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.

And yes I would love EVERY school to be the same, we would have a completely different culture and society over night.

Labour are going to bring the standards down. They are not planning to massively invest in state schools nor raise the bar. I would support any party that could seize education and make it world class for every child.
But social care, the nhs, the huge bill for benefits etc etc are preventing this from happening I imagine.

I went to private from y7-y11. I didn’t enjoy it, I didn’t think the teaching was particularly good, we didn’t have amazing facilities but some were better than the school I went to for 6th form. Some were worse (our library was badly stocked, there were no computers). I liked the “posh” element - lovely polished floors and we ate at huge oak tables like hogwarts. The grounds were nice and the food was good. It was academically selective so everyone was reasonably clever but our 3 form entry would not have been cleverer than the top 3-4 teaching groups in a streamed comp - we just didn’t have those bottom sets. They made some odd decisions academically, such as no combined science gcse because it was “dumbing down” so consequently loads of pupils ended up with a single science gcse. There was no IT/computing at all but there was a typing room and a typing GCSE was offered. I am not a million years old.
A blind man on a galloping horse could tell my friends who went to the local comp were getting a more rigorous and well rounded education with better opportunities for extra curricular activities (just based on population size - they had more sports teams, better music and drama opportunities) so I went there for 6th form. I did average in gcse and well in A-level. My dad, to his dying day, put my A-level grades down to the foundation that I had at my private secondary rather than the teaching I had at my state 6th form. I think I did well, despite, not because of it. My children go to state.

To get a bursary you have to have a parent who wants you to go to a private school.

You have to have a parent who values education.

You have to have a parent who will take you to open days.

You have to have a parent who will help you prepare for any entrance exams.

You have to have a parent who will support you in your education while you're at private school.

You have to have a parent willing and able to jump through the hoops of going through the often extremely intrusive process of applying for a bursary.

And as only 1% of bursaries awarded are full bursaries, you usually have to have a parent who's willing to pay school fees.

And the majority of busaries are awarded to children who a) pass an entrance exam and/or b) have exceptional sporting/musical and/or academic talent

So already you're talking about a child with significant 'social capital'.

The children from families struggling with the issues I outlined in my post are by and large ruthlessly excluded by private schools.

Remove the first paragraph and you could be discussing a top state school - maybe not the “colossal” resources but the rest.

Lots of the people on here saying that state schools are better and their children did wonderfully will have or had have access to good state schools because they can afford to buy houses in expensive catchment areas - and so are buying an advantage that makes them feel morally superior.

Everyone is entitled to an equal education but that won’t happen unless all state schools are equal.

I speak as someone from a working-class background who went to a pretty rubbish state school and now have to send my children to an even more rubbish one, although I was considered to be bright at school and worked hard.

Very little difference to grammars. Much more snobbery there were you are told you are the top 10% "naturally" when really it's parent's money tutoring - private kids are just the ones everyone think are fair game to bully because their parents pay openly for selective schooling rather than take from the state after rigging it for their benefit.

"Labour are going to bring the standards down"

Conservatives have trashed all areas of the public sector - local government, health, education, social care. They've made the working lives of public sector workers exponentially worse and more stressful, and this is leading to terrible retention and recruitment across health, social care and education. More than anything else this has reduced standards in education and healthcare.

The fact you can look at the Conservatives record of MAKING THINGS WORSE since Labour was last in, and say 'yeh, but Labour will bring down standards'. ffs.

Back in the 1950s/early 60s, my parents were able to pay junior school fees for 4 (spread out) children, and buy a 4 bed house in a nice area, on one very ordinary salary. Having said that, they were permanently skint, and there was very rarely any money for non-basics - we only ever had orange squash and chocolate biscuits at our birthday parties and virtually all my clothes were hand me downs - but it was possible.
A huge difference from now.

After 11, a sister and I attended the local state grammar, and the other sister won a full scholarship to a highly academic independent. DPs continued to pay right through for my brother, though - boys being intrinsically more important - in my DM’s eyes, anyway. 🤬

Are you saying parents who don't choose private schools don't value education?
It sounds very much as if you are blaming parents for simply not supporting their children enough.

In my school we had a full bursary boarder who became head girl. Originally from a very poor inner London area. She wasn't top academically for anything, so the bursary wasn't purely on brains. She applied for herself. I think she would have a lot to say about your remarks.

