Disappointed in top private school

[Nevermakeit]

My DS is in one of the junior section of what is considered one of the top private schools in London. We have been there 2 years and I am increasingly feeling disappointed by it, and as if it is all a bit of a con.

To be clear, there is no major issue, and DS is very happy (loves the food and playing cricket).
The teaching is fine, but not exceptional, and they don't seem to be 'all over' things (eg nobody has clocked yet that he doesn't understand a blind thing in any of the coding lessons and is getting left behind). He has little homework, and over Christmas had over a month off, and not a single piece of work to do, with result that by the end he was actually bored.
The school has great facilities but many things are extra eg music (as expected), but also drama (outsourced to external suppliers), and even chess club (£100 per term!) - in which case, I feel we are better off doing these outside the school, where the teaching might even be better (eg specialist teacher for chess/ability to actually see the music lesson). They have lots of grand sounding 'clubs' but now everything is online, I can see that there is very little content behind any of it. The children can sign up to as much or as little as they want, but no-one has any visibility of whether they participate, or even to ensure they push themselves outside their comfort zone and try different things (eg mine simply does sports).
The school newsletter is always full of the pupils amazing achievements, but the reality is that these reflect what they are doing OUTSIDE school, not anything the school has had any real influence on.
I have little contact with the other parents (most of the kids are bussed in), but as far as I can tell no-one else feels the same, they simply fawn over the school.
Everything is 'OK' for me too, but in view of the very high fees (which are significant for us), I would have expected more, and it feels like these schools trade off their reputation and rest on their laurels - and it's a bit of a case of 'emperor's new clothes'...
DS is happy, and proud of his school, as I said, so I will not take the decision to move him lightly. I just wonder if other people have had similar experiences?

We have a very expensive private boarding school locally and I did raise an eyebrow when there was a bit in the paper about one of their students had got a degree apprenticeship with a big accountancy firm.

Very good but my friend’s DD had the same from a run of the mill state school and no one felt the need to stick it in the local paper. It all felt a bit Emperor’s new clothes.

With the £100 chess club, are you basically paying for childcare because your child stays late at school to do it (pre covid obvs)? If so that sounds fair enough. If not it's a massive rip off!

The benefit to private is that you have some power if stuff is going wrong. They have good facilities, and when things are normal there are lots of additional benefits.

That said, if you are in London, I’d probably just use state. On average, London schools are better funded than much of the country and get good results.

We use private Because our local state secondary schools are s£&t. I wish I didn’t feel it necessary, but the situation hasn’t improved in a decade, so I’m not letting my kids near that school.

In our small city any dramatic teenage misbehaviour by state school pupils is gleefully reported by the local rag. There is a gag on any reporting of naughtiness by the private school children as the schools pay for advertising in said rag. My friends children go to these schools and their behaviour is way worse!

I am able to see the differences between state and private when I look at children that shared the same experience at prep stage, one going to state and the other to public school.

The finished product are remarkably different. It is striking. I am glad we continued with private education. It is largely unspoken, but it is not just networks/small class sizes/facilities/lack of troubled families but much bigger than that I would say.

There used to be far less monitoring of independent schools than state schools. Generally parents are less likely to complain if they are paying for something. I use to teach the child of a H of D from a top London independent. They head hunted a lot of the state school teachers. They also freely admitted that their child was thriving in a state comprehensive. There child went to Oxbridge from the comprehensive as did both of mine. Much easier to gain a place at top unis than from independent schools. Oxbridge will always look twice at a student if they apply from a state comprehensive in my experience.

I could have written the OP I think...(SW London girls indie) particularly the bits where the school boast about their pupils achievements all based on things that they do out of school!!! Music is the big one for that - all the fabulous musicians they brag about have not had a single instrument lesson within school and are all at music college junior departments. Ditto sports - to even be in the a/b teams you have to be training with an external club...you certainly don’t get enough teaching at school to do it. Most of the academic teaching is good although every year we have had at least one teacher who has been AWFUL...and actually she stood out a mile at parents meeting this week for not really knowing anything about dd.

