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?

oh and interestingly, regarding Ofsted, my dh who currently teaches in the private school and has been through the private school version of Ofsted says that it's a complete whitewash! Basically you get other teachers/inspectors from private schools coming in and patting you on the back and telling you you're doing a lovely job! He's also experienced state Ofsteds which he reckons are far more robust!

MarsLady - the school to which dh has been promoted for Sept (state) has a wonderful site. fairly crap buildings, but views to die for!

I think that there is life inside and outside of London!

The value for money point is always an strange issue on education though imo. Can I say that spending an extra say £10k per year gives me that much value for money? The main issue is that private education (or at least good private education) doesn't come in small bitesize chunks - I pay £10k or go state. I know some parents who view that they will stick at state and get a tutor and get some private music lessons etc, but as I'm not convinced that a child's introduction to education should be in classes of 30, I can't find a cheap add-on to state school which will give the dcs the benefit of smaller classes. At this early stage I'm not actually that bothered as to whether they're getting their full quota of literacy hour or numeracy hour or whatever, so I don't feel that I'm paying for results but more for a different learning environment. A comparison of free-range v battery chickens comes to mind. I guess HE might be cheaper but actually I'm very content with the dcs school.

At senior school I guess the position is quite different. Children are placed in same ability sets so the teacher is concentrating on teaching at one level, whereas in primary there does seem to be a very large differential in classes.

If the ds can get into good state secondary schools then I would be very happy. As multiple secondary fees are not cheap, and we have got excellent grammar schools close by. Due to the presence of the grammar schools the comps aren't truly comprehensive. And whilst it isn't an immediate decision I suspect I would look to go private again for 6th form. The grammar schools still under punch their weight in terms of university admissions etc.

I'd have to disagree very strongly about inspections, AB.

ISI inspections tend to focus on finding evidence that the schools do what they say they are doing, and as a teacher in the independent sector, one of the things I do is keep evidence to say that I am adhering to school policy. ISI inspections usually (always?) have an OFSTED inspector in the team.

My school has 3 ISI inspectors on staff (Head, Deputy and Senior Teacher) and I have no doubt as to their professionalism and astuteness. It only takes the reading of a few ISI reports to see that they are not easy. They are certainly not doing the nalmby palmy one-day inspection that is standard in 'good' state schools, where difficult children are asked to stay at home, supply teachers brought in for crowd control, etc.

Well ScienceTeacher I don't know when your experience of state school Ofsted was but I've certainly never known one where extra supply teachers are brought in and difficult children sent home!!
Ofsted also focuses very much on finding evidence to show that the school is valid in its self assessment etc. Having been through both, as I say, my dh knows that he's certainly had the easier life in private!

Well, I wouldn't, but two of my friends have done just that. One has sent her son to a private school some 15 miles away, despite having a primary school right on her doorstep that figures in the top 50 in the country. She says it's because he's lazy and she wanted him to be pushed more in a smaller class-size. But I reckon that it's because both she and her DH are privately educated and they just think it's better. They are potless, by the way, so it isn't 'they can afford to do it, so why not?' - they really have to make huge sacrifices to do this.

My other friend is (also!) virtually penniless and has sent her DD to private secondary school. It's a good school, but the nearest local state school is also very good - 82% a-c this year. Her parents (who are paying the fees) say it's because DGD is too bright and wouldn't be stretched at the local school. My friend says it's because there are drugs at the local school, and because DD wanted to go there because some of her friends were going there and she didn't like the boys who were going to the state school.

So there you go! Several reasons for doing it. I would add that my other friend's mother did say somewhat dismissively to my DH, after explaining how her DGD was too bright for state education, "I suppose yours will be going to school in the village", which I have somewhat uncharitably interpreted as 'my grandchildren are smarter and better than your children'. Which could, I guess, be another reason.

I was a supply teacher who was brought in for crowd control (there was the regular teacher plus me in a bottom set class of 20, which would have been 22 except for a couple of kids given an authorised holiday).... and the school got Outstanding. Plus four other lessons...

I think the main thing that justifies paying for schooling is the class size, ie amount of attention your child gets. In larger schools some children just get lost. Then of course there's better facilities and better behaviour.

Ds1 is in a state 6th form college and is doing difficult subjects - so many kids have dropped out, he is in a class of 2 for one subject, and a class of 4, and 12 respectively for the others.

Ds2 is in a comprehensive, doing hard subjects for A level, (maths and sciences) and is in a class of 12

I would have to pay a lot for that if I was going private!

So in that way I am lucky - but given a choice i wouldn't live in london because so few people have access to a really good education unless they are really rich.

Depends on the child too. If the child is quite clever then it might be hugely beneficial to be at a school which has some of the brightest children in the country surely where 99% a - A* at GCSE means a huge difference from 70% A- C.

Also didn't I see that children from private schools tend to earn over £70k a year for the rest of their lives so in some strange way they are given ambition, contacts, confidence, assurance which is something they may not get at the state school. Also having a leading school on your CV, not a posh one but one which is well known and hard to get into, never did anyone any harm, except I suppose for jobs in very left with local authorities. I never really considered state schools as we never went to them as children and I could afford to pay and most people I know don't send their children to state schools so it would have seemed like a bizarre thing to do.

