Did using state schools over private make a difference in your experience?

[Bulblasagnes]

If you chose to use the state sector when you could afford private, for altruistic or idealistic reasons of wanting to participate in the state sector and support the betterment of the state sector for the benefit of everyone, do you think it actually made a difference to other children at your child’s school? Or to the school?

I have always planned on sending my DC to state schools all the way through. I am confident that with our support they would be fine academically and go onto achieve whatever they wanted. DH and I attended top universities and are both in highly skilled professional jobs. To our surprise after a few sharp pay rises we will be in a position to easily afford private secondary when the time comes. In addition, there is an all-round fantastic private school locally (a boys’ school, for DS, the oldest) which has brilliant facilities and teaching in sports, music, drama and so on, in addition to great academics.

Between the two options we have, I still don’t think it will necessarily affect university options, but I do think DS could have a lot of fun and pursue many activities to a high level at the private school, which he wouldn’t be able to at the state. I also think the private school would help with DS’s confidence issues.

My heart is still with the state school option but I want to be sure that depriving my DC of those experiences and possibilities at private school will really make a difference to others. Otherwise it just feels like I’m making them miss out for no reason.

@PresentingPercy

Why do you think privately educated dc don’t understand the community they work in??? Of course they do. They have, after all, chosen to work there.

There are shortages of doctors in certain fields of work because it is perceived to be crap working. So all the ordinary folk who want to be doctors are expected to do the crap work because they are so humble and do not expect to aspire to be surgeons? Really? Keep them in their lowly position that’s shunned by everyone else. Great. Aim high is my mantra. Whoever you are!

If dc don’t like any school, move them. Nothing is fixed. The DC that has removed herself to an exclusive 6th form amazes me. One assumes she knew the money was there! And the deposit paid and the firms signed? Even though mum has no role in it? At least we talk in our house.

Is this referring to my posts? Not sure what you are trying to say in that case. And if I am the poster you are referring to, I have obviously explained myself really badly.

'Aim high is my mantra'. Not everyone defines 'high' as you, it seems.

Re: Camaleon, if I understood correctly, it was re Covoid

@PresentingPercy

Why do you think privately educated dc don’t understand the community they work in??? Of course they do. They have, after all, chosen to work there.

There are shortages of doctors in certain fields of work because it is perceived to be crap working. So all the ordinary folk who want to be doctors are expected to do the crap work because they are so humble and do not expect to aspire to be surgeons? Really? Keep them in their lowly position that’s shunned by everyone else. Great. Aim high is my mantra. Whoever you are!

If dc don’t like any school, move them. Nothing is fixed. The DC that has removed herself to an exclusive 6th form amazes me. One assumes she knew the money was there! And the deposit paid and the firms signed? Even though mum has no role in it? At least we talk in our house.

I can't agree with you more. Schooling is a personal choice.

I went to private schools and earned a fantastic uni education. I have a good but not wow income (circa 90k) and as a lone parent I cannot afford to send my two children to private schools. If I could comfortably do so I absolutely would. I wouldn’t if I could only ‘scrape it’ together as I’d hate them to feel ‘poor’ in their surroundings.

My power is to make sure we live in the catchment for the best state secondary.

My son may not be academically gifted, remains to be seen, but he is very athletic and a private school would give him the scope to explore this. Someone said to me when I first had kids, private is most useful to the middle lane academic kids because they will need the doors opened and the leg up. A very bright kid will likely do well in a regular school anyway.

I think your problem is simple, do what’s best for you kids, you can’t change the education system with your decision, just pick the right school for each child, and you have the luxury of not taking into account if fees are involved. Otherwise you are politicising your decision.

