First post: what is wrong with considering private schools?

[dietcokeisgreat]

Dear all,

I just starting looking at mumsnet last week and joined today. Some of my work colleagues talk about it and i am thinking about options for education for my son, who is just 3 and thought i would take a look. Well, i just starting the thinking, so it is early days.
We could pay for school, or maybe not, we don't know yet. He is our first child, we are having problems getting pregnant again, so unsure if there will be more yet.

I was surprised at some really negative comments on lots of threads towards people posting for advice/ whatever about private schools. Why are they doing that? What is wrong with people thinking about different options? Or asking about a school they know that is private? Twice i read something 'well i can't pay for school' as a response. For me, its no different to whether or not people have cash for other stuff. I can't afford to live in the smarter part of town, or pay for a boarding school but that doesn't mean no one should be allowed too!

Just wondering...don't want to post something that will enrage others or be and be upset by responses ....

Thank you.

mellow- could you define 'worst'? A prep school master would demand that of his charges. Is it not unreasonable to ask that of posters on here? And are we so 'dumbed down' we shouldn't ever be expected to elucidate?

The half I agree with = our society gives some children much better life chances than others.

The half I disagree with = the right response to this is to do our damndest to make sure our children are in the advantaged group, and sod the rest.

Tansie - what are you on about? Have you ever been to private school? You really have some very odd ideas about private education. Don't have a go at parents - to use yor phraseology, it aint right, it aint pretty and it's sloppy. Have a go at the politicians. But of course you won't.

There is a lot to unpack here Tanzie.

Sometimes, going to a private school is a symptom, not a cause of being well connected with a lot of capital behind you. Many rich/posh people you meet would be rich/posh well connected with or without a private education. It's just another privilege like a fancy car, big house, influential godparent, etc. This is really obvious when you look at some of the over-priced finishing schools around the Home Counties.

Meanwhile, there are some private schools that are true elite institutions with a real purpose and mission to educate. I can't blame any parent for wanting this for their child. For some people, it goes beyond just being a means to get "a leg up," in "the rat race." Education is about leading the best, most fulfilling life you can. The world is a more interesting, richer place when you consider it more deeply, see more connections, etc.

Given that children narrow their course of study drastically after GCSEs, I feel it us critical that my DDs have a chance to explore phillosophy, literature, and the sciences as fully as possible before they are sixteen. My local comprehensive cannot provide what I consider to be an education.

Mustchoose, I agree with you.

Because I feel so strongly about private schools, I am always surprised to come across people who have never really thought about the implications of this strange system we have where a small minority of people are bought a whole load of advantages (extremely debatable question, but that is how the private school parents surely see it) before they are even adults and contributing to the world around them.

So, then I get really flummoxed by grown adults posting comments like "anyone would choose private education if they could afford it", "those who are against are just jealous" or "why do people object?".

I am sick of putting forward the arguments now, but it never ceases to surprise me when this question keeps on cropping up.

Mintyy
thing it that Private education for the richest few is a problem that will never be resolved
those countries that have banned it have just exported the problem
those countries that have not banned it wring their hands as well

the main thing will be to ensure that

• internships are banned
• zero hours contracts are banned
• recruitment policies in the whole of the public sector are transparent

THAT will weaken the grip far more than anything else.

Internships are a far greater problem in increasing inequality than private schools : honest

Nothing wrong with considering it, but please ask yourself in 18 years would my DC rather I'd saved enough to see them debt free through university instead.

Or have enough savings to help them buy their first (2nd in our case) house.

Sadly, I can't afford to do any of these thinks for my DDs.

However, DH and I were the very last generation of students who got grants and having no debts makes life so so much simpler.

Talkinpeace

Again I'm with you.

Perhaps a different angle though.

Can we get employers to look beyond RG universities?
Can we get off this idea that degrees are "essential"?
Can we open up the board rooms, civil service, public office?

That is where the world needs to change.

Education that is good is ultimately good for everyone, even if it isn't available to everyone.

Equality of access for adults in the working world is the real issue and banning all sorts of different school types won't fix that.

Education that is good is ultimately good for everyone, even if it isn't available to everyone.

So true.

Education is clearly good for everyone. The measurement of education in terms of how many A*s they can get is questionable. I have encountered students who cannot do the simplest of tasks but on paper are the academic elit

Sorry, elite.

