If you went to private school, do you feel you should do the same for DC?

[LauraMipsum]

DD is only a toddler so we've got a couple of years, but weighing up private v state education. Private would be lovely, great facilities etc, but would mean both parents working in high pressure jobs and would rule out another child. State schools near us aren't great and moving is out of the question.

I went to private school and I wonder how much of my inclination to go private is a fear that I'd be doing "less" for DD than I got myself. So as not to be accused of drip feeding, private school took me from school-refuser to academically successful, I was diagnosed with ASD as an adult. I also wonder if my ASD has got me into a rigid "this is what's happening" state of mind which I'll later regret when I'm looking at 14 years of school fees.

I don't know much about the state system other than it totally failed for me. Has it changed all that much since the 80s? I feel like I'd be doing my DD a disservice not to try to give her what I had, but equally, 93% of kids go to state school, it's not like I'm condemning her to the coal-mines.

I don't want a state v private bunfight (there's enough of that on the grammar threads) but any insight /experiences would be gratefully received.

Don't think in sectors, think in schools. If your local primaries are uninspiring (and it absolutely does matter: the difference between a good and a bad one is night and day) is there a better state school you might get a place at that's reachable, or could you move? Are the private options better? (Don't assume!)

If you get to the point where you know how much, if at all, better you could get by paying fees, it'll be easier to judge whether it's worth things like changing jobs. Think about alternatives too: could you change your self-employment to make it more lucrative, at less personal cost than going to employment? Could you economise? "See how it went" for a few years, rather than solving the problem now? Some combination? Just things to think about.

"Bertrand, you have cheered me up. I am currently going through a phase of thinking how much more I could have to offer if I had less children or only one child, and struggling to see what the pros are for the children."

Obviously not everyone can have more than one child. And obviously for some people circumstances make it impossible.But for those that can- I can't think of anything which should take priority over siblings.

I went to a terrible private secondary (mixed ability teaching by unqualified teachers, not at all selective) so I knew very well that private doesn't = excellent. My husband had never set foot in a state school until visiting our kids' one before opting for it. He always says how envious he is of their privilege in going to a local school that's properly part of the community.

For secondary we ummed and urred and so far (only one of age) we've opted for a private secondary. I'm not convinced we've made the right choice, but certainly my child is very happy and stimulated (which he might well have been in the local comprehensive). The school we choose, however, is incomparably better than my private school (as were all the state secondaries we looked at).

Generally schools in both sectors are a lot better than we were young, but I think the improvement may be more marked in state. Either way, I wouldn't sacrifice my happiness or mental well-being to work harder to pay for school fees - the benefits are marginal.

In answer to other poster asking about 11+. My ds was at a RI primary with very high levels of FSM, SEN etc (basically school round here where you end up if you don't find religion or move house) and got into pretty selective London privates with an hour of tuition a week from end of y4. He's not a genius. I used to wonder how behind he must be in comparison to all these friends' kids at the Hall etc, but it seems not.

Bertrand, I feel that's overstating the LO 's deficit model a bit strongly, but perhaps you were a LO or have had one? Or taught lots?

We do, so we took good care to ensure he was in a sibling style family childminder for a significant period to knock the shiny edges of the only pebble in the beach off.

He would have loved a sibling though and would agree it's worth more than private education. I agree too, but it wasn't to be.

I think if money is or is likely to be an issue, don't go private. I regret saying that, as it leaves e it all to the rich or scholars. But I see too many harassed parents. It's just not worth it. What happens if one dies, becomes I'll, or walks out? Use the money to enhance activity now, or in the future, if you have some if the money, and if you don't, don't put yourself under pressure.

Which is The Hall?

I went to private school and there's no way I'm going to be able to afford it for any future dc. My parents chose it for me because I have/had quite severe dyslexia and that was the best option for me.

Makes me a bit :( that I won't be able to give them that opportunity should they need it.

orlanda - link

Note the bit about registering them before their 1st birthday. Honestly, I have minor anxiety just typing this.

Weirdly, I think the fact that school fees are rising at the mad rates they are is a good thing for those of us in the position the OP and I are in. I'd guess that the more middle class could-go-either-way parents choose state, the more that school benefits from invested parents who can put their hands in their pockets for PTA raffles, facility fundraisers etc, in turn attracting more of the same. (I won't mention the downside of this, as that's taking us towards bunfight territory.)

There was a story in the news earlier on this year about how some private schools are struggling because the state sector has improved so much.

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2016/08/26/more-middle-class-families-choosing-state-schools-over-the-priva/

I went private as did all my siblings. We all attended boarding schools which were paid for by the government as my father was a diplomat.

I wouldn't send my dc's private even if I had money. I believe in equality of opportunity in education for children, and feel that it would be hypocritical for me to hold this belief and at the same time give my own children a massive and unfair leg up. They already have intelligence, good health, a stable home, the support of two educated and involved parents, and that should be enough, if they add their own hard work to the mix.

If my dc's fail in education it will be because they haven't done enough work, not because enough hasn't been done for them. Their state schools are perfectly adequate.

I went private, though my parents never paid more than half the fees from age 3 onwards. My dcs are in a state primary, possibly would go private for secondary but id need to hold down work for a few years (health problems).

We didn't get into the local excellent primary nor the next nearest uninspired one. Luckily the one we did get has been wonderful with ds and helped him be willing and able to learn and get a diagnosis of ASD. He's got a good bunch of friends and likes the rest of his class, and I'm not sure he would learn any more in a private school - travel plus enforced sports could well make him very unhappy. One advantage of it being a big school (90/year) is they can and do constantly pull out a few kids to do extra challenge or support or just interesting activities - so he is being well stretched in maths and getting to actually enjoy support-group PE.

