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.

Genuine questions for those that are against private schools; what about the privileged families that can afford and choose to live in expensive areas to gain access to the best state schools but berate those who choose the private sector?
Is this not hypocritical too?
Can you truly only be a socialist if you immerse yourself in areas that the majority can afford.
For clarity, these are genuine questions. I’m on the fence with regards to private education and would appreciate any responses.

"What's the difference between a bright, inquisitive five-year-old, and a dull, stupid nineteen-year-old? Fourteen years of the British educational system."
Bertrand Russell

(Sorry, couldn't resist-)

In My Glorious Reign, the whole admissions procedure for state schools would be completely overhauled. But until the People come to their senses and elect me Dictator by Proclamation, I think distance is the least worst system. The “buying into the catchment” thing really is only an issue for a few schools. Schools in privileged areas are bound to do better on paper than schools in disadvantaged areas by definition.

My revered namesake was not referring to a particular sector, but to education as a whole. And as he says 19 year olds he would actually have been talking largely about private education!

My husband and I were both state educated, and it had never occurred to us that we would send our children private, but we did from 11. I knew our local secondary (leafy Surrey) would have been a disaster for my older daughter who is very clever, but painfully shy, with low self confidence, and desperate to fit in and be average).

It was Ofsted 'satisfactory' in those days, had a problem with bullying and poor behaviour, and seemed to me to have low aspirations and a very poor offer in terms of the academic curriculum and music and the arts (NB this was during the Labour government, so no excuses about funding). I think it was partly because it went up to 16, so the school was aiming only for the children to do well enough to get to the 6th form college.

We bit the bullet and sent her to a selective girls school, with a scholarship (we didn't get one but the school gives bursaries worth up to 100% for those with scholarships). I was very happy for her to be average there, and she has just graduated from Oxford (ditto).

Do I feel a bit guilty about having bought her privilege? Yes, though she has been less privileged in other ways than many of her old primary school friends, because she has had fewer holidays and we haven't bought her a car). Would I do it again? Definitely.

Of course, though I think the great man was a pretty severe critic of the education offered to poor people too...

The most delicious thing about self-righteous lefties choosing private education is how powerfully their actions confirm the truth of conservative ideas about self-interest and human nature...

I am ready for benign dictatorship at this point-

Funny how the people In the right on this thread seem to be ignoring the fact that those of us on the left are saying that yes, it is completely hypocritical to claim left wing credentials and also use private education. It's almost as if they can't see past the stereotype.....

On the contrary, I (almost*) respect the ideological purity of hardcore lefties who are prepared to sacrifice their children's education for their beliefs.

*Except of course I don't - what a monstrous thing to do to one's own children!

I have no problem with people sacrificing their beliefs for the sake of their children and educating privately.

However, when these very same people then campaign against grammar schools I look down on them with contempt !

These lefties are as bad as the 'Aristos' who believe in the theory of common good. This being as long as they are exempt from it themselves.
A belief that they have a divine right of having the best of everything , why simultaneously engaging in virtue signalling.

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others

Nothing wrong with using Private schools but it is hypocritical to say you are a socialist when you take the first opportunity to jump up the ladder of privilege.

As Dianne Abbott admitted her decision was "indefensible", and that "she had been utterly selfish and self-serving".

I think deep down inside very few people are socialist, its just a phase until you can climb up the ladder a few rungs.

• whether children who go to private schools will experience judgement and prejudice against them

Possibly but less likely to notice or care or be in situations where it happened, as opposed to someone from a different background who would have to fight prejudice to make it to the same place.

Left of centre and briefly toyed with grammar (in London so very limited and only really available to those who can afford tutors) but decided I couldn't square it. i did forgo my ideals though in letting DS1 go to a single sex school.

The problem is that some people start from the assumption that using state schools is "sacrificing their children" It's frankly pretty hard to have any sort of discussion with people who think thar......

The problem is that some people start from the assumption that using state schools is "sacrificing their children" It's frankly pretty hard to have any sort of discussion with people who think thar......

You don't like assumptions grounded in reality? That would indeed make a discussion quite difficult!

What I can never understand is why so many mumsnetters with money for private school seem to live near the worst state schools. Surely most well off people live in nice places?

Yes - but 30% of the parents in my area can afford to pay school fees - and they do - which means that some of the state schools have to import students from rougher areas further afield. Not to mention that there are 6 faith-only secondary schools within easy reach of me and 2 super selective grammar schools.

Plenty of parents I know pay £800 - £1,200 per child in bus/train fares to send their dc to better schools elsewhere. Is that allowed?

Letstalk I'm not 100% sure what point you're making about GS. I am (probably) going to choose private for reasons already stated (co-ed, secular, also better subject choice and I like the IB). But if I didn't/couldn't, I would almost certainly be choosing a GS (assuming DS passes his 11+). In both cases because I think these would be the best schools for him in the system I live in. But in an ideal world I don't think either type of school should exist. Why does choosing private make it particularly worthy of contempt to criticise grammars? Both types of school are socially divisive.

If you believe you would be 'sacrificing your children' if you sent them to a state school, then you are not a socialist. That's the thing about beliefs if you genuinely believed in socialist ideology then you would think state schools were the best option.

I think most people would sacrifice their principles for their children. They tend to understand that it makes them hypocrites and once it happens, usually become more understanding of parents who make similar choices. I have a lot more respect for them than I do for those who loudly proclaim their principles, ditch them for their own children's education and yet continue to castigate those who do the same or had different beliefs to begin with.

Wanting others to uphold principles you yourself jettisoned IRL is worse than hypocrisy.

Incidentally, in the couple of decades I've lived here, I've known one person who opted to send her children to the not very good sec mod even though she could have sent them to either a grammar or a faith school, as a matter of principle. Just one.

Dione if you 'abandon' principles as soon as a choice is required, they were never principles in the first place, just unthought through ideas.

"You don't like assumptions grounded in reality? That would indeed make a discussion quite difficult!"
If you think that sending your child to state school is "sacrificing" then then no, that assumption is not based in reality.

But if state school isn’t worse than private, Bertrand, why is sending your kids private wrong?
I don’t get it? You insist going private is buying unfair privilege but you won’t have it that the state system is worse. It maketh no sense.

my stepmother is an old leftie (grammar school herself) and used to sneer and mock at me because I went to a private school.

Yet her own daughters went to a Catholic college which excluded on the basis of religion, making it into a 'good school'.

Surely just paying for private is more honest/integrated than lying about your religion?