Would you pay for private education when there is a very good state alternative?

[alfiesbabe]

I know this is a contentious issue, but am really interested to hear other people's views. Our situation: have just moved DS (Yr 9)from private to local state school. (His choice). He had been on a scholarship as a chorister, and finished in the choir, but money wasn't an issue as DH teaches in the private school so we paid peanuts for fees. DS is really happy and likes the wider range of students. He is in top sets for most subjects and reports back that the work is more challenging and behaviour better than was the case in his previous class. He gets less homework, but to my mind what he does get is more relevant (eg in maths he might get set 5 questions to test that he has understood a teaching point, whereas at the private school he'd be set several pages of the same type of question). Results wise, the private school had 85% 5 A-C passes, the state school had 72%. Bearing in mind the state school has the full ability range, whereas the private school is selective, this smacks to me of better teaching in the state school. It seems like a very small difference considering parents are paying about 12K a year for the private school. A-level results are similar - statistically the private school is a little better, but not by much. The private school offers more in the way of music and sport; but DS has gone as far as he wants with music for the moment and isnt bothered about sport. I'm not looking for validation of our choice - we know we've made the right decision - but I'm left with this feeling of 'What were we actually paying school fees for?' The experience as a chorister was valuable, but I can't get my head round parents who pay the full whack, specially if their child isnt musical or sporty. I'm aware that our local state school is outstanding and we're very lucky in this respect. So.... why WOULD anyone pay for private in this situation?

suedonim - I think that's a very good point. I think it's a shame if parents feel they need to offload certain parenting tasks to the school. A school can reinforce good manners etc, but it's NOT their duty to teach them - that's the role of the parents.
Unquietdad - interesting post. Yes, a key issue is that proportionately HUGELY more pupils from private schools apply to Oxbridge, and this is a cultural thing really. Oxbridge has a reputation as a very privileged, rarified institution, and for many people this is off putting. Oxbridge certainly need to do more to seek out the really naturally bright pupils in the state sector. I also agree though that there are many many other really excellent Universities which may well be better for a specific subject. I think I'm maybe a bit biased anyway, as a few of the teachers at ds's former school (private) were Oxbridge, and they were among the dullest teachers in the place!

Most of the problems in education stems from poor parenting. An awful lot of families do not teach or display basic manners and courtesy, and so the children have no clue.

It is very important that schools are consistent on what constitutes good manners, because it might be the only place where the children are exposed to them. Having high expectations is the key to achievement.

It's not the nice kids, with stable homelives, that cause the problems, generally. But it only takes a few kids who delight in low-level disruption to wreck lessons for all.

How can schools be consistent on what constitutes good manners when society isnt?

if children are only exposed to certain types of thinking at school and that is imposed on them rather than them making an informed choice how do we expect them to make choices as adults?

It is our methods of education which are often wrong and the belief that we need to impose our systems and thinking on others. We also treat children as if they have no minds of their own and no power to make decisions or influence the things which happen to them and then when they reach a certain age expect them to have developed these skills in some miraculous fashion.

There has been a lot of talk about discipline on this thread as though it were a good thing and it is to some extent but self discipline is much better and is the thing which will stand in child in good stead in the adult world.

People on this thread have made assumptions about nice homelives and disruptive kids without qualifying them and without saying exactly why children are disruptive (which may be nothing to do with homelives) and why the assumption is that disruptive is always a bad thing in any case.

glitterfairy - a really thoughtful post. Agree that self discipline needs to be the ultimate aim. Of course children need guidance and boundaries, especially when very little, but I beleive the key to truly successful parenting is to try to make a seamless transition from imposing discipline to enabling your child to manage their own behaviour.
Your last point is really insightful as well. I think some children are disruptive simply because they are seriously lacking in social and emotional skills, and simply don't understand or dont care about the impact their behaviour has on others. But for many other children, being unstimulated/bored/patronised may be the trigger for disuptive behaviour. This was definitely the case with ds. He is very bright, and became extremely angry at sitting in uninspiring lessons. It also made him angry that other children in his class just accepted this teaching without question. DS had no history of poor behaviour (in fact he had been a chorister which requires remarkable levels of co operation and focus - he was quite used to sitting through several hours of services etc). To see a child like this become so disaffected is truly awful. Fortunately (as I said in the OP) we have a good local state school where ds is now thoroughly engaged with learning and has made some great friends with lovely, bright, sparky young people.

Schools have an ethos, which may or may not be the same as society as a whole. It's pretty easy to be consistent with a code of conduct, including things like simple manners.

