tell me about a 'privileged' education

[Frostycake]

If you attended a grammar or private school or if you teach in one (or taught in one), tell me what I may have missed by having a comprehensive education in the 1980s.

I sometimes see glimpses of the education I could have had if circumstances had been different for my parents (the recent TV series on Harrow, meeting and working with people who went to Oxford, Cambridge, Malvern College etc.) and I often wonder what it is I missed out on apart from the obvious opportunities and overflowing confidence and maturity this type of education seems to instill in pupils.

Come and talk to me about the detail as I'm bursting with curiosity.

Absolutely, Frostycake! Took me ages to work out what was 'different' about my university peers, and wondered why I felt so gawky and awkward in comparison. Then I realised that it was this extra veneer of confidence that they all seemed to have. They'd do a ten-minute presentation on something (often spouting absolute rubbish), but do it with such self-assurance that they'd somehow manage to sound like a world authority on the subject.

Don't think it fooled the tutors, though, as quite a few of them ended up with fairly unspectacular degree results. They're mostly hedge fund managers now...

I went to an all-girls private school from 1977-1991. It was, at best, mediocre and, looking back on it now, positively shit in some ways. I can only think of one, maybe two teachers that genuinely inspired me. Most seemed to be marking time. Some were absolutely awful.

I coasted the whole way and was never pulled up on it, ever. I don't think they gave a damn, really. Most of us did go to university but I remember a very, very bright classmate being actively discouraged from applying to Oxbridge. I still see her and she still talks about it - she's angry about it, 25 years later. Careers advice mainly focused round the teacher/nurse/PA route.

The expectation that you would 'marry well' wasn't overtly expressed but it was there, definitely. The whole ethos of the place was set up for it. They never seemed particularly ambitious for us.

Subjects were the usual - english, history, geog, French or German, bit of Latin, art, textiles, maths, sciences - including the miserable Modular Science GSCE that I had to take because no one believed I could pass biology. I loved history but was told I was crap at it. We also did 'child development' and lots of cookery. I had elocution lessons, fgs. Sports facilities were...ok. A library that even I, at fifteen, knew was crap...but at least there was a library, I suppose.

I now have an MSc and teach at an RG university (precisely the kind of place that we would've been discouraged from applying to). I did well academically once I left - my education is mostly in spite of school not because of it.

Unsurprisingly the place went to the wall a few years ago. I don't feel that I was 'privileged' at all, really. If I'd been living in the 19th century and had had that education, maybe, but at the end of the 20th? It was a bit of a joke really.

My only worry about private education is that my LO will end up being a bit snobby. DH is privately educated, and majority of the people I know who are privately educated have this false sense of superiority. Is it just me who sees this? I can spot a privately educated person a mile away.

I think it will really depend on where you are in the country. I attended an inner city comp in the 90s. It was pretty rough but the teaching was pretty good. Yes there were lots of fights, classroom disruption. I kept my head down and got on with it and did well. I would have preferred an all girls school. Some of my friends who were privately educated have excelled, others not. Now....I live in the home counties and secondary schools in our town are great compared to where I went. My dcs will hopefully have a more enjoyable school experience.

Temps, you are so spot on! Gosh when they don't know what they are talking about, but talk like they do. It is so so frustrating! DH, privately educated, does this too, and urrggh!!

Hungrydam I know what you mean, but I really think it depends on the school (and the person, to some extent). That sought after self-assurance can cross over into entitlement and arrogance quite easily I think. I'm by no means an expert, but there seems to be as much of a social hierarchy within the public school system as there is within wider society - for some reason pupils from some schools tend to end up snobbier than others!

I also went to a comprehensive in the 70s/80s but my experience was quite different to yours, OP. I still feel that I missed out compared to grammar/private education, in some ways, but overall it was a 'good' school as far as comprehensives go. Comparing my experience to my poor son who went to a comprehensive in the 00s and it was fucking awful (and I feel terribly guilty about it - it absolutely fucked his education and prospects).

Back to my 80s comprehensive, our headteacher had definite pretensions ambitions and used to walk around in an academic gown and cap, and make all the Heads of year wear gowns as well. (we all sniggered about this).