The level of favoritism to the chosen few girls is appalling...but I suspect that is true everywhere.

I will strongly be encouraging dd to move after gcse...she is very happy there so I didn’t insist on moving before as she can struggle with friendships.

You are paying for the nice environment, the fancy uniform and the status and contacts. You are very unlikely to get better teaching. You might get smaller classes and more deference and attention because you are a paying customer. I think you have probably realised that you are spending a huge amount of money and your child would probably have been happy elsewhere too.

Absolute nonsense that you can “tell the difference” between privately educated and state educated teens 🙄. You tell yourself that if it makes you feel better! Have you compared all of them?!

If it's just outside London, in Herts, then either my sons are at the same school or if it's the one I think, my son had an offer from there but we picked the other school. So assuming that's the case... it's great academically and my son was fortunate to be offered a scholarship there. It was a tough decision to turn it down as their exam results are great but, for us, there was an arrogant vibe that I wasn't keen on. The (old) head started his talk with "let me start by telling you why we're the best school in the UK" which I found quite amusing but my husband did not.

Our prep school head also made it clear that the sports there were a compromise and was right (perhaps except in cricket) as we play them on a regular basis. And I don't think they really play rugby any more. We have some very competitive parents but I think their parents might be a level above that! That said, I have friends with kids there that are very impressed by the school.

I have moved my kids from one prep school to another. They were very happy where they were but I felt it was a compromise academically and the other school got 75% of pupils into the secondary school we liked, and our first school, only a couple. Once you get that "feeling" of a school not meeting expectations as a parent, it's pretty hard to shift it. Have to say the move was more of a big deal to me than my kids, they settled in quickly and it was the right move.

My kids are very happy at their current school. The teaching is very good and they're both sports mad so enjoy the facilities and number of fixtures on offer. The pupils and head come across as very down to earth, which is important to us. I can't think of any extra curricular clubs that are charged for, except perhaps riding and golf. Certainly not drama or music. There's very good provision in terms of university support, scholarship sessions and pastoral care.

If you have doubts, I'd have a look at other local schools and see if you prefer what they're offering. One good thing about where we live is that there's lots of choice.

We can all play that game!

If you haven't been to an ordinary state comprehensive you can have no idea how bad they can be - just a few issues were staff absences constant with non specialist supply teachers covering the lessons, bullying, constant damage to the buildings plus theft of both school property and individuals, drug taking, lack of resources like text books, computer equipment etc. This is just off the top of my head the problems we had with dd1's school, dd2 went private consequently, thanks to a bursary and pay rise.

With private schools you are paying for the resources but mostly you are paying to keep out the riffraff. Parents willing to get their kids into a selective school care enough for tutoring, and tend to be pushy. (Not all private schools are the same but selective definitely)

I teach at a school that sounds very similar - near London. I specialise in one of the offered extras.

My required activity requires suffice to practise. Because the children are offered everything and participate in a lot, many of the things they do do not meet average.

Those I teach at local state schools often have less activities offered to them and so are far better at my bed activity as they put in the required practise.

This isn't the case for all private schools I am at , but definitely true of 1 out of my 3 private schools I am at.

Several years ago I took my son out of a private school in the area you describe, for all the reasons you describe.

He went to an outstanding state primary instead and goes to an outstanding state school now. I was so scared I was making the wrong decision at the time but to be honest Ive been much more impressed with the teaching in both of those than I ever was where he was before.

I thought I was buying a world class education when he went in. Actually I was buying a name, a network and a beautifully manicured set of grounds, and once I realised I didn’t actually care about that, the scales definitely fell for me.

'The finished products are remarkably different'

WTAF. You seriously believe that?
Laying aside referring to young people as products it just isn't true

I'm trying to imagine what you can mean via me and my Oxbridge friends. The state school educated people were more likely to have regional accents and had less interest in rugby and rowing is all I can think of. I guess the state school folks were a bit less likely to play a musical instrument at a high level or have a choral scholarship too.

