if you could afford to go private, should you?

[tankerdale]

Sometimes I worry that we've got our priorities wrong. We've ended up in a lovely large home with high running costs, we've got some but not loads of savings, most of our 'wealth' is in our house. Income is very good on paper but month to month we only manage to save a small amount, if any. I work 2.5 days, DH is full time. We have a nice lifestyle and I guess eat out a bit but I don't think we're otherwise extravagant, don't spend much on holidays, run 1 car, don't spend loads on clothes etc.

3dc, 2 already at primary school. We live in the catchment of what is considered a very good non selective state secondary but it is massive.

As it stands we couldn't afford to put 3dc through private secondary (there's a nice one nearby). But have we got it wrong? Should we move to a more modest home and prioritise paying for their education?

Feeling a bit guilty that we're not putting them first. Dc1 seems v bright and will probably be ok anywhere, dc2 I'm not so sure about and too early to tell with dc3.

If they go to the state school and have any problems I'm going to wish we made a different choice I think.

So - in principle, if you can pay for private - should you?

Bert

Why do you perpetually find it difficult to understand that their are areas of deprivation and degeneration throughout the country. When someone states they live in a poor area why doubt them? It's as though you seem to want to think people are lying about the schools in their area.
You can live in an area with lovely good/ outstanding schools and end up with failing, needing improvement schools.
good schools can close depending on LA falling numbers for the next ? years.

"When someone states they live in a poor area why doubt them?"

Because generally speaking people who can afford several sets of school fees don't!

Isn't the issue feminism? This poster only works 2.5 days a week an d is playing second fiddle to her husband's career. If she made herself as important as her husband, indeed earned more than him and worked full time like many of ther est of us she could do better for her children and pay school fees (as I do - I work full time).

Do her children really make some massive gain over the 2.5 days that private schools would be less than in terms of its effect given 8% of children go to private school but it confers massive advantage much more than having mummy at home 2.5 days of the working week./

Very rural areas like this have doctors and professional people. Teaching is a relatively highly-paid high-status occupation locally. And there are others who are in business.

she could do better for her children and pay school fees (as I do - I work full time

Personally, if I worked full time I think I'd be doing worse for my children not better for them. They need more than cash, and happy times with their family can be worth far more than the most expensive education in the world.

But the private schools locally attract a certain type of family that I really don't feel we'd have much in common with.
Bertram that is a similar comment to the one you laughed at, but you make no comment on this one.
So it's ok for parents to not want to mix with private school families, but not ok when it's state schools?

Interesting re. My part time working. I in my professional but public sector (& high stress) role could never earn as much as DH in his financial sector role. It also wouldn't be my choice to work ft certainly at this time (youngest is 20 months, eldest coming up 9) and probably never again unless I have to!

But yes one option to make private more doable without moving would be to up my hours in future. I haven't done the maths but not sure that would even cover it and the spread of Ages complicates things.
But perhaps it's a better/comparable option to go state and be around more to facilitate after school 'extras'.

All very thought provoking but overall this thread has made me:

• be thankful we have a good secondary option nearby
• think that private isn't always better especially vs additional extra curricular stuff you can arrange yourself
• it depends on the child and on the particular schools
• not to obsess about what people will think if we don't go private because that is what they assume when they see our house, but really it doesn't matter what people think

And I'm going to name change after this as I've given away quite a lot of identifying info!

I have never ever heard my children or their friends speak of stare educated children as scum. Apart from the fact most of them have been at state schools at some point and have friends/best friends at state schools, they do.not define people by which school they go to.

As for manners, I have seen exemplary and appalling manners in both sectors.

I only put in the full time work point as I see it as the elephant in the room. Also when we can get to ap osition where women pick full time financial serviecs jobs and their husbands might be in the same or public sector then we might have moved to some measure of equality in the UK. Perhaps it is the private schools which help our daughters pick the better high paid financial services careers in the end? (Both my privately schooled daughters are London lawyers for example and I went to private school and as a commercial lawyer too)

By the way my 5 children who are or have been at private day schools which are academically selective have never called anyone scum either or similar words. They play sport regularly with children from state schools whom they know well. They have had or have out of school clubs with them. They seem them all over the place, they had some state school educated cousins. The older ones have gone to university with at least 50% state schooled pupils. it is not some massive divide where people don't speak to each other.

And yes I agree that plenty of state schools are very good. I live in a bit of outer London where there are heaps of schools of all kinds from Saudi fundamentalist, to Hindu state primary to best state grammars in the country and our local nearest comp which I think gets 34 A - C in good GCSEs and seems to specialise in child care, travel and tourism and mechanic GCSE which in itself might not be wrong for its customer base either.

