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!

I doubt you're constantly defending your choices at all; how many people actually care enough to give you a hard time about it?
What some people do think is that you can buy superior grades for your children, as if the mere fact of attending a private school is sufficient to ensure the child does extra well.
I've seen plenty of examples that that is definitely not the case, sadly.

If you are/were poor and uneducated in Peckham, Walworth, Camberwell, Elephant & Castle, Stockwell, Brixton, Bermondsey in the 70s, 80s and 90s you had no chance unless you went private, even the mediocre ones.

No, OP, this is not true. Your chances may well have been very limited in those circumstances, but it simply isn't true to say that you had no chance unless you went private. I know people who grew up in some of these places and who have done very well for themselves, despite going to some very bad state schools. They put their success down to having very ambitious parents.

But even if the picture that you painted was accurate, it has no bearing on your current circumstances in any case, does it? I presume that you are no longer living on a sink estate?

Frankly, I think you're very naive to assume that a mediocre private school is better than a good state school. That sounds more like a hang-up from your childhood than an informed opinion.

As far as sending a child to a private primary with a selective private high school in mind, I think it's a waste of money. Purely because DP and I both went to normal local schools and passed the exam into academic private high schools with no difficulty. Neither of us were tutored, the school was the right fit for us and so we got in. We coped fine with the transition, both went on to study at top universities and don't feel we missed out on anything. Lots who were sent private beforehand and tutored to ensure they got in struggled with the workload.

With DD's circumstances we have talked about private education, but for the environment rather than the academia. DD has a lot of social issues at school and we have heard some of our friends rave about private schools being a better environment for their kids. However, we live in an area in which class sizes are the size of UK private school classes in the public school sector, and I do think the public schools are better set up for catering to SN, at least where we are.

My point is it is never a waste to spend money on what you value, be it experiences, education, house etc. Others should not openinly say youre wasting your money because one, I believe spending money on education can never be a waste because it changes lives.

Of course it isn't a waste to spend money on what you value, and I absolutely agree that education changes lives - my husband's parents were both illiterate, and education was certainly his way out of poverty.

However, it is perfectly possibly to waste money on education, because some private schools just aren't very good!! I'm not saying that's the case with the one that you have chosen, but you cannot assume it's a sound investment just because you're paying for it.

Personally, I would rather pay for dd to go to her current state school than to the local private prep, because in my view, it's a much better school. If I had to make that choice, I'd do it. Luckily for me, I don't.

Does it matter if the OP thinks a mediocre school is better than a good state school? I personally don't agree with her but in our so called free society we are allowed to hold our own views and as it's the OP's money she can spend it how she likes.
Jinsai you might know people from the N. Peckham estate and the other exceedingly deprived one which was part of the Five Estate in Peckham, that I can't for the life of me remember what it was called, who've done very well for themselves but if your talking about people who lived on them in the 70's 80's and early 90's you're literally talking about a tiny handful. At one stage the "underclass" were found by the EU to be only living on these two estates in the whole of the UK.

No, of course it doesn't matter what the OP thinks. She can argue that the grass is blue and the sky is green for all I care, but inevitably people will disagree.

As it happens, I don't know anyone who grew up in Peckham but I do know people who grew up on rough estates in Brixton, Bermondsey and various other places. I don't deny that the success stories are unusual at all, but my own view - based on what I have observed - is that parental support and aspirations are far more important than the schools that you attend.

My DH spent his primary years sitting under a tree with a slate, at a school where the teachers were barely literate themselves, but his mum believed that he was capable of great things. Sometimes that's all it takes.

Through primary. OwlCapone. Private secondary and bursary, free university, fees paid for back then by state local council.

Jinsei, maybe I was not too clear. You may know people who came from those areas, are they between 35 and 50 years old?
From my old primary school mates from my cohort and year above, some are in prison, some already grandparents and some did not complete secondary education.

Out of my cohort, only 3 of us went to university (Facebook). We certainly were not the cleverest.

From my secondary, some kids got b grades but still managed to get on courses that required all A's, we all went to good unis.