It's not impossible for schools to make difference. Your statement implies there is no point in even trying.

Sorry ScienceTeacher who are you talking to?

Of course schools have an ethos which is why we choose certain schools because they fit with our ethos.

It is possible for schools to make a difference I never implied that there wasnt that possibility.

I work in health and have been the chair of governors of a school so have some experience of working with people but often teachers regard the kids in their care as vessels to be filled with knowledge with no opinions of their own but who need to channeled through an education factory.

There are of course exceptions to this and some teachers who consider the ideas and thoughts of the children they are teaching and treat them as people with good ideas.

It is interesting to note that brainstorming is more easy for kids than adults because they have not had many of their ideas squashed. Who is it who does that? Perhaps parents but certainly in many cases education and teaching them there is only one way to behave or operate in society.

Thanks alfiesbabe.

I live near a small "city" which has a very well known and well regarded independent school, two well regarded grammar schools, two well regarded comprehensive schools and a comprehensive school noone would regard at all given the choice. (Although they aren't, of course, proper comprehensive school because of the presence of the aforementioned grammar school - but that's another story!) My observation of the after school behaviour indicates that all the children are capapble of being mannerless oafs, but in very different ways. The independent school produces louder mannerless oafery in posher voices, better grammar and weirder clothes. They also tend to be extraordinarily rude to shop keepers. The comprehensives tend towards the appearance of violence and "macho" behaviour in both boys and girls. If you hear the word "fuck" it will probably have come from a wing collar - "wanker" from a sweatshirt. You pays your money - literally! - and you takes your choice.

LOL seeker! How true - children are children, it's just some wear more expensive blazers than others!

Absolutely. At the local independent school I see the teachers out on crowd control at the bus stop at the end of term, stopping the boys from indulging in the famous sport of "pushing each other into the road".

Meanwhile at the bus stop by the local Comprehensive the same sport is in evidence!!!

absolutley yes. i am planning to, have got wee one name down on pre-prep and prep school list (few years time). i work FT and cannot get to primary school, gates for 15.00ish. School hours do not suit my needs as FT worker, but private school offers after school club so i can collect later after work

I was teaching in a grammar school the year before last. The actual end-of-year plans were a secret (ie whether they finished on the Wednesday, Thursday or Friday, and the specific time in the day). When the secret time did arrive, the police were already in position around and outside the school so that the children could leave in an orderly manner.

Great behaviour, eh?

FGS, secret end-of-year plans? They were obviously expecting a riot!!!

exactly, elenya! Scary stuff. I was advised to park my car two streets over instead of in the school car park.

Amazing, ScienceTeacher! I'm laughing now at the effort people around here put into getting their little darlings into the grammar schools in the next borough! I don't think they are anticipating riots!

Truly amazing what those grammar school hooligans get up to these days!

How on earth does one deal with end of term at the local comp? The SAS perhaps?

And I hear that the police have a busy time down in Rock all summer as well, dealing with the law abiding, sober, well mannered, celibate products of our finest public schools...

laugh and scoff all you want at public schools, mock the alleged behaviour of pupils, titter at pushy patents

but private schools have
Considerably Smaller class sizes
Ability to gain Oxbridge places
..i could go on

it is individual choice. Frankly state schools do not accommodate needs of two working parents

I wish there was a huh? emoticon! So the 93% of children who go to state schools have only one working parent? Only 7% of women work full time? I think not!

Incidentally, our state primary school has breakfast and after school clubs - 7.30 to 6.30.

Oh, and Science Teacher - I'm really sorry, and I'm sure this is unmumsnetty to say, but I would really have to have evidence before I believe your end of term story. I just don't think it happened. Apart from anything else, I don't think there is a school in the country which doesn't publish its term dates. And that's before we even look at the police bit!

And I'm not laughing or scoffing at independent schools -I am just irritated by the assumption that some people make that state schools are universally appalling, that anyone who could would choose independent school, and that it is impossible to make any sort of success of your live if you don't go to independent school.

cant comment for anyone else school but where i live there is no pre/post school provision. i make individual decisions based upon provision avail to me. i need to work and have no family/support network to rely upon.

i did not make any comment upon ability of state schools ( and i went to one)my need is for guaranteed after school care til 5pm - private school fulfills that need

All of my family bar one went to Oxford and none of them went to an independent school.

and.....

It depends upon the alternatives, really it does

and this myth that people from the state sector dont get in is obviously rubbish. Also that oxford or cambridge are the only universities in the country!

To be honest scottishmummy there really is no need to get so defensive and rude.