Why do some parents think private school at primary is a waste of money.... but are secretly saving for secondary?

[Tallandgracefulmum]

AIBU as my little one is starting prep school in Sept. I was asked by a friend at DD's nursery my plans, said private all the way and was told I would be wasting my money and should save it for secondary when it matters.

I hate this ..most parents I know would send kids private all the way through but cannot afford it so are saving for secondary. But to be honets if your not used to paying shed loads monthly for schooling, you will not suddently 7 years later ( and higher fees) start doing it for secondary.

What some people don't seem to get is that some parents value educational experience over material possessions or fancy homes. This friend in question said she will use the money she saves to provide education experiences for her children and give them a lump sum for uni.

My thoughts are she just can't afford it and wants to make me feel bad for spending my hard earned money.

How many parents actually compare a range of private school fees, then calculate how much it would cost to send one child then save the relevant monthly amount ready to give each off spring at 18? Doesn't happen. What's wrong in providing the best educational experience you can afford for your kids without others constantly telling me I am wasting my money.

FWIW I can understand private school bashers who hate all forms of private schooling, but not those who bash primary but would send kids to secondary in a heartbeat!

When my dd was unhappy at school (friendship issues) it was incredibly important for her to have extra-curricular activities with a completely different group of children, some of whom are now very close friends. I'd be a bit concerned about my children having too closed a group, and I do think this can be an issue at boarding school (I'm not against theme though, although my personal experience at a top public boarding school was mixed to say the least).

Many ordinary community primary schools do not have great facilities or a range of extra-curricular things going on. But then that's true for quite a few private preps to. In both cases parents may well top up with community based offerings. To be honest I'm not really sure that to matters terribly much for the average child. Many children seem to have far too many activities going on and might be better off having more down time in their lives.

saintly the good thing for me about activities being offered in school is that for my DS they are not available within any kind of sensible distance. You may have the time motivation and energy to drive 210 miles a week 50 weeks of the year and sit for an 21/2 hours in a cold gym watching a non spectator sport but I personally don't. The friends my DS has made through playing competing and practicing his sport at school (all are older than him and not in the same house) are very important to him.
It all comes back to what I said earlier we make choices that suit are circumstances.

Well that's very specific & doesn't really fit your earlier claim that top independents offer everything at a higher level than is available at a state school. It fits my comment about geography (likewise - if we lived within the M25 then ds1 would have many more opportunities to take part in his activity - we don't so he doesn't) - that's nothing to do with the school. If any of mine happened to be some sort of genius fencers of divers (they're not) then living here they would be able to access the best coaching in the country whatever school they attended.

I'm confused why doesn't it fit my earlier claim the top independents offer everything at a higher level than state schools?

Because you can still access high level activities if you're in state school - and you (everyone) is more limited more by geography than anything else. Anyway ds2's school regularly plays the local public school (well known for its sports) and regularly beats them so I'm not sure the standard is that stratospheric.

Did we ever find out which activities are being done at a much higher level for top independent schools anyway (except rowing - which is surprisingly accessible out of school through local clubs across the country if someone is particularly interested anyway)

I think of the top independents as the schools that top the league tables, not Eton. I don't think they do make the claim to offer all activities at a higher level than state schools - I am sure they would probably claim to do some activities very well, but not everything. If you had a child who was e.g. very good at tennis they'd probably love to have them on the school team but they would advise you to contact the LTS, as would a state school.

Well my DS does a a niche off shoot of a slightly niche sport. He started it at his prep with one of the countries most highly regarded coaches, no school he went to before offered it. He continues to do it at his boarding senior school three times a week, he's not bad at it and wants to get better. The sport itself let alone the niche off shoot is not offered by any state school in this area (I know because we considered moving him into the state sector at yr 9 so I enquired). The fact that it was not offered either by either our state schools or by any local club at the standard he wanted affected our decision as to whether to send him to a state school or independent as he enjoys it.

I think few state schools offer livery. However, I am pretty sure St Paul's Girls don't offer that either.

Well, definitely not Dd1's first study instrument, that's for sure. Diving? AFAIA the Olympic programme coaching is open to state school pupils as well as the posh school, right JimJams? Rugby - the academies down here are for state and private pupils alike. Football similarly although from what I know from a relative who was a schoolboy with a top (evil) premiership club the very best ones get pulled out of whatever school they were at (state or private) and sent to the club's captive school on the club's dime. so that doesn't really count. Don't know about fly fishing though. I wonder what sort of school Bob Nudd went to? Although maybe he wasn't a fly Fisher, maybe he was the other sort.

I'm am more than happy to concede that polo is purely the preserve of the privately schooled though.

Feeling very happy my children haven't taken up a niche non-spectator sport that requires a 200 mile drive to get to. I'm not sure I'd be thanking the school for that one!

Ah the local footballl club here sends its junior squad to a nearby comprehensive . It's um not a premiership side!

My brother got into competitive kayaking at boarding school. He probably wouldn't have done that at any London day school, although might have at a rural comp. There are of course differences between what individual schools offer, and what is accessible in different geographic areas.

One of the things I enjoyed about boarding school when I went at sixth form was taking up rowing, however I've never rowed subsequently (big time commitment to doing it well and you have to leave near a good club). I only started because doing a sport was compulsory and there is no way I would have voluntarily played lacrosse again!

