Does anyone else think their DC's private school is rubbish?

[Mynameismummy]

Ok...I'm asking for a pasting here, I know - but I'm desperate for some outside opinions. My DCs go to a private (primary) school which is full of the usual promises and blah blah blah. I'm cynical enough to accept that this is part of the territory....but they seem to fail on every score. It's academically so-so, the pastoral care is iffy and everything seems to be aimed at putting on a good show for the parents. Everyone else goes on about how marvellous it is (until you get them one to one when, funnily enough, they all seem to have a story of woe about how their child can't read/is being bullied etc). I wonder how much of it is the psychology of people liking to big themselves up and how much I'm the only one who sees how crap it is. Anyone else have a similar experience?

If you think your child's prep school is providing a sub standard education I would remove them from the school.

Last night, DS ( now lower sixth ) was talking about his homework which centred on the pros and cons of private school and he said if he only had enough cash for one part of school life he 'd choose a good prep school.

He said, that it gave him something he thought was really special especially those years when childhood intellectual curiosity tends to peak.

SheGotAllTheMoves interesting. A traditional 13+ prep certainly provides a broader curriculum, science lessons in science labs taught by science teachers 3-4 times a week, French taught by French teachers 3-4 times a week art taught by art teachers in art rooms etc all from year 2/3. No literacy and numeracy hour, at boarding preps lots of games /PE 3-4 times a week, no sats and entrance exams are often a considerable way of in the early years so although basics are established the teaching is broader and less exam/test focused this is what you paying for.
But IMO it's at senior school children need their intellectual curiosity stimulated, prep school children are naturally curious, by teenage years I wonder if this curiosity is waning, so many other things are happening in their lives, so I think it's teenagers who need a broad stimulating curriculum that is not just focused on exams to hopefully maintain their intellectual curiosity into adulthood.

I suppose if its a choice between paying for prep or senior the big factors are what the local state schools offer at each stage and the child themselves.

happy I don't disagree. One boy's experience of one prep school is hardly evidence of a universally applicable truth .

But interesting that this is what he feels. Though of course he has only just begun sixth form so can't really take a view on this section of his education.

I think I'd be more inclined to agree with you. That the teen years are the ones where the best money is spent.

lurked indeed.

I meant to ask DD her thoughts ( they're twins) but we got side tracked by The Choir.

Dd has already said only a few weeks into y7 she can mostly tell who came from state primary and who came from prep. Not because the prep school children are all necessarily achieving higher, but according to her they all work at the level of their ability iyswim? Whereas most of the state pupils are behind their own ability at present, just because there are so many things prep schools cover that state schools can't. Whether that be mfl, sports, music or even stretching children in core subjects where they're already achieving highly.

Round here, secondary is definitely the one to pay for though.

The further DC progress at school (any school), the greater the constraints on the curriculum - the last 4/5 years of any school are pretty focused on standardised exams. Lower down there is far more room for manoeuvre, hence the very differentiated product of some private preps.

Also young DC need logistics support for EC activities and private preps can offer a one-stop shop which is a huge added value.

Sounds like Milbourne Lodge in Esher!

Everyone will say oh it's wonderful, shabby chic (is a common phrase), everyone mucks in together, great for sport etc

Individually they say tiny classrooms, portakabins for classrooms, can't move no space in the dining area, crap sporting facilities, generally crap at most sports as school so small etc...

My DS agrees with yours Shegotall and I think they are right.

If you ever read the ChalkTalk column he always said if you couldn't afford both pay for prep until 13 because once they get to GCSEs they're all doing the same work using the same books etc. I thought it was mad at the time but in hindsight...

I disagree, but I would since my kids all go to the very local primary. Eldest has just started y7 in a private selective secondary and he's rather ahead in some subjects. What's he's adjusting to is a higher expectation of homework - he tends to dash it off, but I think this might be a result of it being secondary rather than private. His handwriting and presentation is pretty terrible, but better than that of his public-school educated father.

I think we as parents are/have been pretty good at stimulating and challenging our children where necessary (though the state school did a pretty good job of it too). I just felt that I wanted to feel as if I could subcontract that out a bit at secondary, hence the private (ditto the sports is now done in-house). Also the private schools at primary would have necessitated me accompanying them by train/car, whilst at secondary he can take himself.

I'm still not entirely convinced that private offers something so marvellous, especially since he seems to have done way more maths than his prep school educated classmates.

I do think it is tougher at the prep school stage to identify a good school. The main guides you have a word of mouth and senior school destinations. At least with a senior school you have external exam results as a benchmark.