All of us were/ are bright, articulate, pleasant, largely law abiding and scrub up nicely. My two friends who were/are the most into drugs went to Radley and Whitgift respectively.

It also didn't matter to us and no-one spoke about it after the first term. Friendship groups were more based on interests than anything else. I do remember how jaw droppingly surprised I was at some people's parents houses if we'd visit in the holidays. (Great for parties if your house has a cellar the size of most people's whole house). At uni though we were all the same.

@MsTSwift

In our small city any dramatic teenage misbehaviour by state school pupils is gleefully reported by the local rag. There is a gag on any reporting of naughtiness by the private school children as the schools pay for advertising in said rag. My friends children go to these schools and their behaviour is way worse!

Very , very interesting. We found the same at childs old private school the behaviour was atrocious. Discipline was not fairly issued, it all depended on who their parents were. There were huge safeguarding failings that were swept under the carpet. It was all about protecting the schools reputation and candy coating everything....

@Alternista

Several years ago I took my son out of a private school in the area you describe, for all the reasons you describe.

He went to an outstanding state primary instead and goes to an outstanding state school now. I was so scared I was making the wrong decision at the time but to be honest Ive been much more impressed with the teaching in both of those than I ever was where he was before.

I thought I was buying a world class education when he went in. Actually I was buying a name, a network and a beautifully manicured set of grounds, and once I realised I didn’t actually care about that, the scales definitely fell for me.

Exactly the same experience as we had !

I think the feeling of vague disappointment isn't uncommon, especially if people really stretch themselves for the fees or haven't experienced independent education before. They thought they were going to get a truly WOW experience because they've paid a big sum and are left feeling 'is that it?'

On one level, expectations can be a bit unrealistic and are often a bit vague about the expectation of WOW which is never specifically pinned down. Often top independents do a lot that is the same or similar to lesser independents or state schools. In some ways, the nitty gritty has to happen and won't be very different. Some of the extras you pay for mig be considered window dressing and either might not impact your indudal child (the 50 clubs - when they can't physically attend 50 clubs) or the many schools trips (when they can't physically go on them all) or the beautifully manicured lawn or new drama studio (when your child isn't into drama) or sports hall (if they don't like sport). The smaller classes might or might not make a difference. The teachers are just teachers and some might be inspirational but some certainly won't be and when the school recruits, it can only recruit from those who apply for the job....and in lots of areas there just aren't huge numbers of applicants. The school can't magic up inspirational teachers for all their classes. The same goes for school leaders. The idea that everyone will just somehow be better isn't the reality. But then you do wonder what you're paying for. And it is the smaller classes, the lovely lawn, more mini buses and lots of clubs and match teas. Depends if you value those things. In selective schools you are certainly paying for learning with othersof similar ability (although lots of so called selective schools aren't very selective in reality...they have an exam, but almost everyone who wants to go gets an offer and can be there, and all schools have to over-offer even when popular as people apply to several and can only take one). Essentially most people are paying to have their children learn in a stable cohort without the troubled families. It is social segregation.

Some people, expect that because they are paying, surely the school will do everything. But actually, even in big fee schools, if parents are actively involved it will all be better. If your child doesn't understand coding, it would be nice to think the teachers always spot it, but if they don't you simply need to say. Actually independnets are usually pretty good at responding to issues raised, where people with state school children often speak about contact and communication which is simply never returned.

Lastly, I think too that people can be disappointed when they haven't had recent contact with some of the issues state schools often face and so take for granted and are not wowed by some of the things independents often do offer. A big example can be stability of teaching staff and qualified specialists in shortages subjects. Even in great state schools parents talk about their child having a big string of supply teachers because someone has left, or several teachers across a GCSE course of 2 years or 2 different teachers because the timetable can't fit 1 in. They talk of their children taught maths or physics by non-specialists. These are really serious issues and if your independent school isn't facing them, you might not be impressed by this as it seems so basic, but actually you are paying for that...and in my view it's one of the things worth paying for.