So are we saying that people primarily pay for private education because of the unusual sports they offer? That certainly seems to be a recurring theme on this thread. I'm not sure I get it, but I guess that explains why I've looked at so many "elite" schools and never seen the attraction.

I see a massive range of benefits to my children from the fact they attend/attended private schools. Other parents don't see that. That's all fine. The fewer who see the benefits the less competition my children have for places at their schools - all to the good.

Well said Jane. Totally agree.

Oh I'm all for unusual sports Jinsei - just not sure they're the exclusive preserve of public schools (although admittedly boarding schools have time to fit more in).

Most state schools seem to have activities weeks now. Ds2's school had one last week - (they seem to have a few through the year, with the main big one in the summer). The choice on offer was fantastic, foreign trips, learn to scuba dive (get your padi open water certificate), week long surf camp, week of bushcraft camp, tree surfing, week of climbing with assessment, loads of activities in school, music, photography, museum trips in London and huge choice of daily activities. Wish that sort of thing had been available in my day. I think every school we looked at had something of that sort going on (although ds2's school does seem to do it particularly well)

Xenia's point of view is perfectly reasonable. If people want to spend their money on private schools, that's entirely their prerogative, and if they perceive that their kids are getting benefits from that investment, it should not matter what anyone else might think.

However, if this is how you feel, OP, why start the thread? If you're so sure about the benefits of a prep school education, why does it bother you that other people think you're wasting your money?

Yes, lots of schools are doing activity weeks around here now, saintly. They're a good chance for kids to try out new experiences.

I quite fancied the padi open water diving - & it looked fun from their twitter feed- but ds2 looked at me with horror when I suggested he did that next year

Perhaps they ought to have activity weeks for the parents, too! :)

I'm in! I did manage to wangle myself onto ds1's Ten Tors team (actually I was called as an emergency at 8pm just as I was about to pour myself a glass of wine for the first child free night in as long as I can remember) - but it was fun (after the mad dash around the house shouting 'where's my socks, where's my sleeping bag, I need my waking boots') so I will try and wangle myself a spot next year.

Jinsei,

If you are happy with your state choice, why do you think you are missing out on something and you need others to convince you of the added value/extras?

Well why did you comment on the thread, you did not have too?

I posted, not long after a conversation with a friend because I wanted to know what other people thought, whether I was being unreasonable with my retort to some of my friends comments, and snide remarks or trying to point out all the failings in the private system etc and that they would not give up certain luxuries just for fees.

As I mentioned before; one comment from a good friend was she loved being blonde and slim too much to waste 700 quid a month on fees!

This is not being snobby, but from the few friends I have that know I am educating all the way through from prep till GCSE/AL they are from traditional MC backgrounds and would love to do it for their own DC but even if they make cutbacks from what they say would still not be able afford to educate privately all through and wonder how, I can do so and have a large family when I came from WC background....... as if only MC people are allowed to prosper.

Anyway, I am happy with my choices, I don't steal, I am in the black, don't owe money to anyone, work hard, so If I choose to spend it 3x a year for the next 13 years per child on education, to me it is not a bad thing. My DCs know that it was hard work of granny that enabled me to do well, so they have to work hard at school etc.

That is why I posted Jinsei.

Tall, you never answered my query.
You chose a particular school for DC1 because it suits their individual requirements, but what's to say it'll suit your other DCs? Are you at least open to the fact that the best school for one or both of your other DCs might be a different Indy, or a state school, or a mix of Indy and state?
I only mention this because my two DCs are very different in temperament and skill-set. They went to different primary schools, and will go to different secondary schools. I was offered a place for DS at DD's (sought after) primary, but declined it, because it was not the best school for his learning style.
Have you thought whether DC1's school is actually the best school for the others, or is it the best school for you?

Commenting on an inflammatory thread is somewhat different from starting one, in my view, but I have engaged here merely because I have enjoyed the debate. It's a topic that has interested me ever since I first realised that my state comp had given me at least as good an education as some of the most expensive schools in the country. That was a shock to me at the time.

I am extremely happy with my dd's school, and absolutely don't think that my she is missing out, but when others are so determined that their children are getting a superior education that the state cannot possibly equal, it is natural to ask what they perceive that added value to be. As usual on these threads, nobody has really been able to demonstrate that their kids are getting a better education, merely that some independent schools offer unusual sports and a more traditional approach to teaching. If you think those aspects are worth the hefty fees, then that's fair enough, but I remain unconvinced.

I am not against private education, and would consider it for secondary if I thought the local independent was significantly better than what the state had to offer. From what I've seen so far, that's not the case, but we have not got as far as making those decisions just yet. I certainly have no objection to others using private schools if they choose to do so. What I do object to is when private school customers like yourselves make assumptions about the values and priorities of those of us who choose not to educate privately. Rather than assuming that we like our gym membership and foreign holidays more, why not open your mind a little to consider that perhaps we are just looking for something different for our children.

I have many friends who were privately educated, and they are lovely people without an ounce of arrogance or smugness. Sadly, that's not the impression given by some on this thread, who seem hugely invested in their belief that they're providing a superior education for their kids and almost indignant at the idea that some state schools might dare to provide something of a comparable standard.

I've been through the private and state schools, and IMO paying for private education doesn't suddenly catapult you Into some educational nirvana. In fact, id say there's no real difference between a decent state and the average private.

But I don't want my kids growing up in a middle class bubble, so privates out for us. I would consider it for secondary if their school wasn't up to the job.