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.

Nothing wrong in private schools and if you can afford it cool, most parents want whats best for their child. I dont think private schools automatically mean better education though, i guess it depends on the schools where you live, and on the private school. But a big plus is the fact you can take your children out of school for holidays during term time, (of course you can from state schools...just be prepared to pay the fine!)

happygardening smokepole selective state schools are equal to private schools academically" The top academic schools in terms of results are all independent.

I think it might depend on what definition or source of information you are using:
www.telegraph.co.uk/education/leaguetables/10590130/Top-100-secondary-schools-by-GCSE-results-2013.html

Perhaps if you included you source I would be in a better position to agree with you.

Happygardening. What we talking about is half a grade difference at A level . The top state schools score between 260- 270 points at A level or equal to an average grade of A - B+ at A level Wycombe High/ Guildford High ETC score 274-275 = A+ -A roughly half a grade difference for what up a cost of up to £250k for 7 years education .

The Pre U and IB are mainly Independent school qualifications designed to pull the wool over people and create a superior attitude for public schools.

Wycombe Abbey Sorry had a Drink..... These are Dept Of education Performance Statistics.

happygardening Mum we sent our DS to a prep to enable him to pass the entrance test into the school that would knew would give him an academic, broad, and intellectually stimulating education. HG, are the vast majority of private schools the same as the one your DC goes to? How many private schools do you think there are that would be comparable to your DSs?

If I'd only wanted stunning exam results I could have sent him to our excellent primary schools Correct me if I'm wrong but did you not say that your local state schools said that they could not cater for your DSs exceptionally high academic ability? From what you have previously posted, this was not an option.

and a state super selective grammar Again you made it quite clear in previous posts that this was not an option from a logistical point of view. What is more you have made it clear that you required boarding.

You have previously given very clear reasons why state was simply not an option and now you are saying it could have been?

Happy is your son Hollister or Howard

isn't it funny how off the scale kids who need separate schools only seem to occur in families with the money to pay.

The lad who left Peter Symonds in 2012 with 7 A* a A level seemed to cope at State schools

least desirable?
They would be fighting to get in this school round here.
One school offers Latin in yr8 if you are top set languages.
Ofsted think its satisfactory, but parents don't.
I don't think many students would get A* in Maths in y8
and there are no state schools with links to grammars, because there aren't any.
just wow

Doesn't this just highlight that many people who can afford to go private do so because of the choices they have or not.

I have been catching up on this thread. Chocolate, you make the most sense to me.

I know everyone feels passionately about this stuff, but the nitpicking, parsing of every phrase, and diving down every rabbit hole is making me dizzy!

Surely education is a good thing, and if people want to spend their disposable income on it; it's not really a problem. The problem lies with constantly continuing to improve state schools. Surely there is room to do that, and that's what is going to truly improve the majority of children's lives and life chances.

Let's not outlaw the competition, but rise to it.

talkin it's amazing how regularly your DD reports negatively on private schools and the pupils and the quality of their education, their relative lack of intelligence.

One might think she had been given the burden of a hefty chip!

I wonder if she also comments on your local school? The one she doesn't attend? The 'shithole' full of 'chavs' and 'big fat gypsies'??

smokepole: surely the difference you talk about is just academic. Comparing the top state school results with the results of the top privates is irrelevant as the geographical locations of the school probably do not overlap. As many sensible people on this thread have said, one can only compare the schools in one's local area (except if one is considering boarding, of course).

In my local area, there is no comparison in the results of the best of the state schools which are available to me and the private my son is at. The best "comp" near me is the Oratory, and as I am an atheist, I don't think my son has a chance of getting in. The next best gets 87% A-C - very good, and the top sets probably do very well - it is also not my local school. My local school gets 67% A-C. My son's private (one of the many which do not publicly publish its results, so the league table which was linked to is not very accurate as the big hitters are NOT listed) gets 98% A/A, with the average student getting all As with 1 A. If I was choosing a school based on results, and as I can afford it, the choice would be pretty obvious. As exam results really don't mean much, I chose the school not because of the "stonking" exam results, but the other things the school can provide my very quirky son - much in line with the reasons happy chose the school for her son. My DS2 is a very different child and we will be choosing a different school for him when it comes time to decide.

