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.

grovel - so unkind of you not to remember Boris Johnsson. He may not be a member of the Cabinet, but I suspect he views himself as a bit of a mover and shaker.

Ooh, a sneaky Scandinavian s crept in, there.

No no, I know very well that you get excellent truly outstanding schools in poorer areas. I teach in one! My point is that those posters making an argument that private education is unfair because it conveys advantage are missing that that advantage is still there for those kids from affluent backgrounds attending state schools in areas with tight affluent catchments. Their experience and very often their attainment is broadly on a par with kids at the local indie school. Their experience and attainment is closer to those kids at the private than it is to those bright kids stuck in a sink comp.

NancyJones Sorry, I'm still not understanding the point. I'm afraid I don't know how to make it any clearer for you TBH.

Sorry talkinpeace, are you asking me to name a failing school?

Please try!!!
Are you saying there is no difference between state schools or that there is a huge difference between state and private? Both your previous posts have just said the same thing. I'm genuinely not understanding the point you are making by saying posters gave talked about improvements.

have talked

I don't see need for private in my area as schools are fully comprehensive and provide a very good education. There are private schools which may suit some children for whatever reason. Personal choice. I am very grateful I live here rather than choosing between school with poor outcomes for pupils or grammars etc...

NancyJones - that advantage is still there for those kids from affluent backgrounds attending state schools in areas with tight affluent catchments. and you don't feel that this is in some way being addressed by improvements in the lowest performing schools?

yup :
its all on the dfe tables anyway :
but I'd like to know which sort of school is so utterly dire because of itself, rather than having another selective or leafy school sucking the life out of it

because selection in state schools is the REAL reason for the differences

I'd log to see a distribution map of mumsnetters. Very few of them seem to live within striking distance of the 80% of state secondary schools that are rated good or outstanding. They seem to clustered round the notice to improves and inadequates. It's very curious.....

Mumtrying- no, I don't think this us being fully addressed at all; not even close despite 'improvements'.

Talkinpeace- I'm not going to name one particular school as you say it's all there I black and white. I'm not even disputing your point. I'm quite sure esp in large urban areas with a good mixed catchment that these schools are failing as a result of other schools creaming off the top. Though not always and not the case in the greater Manchester comp I taught in 10yrs ago. There was virtually zero use of the private sector and they were failing because SLT was poor at supporting staff in dealing with very some very challenging children and parents and there was a failing culture at the school. Self fulfilling prophecy really.

ps grovel, yes, sorry, it was lazy to refer just to Eton. I did, of course, mean all the big public schools, of which Eton sounds like it is one of the most generous, if not the most generous, when it comes to providing bursaries. It is, nevertheless, redolent of a system which accepts that the wealthy minority should take control of things and decide the fate of the poor majority.

NancyJones Mumtrying- no, I don't think this us being fully addressed at all; not even close despite 'improvements'. but you do agree it is being addressed (just not to your satisfaction)?

No I don't agree it is being addressed at all. Government is paying lip service to it as quite frankly no government, left or right, really gives a damn about those at the bottom of the heap. Secondary is too late to stop the rot anyway but successive governments are too weak to address the issues at hand and do the situation at the bottom gets worse.
I pay for all the extras my kids get from being at a large independent school with excellent facilities. I don't pay expecting better grades than could be achieved at the high achieving state school on my doorstep. If they had to go there I wouldn't lose sleep over it as I'm sure they'd do well. As I keep saying, the difference isn't that great. No eat would I send them to some of the schools I have experience of through work though. I'd rather home ed which is saying something!

My auto correct has a mind of its own tonight. Apologies!

NancyJones No I don't agree it is being addressed at all Really, so you don't think any failing schools have been turned around? Are you saying the failing schools that appear to have turned around are still failing and haven't really improved at all, it just looks that way on paper?

Just a few thoughts...

The lack of selection or setting or adequate differentiation is definitely one driver of private school demand in my part of suburban London.

If rich people want to spend their money nurturing their kids, you really can't stop them. (Unless you want to go all North Korea on their asses!) And really, if they spend their money on true education and not just over priced finishing schools, we all get some tangential benefit because we do have to share the world with their children.

rabbitstew, no problem. I like your cyberself and you are challenging. Which I appreciate. Bed time now.

Oh I do think some are indeed being turned around but a lot of others are just glossy rebranding. The actual issues are big being addressed and those schools are still spending too much time and money on resources that schools at the other end simply don't need.
As an aside, I also think there are plenty of dull and uninspiring schools who are still being graded 'good' simply because their results are high. Likewise plenty of schools being slated by ofsted due to poor results are actually full of teachers working their socks off to help kids from deprived backgrounds succeed . Anyway, must put sleeping baby down and get some sleep.

Aww, thank you, grovel. I like your cyberself, too.

Excellent post Tansie

The state schools where we live are absolutely dreadful. Our local high school has positioned itself as a vocational school and offers a limited number of Highers and only three Advanced Highers - I know that probably doesn't mean much to most of the posters in England, but for example, you can't go off to study Medicine or Veterinary Medicine from our local high school because they don't offer the required courses for admissions. The Council produced a paper a few years ago justifying the stripping away of Higher/AH courses from the schools in the area and it was justified by "lack of demand due to the economic demographics". In other words, they can't afford to run the classes for a tiny handful of students. I personally find the "economic demographics" comment quite insulting because it summarises the attitudes here- "we don't expect much from these children". It gives me the rage.

There are no schools around here creaming off the best pupils. DS is an anomaly around here for going private. He commutes over an hour each way to school and he's the only child in our catchment currently going private.

I struggle or reconcile the assertions on this thread that bar a few exceptions state education is very good, with the endless threads on here about people scrimping and scraping to pay rather than send their DC to their local state school, parents appealing rather that sending their DC's to the school they've been allocated, parents moving to get into the catchment area of the only decent school, parents suddenly funding God to get into the only good school and also the complaints of parents I meet in my job.
Either those who believe state ed is very good or all those who are doing all sorts of things so that their DC's don't have attend their local school are clearly misinformed at best deluded at worst.
talkin and others as you know and contrary to what you think in my experience there remains a massive gulf between the "outstanding/affluent" state school (where DS1 attended) and the private school up the road (well not exactly up the road). Frankly when ever I've been involved in anything at either DS1 old "outstanding high achieving academy" or his well regarded 6th form college (which is actually better than the academy) I always come away slightly disappointed and underwhelmed.
Maybe it's to do with expectation, perhaps I just expect too much?
Also I've said of course it's not fair that so few should receive so much in such an important area like education and if we're talking about a the small number of really big names who really are receiving a world class all round education we really are talking about a tiny number. But I don't knows the answer to this but what I do know is that not sending my DS would not have made a scrap of difference to those who have less than he has. Life hasn't always dealt us a lucky hand but in this instance it has and we would be mad not to take advantage of it.

80% (ish) of state secondary schools are rated good or outstanding. Of course that doesn't mean they are anything like on a par with the great publish schools- how could they possibly be? Or a lot of second and third tier ones either. It's just a basic question of money.

But it is also true that many people have a false idea of state schools- the language that is used about them on here confirms that. And many of us just want to challenge the misconceptions- that all bright children will be bullied at state school, that teachers spend 90% of their time firefighting, that "nice" children sink without trace.. I find it very frustrating that one negative anecdote is extrapolated to apply to all state schools- one positive anecdote is either complete ignored because it doesn't fit the stereotype or dismissed as exceptional.