Are we wasting our money?

[angelnumber9]

It appears that every year the results gap between state and independent schools narrows and this seems even more defined with 2017 figures. Combined with the incentives that top universities give to state school students I am struggling to find good reasons to carry on paying our hard earned dosh for DC's education.
To give this some perspective I have checked out local independent school results and compared them with some of the state school alternatives and it makes interesting reading. I have said before that we are very lucky to have such a good collection of schools in Shropshire. It has to be said that we can only just afford the less expensive ones such as Wrekin or Shrewsbury High School and I appreciate that like all things you get what you pay for but if you care to cost it out purely on a results v price basis there seems very little point in spending your money.....or am I missing something really important?
Having watched selective schools like the gdst's Shrewsbury High school continue to plummet down the A level league tables for the last 5 years (from 63rd with 61% A/A in 2014 to 255th and 26% this year) I know that many parents are again asking what their money is being spent on. Especially when non selective schools such as Moreton Hall and Adcote are roaring ahead (Moreton is an all round school monumentally up 118 places to 91st place with 53%, more that twice that of its High School rival. State grammar schools like Newport Girls High, Adams and Thomas Telford score consistently above 50% A/A and at least four Shrewsbury Sixth form students have achieved Oxbridge places. The Marches sixth form has 22% and William Brooke's 24%. Shrewsbury School and Concord (like the High School selective but far more expensive) have broken their own records. Concord unbelievably managing 84% A/A with 45% at A. Shrewsbury School continue to publish detailed exam results and leavers destinations on their very informative website.
Perhaps I'm too caught up in figures but when Shrewsbury High School recently held an Oxbridge conference in an attempt to win an award (sadly I'm told none of their girls have secured offers there since 2015) I can understand why parents are livid. But they now have a new dance school so perhaps girls will be able to waltz their way into Oxbridge??? (sorry, couldn't resist!).
So I am very frustrated about it all and seriously considering cutting my losses. I hate to see our school fees being spent on ridiculous projects when the focus should be on raising standards. With what I would save in fees I could probably buy a small house which may be a far better investment for my children in the long term.........anyone?

Well that is quite possible ontopofthesunset.

What stage are your DC at OP? What do they think about their current school?

So the real issue here is that the indie you went with isn't what you thought you were buying. In that case - move. Don't waste the money. Yes I would expect a selective single sex school to be getting decent results (not necessarily fantastic, but comparable to a good state school at least). And I'd be monitoring results each year, asking questions about drops, and repeatedly considering whether DD would be better off elsewhere.

We tend to view schools as somewhere you have twant stick with until the end. They're not.

Move to state (after carcful vetting of your options) and use some of that cash you freed up to buy in the enrichment activities.

You're not alone in thinking that any private school is better than any state school.

good state schools give a better academic education

"If you compare the top 100 state schools to the top 100 private schools, the state schools outperform. Same if you compare the top 50. Or the top 200. Or any number you like"

And because there are more state school pupils going to Oxbridge than private pupils. Which given how selective private schools are that's quite amazing.

How is your child doing? Is she on track for good grades?

"And because there are more state school pupils going to Oxbridge than private pupils. Which given how selective private schools are that's quite amazing."

Really? Even though only 7% of kids go to private school?

the main benefits of private school are gaining a posh accent and making rich friends. a child with a mum as interested in their education as you are is highly likely to succeed wherever they go to school. what years are your children in? would they be happy to leave their current friends?

I would just check the results aren’t due to the private school doing iGCSEs or International Baccalaureate. A lot of the public schools and some state school offer different exams, this can affect their rankings but doesn’t mean all the pupils are suddenly failing.

Equally, check what subjects they are studying. There are a couple of schools near me who proudly claim pass rates of 98 or 99% but this is due to overseas pupils taking e.g German when this is their first language, or A levels in childcare and textiles. You can’t really compare the education those pupils are getting with the academic grammar down the road where it’s dual or triple science for All and at least one MFL.

I think the postcode thing may apply ontopofthesunset as Shropshire is very rural. DD just started y8 and as is so often the case we have been promised so much that doesn't seem to be materialising. A case of the school showcasing the few and forgetting the many. A high turnover of staff and low morale haven't helped things. I really did my homework on the private v state thing but realise now I got it all wrong. We have discussed options as DD not terribly happy and she has many friends who went into local state sector and seem to be thriving. Never quite fitted into the private school thing and now I feel I've caused her to lose her confidence because she's been made to feel inadequate. I know she would slot straight back in but you know how it is when your kids just want to please you......so I will be making some calls tomorrow and hope to get things moving asap
Thank you all for very quickly giving me some sanity back!

