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!

[Fideliney]

To cut to the chase OP, why do you care what other people think about your educational choices for your DC? And why do you care about their choices for their DC?

If you think you have a superior plan why not just crack on with it?

[summerends]

Jinsei I think money and the ease it brings is an addiction for all but the very idealistic or passionate academic or creative, hence the chase after well paid jobs. Extending your line of reasoning, selecting expensive private school exposes DS to a majority whose parents' stance on life is to prioritise wealth acquisition. That does raise questions on how that may skew DCs' moral outlook. I suppose some DC might take wealth for granted and therefore become idealistic.

[TheWordFactory]

rabit of course most people know a surgeon earns more than a midwife. But that's an incredibly simple comaprison, isn't it?

There are other high earning industries that the children of the rich naturally gravitate towards. The rest of us mere mortals wouldn't know where to start ...

Conversly, the children of the very rich, also gravitate towards certain porrly paid industires as the rest of us mere mortals can't afford to work there...

jinsei As for students at Oxbridge, well I teach there, and I really do think it's laughable to suggest that the privately schooled ones head off to endlessly boring jobs to pay shcool fees, whereas all the state schooled students skip cheerfully away to less well paid jobs that make them happy for the rest of their days, safe in the knowledge that their DC will access an outstanding comp ...

[saintlyjimjams]

I found Oxford to be quite money focused in terms of future career. I looked into training in forensic science (should have done it maybe - I didn't) & I remember friends there recoiling in horror at how poorly paid it was (by their standards).

Anyway good job I wasn't as motivated by money as many of them as I ended up with a severely disabled child (& all the private school education in the world is no use in that world).

[TheWordFactory]

saintly there's a joke that the historians at Oxford are obssessed with it, until they leave and all become laweyers in the city .

I actually found that my time there as a student, really opened my eyes to the possibilities of earning highly.

I recall the Dad of one of my friends telling me to give the city a try, that they would pay me through law school and my starting salry would enable me to buy a flat...and I thought, well why the fuck not?

[HercShipwright]

Several of the people I knew went into the arts in some way (performers, writers, composers). I lacked the essential nerve to do that. I also lacked the financial background to feel able to take a punt - I started work a week after graduating. Ah well.

[Jinsei]

jinsei As for students at Oxbridge, well I teach there, and I really do think it's laughable to suggest that the privately schooled ones head off to endlessly boring jobs to pay shcool fees, whereas all the state schooled students skip cheerfully away to less well paid jobs that make them happy for the rest of their days, safe in the knowledge that their DC will access an outstanding comp ...

No more laughable than your suggestion that state educated kids don't know which professions are more likely to make them rich!

I haven't actually suggested anywhere that the lucrative jobs are boring, merely that money isn't always the primary motivation. Of course, there will be privately educated kids who choose alternative careers too, just as there are state educated kids who chase after the best paid jobs. I'm merely noting a pattern that I have observed. I guess perceptions about how much money is "enough" are different if you've grown up in a very affluent family.

[TheWordFactory]

jinsei I didn't say that!

It seems to me that your desire to find fault with every aspect of private school is clouding your judgement...

Some points you've made a fair, but some are plain daft...

Hey ho ...

herc going into the arts, media, publishing, even the bar, is a gamble. There's money to be made, but not for everyone. And you need a certain amount of money to gamble .

[rabbitstew]

TheWordFactory - yes, it is an incredibly simple comparison, which Xenia has made on more than one occasion (and probably under more than on of her pseudonyms!).

Obviously, Oxford is quite money obsessed in terms of future career - it suits everyone that way, because wealthy and powerful alumni can be more generous.

Btw, I (state school educated) also lacked the essential nerve to go straight for a low paying career, thinking instead that I could get my training in a City law firm, first, which could provide some financial security (which I wanted before I had children), then make choices from there, knowing it wouldn't look bad on my CV to have worked in a City law firm for a few years and that it might be fun while young, free and single, to live in London for a while and have a stint working overseas to see what that was like. I rapidly realised that there were limits to what I was willing to do just for a high income, that I found the work unfulfilling and profoundly disagreed with a lot of what was going on in the City at the time, so didn't really want to be a part of it (oh, how cynical it made me about the supposedly great and good), but also that it was the income I was earning that gave me the freedom to choose to escape from it - it's harder to escape from something if you aren't earning enough to create a safety net for yourself in the first place, or if you enjoy earning the money so much that you are simultaneously spending it all. In some ways I wish I had made other choices and not been so naïve about the fact that the majority of people working in the City are extremely interested in and motivated by money (!), but in other ways, I'm glad I had a chance to see what it was like, because it gave me a clearer idea of myself. We all live and learn. Fwiw, I think if a private school education does create more confident people, then maybe it does stand more chance of spitting out people who take the risk to do what they want rather than what they think will provide them with financial security - but an incredibly wealthy, secure family background probably does that regardless of the education sector you come from.

