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?

that's a shame Suedomin, like state, all private schools vary a lot I find.

Sue, that probably creates a virtuous circle - committed parents help improve school, more committed parents are attracted to school, and so it goes on. This is probably, above fees, what makes good private schools good, and what could and should happen in state schools. But that can involve a leap of faith for parents, and some people may find that a difficult thing to do.

Habbibu - I think you're dead right. A lot of people want to 'play safe' and 'cover their backs'. I know a lot of people with kids at private schools who admit to me that they think they'd do pretty much as well at state school. But they find it too hard to actually make that 'leap of faith'. Human nature tends to be quite conservative i guess...

But equally the school would then turn into a middle class ghetto with house prices to match etc etc

Cam, yes, that's potentially a problem, and ideally (and let's not get into the naive issue again) people would put their children into their local school, with whatever mix is there, and then make the effort to be a governor, on PTA, help out, etc. And so many things wouldn't work perfectly, but there could really be benefits.

I was just reading the Sunday Telegraph or may be the Times about Brighton and schools by lottery and bussing. It said many parents can feel cheated they spent a lot to buy a house in the catchment area and then found they didn't get a place and then the issue is how far you bus the children to achieve the integration between the parents in the £500k+ homes and from the local council estate.

What's happening in Brighton is that more people are seeking places at private schools

Habbibu please don't presume to dictate to me which words I can and can't use, I'm not here for you to patronise or boss around

I don't personally buy the argument that parents are frightened to leave the private sector and are being somehow inhibited about making the leap. I have never met anyone feel that way.

For one thing, there are around 12,000 compelling reasons per child per year to push you into the arms of state schools.

The parents I meet are those who are genuinely frightened of the local state schools and worried about the financial commitment of going private.

And by the way I wouldn't put my child in my local school - I would move to France or home educate if I didn't have the choice I have. Your presumptions are many.

Education may be compulsory in this country but the idea of forcing people into a particular building is bizarre

My post not directed at you Quatro

And what's so good about making a state school into one that the middle class use all their ruses/money to get in to thereby getting a good school for free>

The less well off/non-PTA types then get squeezed out

Just reading about Cameron's daughters likely local state C of E primary in Kensington in today's papers which presumably mostly has middle class parents. The Government's new rules say schools cannot interview, cannot admit on basis of parents' jobs and all those things and yet many state schools are still flouting those new rules.

I would pay if there are good private schools for a lot of reasons but not for a school worse than state schools. However most areas of the country do have good private schools so I don't think the issue would arise. There are so many advantages to many private schools I cannot see my views changing and it's not just the better exam results, segregation by sex and IQ, it's also the nicer grounds, sports, music facilities and also freedom from national curriculum and SATS, better qualified teachers on the whole, class of the teachers does matter too and also being someone who pays - parents have more power and choice when they pay rather than waiting humbly like a citizen of old communist Russia for what the state might decide to bestow upon them.

It always makes me chuckle how many infer that for a school to be good it has to have a critical mass of middle class kids attending. Since when did being middle class solely equate to academic intelligence, committed/involved parenting and wanting the best for ones off-spring?

Please remember that many less well off families have the same ethos. That is why quite a few children from immigrant backgrounds excel (despite what the negative, xenophobic propaganda from the media may promulgate). Many of these kids also live in the poor socio-economic areas and attend the schools that the hallowed middle classes would sooner rase to the ground than send their precious off-spring to.

Since when did private schools necessarily have better qualified teachers 'on the whole'? Yet one more generalisation that really doesn't ring true.

And the 'class of the teacher does matter too'. Yes, heaven forbid our children should be taught by anyone who has got a good education and managed to lift themselves out of a lower class.

Xenia, I know you've said many times that you would only want your children educated with other clever children from similar backgrounds, but I didn't realise you extended your blinkered views to take in the social background of their teachers too. What a cosy club.

In the film Titanic (James Cameron version), Rose's mother is fussing about who is worthy of getting a place on the life boat and she sneers "I hope it is the better half".

Many take that same view with education now.

When Britain becomes a classless society where accomplishment is due to merit rather than patronage and wealth will truely be a time to rejoice.

truly

There were articles recently about the flow of the better teachers with the better degrees going to the private sector. Just go and look at the best private school in an area and the best state school teacher qualifications and you can easily see the difference. You are going to get teachers with Oxbridge degrees and much higher qualifications in the best private schools because the pay packages are better. They sometimes get accommodation paid for, free schooling for their children, lovely grounds, nice parents, clever children. They get the chance to teach rather than police. not surprising many teachers choose to work in the private sector.