meant to say "exam results do not mean much to me"

mum sorry didn't word that very well. If I was only interested in results I could have sent my DS to our super selective 40 + miles away. I've meant a few of families that do this and live in my area. Most appear comfortably off although not necessarily in the 35k on school feels well off but they are completely focused on the results that children from this top super selective achieve. In many cases this is their sole topic of conversation when talking about this school. If you that obsessed then you probably don't bat an eye lid about driving a 20 mile round trip to get the bus twice a day and then letting your DC spend over an hour on this bus morning and evening getting to school and back you've also clearly got this kind of job where this is a goer I don't. All I think went there from state primaries although I suspect all were heavily tutored. I can't comment on the state primaries round here because when my DS was primary school age we didn't live here but I very much doubt they are much different but if your heavily tutoring your child for entrance exams to this school maybe you're not that bothered about what goes on in lessons.
You also,link into the telegraph league tables my DS's school and others of it's ilk don't publish their GCSE results as success and A*/As is a given.
smokepole I'm not overly knowledgable, on point but I understand 280 points is the equivalent to 2 B's and C. At my DS's school just of 50% achieved the equivalent of an a A or an A in the harder Pre U an a is worth 120 just of 90% achieved the equivalent to an A. So I suspect that that's more than "1/2 a grade" difference. Also now that I'm looking at university websites most that I'm looking at for DS2 want 3A's half a grade of then you've missed the grade requirements.
Anyway as I've repeatedly said I'm not paying for exam results.
What is your problem with the Pre U/IB? Neither appear to be "pulling the wool" over universities. Is it creating a superior attitude? Some state schools run the IB it seems to be an excellent qualification for those undecided about the subject they wish to study at university and enables the bright all rounder to carry on being an all rounder rather than being made to specialise at such an early age.
talkin I'm not denying and never have that the super bright exist in all sections of society but I don't personally like the "your very clever therefore you can do more A levels" ethos. We looked at our local 6 th form college they suggested to my DS that he did 6 A levels, 3 in the first year 3 in the second year. This is not for me what education is all about in fact I think it's desperately sad that the only way state education can cater for the super bright is to shove them through more exams. Universities don't want more than three A levels/Pre U's or whatever. It's not about stretching their intellect by getting them to do more of the same thing in less time it should be about stretching their intellect by exposing them to things that are not being restricted by syllabuses/exams etc. things perhaps that they're not naturally drawn too e.g. music or art. Also other opportunities away from the standard curriculum. These are the things that stay with you in latter life as well and provide only obviously IMO an inner satisfaction and contentment.

"I expect after a while of having children in private school and getting to know the parents, I would get to be comfortable with it and stop seeing the fantastic facilities as somehow rather decadent and ott"

Lots of assumptions here. DD's private school is a 60s concrete monstrosity which is indistinguishable, facilities-wise, from our local comp. When we moved DS, he went from a state primary with electronic whiteboards in every classroom to a private primary which didn't have a single one.

We didn't go private for the facilities. We went private for the attitude to education and for other opportunities (in DS's case, that involved going from "he can't learn an instrument, any instrument, as there aren't three other kids who want to start" to "he wants to play the bassoon? Cool! We'll find a teacher.")

Sure, we COULD have paid twice as much to send them to a "fantastic facilities" private school, but that's an entirely separate choice from the state/private one.

" that involved going from "he can't learn an instrument, any instrument, as there aren't three other kids who want to start" to "he wants to play the bassoon? Cool! We'll find a teacher."

Yep- that's what happens when a school has leads of money because the parents are paying fees!!!!!!! it's ridiculous to suggest it's a question of attitude- as if a state school could fund a bassoon teacher if only it wanted to hard enough. It's the same bizarre attitude that says anyone could pay school fees if only they stopped smoking and fished down the back of the sofa for change- it just a matter of what you choose to spend your money on

"But a big plus is that you can take your child out of school during term time"
Ohmypants I don't know about other all independent schools but we can't, there is some gossip around that a father who took his DS out of school a couple of days early at the end of term despite being denied permission and their DS was asked to leave. Probably not true but my DS's school is really strict on things like this as are many others.
I agree with Skylark it's not all about facilities there are plenty of schools with better swimming pools etc than my DS 's school, it's about ethos.