@twinsyang

Re: Camaleon, if I understood correctly, it was re Covoid

Thanks. Got it now

My parents went to grammar schools, and - my mum especially - hated it. So when my time came I was discouraged, despite being bright, from sitting the scholarship test. I went to the local comp and was utterly miserable. No self esteem or confidence, from years of bullying, left me easy pickings for grooming, and I dropped out at 15 when I got pregnant. This despite testing as having a 160+ IQ.
I always say my sliding doors moment was school choice. And while I’ve made my peace with it, I do still sometimes wonder “what if?”
My story is obviously extreme, and some bright children do thrive wherever they are, and I’m sure wonderful comps do exist.

@ColdTattyWaitingForSummer so sorry to hear that. You do so often hear that bright kids will do well anywhere and I really want to believe that but the reality is it’s frequently not the case.

Having done a lot of reading since I first posted this thread, I am almost certain that private is the best option for my DC, but that doesn’t stop me from being incredibly sorry that other children won’t have the same opportunities. I will still do what I can to try to raise aspirations at our local school so that even if the children can’t have all the extra sports, clubs and facilities that they would at private, at least they can have good future prospects for a great university education and professional working life, if that is what they want to do. I think it’s important to demonstrate that this is at least possible at a school - it’s the best way to avoid putting off the parents of bright kids who want their children to have a chance at the top universities and reliable jobs. If you don’t even have a handful of children achieving top a-level results and good university admissions, you end up with the risk of the school going on a downward spiral where anyone with some hopes for their kids move heaven and earth to send them elsewhere.

Sorry to be less than clear.I was directing my comments to @CovoidOfAllHumanity

It is simply not acceptable to say we want to recruit doctors from all sectors of society and then think the ones from deprived areas should continue to work there becausesomehow they are better at it and its their role in life. It is not. All recruits should make choices according to their interests and skills. I for one would never think an eye surgeon was a wasted skill, whatever background the surgeon comes from. Sight is precious.

I do believe that parents can support local schools even if their DC go elewhere. Often there is room for new governors to hold the schools to account and help them become better schools. I completely agree that parents who do have aspiration will send DC to better schools if they can and there is clearly a heirarchy of schools in some areas with the "sink" ones at the bottom of pile being poor. The ones at the bottom always struggle to improve too. I also feel they often attract less goood staff and certainly less good leadership so improvement is hard to sustain.

There is also the big problem that "good enough is good enough". It is not. There are schools that do not open the eyes of DC to greater opportunities. The teachers often do not really know what these look like (never having done anything else) and careers guidance can be poor. There is a big need for young people who can go to university to understand the differences between universities and courses and how the grad tax actually works. Some DC and families are very risk averse so make decision based on beliefs and poor understanding rather than facts.

I am all for all Dc aiming high but often we see the ones who have come from deprived areas still thinking they cannot aim high with jobs. They are pushed into believing they must work with their community, as medics, teachers, social workers, criminal solicitors etc. They have not really investigated whether they could be earning more or opt for a career that involves moving away from home. It is far too easy for deprived area kids to think they must give something back whereas others don't even consider it if they do not want to. They plough on with better paid careers because that is what everyone around them does.

This is not state vs private either. It's about upbringing, influences and advice.

You completely misunderstand me

I have never ever said that being an eye surgeon is a wasted skill. I said that it's not a shortage specialty in the NHS. We have enough eye surgeons and we don't need a lot more right now.

People actually can't just decide what they want to do within medicine according to their interests and skills because then we'd have too many of the popular things. Places in specialty training programmes are limited to what is needed so not everyone can have their first choice.

I did say that we want to recruit Drs from all sectors of society
Currently we don't do that because privately educated people are massively over represented as consultants
I did NOT say that state educated Drs have to stay in our boxes and can't be cardio thoracic surgeons. We can do whatever we like of course and I never said otherwise.

I did say that we need people to be interested in doing the shortage specialties like GP, emergency medicine and psychiatry
It just so happens that if you are motivated by earning a lot of money for private work then these specialties won't give you that
Therefore we need less people who are motivated by money and prestige ie less people who need the extra cash to send their kids to private school.

