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.

@Bulblasagnes
It is worth considering that with the world changing so much, they might come up against discrimination in workplace/university/hiring because of a fee paying education, they will have to get better exam results to prove their worth to universities and increasingly there is an anti elite feeling in society. You are actively putting them in to a 7% minority that many people feel a degree of anger towards based on the massive unfairness of the system.

I went to private school and would say that the extra curricular benefits are mostly limited to those into the school's "big" sports. You can generally get better quality music, sport and drama locally if you have the time to sort and facilitate it, but you do need the time to ferry around which may or may not be possible with a busy job.

Academically the benefits depend on the child and the alternative school.

Socially (network wise) is questionable at anything other than the big name schools and I'm not mad on the old boys' network on moral grounds.

I’m not a fan of old boys networks either. I basically just want my children to have a nice school experience! I wouldn’t want them to go anywhere where they’d come out with a posh accent and I would encourage them not to mention what school they went to in future ie at uni/work and just stick to “a local school in X (city where we live, which isn’t known for being wealthy although there are very wealthy areas within it (but we do not live in one of those areas))”. I think anyone who’s really keen to know what school you went to once you’re an adult is a bit of an idiot!! I’m quite happy to influence my kids to think the same

I believe that if all MC / wealthy children attended state schools (as they do in other countries) the system as a whole would benefit

Do MC/wealthy children attend state schools in USA? If so, the system doesn’t appear to benefit as apparently there are problems in may American state schools.

I’m not a fan of old boys networks either

I’ve never understood why the old boy network only seems to apply to public schools. Why shouldn’t it happen st state schools too?

I have been interested to read all the posts about private school pupils having no idea of the real world and needing DC who are well rounded and can appropriately interact with people from all walks of life. Slightly different perspective from me. I went to a really poor comprehensive with a diverse student body. This in no way prepared me for dealing with politicians, psychiatrists, members of the judiciary, police officers, drug addicts or violent criminals all of which is required for my job as a criminal barrister. However, many of my privately educated colleagues who as students volunteered with a variety of charities, were heavily involved in drama, had public speaking opportunities, played team sports, were exposed to outdoor pursuits and had an education which gave them a sense they could tackle anything, have been excellent at dealing with people from every walk of life. Many independent schools take teaching their pupils about the wider community and being a responsible citizen very seriously and I’ve seen the fruits of that when Ive seen colleagues dealing with very challenging people. Not all private schools produce entitled buffoons just like not all state schools produce well rounded pupils ready for the challenges of the work place.

@andante57 if there was an old girls network from my secondary school it would include several ex-students in prison, a teacher, a hairdresser, a social worker and one lawyer. Fairly sure that’s why my old school don’t have one.

@JohnnyEnglish I concur

Yes the world is changing

We sent our kids to local State comp, not out of any principle, just because we did not see much value add in our local private schools

When DS got a “reduced offer” from a Uni that one of my friend’s privately educated DC did not get into, she felt it was unfair (her DS got Aaa offer, DS got AAC for the same course, for being from a state sixth form in a low attaining area)

But that’s the way things are going now, it seems

But if you love the sport etc do go for the private option. Right now, it probably still confers more advantages than disadvantages

We really need to get rid of this idea that all fee paying pupils emerge from school courtroom ready. From my cohort at school there are a couple of lawyers and medics, a writer. There is also a healthy dose of fraud, unemployment and general low achievement. Some alcoholics, a few with drug problems. But most of them, like most of my DH's cohort from Eton are just fairly unremarkable adults with solid but uninspiring jobs paying the bills and raising a family. Yes there was drama at my fee paying school, but many of the children had small parts because they were shy. And they remained shy. Still are now. Because their genes are their genes and no amount of fee paying education could change that. As they used to say in the fee paying world "You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear."

Have you kept abreast with the mental health problems at some of the superselective schools? Far from being ready to don gown and take on a court, many of these children are crippled with anxiety, eating disorders and face years of counselling to be able to function healthily. No gloss there.
Some children do have confidence from both sectors of education but that comes often from their parents and being bought up in a home with a variety of adult visitors and learning to talk to them from a very young age. My niece is terribly shy, grew up in that sort of house and is still very shy at her fee paying school. But she's fab and will flourish in her own way, but it won't be in a packed courtroom.
As for schools taking community work seriously, our local comp does brilliant outreach programs and aside from that the children learn about community by living in it rather than being craned out of it.