Good stuff about my school- Facilities were good, large sports field, lots of different sports, 2 gyms, swimming pool, science labs, language labs, drama studio, music studios etc etc. 1500ish pupils. Classes streamed according to ability from 2nd year onwards, but in a fairly flexible way so pupils moved sets not only in your year overall sets, but in individual subjects. So someone who was generally average and in mid-stream class, but good at maths, could be in top set maths. Lots of extra curricular clubs, I was in the choir, orchestra and chess clubs (although chess was more about sitting inside out of the rain in winter). Big library. No massive behaviour or discipline problems. There were holidays and trips. I went on day trips but none of the holidays. Some holidays were useful ones like language exchanges. There was also a bunch of well-off kids who went on school skiing trips twice a year. So in one sense - facilities, what was available to us, I don't think a grammar or most private schools would have been very much different.

The difference - and where I felt I missed out - is in the wider type of education and attitude. that confidence. That awareness of the world outside of your family's and opportunities. I don't imagine many private or grammar school pupils leave school at 16 to go to work. Most of us did. Some stayed on for 6th form. And some went to university. But if you didn't think that was for you, or didn't even understand what a university was or what a degree was or what you can do with it (me) there was no big effort to educate you on that. There was a big very posh expensive private estate (talking houses worth up to a million back in the 80s) feeding into the school, and a council estate. Most of the private estate kids went to uni, most of the council estate kids left at 16, regardless of how academic we were.

A close friend of mine (incredibly bright; First from Cambridge; went to the same school as me) says she felt the same when she was doing her law conversion course after uni. Apparently she broke down in tears after one lecture because she felt she could never compete with all her public school educated peers, who all seemed so polished and sophisticated. To console her, the lecturer said 'Yes, but have you actually listened to what they're saying? Most of it is utter rubbish.'

Not sure why, but I've never come across a state school that instils that kind of confidence.

'my LO will end up being a bit snobby.'

I think that depends on the school, and on the family.

I have several privately educated nieces and nephews, at rather good day schools. They all speak very nicely and they've moved on to careers rather than working in the local supermarket, say, but they don't have a snobby bone in their bodies and mix perfectly happily with us lot.

Private day schools. 4 - 10 and then 10 - 17. Small. Girls only. It was just after the abolition of the 11+ as my area went comprehensive entirely in about 1970. The local comps were actually very very very dire although my school was certainly not the most academic private school around.

It must be very hard to generalise as some private schools are not good and some comprehensives are in posh leafy suburbs with rich middle class parents.

My private school certainly was good for me. I got the best A levels int he school, scholarship to university, top of the class despite being a year young, did a lot of music, 4 grade 8s,. I worked very hard indeed though so in a sense I was responsible for how well I did. That was inthe days when about 10% of girls went to university in the country and that school had similar results - about that % went to university. There were not enough clever girls there which made it a bit isolating but yes it certainly was a school which was good. I went on one school trip abroad - skiing and I loved it. That was the reason I went again when our children were 3/5/7 and we have skied most years since. I learned judo and self defence is pretty important to women so I liked that. I didn't do some of the things on offer like fencing. Those things though are available in many state schools so I don't think that's particularly a private school thing.

I did speech and drama exams until I was 10 but again I am sure they are not the preserve of the private system.

My children who have been to and are in day private schools more recently probably have more facilities at their schools. In my school we had to get a bus once a week for the swimming afternoon. I particularly enjoyed gym club but again that is something in state schools too.

I suspect we were treated better as pupils by the teachers than at the average NE comp and I am sure my received pronunciation comes not just from my parents but the school as well which has never done me any harm.
I was top of the year at university and won prizes too so it was pretty consistent and have done pretty well as a lawyer since.

I find my daughters who graduated more recently keep coming across people from school/university in London so perhaps some element of networking applies but in general most of us got our jobs through simply applying and being the best person for the job so I've never seen any network of old girls contacts working in this family. My children have had huge cultural racial and religious mixes at London day private schools whereas of course in Northumberland which is 97% white British you didn't get that but that's just geography and nothing to do with the schools.

I latched on at school to just about the poorest girl when there were Lady XYZs in the class who could have been friend, which to the credit of my parents was never an issue. We are not a snobby family in any sense. People are just people.

I have been pleased to pay school fees for my children and replicate what I had and wise I made a career choice as a teenager would enable that.