@CovoidOfAllHumanity

You completely misunderstand me

I have never ever said that being an eye surgeon is a wasted skill. I said that it's not a shortage specialty in the NHS. We have enough eye surgeons and we don't need a lot more right now.

People actually can't just decide what they want to do within medicine according to their interests and skills because then we'd have too many of the popular things. Places in specialty training programmes are limited to what is needed so not everyone can have their first choice.

I did say that we want to recruit Drs from all sectors of society
Currently we don't do that because privately educated people are massively over represented as consultants
I did NOT say that state educated Drs have to stay in our boxes and can't be cardio thoracic surgeons. We can do whatever we like of course and I never said otherwise.

I did say that we need people to be interested in doing the shortage specialties like GP, emergency medicine and psychiatry
It just so happens that if you are motivated by earning a lot of money for private work then these specialties won't give you that
Therefore we need less people who are motivated by money and prestige ie less people who need the extra cash to send their kids to private school.

Most parents who send their children to private school do not calculate returns.

Without the financial pressure, children are less likely to be money driven and they their interest is more likely to be of first order importance when they choose a career path.

A lot privately educated Children who choose to be doctors are not because they want to make money, but rather their parents are in that profession.

Same rules apply, without the financial motives, a career can be enjoyable and a person will be happier.

Also don't people think it's a tiny bit patronising to send your kids to private school and then bestow your benevolent favour on the state sector by becoming governor of a school you have no understanding of

I am a governor of the school my kids actually go to and I would not be too impressed if someone wanted to join the board but not put their money where their mouth is. You have to believe in a school surely to be a critical friend to it?

I'd be worried they'd have no idea of the actual realities and challenges.
As the teacher upthread said (about the PTA balls) the issue with the state sector is that it has to provide an education to all. It cannot refuse to admit children with SEN, behaviour problems and poor achievement. It has to cater to their needs which a private school never has to. How would someone who sends their kids to a private school to avoid such issues be an authority on raising standards in such groups?

I think you'd be better off donating some money or if you did join the board then a good bit of listening to the challenges involved before offering up solutions would be required.

Maybe some people's idea of aiming high is not the same as mine.
What the hell is wrong with being a medic, teacher, social worker or criminal lawyer? Why would it be inherently better to be a banker or a management consultant?
I could certainly make a lot more money than I do but I do not happen to believe that the pursuit of money makes a person happy. After all you can't take it with you.

We do not have enough of anything judging by the waiting lists!

You strongly implied that people from disadvantaged areas would be great GPs, emergency medicine doctors because they would understand their community. Others apparently did not. We all know these are the least "desirable" medicine jobs but you do think the shortages should be filled by people who are not motivated by money - the people from the cheap seats. It is simply not acceptable. Who says people from deprived areas do not want to use private schools for their DC? Are they not alowed to aspire to that? Is this communism at work? I am so glad no one ever dared say this to me.

I'm not speaking in the abstract
I am a state educated, Oxbridge graduate psychiatrist
I am speaking from what I know. From my personal experience
I could do any job in medicine that I wanted but I chose this one because it interests me. My colleagues are significantly less likely to be privately educated than colleagues in other specialties
I don't think it's because we are stupid or lack aspiration I think it's because we care about different things
I'm sorry if me speaking from my own experience makes you angry. It's my opinion based on my actual life.

Also sorry that my life choices are apparently so 'unacceptable'

Actually this As the teacher upthread said (about the PTA balls) the issue with the state sector is that it has to provide an education to all. It cannot refuse to admit children with SEN, behaviour problems and poor achievement

Is not true or accurate. My ds was ‘eased out’ of one state school and refused entry to another because they claimed that they couldn’t meet his needs.
I could have taken it further but I didn’t want him there if they were so anti children who are different going there.

It’s a much circulated myth that state is best for pupils with additional needs and that private schools won’t take them.

My ds ended up going private and has never been happier, both for primary and secondary.

The private sector mops up a lot of kids who fall through the gaps.

If their parents can afford to pay presumably?

