Would most people choose private education if they could afford it

[mids2019]

My children go to reasonable state schools but especially from my older daughter I keep hearing about a succession of cover teachers and general malaise in the school system (governments fault not the schools)

That for me asking the question would most people choose private education if affordable in their heart of hearts or are there egalitarian parents who would still choose state on ideological grounds?

I am in two minds about this but certainly the private sector locally is attracting quite a few.

That may be but I'm not sacrificing my child's education and life outcomes when our local state secondary only has 17% 7-9 and 45% 5-9.

Most people would, those who are saying they won't consider it despite being able to afford it I suspect are in the same income bracket as me, it would take significant sacrifices so state education it is. Those I know on more money (£200k +) all have their kids in private education and many with incomes significantly lower. In our case we had additional sen issues that meant that private education wasn't suitable

I’m not sure that would-have-been private school parents would be volunteering at state schools though, because they are generally working parents who aren’t about during school hours. (I probably wouldn’t go for private primary but the extra wraparound care that our local prep offers compared to all the local state primaries - which don’t even all have breakfast clubs - is a big attraction)

That may be the difference - I have never seen it as a sacrifice, I think in all likelihood the other advantages they have means my kids will probably end up in that 17%. There are very, very few state schools that can’t help a bright, motivated child access the top grades

I sit somewhere in the middle in terms of ideology. I would much prefer all state schools to be a much higher standard than they are, but would never object to someone wanting something different for their kids (Steiner school, or international school for example). And I think there is a huge grey area with paid tuition anyway.

However I find this discussion is usually (understandably) centred around England, with the assumption that there are multiple state schools to choose from, grammar schools etc.

We lived in rural Scotland. There was one secondary school with a catchment area of hundreds of square miles. It was a crap school (started off good, but got worse and worse through the years).

My kids couldn’t do the subjects they wanted to. There were no teachers for months on end for other subjects (not supply teachers - NO teachers). There was a huge bullying problem that the school could not address. Kids were not physically safe.

We chose private. But yes, ideally I would have liked there to be a good quality high performing state school instead.

Indeed. The ideal is to be able to comfortably afford school fees, so that you don’t have to make sacrifices elsewhere.

There are whole sub-sections of society where private school is a given. I work in the City (with lawyers, accountants, bankers, consultants) and every single person who has children sends their children to private school.

No, we would be able to afford it easily. We would simply never consider it for a moment. It’s ethically indefensible.

And neither have we done thing thing that many Mners appear to believe is a ‘gotcha’ — we haven’t moved to an area with excellent selective schools. We live close to the city centre in a very socially mixed area (our neighbours on one side are surgeons, on the other a rental full of Deliveroo riders), and DS went to the geographically closest school, which is as mixed as the area (our son, our architect’s daughter and our cleaner’s twins all go there, and DS’s class has the kids of the cleaners and the consultants at the nearby hospital) and will go to the geographically closest secondary next year.

Probably not
Reason being there are no private schools anywhere near me. I don't want a 50 mile round trip school run. Mumsnet has an obsession with private schools though even though in the real world nobody talks about them (because 90%+ of the populace don't go to private school.)
Most of Mumsnet are quite wealthy but "opposed to private school on ideological reasons" lol?
Google the term "champagne socialist " and you'll find a description of most Mumsnet users 😂
(Not knocking anyone btw I love this site)

*grounds not reasons

In an ideal, be wonderful if every child was entitled to a wonderful rich education that suit them an individual.

However, an ideal world, doesn't exist. Personally I wouldn't and haven't sent my children to private school but also have learnt not to make judgement on those that have.

But the evidence shows those parents do find ways of engaging in their children’s education. I have always worked full time but have spent 10 years volunteering as a governor at another local state school. Even if they’re not volunteering, they can be donating to the school fund -the average donation amount to grammar school school funds is multiples of comprehensives in similar areas- I want the kids to grow up in a world where that is distributed more equally. Those parents also ensure their kids turn up to school every day and participate in the school community which helps build a culture of education for all. Participating in the school community will look different for different families, but it absolutely makes an impact

That's very interesting. Can I ask deskilled in what area?

If the options were state schools that are appropriate for their children's aptitudes and needs or private, I don't think everyone would go private over state. Plenty of people would decide that an appropriate state school is what they want and they're happy not having the extras that independent education offers.

