore value add. That's why a lot of excellent schools are dismissed. Generally people look at end results only. 99% A-C = good, 60% A-C mediocre, 40% A*-C bad. Few people look into it any more deeply than that.