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.

When were you a kid Gently ?

I didn't choose music as an option (this would be 1982) so that's why I didn't perform but I don't remember anyone else doing this either. I simply remember inter-school concerts.

"Having said that though, they have a contact book that looks like 'Debrett's People of Today.'"

Well, they do if the school was one of the top 4- possibly 5. The rest? Not so much.?a

Hm - well, I went to a grammar in the process of turning comp (70s). It was rather so-so; some of the original GS staff were pretty good though they struggled when the classes started to become mixed ability. The school was no help at all if you wanted to try for oxbridge - I totally messed up my interview, no confidence at all in anything except my ability to get good A-levels.

DH was sent to a private school (cathedral). A privilege of sorts... one year they didn't have a maths teacher so a retired canon taught them to do square roots. For the whole year. He wasn't allowed to do 3 sciences, had to do Latin (which he considers a waste of time) and 'Divinity'. At A level the chemistry teacher was so bad that he obtained the syllabus himself (not trivial back then) and taught himself and his two friends (he got an A, they got Bs. The others tanked). With the result that the transition to university was easy for him. You could say the school was responsible for his maturity and subsequent success I guess.

Ditto re all the schools when I was a girl, and the local state schools now. We're about to have a borough-wide festival of music involving orchestras, bands and choirs from state primaries, secondaries, exclusion units and special schools. Including some stonkingly good stuff.

The privileged education will give you the confidence to get into Oxbridge. I know quite a few all A* students who are top of the county academically, but don't have the confidence, the smooth speaking ability and the broader knowledge to get into Oxbridge.

Late 70s -early/mid 80s. I did my O levels in 1983.

As far as public speaking goes - it's a big part of my job. I hate it but I'm good at it. Some people can do it some can't and I don't think, actually, it has much to do with your schooling, some of the most confident gung ho posh school types I work with, not backward about coming forward people, if you know what I mean, are terrible at talking to a room. It's a completely different thing to having that posh boy sort of confidence. The best speaker I've ever seen went to a comp.

No, the school will be aware that you don't have to be all that to get into Oxford. Unless the place has changed dramatically since my day, plenty of people were bright but not amazingly so - and no, they weren't particularly smooth-speaking or broadly knowledgeable. Good solid students whose schools weren't fooled by the myth you need to be amazingly intelligent to get in.

I did know some very, very clever people. But plenty who weren't amazing.

I went to a bog standard inner city (and northern) comp in the 80s but had some excellent teachers and scraped my way into Oxbridge. To be honest, I was more shocked by how unconfident the public school girls were (not the boys so much) - girls who could not cope with being in a mixed tutorial, who thought of boys as alien creatures and whose life experience seemed to be wholly centered on passing exams and becoming a lawyer. What did they have that I didn't? A posher background I guess - more foreign holidays, bigger houses and more pony/ballet lessons, though they tend to be irrelevant when you reach 18. Specifically they knew Latin and English grammar much better than me (which was relevant for our course), though I did catch up eventually. The London girls stood out as they just seemed more worldly-wise ie, acquainted with famous restaurants and shops etc that I'd only read about.

In terms of how we've all done - most of my Oxbridge lot are indeed lawyers (in the City), with a fair smattering also in the arts. My school friends (who admittedly were the more middle class lot in our school) have also 'done well' and are nearly all in professional jobs - doctors, teachers etc.

My husband went to private school and Oxbridge as well - he enjoyed both but thought the private education was a bit of a waste of money. We're both fairly confident people, in managerial roles and happy to speak publicly (though I think I'd be a rubbish debater!).

Our children are definitely going to the local state comp. The privileged bubble of private education makes me quite uncomfortable but I am an old lefty....

Interesting this stuff about public speaking. I am amazed at how state school children nowadays are encourqged to do lots of presentations and so on- and are expected to speak up when necessary. A good example is the parent's evening thing than so many on here object to. I think it's fantastic that teacher can turn to a child and ask thm how they think they are doing- and they answer, rather than a head down mumble, which would probab,y have hqppened in my day. I think one of the worst iniquities of Gove is the removing of Speaking and Listening from GCSE English........

