To think unless you’ve been to private school you don’t really understand why it’s so valuable?

[huopp]

I have so many people telling me the state system is fine, a private school just has better facilities, that the teachers aren’t any better, that the extra curricular stuff can be done after school at a state school but at a different venue etc etc…

whilst all the above is true, it isn’t what makes a private education valuable? And that you have to actually have lived it, been to one, to get the whole experience it gives you across the board and not just academically?

i think this is why a lot of people with ‘new money’ don’t always spend it on school fees. In contrast those who have been privately educated mostly want the same for their children.

I've had both and I didn't find private education any better than state It depends on the school I would say. plus one's willingness as a child to knuckle down and study. There are plenty of people that I went to state school with who came out with great results.

But the choice of private school and horse riding is engineering an extremely homogenous social circle. If diversifying was a priority she wouldn't be at horse riding, she'd be at football or Guides or any other hobby she would be going to with state school kids.

It's fine that it didn't happen, many of us have a small circle, but if it was a priority you would have made it happen somehow.

That doesn't surprise me at all (about IQ). DH and I both teach at a university and frequently remark that a willingness to give things a good go is much more valuable than raw intelligence.

I went to a terrible state school, less than 40% got 5 GCSE's. Still ended up at a Russell group uni in a tutor group with people who went to St Paul's, Badminton and Harrow.

I was educated privately all the way through, both day and boarding, as were all my siblings. The schools we went to were top tier. My brother was bullied, but the rest of us enjoyed our school days.

If my parents were looking at it as an investment though then they certainly didn't get their money's worth. All of us have had decent jobs, but none of us are high fliers. Despite that, thanks to inheritances, all of us could have afforded to send our children to private schools yet none of us did.

I don't think my school gave me anything that my children's school has not given them.

I was privately educated and have chosen not to send my DC that route. I can afford it. I work in educatuon. My siblings - also privately educated - disagree with me.

"Private schools tell us that education can be better and should be better."

Private schools work by creating an environment that more or less completely excludes children who are most affected by disadvantage: children from families shattered by addiction and poverty; children from families where parents are too stressed or mentally ill or simply too neglectful to support them; children where parents have been raised not to value education; children from families where parents are living in chaos. Families like this often have children who struggle to learn, because children's brains in these situation prioritise survival above learning.

These are the children who are causing chaos in state schools - chaos which then spreads to other children they learn alongside, who either join in or close down as a survival mechanism.

Private schools are communities that thrive because there is an entire difficult to teach cohort that's missing.

And please don't give me 'we have a bursary system to support children from poorer families' - I couldn't roll my eyes hard enough. The only children who get bursaries are those who come from highly supportive households where parents will a) apply for a place at private school b) have a child bright enough to pass entrance exams that most private schools have and c) jump through all the hoops involved in applying for a subsidised place d) understand the extent to which they'll need to support their child's learning to keep them in a private school. I know quite a few children who've had bursaries to mainstream private schools. Every. Single. One has been a high achiever in primary and come from a hugely supportive family. Most come from homes where one or both parents are graduates. The children who get bursaries from private schools are not the same cohort failing on masse at state schools.

And for parents to stand there in their elitist, socially cleansed education utopias, pointing at the chaos in state schools, created largely by the children they're paying a fortune to separate their own children from, and saying 'we know how to do it better'.... Seriously - go boil your head.

Actually it is the reverse of engineered, we have followed her own interests - she’s just obsessed with horses and I’m not into reverse social engineering - ie forcing her to go and join the local football team (which she’s not interested in in the slightest!) or Guides which again, she’s not interested in. She’s a child, not a pawn in a social game of thrones! I’m not going to put her into activities she has absolutely zero (minus 1 million actually) interest in, which wouldn’t appeal at all, just to mix her with different people. That feels incredibly manipulative.

Bollocks.

First and only post by the OP and it's such a goady one.

What are the chances, eh?

Explain?

Going to private makes you able to see both some positives and some negatives of private schooling. My siblings and I went to good private schools. So did two of our spouses. We have 5 children between us, and only one was sent to a private school, and that didn't feel like money particularly well spent. Many of my privately educated friends have chosen state for their kids.