If you aren't happy then vote with your cash feet.

Shegot...your son has a point. DC went to a (relatively) relaxed London prep. I liked it when the science teacher, who the children loved, suggested it did not really matter what he taught them in Yr4, as long as they acquired a love for science. So lots of pops and bangs, though in fact DD learnt a lot and was still repeating stuff she had learned in Prep all the way up to Yr 10. She is now taking science A levels.

The problem was 11+. They did very little preparation as the school went up to 13 and the teaching continued through year 6. This did not matter for several destination schools who seemed to factor this in in the way they would factor in preparation differences between other private and state schools. The weird one was G&L which in my daughter's day had not taken a single pupil for about five years, but regularly seemed to take mini bus loads from the more focussed Central London preps.

It worked out fine. DDs experience, common to many, was that she was some way ahead when she started senior school, which helped her believe that she was one of the clever ones, even if it was not strictly true. (I suspect it is pretty easy to get lost during Yr 7, and if you start as a middle set kid, that is where you see yourself.) She was also used to taking part in drama and expected to turn up if picked for a school teams, and indeed expected to win.

The parents who were very focussed on the very academic West London schools would panic in about Yr 5, moan a bit and then get in tutors to help with the VR/NVR prep which usually worked out if the kids was bright enough.

The real impact seems to be at sixth form level. Each year a surprising number seem to switch to the highly selective sixth form my son attended. And when there to fully engage in music, sport and leadership. Very unlike bobo's experience "that the last 4/5 years of any school are pretty focused on standardised exams". My daughter's peers also seem to have made their individual marks at a range of other schools. She used to bump into them regularly at matches and now a significant number seem to hold senior Prefect type positions.

I think both you and your son are right. 7-11 are important as this is the time you learn how to learn. The biggest advantage for me was that both DC learned to balance academic and non academic stuff and do their homework quickly and efficiently at the after school club, so procrastination was never a problem at secondary. 11-16 are important as this is when children find themselves, their sense of purpose and who they are, as well as setting the building blocks for the future.

I think sixth form is also important. A good experience should mean that a young adult enters University with the wider leadership, social, resiliance and other skills that will take them through the tough (and University courses are tough) University years, not just coping academically but able to contribute to the wider community. This then should help them in the increasingly tough employment market.

In short Shegot is right, you have a choice. People often focus on results and where pupils go on to. I would suggest you look instead at the pupils in the top year and decide whether you like what you see. Are they purposeful, active and engaged, are they weary and over coached, are they immature and not reflecting their potential? Can you see your child fitting in with this sort of child. Obviously teaching has to be adequet, but the overall education is the key. Results should then follow.

(And I don't think it is just private/state. Private schools normally have more resources to apply to extra-curricular and perhaps fewer children who need a lot of senior management time, but a good state school, would be better than a poor private school.)

I think we hit very lucky with DC's prep.

It really was/is a fabulous school...though I'm not claiming any credit for securing places there. It was literally round the corner from where we were living at the time and we fell in love with it when we were shown around.

All the things I think made it such a good school, I have identified with hindsight.

Also, as lurked pointed out it does to some extent depend on the child. I know a parent who swears blind that this same school is one of the root causes of her son's problems.

needsmore having two DC go through two different secondary schools at exactly the same time has been interesting.

Whilst obviously there were common experiences for them, the experience of y7-11 as a whole was very different. Both naturally had pros and cons.

There were times when they both envied the other . And DD made the decision that for sixth form she wanted what her brother was getting.

The absolute best thing about private education is choice.

Well. That depends where you are. In some places the private schools have 10 applicants per place, so moving isn't so simple (thinking NW London)

Shegot, isn't that in part about single sex or co-ed. As well as selective/non selective.

Single sex to 16 and co-ed beyond worked very well for DS. I feel it is so much better to get that transition over before starting University. But I assume it depends partly on the child. Co-ed prep worked well for both. Boys between the ages of 8 and 13 can be quite tough on each other. One boy tends to be the leader and if that boy is not very nice to the less macho ones.... The presence of girls dilutes the tension, but obviously makes it harder for the school to deliver a decent football/rugby team.

I am not convinced that simply focussing on the grades a school achieves is the best way to choose a school, though in London at times you would think it was the only way. So much depends on the child. DS did not mind not being at the top of a very selective school, and the fact that with a very able cohort he was able to really motor going well beyond the syllabus, is serving him well on a competitive University course. In contrast it suited DD to be towards the top of her secondary cohort, and the fact that she had learnt so much maths, science, geography, French and Latin before arriving helped ensure that was where she started, so helped ensure that is where she stayed.