I don't knock state schools FGS, I do know that primaries in areas that are deprived children do perform well, but for some by 11 thats where it ends. State schools in areas where catchments are wealthy, cannot compare to state schools in less than desirable areas.

There are some mediocre private schools that still consistently send pupils to top universities year in year out. If you have a choice of fantastic state school yet performing the mediocre private school, then the majority will send their children to the state school, yes makes sense.

But those who choose not to, at primary are after more from the school, than the grades. Hence why some mediocre private schools are still around (yes some do close in areas where state schools are good) and many dire state schools I knew back then have closed down.

Going back to my post, it is never a waste to spend on smething if you value something that much unless it is hard drugs.

Flog molly, yes; I do have friends who joke about it constantly, going to another party today, if the topic of schools comes up, which it always does same old same old. I'll just smile and pour myself some more juice :)

Got to go now, thanks for all the responses. Happy and others thanks for the tips.

Jinsei, maybe I was not too clear. You may know people who came from those areas, are they between 35 and 50 years old?

Yes, they are around my age. I'm 41.

Jin:
Is that parental support and aspirations are far more important than the schools that you attend.

Have you/did you grow up in North Peckham, or any of the rough South London Estates, where the local schools were dire primary and secondary except for a few catholic primaries or a splattering of the single sex secondarys?

My family and many others from the estate had aspirations for their children, but lack of knowledge, teachers treating parents as thick, below them etc and education meant their aspirations were pipe dreams. Unless they were the one kids that made headlines for the school for all the right reasons.

I can name many schools that in the 70, 80s and 90s, even if your child went there and you had parental support, the kids were unlikely to go very far.

Yes, times is changing, but it not enough to state parental support and aspirations is enough when you come from a poor uneducated background. Poor parents cannot canvass areas to find out where the best state schools are, cannot move into catchments, sell house, increase mortgage, pay for experiences, support through reading at home, good home cooked meals, nice clean family environment, access to dental care (yes when I was growing up it was free for all kids), holidays, tutoring, I can go on and on and on.

Poorer parents, who are uneducated cannot do this, all they hope is for luck to change and if they get a chance to work 2, 3 or 4 jobs to send their child to a school that will change the lives of their family, then, thats fantastic.

Your DH, yes, it is great, my mum was the same, but it took more than her dreaming. She asked around, got knocked back, laughed at, but pursued things on her own, took on jobs and we made it.

You need more that just aspiration
.

I agree Jensai that some who come from exceedingly disadvantaged backgrounds can do well especially those from the developing world. But children growing up on the two most deprived estates in the UK which were part of the "Five Estates" really were at a significant disadvantage, as I said a Chinese girl managed to get 5 A's at GCSE but the vast majority in the 70's 80's and early 90's were not so lucky, hence the the enormously high rate of illiteracy amongst the residents of Camberwell HA. No one in their right mind would inflict the appalling standards of education offered by the school near the N Peckham estate on their DC if they had any ambition for them and of course had a choice, however motivated and ambitious the individual child might be.

I've looked for the stats I was involved in collecting and collating at the time from this area but they are jammed in my loft but they make desperately sad reading.

Cosmic, your post touches up on some of my issues.

My parents choose a particular private not becuase of the academics, it was the best school, but they could aford it and felt the enviornment was better for us, so worth the sacrifices.

I guess we all on this post do the best for our children, I just hate te term "waste of money", especially when the person paying does not think it is.

You asked why some people think private primary is a waste of money but are saving up for private secondary. Various of us have answered that it is because a lot of state primaries are at least as good as a lot of private primaries. Or we actually can't afford both and judge that in our localities the gain is more from saving up for secondary. You expressed disbelief that people would suddenly up and pay fees after 7 years of free primary - I can tell you I know loads that do near where I live, and we may do it ourselves if the private secondary is the best fit for our kids.

That's nothing to do with whether the state schools were good where you grew up is it? And as it sounds like you live in a naice area now I suspect the state primaries will be pretty naice too.