I went to a terrible comp. Truly dire.

I still have young family members there. It has improved.

But I send my DC to private school and the difference is breathtaking. A whole different day to day experience.

I sometimes feel a bit envious of my DC for the wonderful education they're receiving.

I'm in awe & get intimidated by their level of self-assurance, polish, ease of conversation & their glossy thick hair!!!
I have some public school friends with 4 year olds who have the confidence & self assurance of 30 year olds but still nmanage to be lovely little children so it must come from the parenting as well as the school(oh & the 4 year olds have inherited the beautitful mane of thick glossy hair too!

I went to a comprehensive in the 1970s.

I played two musical instruments to grade 8 standard and got a scholarship to read English at Oxford when I was 17.

I was not madly overwhelmed by my contemporaries when I got there though some of them did seem rather over-confident and many of them had very posh voices. My university boyfriend had been to one of the leading public schools and I didn't feel particularly intimidated by him or his friends.

Oh, and I've always had thick glossy hair. My 14 year old has the most stunning head of pre-Raphaelite curls I've ever come across, rivalled only by one of her best mates at her inner-city comp. In follicular terms, I'm not madly threatened either.

I went to a state grammar. Very achieving. Think I did well from it. Competitive as all high achievers which I take on with me through life.

Interestingly though, where I work we have lots of work experience kids. And one thing that is very noticeable is that the private kids have an air of confidence about them which is good in some ways but can also be mistaken for arrogance if they're not careful. State ed kids a lot more shy and perhaps less likely to grasp opportunities as a result.

I (private school) was quite shy and hairdressers have commented on my thin hair!

So apart from the great facilities and willing pupils and capable staff, the main thing I appear to have missed out on is the self-assured air which comes from being told that you are capable, bright and deserving of good things in your life, instead of, as happened at my comp, being told that you're worthless, good for nothing, will amount to nothing, being caned by teachers and attacked by pupils and raised as a shop/factory worker.

at JillyR2015 I'd swap your private education for my thick glossy hair any day.

I have some public school friends with 4 year olds who have the confidence & self assurance...

Yes that same confidence and self assurance that I witness in the park with little Princes and Princesses lording it over other children, with their heightened sense of entitlement, already demonstrating feelings of superiority inculcated by some schools and parents.

I went to a comprehensive in the 80s. It was quite a good rural one - no behaviour issues - and I managed to get into Oxbridge. Some of the teaching was great. In one A level subject though I only got my "A" by dint of getting myself a textbook and making sure I had covered it all. So it was patchy overall and I can't say the extracurricular stuff was any great shakes.

When I got to Oxbridge I met all sorts of people who had had a more "privileged" schooling. I don't think they were necessarily any brighter or managed better academically (I got a high 2:1 degree without absolutely killing myself with work, if I had been less obsessed with my first love really focussed am sure I would have got a first).

But they had all had a much greater variety and depth of experience. Most had done much more travelling and exciting school trips. Music at my school was awful (I was very musical but all outside of school), whereas they were all playing/singing in very high standard school orchestras/choirs. They had done things like go away to the schools "cottage" in France for a half term, or the schools residential centre for a "Philosophy Week". They'd all done work experience not in M&S like me but in a barristers' set or in the City or at the BBC. They'd had societies at school e.g. politics society/history society to which famous people came to speak. They were used to attending black tie parties and formal dinners and all that sort of thing. They'd done rowing and lacrosse at school rather than trying it for the first time at uni . When they'd done drama at school, they had done near professional productions in a custom built theatre with proper lighting and everything rather than just improvised on the hall stage like we did.

Of course if you go to Oxbridge as a lower middle class comp kid, it gives you the chance to get familiar with all this stuff (not that it necessarily has any value). I'm now at home at a drinks party or black tie dinner. I can talk to anyone no matter how august. I regularly see people I know on TV and in powerful positions. We go to alumni "family days" at our old colleges and my kids are growing up with some connection to the "establishment" that I never had as a state school child in rural provinciana. If they want to go to Oxbridge when they are older it will be much less of a psychological leap for them; they've been there for a bbq and seen mum's old room and dad's old college. If they want to do work experience we have no end of professionals to call on, I doubt they will end up at M&S. This is how privilege perpetuates itself.

