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.

ethelb, this dawned on me when i went for interview at Oxford aged 17, with no clue of the degree to which some candidates would be groomed for interview. No-one else had ever applied from my school,I couldn't take the entrance exams which still applied, as I was applying from another country with a totally different exam system. I was gauche and self deprecating and had applied for a competitive humanities course at a big name college (oh the circles within circles of elitism!) and unsurprisingly didn't get in.

It was crushing at the time, but actually good preparation for life and I've never ever regretted applying. Not least because the fact that I applied meant that other girls from my school did so too, and some of them got places.

I went to another RG university which I think in fact suited me much better. Not least because it allowed me to see at first hand how unspecial some of the products of private schools were as teenaged individuals.

sorryforher
Even if every school in this country was a comprehensive of an equal standard - competitiveness and money would still lead to some children being pushed ahead of others.

I spend a lot of time in meetings (with external people rather than people within my company) where I think I'm probably the only woman, the only northerner and the only person who was state educated - and certainly the only person who is all three! I find it so depressing that that should still be the case.

That comment wasn't in response to anyone in particular, just musing about glass ceilings.

I hear you Amber - it's the way of the world. But you're there.

sorryforher though that is true, we can't just throw our hands up in the air, can we?

We've had a fair bit of success where I work. More diversity in applicants. More diversity in those being given offers.

Obviously, there is still work to do...

amber me too!!!!!

ethelb
Professions like Journalism being full of private school kids has a lt more to do with the nasty growth of unpaid internships than schools

only rich parents can afford for their little dears to travel to an office in central London for 6 months unpaid

ban unpaid internships : make all jobs NMW or less than 3 weeks (no repeats) and the industries will open up again

then again La Toynbee sees nothing wrong in the Guardian having paid her kids boarding school fees so there you go

But it's come some way from this controvery

Which I found hilarious btw - what many objectors seemed to be saying was "what's the point of paying for education if it doesn't buy you advantage?"

Amber
I remember walking into a meeting of a financial services strategy group in the City. There were about 40 people there. Two of us were women, me and the secretary to the meeting who was taking the minutes. I doubt there were many of us who had been to a Comprehensive school .

I made sure I spoke up.

TBH Bristol's admission's policies are the least of its worries.

The cost of student accommodation is so high that it really is the preserve of those with well off parents!

Chazs, we follow similar paths. I was at a corporate event last year where I was just about the only woman there as the invited guest rather than the plus one. DH didn't want to come so I brought my BFF. People's thinly veiled I-didn't-know-you-were-gay reactions were quite striking.

I'm thankful that I've found myself in this position at a point where I'm relatively confident in myself and my abilities. I used to work in an area that was female-dominated and pretty down-to-earth. It's only since changing roles recently that I've noticed the striking change in the demographic. As a younger / more junior person I think I'd have felt quite intimidated by it. Now I'm confident that I have every right to be there, and that my background is actually an asset, not a problem.

There is a reason why fewer clever state school pupils attend Oxbridge or other top institutions, or go for the most competitive courses or careers.

It is simply that those working in the independent sector have knowledge and experience or contacts with those things and therefore pass that knowledge on. Top universities and careers are not a mystery to the teachers and parents, so they can confidently promote them. In many independent schools a number if teachers have been at Oxbridge or have private school backgrounds so know people in the competitive careers. It is not a mystery to them, so they happily and easily promote them. And then a culture of it being the norm to apply to such places and for such jobs develops and exists and the kids just apply as a matter of course.

In many state schools there is no single teacher who has been to Oxbridge, or is fully au fair with the different colleges and how to prepare someone well for the interview. Oxbridge and highly competitive careers are not promoted, because those advising have no knowledge of them and perhaps don't know many people in them, so it is hard to advise someone to do something you know nothing about. And in many schools the careers service has died a death. So there is simply no culture of applying for top universities or no expectation of going into a a top job for many children. If they want to do it, they are going to be unusual and have to be serious self starters, accessing the information themselves, finding people who know about it all to talk to, and then flying in the face of the existing culture. Not easy.

I think that this is what explains the differences in for example RG and Oxbridge applications at some Grammar Schools to many less academic independent schools. So for example, there are very academic, hard to get into State Grammars in the W.Midlands, but fewer people go to Oxbridge or RG Unis than the lower achieving Independent schools around them. Whilst the pupils are very clever, their expectations of their own capabilities are perhaps lower. Their contact with people from Oxbridge is perhaps less and the aspirations and expectations of their parents are lower too. Many are very pleased their children are clever and in Grammar School, but a number have little or no experience of top universities or top careers......so these things still hold a mystery for them.