I never got any incentives for coming from a state school at uni I only graduated last year ...

Also private school often leads to connections ... which lead to jobs.

There are a huge variety of independent schools.
They range from the top performing academic hot houses which also offer great extra curricular, to those which offer a fantastic broader experience but less of the academics, to the very many which are mediocre or poor and offer only a limited broader experience and very average or even poor academics.
Sometimes there is a correlation between price and quality, but not always.

So some independent schools offer good value for money and indeed add huge value. But lots don't add any more value than a state school (and sometimes add less) so are extremely expensive and not VFM at all.

In the end, we all have to decide what we value and will pay for. We have to know what the free alternatives offer and compare to see if the extras offered by the independent are worth it. We won't all come to the same conclusions, even about the same schools.

Personally, I wouldn't pay for a school which offered only moderate or poor results. I could get better than that in a state school. For me and for many, great results is a fundamental requirement. But I do want more and I will pay for more - I want the broad range of extra curricular, loads of music opportunities and sporting and drama activities, plus DofE to Gold level for significant numbers, opportunities for careers and university advice, access to massive help during UCAS time, access to lots of academic support if ever needed, great pastoral care. I want access to a group of aspirational children who want to succeed and engage in opportunity, which will help my children develop the same aspirations. I want success to be valued and sought after and the success of other to be acknowledged and enjoyed as a community, but also a place where children learn how fortunate they are and to have empathy for others. I want a lot. And I am willing to pay for those things if they are available.

However, I absolutely wouldn't pay for a few shiny facilities which don't even hide poor results and a culture of a lack of aspiration.

Choices do very much depend on the alternatives. If the only state alternative is a total dive, then perhaps the mediocre independent suddenly seems more attractive. However, usually there is a choice of independents, so I don't really understand why people choose the mediocre ones...I think sometimes it's because they can't really afford fees and have to choose the cheaper versions. TBH, I think these maybe a fake speconomy or not worth the money. When people have great state options available, I think the independent has really got to be extra special to be worth paying. If the State offers great results and reasonable extra curricular, then the up,fit of broader experience and a fantastic culture need to be truly fantastic to make it worth it, unless money is no object. But I think people do value those non-academic things highly.

By the time you are looking at top 50 or top 100 schools, they all offer great results. Parents take great results as a given at this point. What people are looking for and paying for to be in the really top and special schools is the extras beyond the academic - something very special which creates an environment of enquire and enthusiasm and engagement, coupled with opportunities to allow these to flourish. It's hard to pin this stuff down but people will pay a lot for it and it's about a lot ore than grades.

Really? Even though only 7% of kids go to private school?

Um, how many children do private schools takes from PP, FSM, EAL, Disadvantaged children, HES, BEM, refugees, asylum seekers, Travellers/Roma, white working class, LAC, young carers, SEND.....

Private schools have small class sizes, are awash with money, privilege, expel those that under-perform or are badly behaved, advantage advantage, advantage... the fact that state schools perform better than private schools and also send more kids to Oxbridge is either a miracle or they provide a better academic education.

Well no, you are meeting your financial responsibilities. You chose to have children you shouldvloody well pay for their education-it's hardly fair to expect the rest of us to do it so that you can go on a few extra ski trips.

I do not believe that the top 100 state schools outperform the top 100 independents.
What measure are you using? Are you measuring %A/A*?
Re Oxbridge, of course a system with 93% of pupils sends more to Oxbridge than a system with 7%. This doesn't make it more successful. What % of those in each sector go to Oxbridge?

What do you mean by 'perform better'?

OP! I just read your last post. I don't think you are the first or last to make the mistake of thinking that all fee paying schools must be better than state schools. I'm sorry you have found this out through butter experience.

There are lots of truly fantastic state schools. Some are Grammars and some are Comps. Many deliver top notch results for their able kids and add great value for all abilities. Despite their funding issues, some still manage an impressive extra curricular programme and many of the parents at these schools would argue they couldn't get better if they paid. The kids and the parents are very fortunate. But the majority of kids are not in those schools and can't have access to them.