Probably in the end, like everything, it depends on how much you're sacrificing to pay the fees, if it feels worth it or not worth it. If you still have a big house, plenty of holidays and know you can retire easily and don't have to check you bank statement, it might feel worth it, even if the gains aren't that significant. But if you are significantly adjusting your life, it may well not feel worth it. £20k+ per year for day school and more than double that for boarding is a LOT of money.

@WombatChocolate that was a great post. Only thing I think I would disagree with is that your child won’t mix with children from troubled families at selective schools. Through my work, nieces and nephews and my own private education I see/saw tons of troubled families at private selectives - it’s just their troubles are easier to mask behind a veneer of wealth. Drunorexic Mums, arms dealing Dad’s, plenty of financial crime/fraud, divorce, affairs, drugs (albeit the pricier ones, the parents are more likely to be coke heads than meth addicts), bankruptcy, domestic abuse and other violence, parents getting in to fisticuffs at school sports matches. Wealth doesn’t eliminate troubles (some might say can make some troubles worse eg drunkorexic mums) and it doesn’t protect children from having an array of mental health problems of their own.

@WombatChocolate plus some of the parents are on hand outs (albeit family ones not state ones) so work ethic can be slightly dodgy.

Oh I totally agree. There are lots of troubles and more and more children seeing counsellors and struggling in all schools.

However, it is different to some state schools too. Troubled home situations, but not often of the type where there are large numbers in most classes who have behavioural issues that make learning really difficult and where the families won't be supportive/are obstructive and very difficult for the school to handle too. Not the issues arising from lots of extreme poverty, such as being hungry or lacking basic equipment such as pens and pencils, or the school being unable to let children take books home as they might never return. So yes, definitely lots of deep rooted troubles in Independnet schools, with social service involvement with families, behavioural issues sometimes and lots of mental health difficulties, but different in terms of how it manifests and impacts the day to day learning in the classroom.

Often, parents are paying, partly so they can avoid their child learning in a class which might have 1/4 of disruptive students who take the teacher's attention and change the whole atmosphere of the classroom, or mean the pace of learning is entirely different. This isn't the case in all state schools or all lessons of course....but people pay to reduce the risk of their child finding themselves in this situation. And the fear of this is as important as whether it's a reality. There are state schools with pretty similar demographics to lots of independnets who won't have many of these issues at all...but parents have a big fear of them and will pay to avoid the risk in Lots of cases.

It’s harder to be a good/outstanding teacher in a challenging school than a private school in my opinion. The teaching isn’t necessarily better just because you’re paying for it. I’m speaking as someone who attended private and has taught in challenging schools for 13 years.

@VitreousHumour

My child went to one of the top selective state schools in London and I was also very meh.

Ultimately I felt that they took in an incredibly bright cohort and pushed out.. an incredibly bright cohort.

Yes this is precisely what super selective schools do IMO!

Seems terribly unfair to me to compare a school that has to take everyone living in a particular area with one that sets its pupils a tough exam to get in and is only open to those who can afford it ie the most successful segment of society! Which one will have the best results?!

It's easier for teachers in selective independents to become complacent and not push themselves. Teaching able and compliant students means you can deliver good results pretty easily, but really gadding value and getting more out of them than they would in most places, or making the learning experience more inspiring requires more work and effort. Some will push themselves to deliver this and some won't or just won't have the ability to do so. As I said before, when schools recruit they can only pick from those who apply. And actually, lots of teachers aren't actually interested in teaching in independent schools and aren't attracted in by smaller classes or a bit more money (which not all offer anyway) so often the pool to choose from is pretty small, especially in areas of the country which are expensive to live in.

I agree that unless a teacher is genuinely crap or totally lazy, they probably won't deliver a less than satisfactory experience. It probably is easier to be good as there's a bit more time to plan and smaller classes to mark the work of, but it's also easier to be complacent and deliver 'good enough' rather than something more than that. But I think lots of parents hope for inspiring teaching and are a bit disappointing that a small amount if it fits that mould really and the teachers are doing what they would be doing if they were working in a state school with a similar cohort.