Two key things to think about:

Just because you pay doesn't mean its better.

Which is the best school for your child, varies with the child. So even school X may not be the best school for every child.

BTW age 3 is not early to be thinking about these things. Its about right for most schools, and could be a bit late for some, even secondary. Doesn't Radley start its list from birth?

Another few things to think about.

Fees rise. Often faster than inflation.
Fees do not usually cover everything. This is particularly pertinent if your child turns out to have any sort of sen.
They can ask you to leave at any point. Some parents think this is one of the good things about going private- they are generally not the ones whose child has been asked to leave.
Pretty uniforms and nice buildings do not necessarily mean a good school.

Tansie you make some interesting points and I don't actually disagree with a lot of what your saying. But I just want to make two points, there are private schools and then are a relatively small group of big name private schools. This "advantage" that you talk about, and I agree can occur in both, but it is in the latter group that you are really buying "advantage", not because of the old school tie/old boys network parents who send their DC's to these schools already have the connections but because of the whole package offered. It is no surprise that the top schools in the UK in terms of number of A*s at A level are independent, the schools sending the highest % to Oxbridge independent, crude measurements I accept but the measurement many use as their bench mark for success. But then this is hardly surprising you very carefully select the brightest, children who they feel will flourish in their environment, many interview parents as well to ensure their signed up to the schools individual ethos, they provide them with a world class education, a high teacher pupil ratio in and out of the classroom, within stunning facilities they are free to ask any child who is not performing as he/she is expected too to leave so the outcome is inevitable.
Secondly I may be in a minority but I am not buying my DS "advantage" in terms of A level results or connections later in life.

mummy I think you'll find only Radley amongst the big name schools has such a ridiculously early registration. What is often not made clear is that any boy registered still has to pass CE I believe their pass mark is now 60% so weeding out the less able.

Talkin - - "recruitment policies in the whole of the public sector are transparent"
I agree about zero hours and internships but not sure what above sentence means?

Education that is good is ultimately good for everyone, even if it isn't available to everyone.

Can you explain what you mean by that, MarriedDad?

I pay more than 25k pa to send my dcs to a private school. This is largely because I was horribly bullied at my own comp for being posh. It really damaged me. All the other posh kids in my area went private it seemed. I feel that my lovely lefty parents sacrificed my education on the altar of their principles. They didn't change the world and I had a miserable time.

My dcs speak "posh", they don't swear, they love school and are excited about learning. They are proper little teachers pets, just as I was. They would be eaten alive at the local state school IMO. I'm not prepared to risk it.

Trice wow those school fees are cheap, must be primary?

Yes but if you don't want Radley - but say hanker after Eton, you probably should be aiming at the right Prep.

But I think everyone should look at their local State schools first. Try to be honest about their children, because getting in at 4 or 7 doesn't mean they won't push you out later if you don't "fit".

My DC are at a Comp - with plenty of "posh" students, some even went to Prep school.

Heels, one of each. And a relatively cheap school. It is a lovely quiet, kind place though which suits my gentle natured children.

When I said I wouldn't be answerable for the consequences if anyone said "leafy", I forgot to mention that "eaten alive" would produce similar effects.

AmbertheCat

It is my theory (reaches for evidence by can't find any to hand) that high performance in education will lead to greater production in the economy which benefit everyone (e.g. more tax, more GDP, more innovation etc).

So, for example, a student in one of the "buckets" below may have the privilege of enjoying a higher standard of education and then go onto to enjoy greater than average productivity and will contribute more than average to wider society:

• a student at an outstanding comprehensive school (vs one in special measures or under performing)

• a student at a faith school that benefits from enhanced education through selection bias (e.g. above average high attainers, below average FSM like the Oratory in London)

• a student at a grammar school (more or less ditto to faith schools)

• a student at a private school that provides an education unobtainable in the state sector (IMO some private schools don't provide anything better than state)

So there are plenty of students that have access to a subjectively superior education to many others and their contribution to society might be greater than it otherwise would have been.

I think this opinion is open to plenty of challenge, not least as it's all conjecture with no evidence.

Last night we had dinner including something that was leafy and eaten alive.

Sorry, silly post alert.