I do wonder if this difference is in part down to cultural exposure, early life experiences

Such as?

“In university there were a lot of students with anxiety or mental health issues, amongst hugely privileged ex private school students in a way that simply didn't exist in my sixth form. Whilst I know mental health problems can occur to anyone, it was noticeably more of an issue at university (perhaps just a result of a pressured background?).”

Could it be that many of the state school kids who had additional needs or mental health struggles didn’t get the support they needed to make it to university or even sixth form college? Many parents of children with SEN, confidence issues, or sensitive / anxious children who can afford to decide to go private because they feel their children will be able to cope better in such environments and receive more support.

By cultural exposure I meant that for students going to a mixed comprehensive school, they will have a wider experience of different parts of society. So might be motivated to move into jobs such as social work/nursing etc because they have a specific desire to support families through issues they have experienced themselves, or seen others experience.

@Bulblasagnes yes, that's an important point. It does very much depend on support available in state schools as well and I can fully see that a private option might in some cases provide extra support or support not available in a.state school. I think I was reflecting on some of the potential hot house pressures that were definitely not present in my school.experience.

Thank you for answering my question muddywellies

I also think that many children who go to fee paying schools then feel they must choose career paths that a) make the amount their parents paid worth it as they feel responsible b) will earn them enough so that they can perpetuate the experience for their own children. My father wanted to be an artist but knew that he couldn’t be if he wanted that life path so went for a finance job - he became unhappy and an alcoholic and had health issues from the stress, I think mostly because he is at heart a creative soul and felt that he was in a world that he didn’t believe in and that didn’t suit his personality. We would have preferred him to be happy and have gone to the lovely normal school down the road!

so went for a finance job - he became unhappy and an alcoholic

Plenty of people pursue the career of their choice and still become alcoholics.

@Andante57
Of course - but his stress was quite horrible to see and live with, the drinking was particularly bad after big board meetings and when there were all consuming projects at work and he felt the most unimaginable pressure to give us a fee paying education (he was always telling us we were lucky and yet we didn’t feel it as he was so miserable) and I vowed my husband and I weren’t going to feel that way unless one of our DC had needs that meant it was the best option. I also love knowing my DC won’t feel any pressure to limit the number of children they have / choose careers that are based around the need to earn that amount.

I can completely see that being the case and I would hate for my children to feel that way.

To give another perspective, I know a lot of people who pursued their passions into creative and less well paid careers and have bitterly regretted it when faced with low pay, lack of job security, huge challenges getting a mortgage to buy their first home and watching the prices go higher and higher in the meantime, not being able to afford to live somewhere they feel safe, worries about DC school but completely unable to do anything about it (can’t afford to move into the catchment of a better school or tutor to get into a grammar).

But there are plenty of jobs which are in between the ultra highly paid but stressful finance jobs and
minimum wage and/or insecure work, which I hope they’ll go for! Also to add for balance that there are of course many very well paid jobs that are not highly stressful (I consider myself fortunate enough to be in one and I think it’s important people know they exist!).

Whilst we were not in the same position (went with grammar over private but would have gone with comp over private too), I definitely see your point.

Our local comp improved massively when lots of mc parents had to take their children out of the local indies in 2007-2008 and send them to the comp. At that point, going to an indie for secondary from local primaries was not unusual, now maybe 10% go the indie route for secondary. Big change in attitude amongst the parents and as a consequence in the quality and reputation of the local comp. To think that a single person's choice doesn't matter, and rely on others to take those steps is to not understand society. Change starts with individuals taking the first steps.

We did sit with an offer from the local indie but upon seeing the non-diverse parent community, I was not as positive as I had been before.

However, we only looked at co-ed schools as DC didn't want single sex and I think that co-ed is better for boys. I would make that a major point for going state in your case.