@CovoidOfAllHumanity

If their parents can afford to pay presumably?

Was that to me? Are children with additional needs not allowed to be helped because others aren’t?

My LA pays for DS, it’s not as uncommon as you would think.

There are a couple of others who I suspect have AN too. My point was really about the myth of state schools being so wonderful and inclusive, they are not.

Frustratingly it’s often people who have no experience with navigating the education system fir a child with AN who claim that’s it fabulous and private schools refuse to take them.

Suits a lot of people’s agenda.

So I was disputing your point that state schools ‘cannot refuse’ certain pupils. It’s not true, they do, it happened to me.

www.theguardian.com/education/2019/may/07/cuts-heads-refuse-school-places-pupils-special-needs

Older but still demonstrates that the well loved trope on here is not accurate.

www.theguardian.com/education/2012/may/24/academies-refusal-pupils-special-needs

You strongly implied that people from disadvantaged areas would be great GPs, emergency medicine doctors because they would understand their community. Others apparently did not. We all know these are the least "desirable" medicine jobs but you do think the shortages should be filled by people who are not motivated by money - the people from the cheap seats.

The people from the cheap seats? What does this mean?!

Schools are technically not meant to refuse SEN pupils but some move heaven and earth to say they cannot meet their needs. It has always been the same.

@CovoidOfAllHumanity
What you experience is not necessarily what all state educated people should aspire too. You might well be more than happy with your choices but getting upset about me saying others should have a choice is ridiculous. I am not upset and I do not care where doctors went to school but being dictatorial about what they should do when qualified stinks. Everyone should have choice according to their skills and attributes. They should not be pushed into aeas of work that do not suit them (for the sake of the patients ad much as anything) to make you feel better about too many privateley educated doctors getting better paid roles. They want them: you did not. Fair enough.

I'd suggest that some private secondary schools with generous bursaries and scholarships will be substantially more diverse than an ultra desirable state school with a small leafy catchment... as buying a house in catchment requires far more deposit and income for mortgage than paying the fees.

This possibly also applies in Scotland for certain schools (Jordanhill, Douglas Academy, Bearsden Academy) where even modest housing in catchment is £££!

@CovoidOfAllHumanity it doesn’t have to be patronising at all. As an ethnic minority woman I know I can inspire many children from a similar ethnic background or young girls (and even more significantly, those who agave both those characteristics) at the local school. Should I withhold that potential source of inspiration just because I chose to send my own children private? Should those children not know what is possible even as an ethnic minority child from a background that has no career aspiration for girls? This whole attitude of sod off if you chose the private sector and don’t let the door hit you on the way out is pretty harmful. Actually if there was greater cross pollination and interaction maybe wouldn’t have quite such extremes as we do currently. I don’t think you can underestimate the value of good role models (and yes I do consider myself a good role model as far as university and careers go and I won’t apologise for it!).

@PresentingPercy I am following the discussion with interest. One thing that many people don't know and you implied they do is that 'there are less desirable doctor positions than others'.

Obviously, when it comes to have access to elitist jobs (in the sense that they are occupied by a small minority of the population and they are very well paid, well beyond the average salary in any given country) private education is a plus.

And obviously not everybody has a choice, not only becasue of money. Just because they don't know about the choices. I don't think privately educated people have all the choices either. They are in a bubble (at least in the UK, where over 90% don't attend private schools).

However, there are people with different values who would choose the state school because they believe it is better for their children, even if they can afford private. The extras the private school offers are not attractive enough for the minuses.

I believe myself that state schools within the community broaden horizons and allow children to imagine a much wider range of futures. I may be totally wrong since my own kids have decided they wanted to move to a more selective/more academic setting when they could choose themselves.
Just pointing that we are all quite dictatorial on how we see this. I have no doubt that most people who pay private do so because they are convinced it is better. Why would they pay otherwise? It is interesting to listen to the different reasons and all the assumptions people make about each other (including that private schools get better mannered people!!!!)