If you want to talk about 'value-added' of Independent schools, one of the things some are REALLY good at, is taking moderately clever children and getting them onto highly competitive courses at top universities.....far in excess of what could be predicted from their starting points. The world is then their oyster.
The Sutton Trust identifies a list of the top 100 schools who do this - achieve better outcomes in terms of Uni applications than their results would suggest.
These schools really make the most of what the children have. They give them great Uni application advice and ensure that they find courses at OP universities that are ambitious bit within reach for the vast majority of their kids. Some of these schools get far more into Oxbridge too than the raw A Level tesults would suggest but it is particularly in terms of RG Uni access that they excel in.
Other schools,have similar or better A Level results, but the kids go onto less well recognised places and courses. Which do you think really has the best 'value added'?

I find it quite depressing that parents think it is okay for DC to witness fights in classrooms and sneer that it is elitist to want to send your DC to school where that in unheard of. No wonder teachers are leaving the profession in droves, or feel completely undermined and unsupported with that level of parental complacency.

Getting Y13 offers at the best possible universities and on the best possible courses is a real skill. I know because I help French Terminale students with their UCAS applications. None of the applicants I help could be described as anything but hugely advantaged but without proper guidance it is incredibly difficult for them to do well in the admissions game.

MsHerodotus - you must have read a different thread to the one I'm reading. I haven't actually read anyone on here saying that it is okay for DC to witness fights in classrooms. Perhaps you have your "wilful misinterpretation" spectacles on.

I agree Bonsoir. And it is an area Indpendent schools are particularly good at. They need to post the destinations of their leavers on their websites because parents really do look at that information and of course it is so important, as it is the next thing after school and opens or closes so many doors to the next stage.
Those lists can determine the schools parents choose for their children, so being able to 'maximise' children (and I know it's a horrid word) in terms of enabling them not just to get the best grades, but the best universities and courses is so important.
Too many schools get great grades, but don't maximise the detinations of their pupils. And yes of course I know that people ate individuals and going to top places to do competitive courses isn't what suits all people.
The typical teenager who doesn't really know what they want to do though, benefits from being steered onto standard, academic courses, at top universities,simply because more doors remain open to them.

So, people pay for private for steering and game playing purposes, then? I wonder if MsHerodotus finds that depressing?

Ms Herodotus - with that post I think this thread's certain to surge past the 1,000 post mark......

What rabbitstew said.......

"I find it quite depressing that parents think it is okay for DC to witness fights in classrooms"

I don't. Nobody does.

"sneer that it is elitist to want to send your DC to school where that in unheard of."

Nobody has sneered, or used the word elitist. Which thread are you reading?

Great post chocolate, very perceptive.

I agree that the 'steering' in terms of choices at GCSE, A Level and University applications is one of the things parents pay for. They want their children to face as many open doors as possible when they leave.
They pay for the grades (but as many point out, great grades are achieved in other schools too, although perhaps not to the same percentage of pupils) and for the wider extra curricular provision (which again exists in many state schools and is not to be sniffed at. However, the scale and scope of the provision, such as 5 teams per year group in each competitive sport might not b matched in many state schools)
People also pay for an environment which they hope is conducive to learning, without so much low level disruption (not to say that all state schools have this problem, as clearly many dont, and clearly some private schools do have this issue)
Some people also pay to only mix with certain kinds of people or to avoid some people, but I don't think this is usually the key reason.
Some people pay as they think the provision in a certain school better fits the individual social, learning SN or whatever needs of their child, better than the state option.

So people choose to pay for a wide variety of reasons. Many consider the State options and decide that for one or more of the reasons above, that paying is worth it. Others consider it for the reasons above and decide paying isn't worth it. Of course a lot depends on the quality of the state school options available and how you value the different things mentioned above, because people place different values on things like extra-curricular provision, sport, university destinations, avoiding certain groups of people etc. For some, these things are of little consequence and so they wouldn't dream of paying for them (even if they could afford to) but for others one or more might be of vital importance.
There are some people who never ever consider Sate options and for whom Independent schooling is a for-gone conclusion - often if that is the experience of all of their family and friends and money is of no major issue. But most people I think do consider both options. And for many, they are not always in one sector but have moved and don't do it light heartedly or easily. Those fees bear serious consideration for most people and most people really need to believe they are going to get something better than they were at the alternative.
Yes some people probably do make the move for 'wrong' reasons. However we all value things differently and different aspects of education matter more to some people than others and I think that explains why some people who can afford to pay do so, and why others don't.

No child should have to go to a school with fights in the classroom. The only thing people have questioned is how many schools really do have that sort of behaviour.

Er, where did anyone say that, MsHerodotus?