""But a big plus is that you can take your child out of school during term time"

What a very odd thing to say! In any case, the fines would be cheaper!

IMO most paying 35k a year in fees (that's more than a £1000 per week slightly more I believe than the state sector charges in fines for unauthorised holidays in term time) are highly unlikely to want to take their DC's out of school for a couple of weeks holiday in term time, they're only their 32-34 weeks of the year! In fact many have insurance for time off school due to illness and still being required to pay the fees.

Happy. The Dept Of Educations Performance Statistics must work in a different way. for instance on their Statistics Wycombe Abbey score an average of 274.9 which is equal to a average grade of A at A level Queen Elizabeth's Barnet scores an average of 271.4 which is also equal to to an average grade of A at A level. I think 275 equals A+ on their statistics so that must be the highest points that can be got on the Government Statistics.

I find this UCAS points things very confusing all I understand is that 280 is BBC or ABC (I think) any way well below the required grades for all the RG universities I've recently looked at. An A is 140 points (145 at Pre U not 120 I read the wrong bit on the UCAS website) so three A's at A level would be 420 points. I'm guessing if you do four subjects and the university is only states number of points not grades then I suppose you could have lower grades but those who know more than I do might say something different.

The blunt truth is that money brings choices. If you have plenty of money you can choose and pay for a school that suits your child. That school is likely to offer a wide range of extra curricular activities and have good facilities. Alternatively you can use your money to pay for tutoring for super selectives and selectives; or to move into the catchment of a particular comprehensive (leafy or otherwise); you can fund activities out of school that the school doesn't provide and provide tutoring if you feel your DC aren't progressing in the way you would expect.

As Chocolate has said, all of us on this thread are interested in education. Consequently, I expect all of us are doing what we can to support our DC. So in some ways, all of our DC are better off than many, no matter what type of school they are in, because they have engaged and articulate parents.

The children I worry about are the ones where they don't have the support at home and where the school doesn't seem to be doing a particularly good job either. There are some schools that I know in London that are producing results well above the national average with high levels of FSM and EAL but there are others with a similar intake where the performance is woeful. If some state schools can perform that well, why are others doing so badly?

Compare the KS4 results of these two schools and look at the make up of the cohort
www.education.gov.uk/cgi-bin/schools/performance/school.pl?urn=101943 46% 5 A-C

and
www.education.gov.uk/cgi-bin/schools/performance/school.pl?urn=130912 76% 5 A-C

The % are 5A-C including English and Maths.

"But a big plus is that you can take your child out of school during term time"
Ohmypants I don't know about other all independent schools but we can't, there is some gossip around that a father who took his DS out of school a couple of days early at the end of term despite being denied permission and their DS was asked to leave. Probably not true but my DS's school is really strict on things like this as are many others.

It's the same at the two schools that DS applied to. The school he turned down makes it clear in their literature and it was mentioned at the Open Day. The school he does attend makes it clear at every parents' intro night that they will not authorise holidays during the school year and if you ignore them, you will not be welcome back.

Interesting statistics Chaz why do these schools have such different results? In my book it comes down to the quality of the leadership/teaching. Maybe others will have different views/explanations. Teachers can't constantly blame parents/home life.

Some will let children leave a day or two early to catch a flight home but DS2's school won't. Like Taz we were told in the welcome pack/by our HM/and on the first day that we should not ask if our DS can come home a day early or even out on Saturday evening to attend a family event because the answer will be no. I personally don't have a problem with this although I suppose if you live abroad you might.

"There are some schools that I know in London that are producing results well above the national average with high levels of FSM and EAL but there are others with a similar intake where the performance is woeful."

My dd goes to a school like this. Higher than average levels of children on free school meals, but the school results are very good.

I think it's not just down to teaching and leadership, it's down to the cultural lives of the children attending the school.

Schools with good leadership and teaching and large numbers of children from immigrant families in London get really decent results.

The worst results at schools across the board are in schools with a high intake of white working class children.

White working class boys are now at the bottom of the educational scrap heap in the UK.

Having worked at a boys comprehensive on a big, predominantly white, housing estate I can say that the single biggest barrier to learning in the children I taught was the outright refusal to read for leisure in any capacity - fiction or non fiction, and the lack of belief in the value of education for its own sake.

here