I think, EnormousTiger, that you have pinpointed a real issue: what home/school scenario confers (massive) advantage on DC? Is it always private school, with, in the UK, the very significant costs involved? I suspect that, as a rule, you are correct and, if you had to choose, two FT working parents plus private school generally confers more advantage that one SAHP and state school. But it's not an absolute rule.

Even with both parents working full time most families couldn't afford private education.

Certainly many traditional middle class families who could afford private education in the past are now priced out of the market.

Especially on one income.

This group's switch from private to state sector has had repercussions in both. Probably none of which were expected.

Middle class families have been priced out of private education in part due to the extraordinary increase in fees, which is driven by ever more luxurious offerings in private education. Is this a good thing?

I posted a question like this recently and most people told me not to do it on our salary. However, I went to private and though it has it's flaws, it's undeniable for me that a privately educated person stands out from a state educated person in many cases. If you yourself haven't been to a private school then I don't think you can truly know. I mean, I don't even know what to call it... I guess a privately educated person has a certain confidence about them. It's an inate confidences that has been instilled over many years that you don't find in state educated people. This is priceless imo. I work in the state secondary sector and it scares me shitless that my dc will be experimented on with exams and have the goal posts constantly changed. Behaviour in private is better in general imo but there are of course exceptions. It really is how much one is willing to sacrifice and the jury is still out for us. I have a concerned feeling that British state education drags the best down in order to keep everyone in the middle. It will strive to get the low achieving up to the middle, but does very little to let the best fly.

bobo fees have shot up, but actually the traditional middle classes were already being forced to abandon private education ( especially in the south east) due to rising house prices.

The only way for the families to retain a standard of living they recognise is to either spend a huge amount of their income on housing or to move out thus often precluding two working parents due to silly commute time.

The life style of one working parent, a large home and children in private school is simply no longer attainable.

Whether the fees are 4.5 or 8.5 a term is mute. Your average MC family just doesn't have it for two or three kids. Certainly not if they want decent housing too.

As for the facilities at private schools, well yes, some are unnecessary. But many did need massive refurbishments.
And when you look at the books the biggest spends remain salaries and upkeep of often very old and beautiful buildings/grounds.

Certainly the whole concept, for want of a better word, has changed since I was a child. There were loads of small private schools, and probably the majority of middle class children went to them. Many were pretty rubbish, with unqualified teachers and not much in the way of facilities. Often just in a big house. Some friends of my parents set one up so they could afford to keep a house they had inherited. Obviously some had brilliant and inspired teachers, but it was just a matter of luck. And many of them just kept their heads above water, and foundered as the world changed, and there were fewer people happy to teach in a little private school for a tiny salary and their board. When people say private school, they often imagine the well known, established ones - which have a lot going for them, of course. But certainly many people of my age and older who say they were privately educated went to one of these little St Custard's like establishment that existed to cater for the middle classes who even then couldn't afford the major players.

Not sure getahaircut - our school spent more on a statue than it would cost to build a new state school.

GetAHaircutCarl - I lived in the South East as a child, as did many of my cousins/aunts/uncles. The generation above them did too. What you describe is not new! There were plenty of mothers working to pay school fees in the 1970s, just as there was judicious movement between state and private education. There were DC of tradesmen at my private prep and there were commuting professionals using religious state schools. Etc

Staff costs are very high because of "luxury" teacher:pupil ratios.
Upkeep of beautiful buildings and gardens is also a new luxury (we made do with run down in the past).

Many members of my family regularly get tours round their alma maters in the vain hope that they can be encouraged to leave them something in their will. The infrastructure and standard of accommodation is very different to the past, with associated costs.

Turkeydinosaurs people who work in state schools and hold those kind of opinions about state school education are to be found in every establishment. They are among the lowest of the low in my opinion. Don't insult those children by continuing to work with them, please head off to a private school where you can be around the other confident people.

"I work in the state secondary sector and it scares me shitless that my dc will be experimented on with exams and have the goal posts constantly changed"
They do take GCSEs at private schools, you know!

Bertrand - private schools have wildly greater leeway to teach DC beyond the exam syllabus. That is why, even where schools are bound by the hurdle of GCSEs, the risks of new curricula are much less great than in state schools.

There are some interesting issues around exams in state v private. Private are not required to publish 5A*s to c including English and maths in one sitting results. Sounds like a small deal, but has huge impact. Private can still 'game' with repeated entries until best result achieved, lower ability privates can still include non EBac results in their scores, private can do igcse which allows more course work and retakes.
More confident in private? Not sure I agree my most confident is my eldest who went right through in state comprehensive. My least confident is probably the youngest who went private from start. Private kids are very confident in their own settings usually but pop them outside their comfort zone and they might struggle. It is entirely dependent on child of course.

mistress that's the system, I didn't create it, so get off your high horse. I care about my students and their results but I care about my own dc infinitely more and I will not be ashamed about that. State school is my job but my children are my life.