It's possible that your mum made the right choices for you and private is still not the best option for your kids. It's possible private is also the best option for your kids. The only reason I'm doubting your decision is from your posts it sounds like you've dismissed state primaries out of hand. If you've looked at them and found the private school better for your kids, great for you. But other people may find the state school best for their kids and in that case paying for private would be a waste for them wouldn't it?

BTW NHS dental care continues to be free for children.

I'm not suggesting that it's easy for kids to succeed if they have supportive parents with aspirations for their kids. Having said that, it's not at all easy for poor, uneducated parents to send 4 Dc through private schools. What I'm suggesting is that your parents were pretty exceptional, and that exceptional parents tend to have exceptional kids, no matter what kind of school they attend.

Again, I'm not denying that environment is hugely important. It is a massive influence, and a big part of the problem is poverty of aspiration in whole communities. I didn't grow up in a sink estate, and although I went to a state comprehensive, I was fortunate enough to have had an excellent education. However, I have worked extensively with young people from disadvantaged backgrounds who have defied the odds, so I do believe it's possible. And I believe that parental input is key.

sorry for the awful spelling and keyboard :)

If you are in SW London (like me), and your friends have opted to educate their children in the local, mostly ofsted outstanding state and faith schools, that is their choice, and one I find quite wise.

There is one thing that your privately educated children wont have, and that is a varied socio economic demographic. Fair enough that you are rich and can afford the fees, your childrens classmates will also be rich. All of them middle class and above.

One friend of mine is worried about this for her children, she has suddenly discovered that her child is flummoxed by the lack of swimming pools and second country homes when visiting "normal" homes. "you only have one car?" "Where is the rest of your house?"

If there is one thing that my state educated child has discovered in his independent secondary, it is lack of grace and decorum from the children who has been privately educated throughout. They pity him that we dont jet off to Barbados for half term, go skiing for Christmas, go to Rome for the weekend. He is shocked at the lack of manners, empathy and understanding he has met in the last year.

We had a very high percentage of wealthy parents at my children's state primary, and most have continued to chose not to educate their children independently at secondary too. These rich kids have rubbed shoulders with and played with "normal" kids, (most of them at least) have healthy attitudes and are well rounded individuals with good manners and a good ethos.

Having experienced both the private sector and the state sector, and having had friends who have educated their children both in state and the private sector, I would suggest that it is not the education that is the main difference between state and private, it is the type of people who opt for either, and what values they otherwise stand for.

Perhaps your friends are just surprised.

As I've already stated in retrospect I personally wouldn't waste my money on private education until yr 2/3 but I don't thankfully live in London anymore. I understand places at some London preps at yr 2/3 are heavily fought over. The OP might also wish to send her DC's to some of the big name boarding school with very competitive entries and feels that they'll have a better chance from a good prep and therefore believes that in her situation it's better to get them into a pre prep now than fight for a place in a few years time.
Many factors influence our decisions, not just if we have the available money, when it comes to paying for education or not that is why neither camp should criticise the other.

I kow mrs cakes, again from personal experience, my brother could not get some dental work done till mum had the money. My brother is 49 so things have changed since he was 12 :)

Many factors influence our decisions, not just if we have the available money, when it comes to paying for education or not that is why neither camp should criticise the other.

I agree, there is no need to criticise. If the OP wishes to send her kids to private schools, that's fair enough, and as long as she's happy that she's getting what she has paid for, that's all that counts.

However, it goes both ways, and if the OP suggests that parents who choose state don't value education, and that even mediocre private schools are better than good state schools, she can expect people to challenge this as it patently isn't true.

You've lost me now.
You said "access to dental care (yes when I was growing up it was free for all kids)"
Now you say that your brother didn't receive dental care when he was a child because your mum couldn't afford it.

My brother is 49 so things have changed since he was 12

True! And also true of education in state schools too, I think.

My parents choose a particular private not becuase of the academics, it was the best school, but they could aford it and felt the enviornment was better for us, so worth the sacrifices.

