Can you be a leftie and use private schools? Are people prejudiced against the privately educated?

[SpoonsAndForks]

I've always been into equality of opportunity and on that basis, think that it's wrong that our country allows private schools.

But then my son's state primary went into special measures and I pulled him out and put him into private school. Now he's being offered a really great scholarship to stay on and I'm considering going private all the way. So I'd rather private schools didn't exist but now they do, yes I'd like my child to benefit from them.

I came across this book yesterday - www.amazon.co.uk/Posh-Boys-English-Schools-Britain/dp/1786073838/?tag=mumsnetforum-21 - the intro to the book sets out the 'public schoolboy' as the most horrible creature, misogynistic, egotistical, generally a posh hawhawhaw uncaring horror (usually a nasty MP). Yet the intro also sets out some interesting statistics about those in top jobs always being from private school (which makes me want to give my child that opportunity). But makes me sick at the thought of educating my child into a guffawing posh MP.

I'm keen to explore:

• whether you can sit politically to the left and square it with yourself if you use a private school
• whether children who go to private schools will experience judgement and prejudice against them
• whether children who go to private schools are all at risk of turning into posh uncaring brash misogynistic MP types.

@Walkingdeadfangirl Ummm do you know anyone who goes to a grammar or private school, its very common. Of course they are not going to say it in public but have a glass of wine with them and it all comes spilling out.

Yeah I DO know people - ME and my parent friends! DS1 goes to grammar and DS2 already goes to private as per my OP. I know plenty of parents from both schools and have never heard any of them say this.

I also know that I don't feel it or think it. In fact it was one of my worries (and still is) about DS1 going to grammar, that he'd miss out on socialising with a wide demographic of children. But overall, to me, the fact that he's receiving outstanding teaching that goes at his pace and keeps him engaged in learning is worth the trade off. That's all I want from a school - to keep my children engaged in learning.

I was moved round various secondaries and as a result of moves including one awful comp did terribly in my own GCSEs and I want better outcomes for my own children than I had, that is all.

Betrand weren’t you desperate to get your dc into grammar school? Surely that was to ensure they had academic classmates? Did your dd go to Oxbridge? I think your dc have done well out of selective, well funded (you are in the SE iirc) education?

I was just saying how I felt as someone who has actually walked the walk. It's a tough thing to do and you have to resist your own prejudices. Foolish to pretend otherwise.

It's funny because I have twice chosen primary schools with the highest local levels of free school meals and esl because they were excellant and diverse. We had raised eyebrows from people that we didn't choose the leafy church primaries.

My kids definitely benefited in all sorts of ways. My principles intact.

All good until my neuro diverse kids hit secondary school. Details upthread. Youngest in private to spare us all the suffering.

I live in a wholly selective area. Yes, I would have preferred my children to be in a school with more of their academic peers and where there was high quality music, but I was not "desperate" for that to happen. And it didn't. Happy to admit it was tough.

the fact is the pupils (and their parents) there are predominantly not PLU “
Yep. And the reason I know that? Because it’s exactly how I felt,

Yep. That’s absolutely, universally it. Well done.

The lack of triple science and more than one MFL are giving me no pause about my only state option at all.

Not all state secondaries are state of the art with top flight teachers. Even in ‘naice’ areas. Despite what this thread would have you believe.

All bets are off for non NT children since the education cuts. Our local secondary modern uses to have a staggeringly good autism unit. No more. Cuts to the actual unit-then cuts to transport so kids couldn't get to it which meant it was undersubscribed so even less money.......

Well clearly she didn't think her DC had enough privilege when it came to choosing a secondary school THEsonofaBITCH.

Bertrand. I am glad you accept private education for Autistic and other children with developmental delays. The state system was failing my Autistic son (apparently below IQ 70) and had basically decided he would be lucky to attain @ level 2 English/Maths GCSE. 18 months later and after repeating year 10 last year we are hoping for level '6' grades in English/Maths in a months time.

The 'outstanding' high school would not contemplate allowing my son to repeat year 10 or previous to that year 9... Instead they were adamant grade '2' at English/Maths was my sons limit !