[saintlyjimjams]

saintly there's a joke that the historians at Oxford are obssessed with it, until they leave and all become laweyers in the city

Well that describes what happened to DH - and why we refer to the curse of being academic (falling into a City law firm because you don't know what else to do). Being the father of a severely disabled child isn't hugely compatible with a City law career (& DH felt much the same as rabbitstew) so he took a huge pay cut & we moved to a place with space, sea & hands on family support. He would be earning triple his current salary at least - probably a lot more - if he had stayed in the City, but the money wasn't enough (for us) to make up for all the compromises we'd have to make.

[Tallandgracefulmum]

Ellie,
Thank you for your post. As mother's we all want the best for our kids and sometimes it does take sacrifices, which are worth it; be it sticking it out in well paid job, embarking on 2 or 3 jobs, moving house or staying put, enduring grulling commute, holidaying every half term or once a year, investing wisely. upskilling etc.
Best wishes. :)

[Molio]

My DC at Oxford, despite my own limited means, are heading towards jobs they hope they'll enjoy, regardless of money. I think Oxford has given them the independence of thought to work it out for themselves, and not necessarily be City lemmings.

[Molio]

Also (apologies for not having read the whole huge thread) very obviously some independents at primary are less good than some states, though vice versa, and the same at secondary level. It all depends on area. If all the schools in my area were equally good, I'd go state, for social reasons and because it can bring advantages in uni/ job terms these days.

[Teddingtonmum1]

My ds is weekly boarding at a private secondary in september and i was letting the dentist know that he can only come in the holidays now and was surprised when dentist was asking me about bursaries!!! Sign of the times??...

[Iownafourinchporsche]

Not read thread sorry. But wanted to add that I see infant years as play time and a chance to make local friends. So state is great in my eyes for infant years.

[TheLovelyBoots]

Obviously, one of the main reasons that people send their children privately throughout is so that reading for fun/violin/chess/computer programming etc is normalized among their peer group.

[lainiekazan]

Yet another crackpot who thinks that state school children spend their spare time from the age of 4 swilling lager at the bus stop, or if it's raining doing Call of Duty marathons.

[TheLovelyBoots]

Not at all. Our state option is a school in special measures. There is no chess, violin or computer programming.

[TheLateMrsLizCromwell]

I have taught in outstanding state schools, and every penny we spend sending out DC to indies is well spent. They mix happy with people from all backgrounds - school is not the only place is meet and interact with people - and academically there is just no contest. They are not there because of results, they are there because it is a learning environment, which does not exist in the same way even in an 'outstanding' non-selective state secondary school. Parents, unless they have been teaching in schools, have no idea how the learning environment compares.

[PercyPorkyPig]

We live a stress-free simple yet fulfilling rural life - basic semi with very manageable mortgage meant that I could be a SAHM (and look after my own DC giving them a great start) until both of my DC went to local village state primary, never rated -yet-anything beyond 'satisfactory/ requires improvement' but with a great community sharing & caring feel and yes, a great learning environment. Both DC went to a standard Comp, achieved well,- our eldest has just graduated with a Masters [with First Class Honours] and has just secured a PhD studentship. Like us she does not want a highly paid job, just to excel in her field of research to benefit the wider community. Natural talent, a will to succeed, - no expensive tutoring needed, no school fees, no long commute and rush hour traffic, no long working hours, no rat-race. FAB!

[minifingers]

Thelatemrscornwall - how is it then that many non-selective state educated children do brilliantly and end up at top universities? And actually once at university do better than privately educated peers who enter with similar A level grades?

[minifingers]

The main reason people send their children private is to separate them off from thick and badly behaved pupils who they feel drag their children down. Also to give them more teaching time - very important if your aim is to advantage your children so they can scrabble up over the backs of similarly bright state educated children (who have had less money spent on them and less attention from their teachers), when it's time for the handing out of university places and good jobs.

[TheLateMrsLizCromwell]

I bang my head in frustration when people seem to think that it doesn't matter how miserable a time DC have in school as long as they get into a top university! You only have one shot at being a teenager - no consolation to have a rubbish time and then 'get into a good university'. I want my DC to enjoy their schooling, not just get through it to a destination.

[PercyPorkyPig]

My DC loved both their state primary school and state [non-selective] comprehensive School - they took full advantage of School clubs and a range of outside activities, and have both become well-rounded and socially confident adults. Interestingly, more than a few of DD's course-mates who were privately educated dropped-out of Uni early on, unable to hack the independent study necessary to succeed having been wrapped in cotton-wool and hot-housed to within an inch of their lives way beyond the level of their natural abilities. That's the real misery suffered by many whose parental expectations exceed their common sense.

[TheLateMrsLizCromwell]

Usual myth about independent schools hothousing. I have friends who are lecturers at Oxbridge who scoff at this mumsnet myth, which some parents are desperate to believe. And as a teacher in state schools I see much more spoon feeding (especially around controlled assessment which are basically written for them) than my DC in an indie, who are expected to do far more independent research and reading around the topic. And again it all about Uni - and school as a means to an end - why the obsession with Uni? in any case, if you are satisfied with the education your children are getting, and others aren't then that is the reason they are prepared to pay for the right school for their DC. As we were.