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!

Herc I think there were barriers to social mobility when we were coming through. But not necessarily financial.

I got a full grant to go to university. Summer jobs were plentiful. I wandered into a training contract in the city and they paid me to go to law school ...

I didn't have to do work experience, or an internship, or an MA...
And they paid me very well indeed from the moment I arrived at work. Enough for me to buy a flat in London...

These days it's all so hard.

We are doing state primary and then will go private (probably) for secondary, mainly because the state primaries in our area are excellent and the state secondaries not so much. So yeah, there is no need for primary in my view (where we live).

I get that private primaries do groom kids for the private secondaries, but I will take my chances.

I had a similar conversation with a friend (private school for her DD) who lives in a different area and when I said there was no need for private where we live (although totally understand why she would make that decision in her local area as I used to live there too), she made a comment about it being all to do with where you think it is important to spend money; fancy houses or on your children's education. We were moving house at the time (to a bigger house as we had outgrown the current one) and I noticed the slight dig but ignored it.

Your posts reminds me a bit of this conversation. To be honest, this sounds less about a wider issue around 'people's' attitude and more about you and your friend. Sounds like you are a bit competitive/snipey with each other. I'd live and let live. She probably thinks you've been making veiled digs about private being better and so she has retaliated with the 'oh you're wasting your money' response. I'd just avoid her for a bit and stop upsetting yourself.

Word - exactly. Not only did I have the same path as you, I also got a sponsorship from a local firm while I was at university, and the downside was - I had to work for them - for money! - in the holidays! Well, boo hoo. Fuck knows what will happen to my kids, I get tired just idly considering their future paths...

I am such a person, considering private secondary and state primary,

For Primary school there are several to choose from, all local, small, easily accessible and free, private primary schools are out of area and expensive.

There is only one secondary school nearby, the other would require a lengthy bus journey. This school has a large population and is under performing and is currently being closely monitored by Ofstead and local authority.

By using the state school for Primary Education I am in a position to potentially fund a private secondary school, why wouldn't I? However I am not keeping this a secret.

Herc, not every bright kid in a comprehensive school had that experience prior to the huge addition of uni places on the late 1980's. I can tell you for a fact.

One reason some of you found things so much easier then is precisely because there were relatively few of you.

Everyone found things easier then. There were good worthwhile remunerative jobs for non graduates. You could go work in a bank, as a nurse, as a police person, even as a teacher without a degree (although you had to do relevant training, so, nurse training, cert. ed etc). You could get on the housing ladder even in London. University was designed for the top whatever it was - 5%? 15%? And the system worked. The system no longer works, we have far too many universities, far too many kids going into debt for qualifications of dubious worth, and far too many people making money off the back of this. The system is broken.

Unfortunately for the wealthy and powerful, there really aren't enough of them to take all the top jobs, all the roles in all the West End plays and musicals, all the sporting glory, all the positions in the orchestras and operas, and all the traditional middle class careers like medicine and law. Bringing in hundreds of thousands of overseas-qualified people to fill the vacancies is a bit of a crap solution, too, guaranteed to cause problems. So, guess what? They are going to have to use some of their nouse to ensure an affordable, good and life-affirming education for the underlings, or they're all buggered, too, drowning in the results of their own unshared excesses, with a large mass of the world population wondering what their point is, because they aren't doing a very good job with all that wealth and power. Large masses of pissed off underlings are a frightening prospect, particularly given they are unlikely actually to be the slightly miffed middle class ones. Still, until that happens, why not keep eating cake, or playing obscure non-spectator sports?

objection the barriers were different.

Expectation being a main one. When I told my school I wanted to apply to Oxbridge, my head of year laughed and no one offered me any help at all.

And obviously, it was hard to study sometimes when things were tricky at home (we were made homeless several times and ended up living with my Nan, so completely overcrowded).

But these days, even the most middle class of families, find it hard to support their DC. Places on the most competitive courses at university are ferociously fought over wiuth competition from abroad.

And the families are expected to come up with top up money. Loans don't cover all expenses. And it will get worse.

And London is becoming way too expensive for many students, thus cutting LSE, UCL etc out of the mix.

And let's not go there on the expense of accommodation in Bristol!!!!!

