Grrrr, why does this irk me so!?! Warning - this is about private schools!

[BogeyNights]

DS1 has just started high school. Got into our first choice (state) school, and he's settled in great. We, as in my DH and DS are all really pleased with our choice and we are incredibly relieved and happy that things are going well so far.
My DS2 is at Junior (state) school, and this too is fantastic. We love the school, staff, ethos and atmosphere and both boys have been (and are) very happy there.

So why does it grate on me so much that all (and I mean ALL) their cousins go to private schools. I feel like the poor relative, which is crazy because we're not. And I have to listen to the parents bang on about 'speech day' and 'saturday school', 'entrance exams' and 'after school prep' and other such stuff. And now there's chat about 'having to find a sporty school for cousin Billy because it's so important to him.'

State schools do offer sport! Some of them even 'specialise' in sport. DSs school offers sports clubs before and after school and at lunch EVERY DAY. But is specialises in humanities (whatever that means!) and other schools specialise in science and other subjects. What the heck is wrong with state schools - btw all the cousins live in 'naice' areas of the country, where the term 'special measures' is no doubt very rarely applied to a school near them.

I know it's all about choice but I still grates. Although on reflection, I suppose I know lots more kids that go to state schools and they're all ok - ie the ones who go with my kids!

Just a rant, and a grumble... thanks for listening :)

Amber I know what Zero means, it's having a hinterland, whether they'll ever say something surprising or whether they've take a set of opinions and views and don't deviate from them.

And a hinterland or not IMO isn't the preserve of the privately educated at all!

Oh dear - obviously my acquaintance anecdote was only tenuously linked to the subject of the thread. I'm not trying to suggest that any particular form of schooling guarantees a fulfilling intellectual life.

I am trying to pinpoint exactly why we were drawn to "this" school not "that". Some desire for the broadest possible horizons, the "official" curriculum being just the start of the journey ... Dunno.

Actually I do. We wanted a total integration of education and experience.

Or you were too lazy to go to more than one source for everything? I don't see how you can get a hugely rich "hinterland" from just one place, tbh. It seems a bit... limited... However, if you think you can get total integration from one school, then go ahead and tell yourself you are gaining yourself a rich hinterland, if you want...

I didn't actually use the word 'hinterland' y'know...

Zero, thought you made an interesting point. And v eloquently. speaking as one with a horizon-limited hinterland thanks to my crappy comp ; )

All my "depth"/whatever has come after school from evening classes/plays exhibitions/places I've seen underpinned by work/life experience. I would now have loved to have been taught classics, a range of sport, art history, philosophy... To have had teachers with the time/dedication to spur me as an individual on, to work on my strengths, Yes, i believe very good private schools can do this much better than most state schools have the capacity to do.

I would now have loved to have been taught classics, a range of sport, art history, philosophy.

If only you'd mentioned this last week you could have visited just such a school with me.

After a mixture of education: state, private, tiny bit of home ed, Oxbr, prof quals, inauguration into the Grand Society of the Underachievers Thread , and then plunging into it all again with the intention of helping the next generation avoid said society I have - lost my train of thought -

What MN needs is some means of merging threads. Because there's one running right now about language teaching in secondary schools. And those of us who lived through the good times of a previous century are somewhat shocked, generally, at the poverty of aspiration we're hearing about now.

But to say one thinks things could be done better would only irk the OP of this thread.

All any of us want is happiness and a good education for our kids - whether that be through state or private schools. OP - it sounds like you have that for your kids so be happy for that and the £££s you saved for other things like a good standard of life, less financial pressure, great holidays etc... None of the rest matters. Let it wash over you..

Aww, ZeroSumGameThingy, would you rather I'd referred to "rich interior monologues," then?

Alas, a private education does not protect you from a life of unoriginal debating, vacuousness, divorce, alcoholism, a tiresome obsession with shoes and handbags, severely limited literary interests, or a floundering career. There's no helping some people.

You have to look at someone's whole life experience, not just their school.

rabbitstew - I grew up in the back end of nowhere, where there were no ballet classes, chess clubs, leisure centres etc. I also had a father who worked till 10pm every night and every other weekend and 3 younger siblings.