Yes, I like teachers who speak well because I want my children to speak well too and you are more likely to get a better class of teacher in private schools than state and they tend to wear better clothes too. I want the children to have middle class values too and not be told Oxbridge isn't for the likes of them and they won't fit in or be sullied by left wing views of many teachers that are out there too.

I have been delighted at the religious and cultural mix you get in the private schools around here but that would be daughters to be doctors from hard working Indian families rather than poor ignorant sexist culture type families with girls married at 16 etc. I also don't like the posh boarding schools for rich not so clever children who will never have to work and have too much money. That ethos isn't good for children either in my view.

Also people change their accent as they change class very often. IN work and life people are judged on their accents however unfair that is and surely many parents want their children to speak well so they can get on in life and work. I don't see anything wrong with that. If the teacher has a strong regional accent that may not be quite so good for the children. Perhaps elocution lessons should be part of the PGCE course!

Teachers from less well off backgrounds can speak well too.

Pay packages are not always better in the private sector, I know several people who've moved to state schools and got paid more. A relative of mine got a job in a very good private school - one that even you would concede is good, I've seen you mention it in fact. Her husband also got a job there. Their children were offered free places there. But they were earning much less than they had been in the state sector, and were not happy with several aspects of the education and facilities there. So they moved their children after a couple of terms and both managed to move back into the state sector at the end of the academic year.

There are good and bad teachers in both sectors, I personally know teachers at very well respected private schools who I wouldn't want teaching my children, and who aren't good enough to get or keep jobs at good state schools. But I wouldn't extrapolate that and claim that teachers in the state sector must therefore be better than those in private schools. Or that you get a 'better class of teacher' in one sector. I'm bemused, amused and sad that anyone could seriously claim that.

hmm, there was something in the news recently that said there were more teachers in the private sector per child (7% of the countries children but 15% of the countries teachers I think) but that's not to say those 15% are the best ones.

Just like to point out that just because someone has an Oxbridge degree does not mean they can teach or spark enthusiasm in a subject.

My Brummie accent has not prevented me from succeeding. Only an idiot would judge someone on their accent and preclude them from opportunities because of it.

To be honest with you I think teaching is not about academics - it's about teaching rather than an ability to knock off a 10,000 word dissertation. So I am not sure whether a teacher's ability to teach correlates with how good their own personal academics are.

Certainly the accent or class of teachers is no where near top of my list of reasons for private schools - I just threw it in...

From BBC web site:

"Teacher recruitment

In their study of "Competition for Private and State School Teachers", the LSE economists argue that there is a "loss" to state schools, and an equivalent "bonus" to private schools, in the net flow of publicly-trained teachers into the private sector.

They have produced some interesting statistics. While the independent sector educates just over 7% of all pupils in England, it employs 14% of teachers.

The apparent mismatch is because of the much smaller class sizes in independent schools.

Interestingly, the class size difference - as measured by pupil-teacher ratios - has widened since the 1980s. The ratio is now 18:1 in the state sector compared with 9:1 in independent schools.

So, with fee income rising ahead of inflation, the independent schools have used this premium to recruit teachers at a faster rate than pupils.

They have also particularly recruited better-qualified and more experienced teachers, as well as those in shortage subjects, like maths and science.

Thus while the proportion of male state school teachers with a higher degree is 45.2%, in the private sector it is 55.6%. A similar gap is evident when comparing teachers with higher degrees in sciences, maths and engineering. The gap amongst female teachers is also evident, although less marked.

In 2006, independent schools recruited 1,125 teachers straight out of universities and training colleges.

In addition, they recruited 2,009 experienced teachers from state schools. The flow, of course, is not all one way, as some teachers move back into the state sector. But the net flow to the independent sector was 1,400 experienced teachers in 2006.

The report says this amounts to a "significant loss" on the state's investment in teacher training and that this transfer of experience teachers is a "substantial bonus" for the private sector.

State school 'damage'

Of course, parents paying school fees could argue that this means they are getting at least some small return for the taxes they pay on top of school fees. "

Xenia - I think that it is misguided to talk of "loss" of teachers to private schools.

A lot of teachers working in private schools would not be teachers were they to work in the state system - they only chose to be teachers because they could work in the particular environment (that they personally find desirable, including smaller class sizes) of a UK private school.

Well, I'd agree with the point about academic qualifications up to a point. Teaching is a skill apart from academic ability for sure. But there are also some (not many, but some) teachers with a fairly poor grasp of their subject out there. I once had to explain to a senior teacher who taught A level chemistry why his GCSE pupil's account of rate of reactions was more accurate than his own. It was pretty shocking.