I attended a private day girls school in the 80's.
To be fair it was very much like St.Trinians.I only got 6 O'levels,not particularly good grades & didn't go on to college.
I hated most of my time there,but boy could I tell you some funny stories about it all,it would never happen nowadays

Hak - I rarely spoke in class at school. There seemed little point, and I wasn't made to except when doing french oral and when we had our single practise session for spoken english O level. I was often off with the varies (or in my case, with the cybermen or similar) anyway. Apart from in French where I had to make an effort. And music and history which I enjoyed enough to pay attention. I did lots of solo performing though so I did have that experience of confronting a sea of hostile faces with nothing to defend me except my wits - but the music was a useful filter there. You're absolutely right about kids doing shedloads of presenting these days - I think it's really good, but I still believe that some people can do it and some people can't and no amount of practice will change that if you can't do it.

As for parents' evenings - I have no objection to teachers requiring kids to participate constructively in the 5 minutes but I do object to the lazy 'how do you think you are doing' opening gambit which is a waste of time if you already know how your child thinks they are doing. And mine often do say 'alright I suppose' not because they are tongue tied but because they fear hubris. If the teacher doesn't know how a child thinks they are doing then by all means ask - but in lesson time, not when I've taken time off work so they can talk to me!

I think people do get confused though between people who are naturally confident and people who do the structured talking thing well. The venn diagram might show significant overlap but the two sets are not isomorphic.

My DH is a brilliant public speaker. He makes it look effortless and almost impromptu. What audiences don't know is that he is often sick before speaking and that he sets aside at least an hour of preparation for every minute he is going to speak (I'm talking weddings/staff leaving parties etc, not talking in front of Powerpoint).

When I asked him if he learnt public speaking at his public school he said "No, but I learnt to hide fear there".

grovel your poor DH. I feel fine before presenting and the first five minutes are no problem, it's after that when my mouth goes dry, my brain becomes a desert and my hands shake and my heart pounds. I try to do everything in five minutes!

Anyone can makes themselves good at speaking. I am paid to speak about 30 - 50 times a year, mostly in London , but sometimes abroad. People need to listen to themselves - cut out all the pauses, ums, ahs, you knows and speak with good English and grammar. If you do it enough it gets easy. I spoke for 3 hours yesterday. It is certainly the most tiring of the things I do. I don't think I did much speaking at my private schools - just the speech and drama exams when I was quite small. However I do think on the whole you tend to get people better at speaking, interviews, talking to customers/clients etc from private schools than otherwise.

it is one reason some employers do a first interview by telephone as for some jobs (not all of course) verbal coherence etc matters.

Yes, my DH is a great public speaker and has to do it all the time (on a plane now to speak to hundreds of his fellow partners).

But he hates it. He's trained himself. He's forced himself.

What he wanted more than anything for DC is that easy confidence.

Certainly DD has it in spades . If anyone will listen, she will speak! DS is less natural, he doesn't enjoy it per se, but he doesn't dislike it either.

How much school has had to do with that I can't say. Certainly from being a tiddler both have had to speak to relatively large groups of people.

rabbit made a good point up thread, that the gifts showered upon these children are less to do with their education than their wealth.

I think that their wealth is undoubtedly a part of it. Vague middle class privilege doesn't pay for things. Hard cash is far more useful to these DC than the fact that their parents say 'loo' not 'toilet'.

It's a slippery mix of wealth and schooling that gives them their privilege. The two hold one another up like scaffolding.

And it's not just the top schools that provide it. I have one at a big name school and one at an unrecognisable day school. But the later has provided DD with plenty of privilege. A perfect example is the fact that DD's drama competition was watched by various people with clout in the theatre, and she was asked to audition for a show.

These sorts of things only happen when there is a concentration of people with certain types of jobs, I guess.

Really interesting thread. I went to Cambridge from a school that refused to sign my UCCA form initially as I had 'no chance'. I hated speaking up and had very little confidence but they must have seen something so it can't all be down to the 'polish.' I seem to remember them laughing in my interview (?at me ).

That said I have witnessed the easy confidence of people from private school ( and , to be fair, the very good state schools) throughout university and my professional life. I have decided to send my sons to private secondary schools precisely to give them this. It seems less stressful than having to down four drinks before you have the confidence to talk to anyone. And you're all right the ability to public speak is learned. I can do it now in front of hundreds but the path to such apparent ease was a rocky one....