The private school want my son to take 3 A levels over 3 years . Why does it matter that my son will be 20 when he finishes school. The state system should allow for children like my son to take as long as they need to achieve their potential. They should also not through 'lazy' or misguided ideas assume what the limit of attainment is for a child, with a developmental delay.

Nobody is dumb enough to pay a shed load of cash to avoid their child being with people who aren't like them

I think you'll find a lot of people do exactly that. They just won't be honest about it.

"Nobody is dumb enough to pay a shed load of cash to avoid their child being with people who aren't like them"
No. Course not.

I am stunned that feel you can judge others for choosing private education when you wanted your dc to be educated in a selective setting Bertrand.

Fair enough. But if you live in a wholly selective authority you don't have any choice in the matter.

You could have moved to another area !

'Selection' is the reason why my son is achieving so much. It is also why DD1 attained 2 A* and a A at A level as will 'lazy' DD2. Selection is the key here to success whether though the state or privately .

"You could have moved to another area !

Oh good lord, so I could. If only I had thought of that at the time.

Plenty of affordable housing up in Burnley and a fully Comprehensive education system ….

Try Liverpool! The only problem is that the Government spends more per pupil for children in the SE than it does for children in the North West, and primary aged children are now in ‘supersize’ classes because of budget cuts, but don’t let that put you off Bertrand.

Actually the Ribble Valley is a wonderful place with great restaurants, pubs, great scenery and great schools ! Selective schools like Clitheroe Grammar. There are also non selective High schools that attain up to 80% GCSE pass rates !

Burnley though is fully comprehensive which would have been right up Bertrand's street ..

I love the Ribble Valley. Beautiful countryside and brilliant people.

Of course you had a choice Bertrand, you can choose the secondary modern, for the greater good, right? choosing grammar over secondary modern isn't in any way morally superior to choosing private over comprehensive.

Middle class woman wants better education for all! Shock!

You absolute bitch Bertrand wanting to improve education for all and not just the middle class. How can you live with yourself? Working and campaigning for a better education for all rather than just paying for education and then pulling the ladder up so the other kids could drown.

The U.K. is not perfect, the system is not brilliant, lots of people feel forced to compromise. Fortunately, I was able to send my children to local schools and even in a selective area ignore the 11+ my dc have had an excellent education. That is down to where I live not my principles.

Wanting better education for all is not a crime, it does not make you a hypocrite, it makes you an idealist.

It would be so easy to say 'my kids are fine fuck you' it is a lot harder to try to work for a better education for all.

What would be awful is if someone grabbed what suited them and then just ignored the problem.

Bertrand - oh that made me laugh - I had forgotten that " To (roughly) quote Lord Peter Wimsey "Rugby? Surely that's a railway junction" "

There are many reasons for not sending your child to a private school - political , philosophical or financial & also because many of them just aren't very good & some of them really aren't. . Some people question "Private or State" , some just look at the options and choose the school , whichever sector.

What I do think is ( not necessarily this thread) the private / public school dim chinless wonder incapable of mixing with the general public vs the state school feral knife wielder , surely has run its course? I exaggerate for effect

Several pages of the thread won't load for me so I apologise if this has already been brought up....pretty much all secondary schools are academies and many infant and primary schools will be soon. Without directly costing parents a 'fee' they are private schools. And much of the funding lines the pockets of several individuals working for whatever trust has taken the school. State versus private is no longer really a really argument. I would rather a hundred times over send my child to a non selective, well rounded and inclusive private school than an academy. They will more likely be working and basing their curriculum on evidence and in the best interests of the children. Academies are not working in the best interest of the children, you just have to hope that the staff are able to do their job as best they can as that is the only thing going for them.

moussemoose What would be awful is if someone grabbed what suited them and then just ignored the problem

Claiming to be a socialist then sending your dc to private school is doing exactly that.
How is saying 'oh I shouldn't be doing this but I am because the local state schools aren't good enough' working for a better education for all?