If money were no object and the choice was between a state school that would do ok at meeting a child's needs on average or a private school that was appropriate for the child's needs and aptitudes, most sensible parents would surely want the environment that is most supportive and nurturing for their child.

Disclosure though, I've worked in state schools that have as much, if not more, wealthy lifestyles than some smaller private schools and know of areas where house prices in catchment are social selection by any other name. I'm very skeptical about those people who having got a house in the right area decide they went state for moral reasons or principle. It's very easy to stand on principle when your choices are all good and you've got many options.

The left always say they are against private or selective education. Until they have children. (Buying a house in a pricey catchment area near a good state school can ease the mental pain though.)

Just like they approve of inheritance tax until they inherit.

Yes I would, and could have, but my children have SEN that were met better in the state setting.

I don't see paying private fees any different to spending ££££ on a house to get into a good state school.

My sons are at a private school and while I don't dispute the fact that there is more work and therefore more pressure on them from a younger age (something I'm not that happy about) I am surprised about your comments that the kids at private school were unable to talk and converse properly as the children at my sons school as well as those we know at other state schools are very confident in talking to children and adults.

Ours two DDs are at a private school, and my DHs brother has such a problem with it. He says "it's unfair, full of snobs, entitlement".

He didn't seem to have a problem paying for a 3 bed terrace for £850,000 to get his son in to the best state secondary in the country, that has a 0.2 mile radius. Hypocritical prick.

My mind exactly.

My children have both been privately educated. My daughter is not at Uni and my son is upper sixth so nearly finished.

The local state schools are good.

However we felt that by going private we had a choice as to where they went.

My daughter went to a selective girls only school and has done really well. She is ambitious, hard working and happy. She did competitive swimming so was in a mixed environment for that plus she has a brother. She certainly hasn't turned out boy mad despite only being with girls. She is currently studying Vet Med which was a brutal application process, I was pleased with how resilient and determined she was to be honest.

My son has gone to a more nurturing school and has done extremely well. I would say that he was a more 'middle of the class' kid who I believe sometimes get ignored. He did exceptionally well at GCSEs and is on track to hopefully do well at A levels. His school was single sex but they have now added in girls. It all seems to be going well. He is also ambitious, hard working, exceptionally kind and just a really good kid. I believe that in a large class he would have been forgotten about.

I would say that not all private schools are good. His prep school was dreadful in that as he didn't fit the mould he was pretty much ignored. Thankfully we moved him to his current school in time.

Obviously I can't say whether they would have achieved the same (not just grades) in a state school. Maybe they would have, I can't know that. However we have been pleased with the decisions we made.

That is utter nonsense.

Nah.

No, because it just isn't fair and fairness is a core value of mine. I don't want my kids benefitting from any any more unfairness than necessary.

Education is a fundamental human right and everyone should get the same opportunities.

I know there are lots of other unfair things in the world - but 'Whataboutery' doesn't change the fact that this particular thing we're talking about is deeply unfair and it's wrong to benefit from it.

If private schools were abolished you can bet we'd get a government that prioritised state education - all those sharp elbows would ensure it.

Not necessarily hypocrisy- he may wish to ensure his children have a wide and representative social mix at school, instead of only coming across children whose parent's can afford private education.

WhatsTheUseOfWorrying
The left seem to have a lot of people who'd rather focus on the middle classes and moaning about what choices people make within a broken system than take on the big and difficult issues that affect the top end and powerful interests.

It's very easy from a decent state school usually in naice areas, that's topped up by parents with lots of enrichment, tutoring if required, and lots of opportunities that cost a lot of money, to say "we could afford private but we don't" with the implications that another family with similar income who chooses private so they don't have to do lots of topping up / don't have to move house to the right catchment are the selfish ones.

They spend a lot of time congratulating themselves for selecting one of many decent options, but they're strangely silent when it comes to teaching terms and conditions, high staff turnover, the disgusting lack of support for many families with children who have SEN, the increasing range of issues that state schools are having to deal with and so on. Ultimately, they're speaking from a position where they know they'll be able at any point to step in and make up for what's happening and their children will be fine. If their child doesn't have a maths teacher in GCSE, they know their child has had a privileged background and parents who can get a tutor in. But they're against buying advantage because they stop short of private education.

I don't see paying private fees any different to spending ££££ on a house to get into a good state school.

Indeed, plus you have the added benefit of usually recouping that spend on the house when you sell it to the next person who wants to do it.