The great drawback of an elite education so far as I can see is that there is a massive assumption that it is not OK to be non-ambitious and non-high achieving. My friends who went to smart schools are all now in London following serious careers and earning lots. The ones who went to comps have been much more likely to get out of the rat race and settle for quality of life rather than high achievement. Both DH and I have done that - we've opted to live in a provincial place and sacrifice our careers in order to have a simpler quieter life and be able to be with our small children. I think if you have an expensive education that is a very difficult path to take, as you are programmed from day one that achievement is everything.

My kids are both bright and probably scholarship material. I hum and har constantly about whether we should try and get them into an elite school or whether actually they will be perfectly happy at the local school without being programmed onto a track in life, and there is more to life than achieving stuff.

I went to a girls' state grammar in the 80s. At that time it was only open to people living in my borough. Everyone in the class took the 11+ during class time. You couldn't opt out.

Good points

I have fond memories of school and teachers so do many of my friends.

Most pupils (not all) were decent people and I made some lovely friends.

We had a good education.

90% of the teachers had no problems controlling the class.

Bad points

About 10% of the teachers could not control the class at all, so we didn't learn much in their lessons. Nothing was ever done about this, so they were left not controlling the class for years. One of the teachers was a maths teacher, so i didn't learn a lot of maths for the first two years until I changed to a different teacher. I found it hard to catch up though.

Zero pastoral care. The teachers were nice enough on the whole, but it was their job to deliver the lessons, not to worry about anyone's wellbeing. Teachers didn't intervene if there was any bullying.

We were not really encouraged to aim as highly in the sixth form as we could have done re higher education. Two girls went to Oxbridge, but considering double that regularly go to Oxbridge from my local regular state comp, i don't think that is particularly impressive.

A girl from our school went to a private school for sixth form and she got into Oxbridge from there and my teachers were making comments about how they didn't think she was bright enough. Oxford obviously disagreed!

The confidence/arrogance thing is interesting.

I was brought up in a working class family and very much taught that the sort of assertive/articulate behaviour displayed by many public school people was wrong.

Then I got to Oxbridge, then on to the city and I started to see a very different picture. Yes, there are public school tossers who think they can boss you around, but frankly there were legions of people like that on the council estate where I grew up.

Some people are just not nice. Whatever their class or schooling.

Yes, the confidence/arrogance displayed by the public schooled can grate. Especially if you've been brought up to find it unpalatable. But actually, being very articulate and assertive is very helpful.

But more than that, the reticence of many working class people, especially women, the lack of speaking up for fear of being wrong, the reluctance to say what it is you want, and argue for it, is damaging. The demonising of assertive, articulate behaviour as 'arrogant' simply holds certain groups of people back.

I have two children. One had a very privileged education at a grammar school, the other is having a very "unprivileged"one at a high school.

The thing that has impacted most on their education is their home life and thwt of their school mates. Dd's peers were more likely, for example, to play musical instruments to a high level, because they had had years of out of school lessons. Ditto dance, drama and sport. I have had to work harder to make sure ds gets the cultural experience I want for him because his school peer group generally come from backgrounds which do not have either the money or the inclination or both to want th same for theirs.

The teaching style is very different at the two schools, but both styles are equally valid and effective and ds is actually academically more advanced than his sister was at the same stage.

However, the sense of entitlement that being told you are a member of the elite, and the sense of failure at being told you are not, at the at of 10 has ramifications down the years. Hardly surprisingly.

Word - I agree completely (and my experience was and is very similar to yours). The only difference between my education (comp, cambridge, professional qualification in the city) and that of my posh school colleagues is that they had confidence instilled in them and I had it knocked out of me possibly from birth. I did OK though, but still...

But more than that, the reticence of many working class people, especially women, the lack of speaking up for fear of being wrong, the reluctance to say what it is you want, and argue for it, is damaging. The demonising of assertive, articulate behavior as 'arrogant' simply holds certain groups of people back.

this

A colleague of my sister's once commented (and not in a positive way) that I seemed to have 'done very well for myself' and was 'rather assertive and determined.'

As if to say 'how very dare she?'

GentlyBenevolent Well done on doing well in spite of your comp education. Yes, it seems we were conditioned to be demoralised and 'kept down' right from the start. Some might say easier to control and subjugate.