And with the world and his wife having a degree now, and MA is all the rage. And getting funding for that! Well, not easy.

And as for work expereince and internship....they are the work of the devil as far as social mobility is concerned.

rabbit I wouldn't hold your breath for change (unless you suit blue)...

The middle classes are in complete denial ...

The system worked for you because more people had their aspirations "managed" by state teachers to allow you to become lawyers with relative ease. Now those people's kids are competing with yours for the graduate jobs. Less british born kids now are willing to do the non-graduate job their parents tolerated. Everyone wants and expects more.

Word - I was appalled to find out how many of DD1's possible courses are actually 4 year courses. :(

I was luckier than you in at least 1 respect, because I was pushed by my comp to apply for Cambridge (and I was the one who laughed. My mum was more...worried looking about it all. She was still trying to make sure I understood I didn't HAVE to go the day I set off.)

I know a few people who feel into that category who became buy-to-let millionaires rather than the educated professionals they could have been, unfortunately pricing out your kids in the process. Now their profits have enticed oversees investors to join in adding to the misery.

Objection - I'm not a lawyer. I quite fancied law but was (wrongly) told by a teacher at school (SE London comp) that to become one you had to self fund law school after university (there was no mention of firms paying for that - maybe they didn't know). Nothing about my life apart from getting into university was easy and certainly my time at university was about as far from easy as it's possible to be (well, not quite - because my life threatening illness didn't in fact kill me). But that's a different story. :) The only managing I witnessed from state teachers (i.e. the teachers who taught me at my comp) was the managing that saw them persuading me to give applying to cambridge a go when what I wanted to do was stay in London. I don't think they managed me away from fancying law, I think they genuinely believed people had to self fund law school (and it's possible that, when I was told this, they did have to do that).

I'm not sure why you think my kids have been priced out (they are a tad young for that). I'd possibly rather be a buy to let millionaire than a well educated professional to be honest. If I could just square the moral problems. And also, of course, if I could ever have summoned sufficient arse to make something of myself (it was never going to happen).

Hi InMySpareTime,

Never chosen a school or nursery just because it suited me, yes it had to fit certain criteria but ultimately each child. Sometimes parents do find a school for FB then the rest just follow suit.
Sometimes it not always easy for parents to choose different schools for their children, but my siblings and I did not all go to the same schools, and we each ended up doing ok. You could look at it another way, your DC have different temperaments, the school will have children that poses the same traits so they could be fine going to the same school.
For me DD1 and DD2 will go to the same school, DD3, I have already registered her with DD1 school and another school, the school I would have liked DD2 to go to I had looked into earlier, waiting lists were closed for 18 months!

If you choose a school that teaches a wide range of subjects, has varied teaching staff, co-curricular opportunities, then you might just find that it suits both of your children, but alas it may not be on your doorstop and it may not be free.

Herc,

oh well, if you want to be like that..
I will settle with being a well educated professional, under 35 years old, mortgage free home, mother of 3 DC with another on the way with good health (touches wood) than a buy to let millionaire anyday.
Each to their own.

Herc,I'm sorry to great you were ill but try to think beyond your own personal experiences in this discussion about state education in this society.

Hmmmm.

Well I'm a well educated professional who also owns a lot of buy to let property...legs it...

Great = hear (oopsp

No need to leg it. I guess my point is that the to of society has never been accessible to all of the people but the barriers change.

Tallandgraceful - did you not read what I actually posted?

I'm not tall nor graceful either. :(

But it might be nice to be a millionaire rather than just a well educated professional. I wouldn't have to go to Brussels next week if I was a millionaire. I wouldn't have to go to Brussels EVER AGAIN. That might be worth being a modern day Rackman. Or maybe not.

Wow some people on this thread are terribly pleased with themselves

Objection - I was state educated and my DC are all state educated. Even though I could afford school fees (if I made adjustments. Those who know me would find the idea that I could make sufficient savings on hair appointment to pay 3x school fees quite amusing though). So I'm not quite sure what your problem is? Unless you are unhappy at the fact that someone who went to a SE London comp in the 70s-early 80s managed to do well?

Word - you made much better life choices than I did. :) You probably work a lot harder than I do, too.