But that's exactly the point I was making, OP. DD is 7 and attends public school- UK equivalent would be state primary. In our province, class sizes are capped at 20 in elementary unless all other classes in the year are full (as we have discovered to our peril now they've had a reshuffle and moved DD into a different class to her few friends, but that's a whole new thread). We would be hard-pressed to find a private school with smaller classes unless we went for a French language school. From a SN perspective, her current public school is better equipped for her needs than the private options we looked at- yes, her current school aren't perfect and we have issues with the way they have dealt with her needs at times, but the private options just aren't set up to offer her more support than she is currently getting. So at elementary level, DP and I have chosen the school we view to be the best school, at which we feel the environment is best for our circumstances, just like your parents. It just so happens that at the moment, that school is public.

DP and I both feel high school is a totally separate issue, and we will re-evaluate nearer the time. If DD is academically strong enough and our financial situation doesn't change, we will send her to a selective private on the basis it would be a better environment for her. If she isn't, we wouldn't put her through coaching to get her in.

Jin, I like your last post.

Yes my mum was expecptional, but our educational, was not from 4 -18 it was mix and macth and not in the schools she would like, think Dulwich College, Jags, SPGS, but the schools which one, let us sit the exams, waived the registrations fee, discounted there would be no primary transition report, and offered the largest discount on the fees. My mum only paid for 2 at a time due our ages. After the middle sibling started, my dad had a strok so my mum then took on a 4th job.

But saying that, we had to get the top marks though, so even the mediocre schools still have top students.

Quin, I do agree with you also, I live in SW a place I have always asipired to live :) having said that, many of my neighbours educated privately, our brough has a high proportion of children going to private schools despite the outstanding state schools, all for different reasons.

Yes we all know wealthy parents flood the outstanding state schoohls in affulent areas, why not. Pooer parents do send children to private schools.

But by sending a child to a state school in an area like mine or even worse my siblings, the state schools might was well be private, becuase there is no diversity.

I grew up in diversity and loved it. I hated the crime, grime, and the bad stuff. Yes, I wanted to move out, who would not, but I chose private over the outstanding schools, good schools and satisfactory school ( well the local council would have chosen for me) becuase I wanted more than just academics, I wanted diversity, ethically, socially and I wanted a school that suited DD.

The state school that I viewed that I thought would suit DD I had no chance in getting her in unless I moved into the playground and hoped there were no siblings, and that school was only good :)

I think it does seem a waste of money to pay for a prep school and tutoring and Kumon on top, which is what they're all doing round here (SW london), when all that's happening is the little kid is missing out on playing and going to the park or watching telly.
My favourite phrase these days is "you can't polish a turd" but by god they're trying.
That said, if your kid is really bright or talented and the state school is small sweet etc but not massively stimulating then a GREAT private school could be worth it.
Kids with SEN def seem better off in state, though.
It's a common convo round these parts because many of the prep schools seem so average and why pay when you have a lovely state school.
But horses for courses. If you were truly happy with your choice why bother what others think.

Well Quintissentially my DS has boarded from such an early age he can barely remember being at a day school and the short time he was at a day school quite a few left his roses round the door primary at yr 2/3 to go to his boarding prep, so again primarily at school with the mega wealthy.
He's spent nearly all his childhood mixing with the children of Sunday Times Rich Listers, hereditary peers and Russian Oligarchs, highly successful investment bankers etc. where postcodes beginning with SW1X SW1W are the norm as are swimming pools, third or fourth massive piles "cottages" and islands. We are in a tiny minority because we live in a "normal house".
Not once has he been flummoxed when he's visited others who aren't even as fortunate as we are, he doesn't pity those who don't go skiing etc, he also doesn't demonstrate bad manners or lack empathy or understanding. When you live along side the uber wealthy 24/7 you quickly discover that they are no different from anyone else, that money does not make you a better or happier person, that just as kids on the N Peckham estate had problems so sadly do these children.
You may have met some thoroughly unpleasant individuals who've been or are at independent school who are completely out of touch with how the rest of the 99% live, but this does not apply to the majority and this stereotype is as ridiculous as any made by readers of The DM about those on benefit.