Being able to pay simply gives you more choice. So if you don't have one of these great state options (or even if you do) you can choose to go elsewhere. Not everyone who can pay can afford the best schools or access them due to distance or entrance requirements. However, I'm of the opinion that anyone who is paying and is prepared and able to pay decent fees for their area, shouldn't have to put their kid in a mediocre independent school. Isn't the whole point of paying to avoid this? There is choice and people have the money to choose,mso need to choose wisely and in full knowledge of what they are buying.
I know schools can change, but significant changes over short periods should not be likely in areas like results.

As parents, for this important and long term purchase, I just think we have to carry out our research very carefully. Most independent schools can pull off a glossy brochure, some impressive kids as tour guides and some lovely coffee and canapés at the open morning. Many can also show some shiny facilities. But we must look beyond those things. We must think carefully about what is important to us and where we want the emphasis to be and what our DC are like and what will be right for them. The research involves looking at a number of schools, both fee paying and also state too for lots of people. I must say I'm amazed that people commit to this level of expenditure and to something so important without a LOT of research and digging beneath the surface.

OP! Sorry you've found out this way. I hope you can find somewhere better for your children.

I do not believe that the top 100 state schools outperform the top 100 independents. What measure are you using? Are you measuring %A/A?*

Sorry but that is a published fact from last years results..

Re Oxbridge, of course a system with 93% of pupils sends more to Oxbridge than a system with 7%

Sorry but if you cream off children from the top of the system and stick them in a privileged segregated school then you would expect them to achieve the majority of the best university places. They dont because state schools provide a better education.

But regardless of that, whether it's true or not that the top 100 state schools outperform the top 100 private schools, on whatever measure you choose, it's irrelevant to the OP who is presumably only choosing between one existing private school and a couple of existing state schools. She only needs to know whether her local state schools are outperforming the private school she has chosen, and it sounds as if they are. In my case my local state school is not. So she might make a different decision if she lived here.

And of course she might be basing her decision on a broader set of judgements than just exam results. Hockey provision might be top of her wants or after school care or a dojo or the ability to do 4 modern languages at GCSE.

I moved dd from a cheapish indie to state 6th form. In our experience the indie was pretty much a waste of money. The state 6th form is absolutely fab and tbh in 6th form all the extras are a bit superfluous as they have to just crack on academically anyway. Extras are lovely until year 9 or 10.

Of course Ontopofthesunset, we can only generalize on here.

But do the 93% of state educated children take 93% of the Oxbridge or RG uni places? No they don't. So I don't understand your argument.

Do the 7% of privately educated children take only 7% or fewer of the Oxbridge places and RG places to justify the view that state schools provide a better education? No they don't.

And where is this published fact from last year's exam results? Please provide a link to these tables or results so we can see.

Fresh- I think you're going to have to link to some stats. Because as it stands, your assertions are looking pretty dodgy.

I think Fresh might be referring to this article, which makes very similar points here but as there are far fewer private schools, the 'top 100' privates will be a far higher proportion of those schools than the top 100 state schools.

In none of your assertions about your school, OP, do you mention value added. The school may be very slightly selective in that there is an entrance exam but it possibly only weeds out the SEN children. With so many schools to choose from, maybe the high achievers are not choosing your school? In addition, you can never assume that the school alone will get your child a string of A grades and better. They cannot work wonders on every child if they are not high achievers. Perhaps the pupils did as well as they could and have not "failed".
I rather agree with your assertion that you made a mistake because your view of a school is very narrow if you think dance is a waste of time. It isn't. It is great for less sporty girls and is fantastic and enjoyable exercise. My DDs school had 1/3 of the school taking dance lessons and the annual dance show was a supberb event. I feel you are missing the point of a private education if you cannot value such extras. Also my eldest DD did 10 extra activities whilst doing 11 GCSEs at boarding school. She took full advantage of what was on offer and still got a place at Oxford. Life is never just about academics though - it's about having a bit of fun on the way and expanding the child into a young adult. Trying things out and seeing what makes you tick. That could be dance or it could be Politics club. It all expands the young mind.

I discovered from reading g this thread that our DC count as coming from a deprived socio-economic background due to the vagaries of Acorn postcode typing. Apparently we are a family of financially struggling pensioners. To be fair, the neighbours on our left do fit that description.