There's about 50 potential state secondaries he could go to. Some are huge - a comp of 2000 pupils where the top half of them get scores similar to those in a 500 pupil private has the economy of scale to provide similar support to privates.

Clearly not everyone's satisfied with their independent school:

www.independent.co.uk/news/education/father-sues-private-school-abbotsholme-independent-rocester-son-fails-all-but-one-gcses-a7195716.html

I think Claire's post is excellent. For instance, in doing some research I found that Redcar and Cleveland ( a very deprived area) now has 75% o its schools getting 50% or over 5 GCSE(E&M). So while not every comp is yet superb I would think that nowadays there aren't that many where a child who's prepared to put in the work won't get good enough grades to move on to the next stage. I suspect 20 years ago there were quite a few schools where a child simply couldn't have done that. I can well understand teacher's frustrations with Ofsted and the rest but I think they have driven up the minimum standard.

I went to both and have taught in both. If I can afford it when the time comes I would sent mine to a private secondary. I am not concerned about the private state school education.

From what I have experienced private schools give more opportunity for alternative options- sport isn't just football or netball but they can do rugby, rowing, lacrosse, horse riding, archery, orienteering etc etc. They also potentially have things like CCF, choral groups, drama academies and DofE. (Although a number of secondaries now run DofE!) they are also more likely to take students on trips as behaviour is better. The class sizes are smaller. I taught in a private school where the max class size was 22 and in a state secondary where max class size was 36! The fewer the children in a class the more a teacher can devote individual time and the teacher's workload is smaller (fewer HW to mark) so more time can be devoted to comments on work and explanations of marks.

I also think a lot of secondaries are like cattle markets- they have huge numbers - and students become one of 1500+ whereas private schools tend to top out at half that- so each student is better known.
They also usually have a specific pastoral team whereas in state schools government cuts have often meant this role is removed.

If I can afford it I would find a day private school- if they are sporty or musical I would try for a scholarship too.

I went to state school, did ok, not great, ended up doing the job I wanted to do. (Engineer) if I went to private school I may have done slightly better but would it have been worth it? No I would feel bad for my mum and dad having spent the money for nothing

I went to a private secondary school and loved every minute of it. However, there was an awful lot of pressure to do well, not only from the school but also from my parents and also pressure I put on myself as I knew my parents were going without stuff to be able to afford to send me there. I left school 14 years ago and my parents still regularly mention how much my education cost them.

DH went to the local comprehensive which at the time was very good, now it's not so good. He did the bare minimum at school to get by which has meant he's had to do a lot of studying and qualifications around working full time and having a family, which is obviously a lot of hard work. He went to school for the social life, not to work.

In terms of our DS, he's at a state primary and although I would consider private secondary school for him, DH won't entertain the thought for a minute. On balance, though, I think we'd rather encourage him to do well at a state school and still have some money in the bank to be able to help him with e.g. a house deposit when the time comes. Unfortunately we wouldn't be able to pay for private education and offer financial assistance for other stuff as well!

Ah, that one. Yup, a bit oversubscribed I fear.

Excellent SEN provision at our local one

I would be careful op as some schools use it to get more funding for the school.

How does that work sunshine? Presumably they have to use the funding they get to actually provide for those students.... or am I being naive?

Just looked at the website for the Hall.

Okay, we're not looking in that league!

No.
I and my siblings all went private.
I am delighted that my kids went to State Comps.

DD is about to start studying Biosciences at RG University.
DS is just starting Science and maths A levels

DD does music and DofE and horse riding and stuff
DS does Rugby and tennis and computing type stuff

The school I sent my children to had a high number of sen children when OFSTED inspected they wondered why no children were progressing. The head teacher who was there at the time didn't have a clue she was getting this funding but it wasn't used correctly.

Op I wouldn't worry every school has to help every child reach their goals or they get a bad OFSTED. When you look for state primary schools you read OFSTED and then SATs results that will give you a clear picture of the school. I think the problem with private schools is that you don't mix with people from a variety of backgrounds or classes. I hope you understand what I am trying to explain.

I do think it is up to the parents to help encourage and do a little with them at home. Either way you can't leave it up to the teacher. You could send her to a state boarding school with live in teachers you can't get no better than that. Its not private but they are structured they have times for activities and prep.

What minifingerz said

Yes. We both got free places at private schools so feel 'obligued' to provide the same for our children. There are no grammar schools where we live. Primary schools are ok but secondary schools average or below average. We plan to stick with state for primary and pay for secondary school.
It depends where you live though. It seems schools in London have improved significantly since we were children so there may well be no need to pay. None of our London friends are intending to pay for independent school and want to get free education for their children despite having had a private education themselves.

Yes. I went to six different schools round the world of which one was a state school in the UK.

I spent most of the year trying not to speak (wrong accent), speak French in the French class (bilingual) or grass up the girls who waited for me after school each day to trash my stuff.

Six months in, they moved me to the top sets and I found my people, but the majority of the school were coasting and causing trouble and keeping their heads down.

There was never a question in my mind. I know 'bright kids will do well anywhere' but why make learning more challenging than it needs to be by having bright kids who want to learn stick in with demotivated disruptive pupils?

The teachers I know in state schools tell stories that would make your hair stand up (West London).

I am very aware of the privilege of choice and it's why I am so pro grammar schools.

"I am very aware of the privilege of choice and it's why I am so pro grammar schools"

So you think children who are academically successful children need and deserve more protection from bullying and disruption than children who are less academically able?

:-(

by having bright kids who want to learn stick in with demotivated disruptive pupils?
Heaven forfend bright demotivated disruptive pupils
cos that never happens at private or selective schools