It would have been impossible for my parents to ferry us all around for hours to the nearest towns for anything extra-curricular.

Instead a private prep with a large number of boarders managed to tick all the boxes and give us all the opportunity to try things that we'd never have even thought of.

For me, the extras are just as important as the exam results or how successful a child is later in life. The journey is just as valuable.

We're currently moving out of London. I have the choice of leaving DD at her London primary and paying for her to commute in everyday, or moving her to the local school round the corner. In terms of results, the London primary is better, but not by a huge amount.

However, the access to experiences being based in London is massive. I'll happily pay the train fare to give her those opportunities. Doesn't mean that she'll do any better in her SATS.

Minifingers - you are right, it's true.

I'm probably a bit duh on that one since no-one in my or DH's extended families has ever not gone to a selective school whether state or private. I just rather assume that DD will do the same.

Even so, my grammar was not super-selective back in the day, and still got those kind of results. We were just expected to - failure wasn't given as an option. I doubt whether a lot of my classmates back then would get in today - it's become hideously competitive whereas before it was only super-selective for the boarding places.

I don't doubt, pyrrah, that some people, given where they live, can only access all the extra-curricular stuff they want via their children's prep school. I was merely making the point that this does not automatically create a "hugely rich hinterland" or a "rich interior monologue." It does highlight the point, however, that most of us have to make compromises in life and it's your whole life experience that counts - your father didn't get to see you very much and you grew up in the back end of beyond, which probably had some advantages or your parents wouldn't have lived there, but it wasn't a hugely cultural experience. It will have affected your interior monologue, however. I, personally, find it pretty offensive for anyone to suggest that someone should have nothing in their head if they hadn't read a great many novels and had ballet lessons as a child...

island if you'd listened to a programme on Radio 4 the other morning you would have heard how horse ownership is not the sole preserve of the very wealthy.
Secondly however I look at it I just don't believe I'm elbowing out the way those with "raw talent" and let's not forget wealthy parents can have talented children as well.

how is " raw talent" different from " talent"? Do only poor or deprived dcs have their talent"raw"?

Raw talent is normally taken to mean an untrained, natural ability. Talent could mean raw talent or talent that is being or has been nurtured, directed, built upon and encouraged - ie trained. Raw talent is therefore a more specific term...

I'm assuming the term "raw talent" coined above has the same meaning as that applied to some horses, meaning loads of obvious natural potential but yet to be refined into anything useful with education/training. So for example a big moving horse which is not yet been broken in to ride could have the raw talent to make a top dressage horse.
Where as talent means that this natural potential has already received some sort of education/training and often very extensive education and training and still remains very obvious and has not as yet reached it's maximum potential.
Neither terms are derogatory and in both cases just like in world of horses this talent doesn't guarantee great success in the future.

Dh has 'talent' in music as he's a fairly accomplished pianist. He's had 20 years worth of practice and lessons to refine it.

Ds1 aged 6 IMO has 'raw talent' in music. He's had no piano lessons but is able to listen to simple tunes once and pick them out on the piano.

As all horse owners know and I sadly know this from my own experience you can purchase a horse who on paper has all the necessary breeding to make it a "top" horse in your chosen discipline, it can have the correct conformation and paces, appear to be of the right type to do the job at the highest level when galloping around a field all day, it can be coveted by other riders in your discipline but if it doesn't have the right temperament to do the job it's no more use as a top competition horse than a beach donkey on Blackpool Beach.
The same general principle must apply to children you can have lots of "raw talent" but if for a myriad different reasons some outside of your control you are mentally or physically unable to channel this talent into the right area then it's of little benefit to you and your future prospects, We know that poverty, substance dependence either parents or the child him/herself, bereavment, acrimonious divorce, ill health in particular chronic ill health either a child's of in his immediate family, long tern unemployment, motivation or not, general well being, depression happiness etc etc all impact on how children learn and if they are able to develop their "raw talent" or continue developing refining talent.