But I don't think I'd pay if the choice were rubbishy private school and really good state school. No one would actively damage their child unless they're very left wing and pick a bag school to make a political point I suppose.

Xenia my eldest is at a state school in the top 20 and frankly your post speaks for itself as you say you never went to a state school yourself.

I have no idea what point you are trying to make about left wing authorities or left wing people.

Xenia the choice that the OP had was between a private school that had 85% 5 A-C passes, and the state school that had 72%

So her personal choice was not the same as yours. Of course I agree with you in substance - we've often posted on variants of this thread from the same perspective - but her choice was between an indifferent private school and a very good state school.

I'm one of the ones that don't get a choice- economic factors would make private education impossible.

Still, I can't say I'm unhappy about it; the local state school is quite good enough to give my children a stimulating education; it doesn't have to be the best in the country as long as they get a chance to learn. I don't think it matters very much if you earn a lot of money or not as long as you have an interesting and fulfilling time.

Confidence and assurance can be good or bad depending on what you make of them; I have met independently educated young people whose confidence and assurance was such that I would be very sorry to see it in my own children. A little humility would have stood them in much better stead.

I was educated at a bog standard state school and my husband went to a well-known independent school- but I'm the one with the PhD, the one who does academic research.

For my own children, I see huge benefits in being at a school where they have to learn to get on not only with people as talented as themselves, but also with the less talented. In other words, 70% A-C definitely trumps 99% a-A* in my books. Not because I am a fanatical leftie, but because I am aware that most of life doesn't happen in the exam room and that even the most academic of academics don't usually manage to spend [all] their time in the ivory tower.

Xenia, I went to a private school, and know lots of people who went to different private schools. Can't think of many who earn over 70K. Must have gone to the wrong schools Public shcools, maybe?

There's a balance though isn't there Cory?

This is quite possibly going to sound revolting but here goes anyway:

Yes being able to mix with people from all walks of life is desirable BUT

(i) If your local school had more teenagers with ASBOs than teenagers going to university, would you still be enthusiastic about the friends little Johnny might be making?

(ii) You can find good independent day schools that are not poncey

There are a few good state grammar schools left, Reading boys is one of them. My son is in year 10 and is enjoying it.
DD sporty musician drama queen happier in private secondary so I can see both sides of coin.
Put your child in the school that suits them best

I did say if it was bad private or good state I'd take good state. It's just that in most of the country (particularly cities) you have good private or not quite so good state so it's an easy choice for those who can afford it. My brother and sister who don't live in London have exams this week for their primary age children for private schools. In each case the private schools theirs may go to if they get in are much better than the equivalent local state schools. But I certainly don't disagree with the original post.

Fascinating considering my own school however - it was a very very small private school and not many people went to university. We lived opposite a very big comprehensive which even had riots I think in the 1960s/70s. I did well in the small school, very well but I bet the local comprehensives on average had better exam results so did I do well because I was the best in the school or because the classes were small or there was lots of one to one teaching or everyone was well behaved and posh and all girls?

The highest placed state school on the Times top 100 secondary schools which takes GCSEs and A levels and is a good table has this year (11/07) no state school in the top 20 but it does have Henrietta Barnett at 21 and QE school Barnet at 23.

The vast majority of children go to state schools. The vast majority of children do very well. The vast majority of "people like us" send their children to state schools. The vast majority of state schools are absolutely fine if not better.

And, I would venture to suggest that the vast majority of people who knock state schools have never been near one and have formed their opinions based on scare stories, rumour, urban myth and the Daily Mail/Daily Telegraph.

Not really.I know 94% of children go to state schools and most of those schools are fine. Of course I know and accept that and my ex husband worked in both sectors so we probably know more than most people but you cannot get away from the fact that most Boards, MPs, even leading surgeons were private educated. It confers huge advantage on children and if you can afford it and are comfortable with it then why not give your children that huge advantage?

seeker

Don't get heated. I have never paid for a Daily Mail or Daily Telegraph. Our local schools really are dire and the local comp really does have more children with ASBOs than go to university. This is not an urban myth, one of my good friends teaches there. So I don't think I can personally be blamed for going private, can I?

"The vast majority of children do very well."

Really seeker? Do you honestly believe that? What do you define as very well? Less that 50% of state-educated pupils got 5 GCSEs at A-C including English and Maths, so presumably your definition of doing very well is less than that?

In answer to the OP, no. In fact I wouldn't pay for private ed even if I could afford it.

Vast majority is right.

The majority of pupils do not get 5 good GCSE passes including maths and English. That is not good!

Step away, step away....

Huge generalisations on all fronts from the expected Xenia to all state inner city schools are sink holes

Why would I choose state, because it matters that we live in communities where my kids go to school with the kids over the road, where we deal with families from different social circumstances and backgrounds. Don't get me started on religious education.