My DS went to a private primary initially.which was privately owned by a husband and wife. Pastoral care, behaviour and the teaching were quite poor. Taught by an unqualified teacher (who , it transpired, had worked at a local garage) before teaching. At a parents' evening when we asked what could be done to keep our son safe, the teacher suggested keeping him in at break! There were too many issues for us to deal with so we moved him to a state primary (a much better experience) and then to a top prep at 8. He is now at one of the countries top senior day schools. In retrospect it seems that parents at the first school were prepared to ignore almost anything as the school offered wrap around care and holiday clubs.

My eldest went to a very expensive international school overseas which was an absolutely terrible school.They had no reading scheme and didn't even notice my daughters results had plummeted one year.We returned home disillusioned and put the kids in the local state school for 6 years.Two are now in the top sets in a private school.They have been well-taught in the local school.One - dyslexic has done very little in the state school.In retrospect I wish I'd moved him earlier as he has no confidence in his academic ability ( plenty in his sporting and sociability though).I'm currently very happy with the Prep school and the girls school.Though eldest is not as happy in the sixth form as she was on the lower years.My children's schools definitely expect more from their pupils and provide a much wider breadth of education.Several of my children love Latin and Mfl's that are unavailable in the local secondary.Science is also very badly catered for in the state system.
If you as a parent are unhappy with your child's school simply move them.I did this with my year 9 DD ,totally against her wishes.She now says it was the best thing I ever did fot her future.

I think people place far too much emphasis on the outcome as opposed to the experience. Many people who sent their DCs to a state for primary think that prep school parents wasted their money because their very bright child got into a "better" school. It never occurs to them that there will be children in state schools who will get better GCSE/A level results than their DC and the parents of those children will say exactly the same about them.
Once DCs are in Y10 regardless of where they are, they will all be concentrating on their GCSEs, not pursuing extra curriculum stuff. Games and teams for boys in Y11/12/13 are lumped together because schools know there are other priorities. My DS is at one of the top London Indys and I can't see much difference between his Y10/11 experience and that at the local state schools except for his peer group.

I think that is right cake. We live rurally which limits the choice of both state and private secondary schools.

When the GCSE tables are published the better state schools often trump the very expensive private schools in my county.

I suppose that the daily experience/exposure to different things is different though.

Here DD will go to the best school that fits her as a person, she is (currently) very capable but her self confidence in her ability is not very good and easily squashed - am dreading having to look round secondary schools tbh, especially as we will be moving to an as yet unknown location for work reasons, may not even be in the UK. I can't even begin to think about it with less than two years to go.

I don't think anyone who payed for prep round here wasted their money, unless of course they didn't think it through, spent up on prep and their state secondary choice is dire.

Again it depends on the child. Dd isn't fussed that children she's equally able as, or in some cases more so are achieving more in some subjects. Her ability/ personality means she's loving the challenge of trying to catch up several years of mfl in as short a time as possible. Or years of dedicated teachers in sports Dds only done at primary. She's happy enough for the bilingual or county child to excel her but is rising to the challenge of catching up and overtaking those that started ahead.
Not all children would see it that way, whether through personality/ confidence or ability. And comparing who wasted money from the outcome is pretty pointless unless you're sending identical twins to one of each, as ability is a big factor. And of course the overall experience is a huge factor.

Cake,

"Once DCs are in Y10 regardless of where they are, they will all be concentrating on their GCSEs, not pursuing extra curriculum stuff. Games and teams for boys in Y11/12/13 are lumped together because schools know there are other priorities. "

I honestly don't think that is true. In many cases school sport is limited at that age because good sportspeople are doing lots outside school. Saturday hockey matches for girls are a nightmare as any one who is any good is playing Club hockey, and ditto after school, as many will be training at least one evening a week.

The real joy of the schools my children have attended is that there is some much going on beyond GCSE etc. Yes some kids do little else but focus on grades, but I think it is a real advantage to learn at this stage that you need balance. If you know that you find calm and enjoyment from practising the piano, singing in a choir, getting out on the rugby field or working with others on a school play, you should be better at coping with setbacks further down the line. Especially in sixth form, where friendships groups often split between humanities and science students, its great to have ways of mixing with a more diverse group of personalities.

But again its down to choice. Some people will choose a school with a very strong focus on academics alone. I don't think this would have suited either of my children, for quite different reasons. The great thing about London is that there is a choice.

Which means that one person's "rubbish" school, is someone else's idea of perfect education.