There are lots of arguments for what is best for society. For example, setting in schools. IIRC from my education papers, not setting is best for cohorts as a whole as it improves lower scoring pupil's attainment however higher scoring pupils do better when classes are set by ability. If you were the parent of a high-scoring pupils choosing between one high school with sets and another with mixed ability classes, which would you choose?

I think it's great to walk the walk when it comes to choices for yourself and your own future, but I always wonder when it comes to picking things on behalf of your children whether the choices are about political ideals or what it best for the child.

Do you have an equally good option for your younger child btw? (Assuming DC2 is a girl?).

In any case, I would start putting money aside now. If they get to secondary and you go private you will have a nice fee buffer. If you stick with state, you can use the money in other ways.

Great discussion topic and many valid points.

We have been deciding between a local outstanding state primary vs a small uber academic prep.

I am leaning towards the prep because its single sex, better focus on academics (we want grammar i.e. free! secondary) and a focus on good behaviour. We would even consider moving so we can walk to the prep.

Absolutely get we would be sacrificing not having a local community, but my biggest fear is if DC lose the love of learning early on, get influenced by what "good" means and have lower expectations, and then it is too late to just cram 11+.

So for us it is private primary to get the foundations in place, aiming for super selective secondary. Private secondary as a fall back.

@Andante57

I believe that if all MC / wealthy children attended state schools (as they do in other countries) the system as a whole would benefit

Do MC/wealthy children attend state schools in USA? If so, the system doesn’t appear to benefit as apparently there are problems in may American state schools.

hi, american here! roughly 9-10% of students in the us attend private schools and the rest attend public schools (what we call state schools). interestingly tho, when we say public schools, we're including magnet (specialized, i.e. bronx science or lag arts, kind of like grammar schools bc they're selective) and regular public schools u get assigned to based on where u live and we don't differentiate between selective and nonselective public schools.

as for what kinds of schools wealthy kids attend, it depends tbh.

unlike the uk, there usually isn't an idealogical reason for not attending a private, probably has to do w the fact that neither of the two major political parties advocate them being unethical or for abolishing them so nobody really cares.

also unlike the uk (and i cld be wrong abt this), it seems like it's easier in the us to move to an area w good public schools because our catchement areas aren't very nitpicky + we have something called out of state tuition where parents who don't want to be extremely expensive houses just to be near good schools can pay tuition to go to that rlly good school. in dcs school, about 7% of students pay betwwen 23k and 28k to attend the school, which is in the top 2% of public schools in the country.

interestingly enough, the top two schools that get the most kids into harvard, princeton, and mit are magnet schools not privates and 1/2 of the top ten are also magnets and the rest are privates (and then there's also the argument that magnet schools themselves contribute to an unfair education system because they only exist in high income cities (nyc, boston, etc) and the average student isn't going to be anywhere near one).

loads of public schools are better than private schools and vice versa. i don't think there's much in terms of extracurriculars a top private offers that a top public doesn't. top privates do provide internship connections bc of wealthy, connected classmates/alumni and better university counseling, though.

also, places with crappy public schools don't tend to have good private schools, so ur usually choosing between a good priv and a good public or a bad public and either no priv or a bad priv.

so yeah, that was a lot of rambling trying to explain the public and private systems but to conclude, if u have an at least above average that might even not be amazing public option middle class parents aren't going to bother with a private. can't say much about the uber wealthy because i honestly don't know.

I have never seen a private primary that teaches the foundations better than a very good state primary. Small private primary schools are mostly a mixed bag and can be financially insecure. They may be 11 plus crammers but rarely get art, music, sport, all rounder, drama or academic scholarships to top level senior schools. The best prep schools are usually larger, have great facilities for all subjects and don’t just focus on a narrow curriculum. Destinations are key to making informed choices.

Ditto any senior school. Make sure you get value for money. If you don’t like the look of other parents at a school then don’t go there. You won’t be happy. I think dc find their level according to upbringing, ambition (or lack of it) and how bright they are. Schools play a part but they cannot change everything. So be realistic and choose the best school. If you don’t like private due to politics, stay clear.

The description of schools in the USA was fascinating. Thanks for that @user38501

Thank you user38501 for the explanation of US schools.