We are fortunate. We live in an area with good or excellent schools, private and state, around us. I can't afford private so DD went to good state schools. I know private offers more opportunities and better facilities, but DD is a very quiet, reserved sort so even if I could afford it, she wouldn't have taken those opportunities up. Even in state she excuses herself from many things. So I think that choosing a school is very much based on finances and if it suits the child themselves.

My socialist side says all education should be free, but we live in a capitalist society and some people want the choice.

"Actually it is the reverse of engineered"

Putting a child in an school setting where they will be shielded from the educational fallout of social stress which children in state schools have to deal with as part of normal life is 'social engineering'.

Private schools are ghettoes of privilege. They're elitist. They're exclusive. If you send your child to one instead of a state school you 100% are engaging in 'social engineering'.

Fees are relatively considerably more expensive than they were a generation or so ago. Coupled with the soaring cost of housing, this means that quite a lot of people who were themselves privately educated can’t afford the same for their own children - if they wanted to, and not all of them would want to.

See this whole “you’re not rich enough to understand why private education is valuable” trope is exactly why people think you’re so far up your arse that your opinions are irrelevant. If you don’t like the VAT increase you’re unfortunately just not rich enough for their liking anymore. Time to join the poor paupers in state.

We didn;t choose private for our kids. DH was privately educated to 16 then did A-levels at a boys' grammar school. I am state school educated.

However, we did very carefully choose where to live based on the schools. The state schools here are top notch and here at least there is not much difference in demographics and outlook between the parents who use the state provision and the parents who send their kids to a day school privately. The flip side is we paid a lot more than we would have done to buy a house in a different catchment area (we are in Scotland so these are set).

Having said that, I firmly believe it's down to personal choice and every parent makes the choice which they feel is best for their individual child.

Exactly, it's kind of the whole point. Usually phrased in nicer terms, but the decision to send to private school is always "I want my child to mix with other financially well off children whose parents are also heavily invested in their education". Just own it.

The OP is phrased such that only those who were privately educated can answer the poll, or about 7pc of the population (much higher on MN I'm guessing).

Choices 😊
Obviously given circumstances....

Exactly.

And the tone: only those of us with the superior understanding because we went to private school can understand why they are superior, demonstrates the self serving complacency of many who went through private school and now rule the rest of us and have power over the spending budgets for state school.

I was privately educated from 5-16, secondary school was one of the worst experiences of my life. I went to a state school sixth form and loved it. Even if we could afford it there is no way I would send my kids to a private school. I know that's my own experiences clouding my judgement but DH went to a state school and in terms of education and non curricular activities, his experience was infinitely better and exposed him to far more opportunities than my school did so we are both much more pro state education.

I had the strange experience of starting private school on a major academic scholarship, getting moved up a year and then spending the rest of my secondary education with a grammar intake.

I also went to state primaries.

My DH went to village primary, then a comp until 16, then a boarding school (as fee payer) from 16 - 18

We are therefore very familiar with all the advantages that private education brings.

And we chose to send both our children to the local comprehensive schools because private education reinforces social inequality. We didn't put either of them in for the 11 plus either (there is one grammar within travelling distance.) We don't live in the leafy suburbs either. Our local school is truly local as the next high school is 13 miles away with no public bus service.

We have been criticised for our choices as though we put our children at risk for a political statement. I cannot claim their education was perfect. But their experiences at university (both Oxbridge) have shown that there is a significant number of people with a high level of educational entitlement derived from the privilege of having parents who can pay for advantage. My middle class child has been shamed at her Oxbridge college for being from a comp and having a midlands accent. Oxbridge is disproportionately packed with students from private schools - and they will be the politicians neglecting the education of the next generation of the 93% of children who are reliant on the state.

Full transparency: I don’t send my DC to private school. You are correct in your statements above regarding children coming from families where education is not supported, there are addiction issues, etc. How a child performs in school is definitely down to parental support at home and having a home life/environment that facilitates this.

Parents want the best for their children—is there something wrong with not wanting your own child to be in a classroom, which as you describe above, as chaotic? I don’t want my own children in chaotic classrooms. Does that make me a bad person?

Reality check: "According to the IFS, since 2010, private school fees have increased by 50% in real terms but this has not led to any reduction in pupil numbers. And since 2010, the gap in funding between private and state schools has increased to more than 90%.".