I agree with word this confidence people at talk about comes from your home as much as your school. Confident people probably get better jobs simply because they interview better, they're not afraid to take risks and apply for that job that might initially not seem suitable, confident people usually get promoted to leadership positions, better jobs equates to better money, better money enables you to pay school fees. Confident people are used to getting what they want and believe in, they're not afraid to ask for help or advise where necessary or question things. Children see their confident parents and from an early age obviously model themselves on them. They they go onto schools where they mix with other children from the same back ground, the staff are used to dealing with confident children and parents and dont try and knock it out of them, they don't perceive it as rudeness if a child questions you're decisions. I questioned DS1 English teacher once and firmly expressed my view that what she'd done was ridiculous, she was stunned and complained that in 20 years of teaching no parent had ever questioned her decision. In contrast DS2 regularly questions his teachers about things they encourage questioning.
I don't believe confidence and arrogance are the same thing at all, but I do know that many are intimidated by confident highly articulate people, especially those who won't accept mealy mouthed answers or excuses to legitimate questions or who won't accept "this is just how it is" argument and can easily mistake it for arrogance.

I'm inclined to agree, happy. Actually I think this perceived confidence comes more from home than from school. Public school boys were regularly chastised in the 70s/80s for daring to question adults. Now it is seen as healthy. The schools produced confident young men in both eras. This suggests to me that family is a huge influence.

I attended village primary schools (3 different ones) and a comprehensive in a small town that was thought of as 'good' locally.

DH attended a boys independent day school from 4-18.

We both went to Oxbridge medical schools and now work as doctors. Lots of experience mixing with those who had 'privileged educations'.

I am pretty envious of others education, I have to admit. But this maybe because I am a geeky nerdy type who would have enjoyed more than I was offered. Clearly others might not. I had lots of bullying problems, hated the fact no one bothered with the school uniform and were rude all the time, hated that activities like drinking/smoking/sex/makeup were the most important things. However, these issues are a problem in all schools to some extent.

Things other people experienced that I did not:

• Better behaviour overall, I found disruptive classrooms very frustrating. Maybe due to having 35 in all classes, about 25 at a-level. Everyone in the middle got totally lost.
• Emphasis on getting people to achieve minimum level, ie C at GCSE, rather than their potential.
• More subjects offered (e.g. our school only did French and no other languages, only double science GCSE and not separates, no further maths a-level etc).
• Breadth of learning possible. We covered the syllabus, nothing else. I certainly struggled when starting university because of this. My general knowledge is akin to that of someone with many fewer years of education than I actually have.
• Interesting clubs. Husband did chess, greek, fencing, music composition etc. I might not have chosen these but my options were limited to netball, hockey or whole school orchestra (all instruments, abilities and attitudes).
• Ability to prepare pupils for what they want to do next. Attitude of my school to my request to help prepare for medical school 'oh dear, perhaps your parents or GP knows someone who can help?)

I don't think only private schools can provide all of the above but unfortunately aside from a few 'super selectives' and places with top performing grammar schools it appears logistically impossible for most schools to do this.

I went to a mixed Grammar in the 80's. It had a catchment which extended several miles up in one direction and stopped not far from the school, excluding what was generally described as a 'rough' area. We all did the 11 plus at primary.

One of my close friends fom school lives down the road from me now, we've both moved away from the area, we were discussing school the other day and she was saying to me that my experience at school was quite different to hers as I was in the A stream and she was in the B stream. She said she was always told she wasn't good enough. I felt really sad hearing that as had no idea at the time.

I also want to add that my DS is not constantly being told how wonderful he is or how clever he is. I suspect he's told that he's receiving an outstanding education and that's he's fortunate to be in this situation and that he should make the most of it. Others mentioned lack of ambition amongst children from the independent sector, this in not my experience, most of the parents are positively and openly bristling with the highest levels of ambition for their DS's and the school is also exceedingly ambitious for it's pupils, expectations are enormously high.

I also want to add that my DS is not constantly being told how wonderful he is or how clever he is. I suspect he's told that he's receiving an outstanding education and that's he's fortunate to be in this situation and that he should make the most of it. Others mentioned lack of ambition amongst children from the independent sector, this in not my experience, most of the parents are positively and openly bristling with the highest levels of ambition for their DS's and the school is also exceedingly ambitious for it's pupils, expectations are enormously high.

Have others mentioned lack of ambition in the independent sector on this thread? Where?