I don’t understand what you think is the answer is for the children who don’t:

have a parent who actively engages in open evenings/teacher evenings/school catchment research.

have a parent who values education.

have a parent who will support in their education while they’re at school.

There are thousands of these children up and down the country. I’ve seen the social care intervention. I’ve seen the school intervention. Nothing changes. None of the previous governments have been able to crack this. Unfortunately the people to solve this problem are the parents. And they don’t. It’s sad, but I don’t think this will ever be solved, unfortunately.

I have two friends who went to private school, and despite being able to afford chose to send their children to state school.
I also have friends who won the lottery and chose to send their oldest to private school (youngest 2 have chosen to stay with their friends in state).

So no, clearly the people who actually have had experience and understand it have actually voted against it.

It's pretty obvious the benefits of a private education are in the soft skills & networks gained. There's no educational benefit beyond the half grade inflation at A level.

The problem is it does it for only 7% of the population who then go on to make up 65% of senior judges, 52% of junior ministers, 45% of public body chairs etc.

It narrows the pool of talent the country draws on and reinforces inequality. It's a ludicrous system for a supposedly modern liberal democracy to still cling to.

"Very little difference to grammars. Much more snobbery there were you are told you are the top 10% "naturally" when really it's parent's money tutoring - private kids are just the ones everyone think are fair game to bully because their parents pay openly for selective schooling rather than take from the state after rigging it for their benefit."

You're not going to find me defending selection at 11 as an ok system - it stinks. It can't be made fair. It's also elitist and favours middle class children who've been to private preps.

However - if we're going to do the 'there's very little difference' - I'm going to disagree.

Grammar schools have half the spend per head of private schools.

They have much larger class sizes.

They have about 1/4th of the number of pupils on free school meals as non selective state schools, but that's still exponentially more than the number of children at private schools who are on 100% bursaries.

And in terms of admissions to top universities - "The proportion of university entrants going to Oxbridge from the top performing 30 independent schools was nearly twice that of the top performing 30 grammar schools – despite having very similar average A-level scores." That's from research done by Sutton Trust.

https://www.suttontrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/UniversityAdmissions-1.pdf

That's not correct.

Attending a fee paying school increases the chance you'll go to a top university.

And going to a top university increases the chance of entering and rising to the top of an elite profession.

https://www.suttontrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/UniversityAdmissions-1.pdf

"It narrows the pool of talent the country draws on and reinforces inequality. It's a ludicrous system for a supposedly modern liberal democracy to still cling to."

A hard 'yes' to this.

That study is 16 years old. I think the top universities have started to pivot toward non-private students for admission. At work, I’ve heard several parents of private students complaining that the preference is now weighted toward state-educated pupils, for example if there is a private applicant with A-A-A results and a state applicant with A-A-A results, the offer will be given to the state applicant. They’ve expressed that they feel like their children are being disadvantaged in applications because they went private. I don’t have any hard data on this….

"They have about 1/4th of the number of pupils on free school meals as non selective state schools, but that's still exponentially more than the number of children at private schools who are on 100% bursaries."

I am actually very interested in this data - if you could source it? I know dd's school has at least 4 full bursary kids in her year, which is more than are on FSM in the average cohort in the larger grammar schools locally.

@izimbra · Today 10:09
I genuinely think the insane privilege of private schools is just completely toxic for the country.

I guess you want private schools abolished as you’ve written quite a few posts disparaging them - which obviously you’re fully entitled to do.
However, if they were abolished what do you think should happen to the buildings, grounds and playing fields etc?
It would cost the government a fortune to buy them at market price so do you think they should be confiscated?

I boarded from age 7-18. Lovely prep school followed by well known public school. Our dc attend the local state school. We could afford private.

Looking at it from a 'value' perspective I think actually you're probably better off buying your dc a house instead of paying for private school- morally this is likely more ambiguous than paying for education, as housing is already one of the main facets of wealth inequality and one which is likely to become even more prominent in the future as my dc become young adults.

Even if id had that money, id rather give it to them for a deposit on a house. I won't be able to give my kids a hundred k for a deposita nd I feel some inadequacy wrt that!

You are extrapolating from your one experience of a boarding school to the entire private school sector and using it to support your assumptions and prejudices.

I did consider this angle with DD but she is dyslexic and we are in a grammar area (she went to state primary and was bullied by the girls going to the grammar so has a fear of going there). However when I looked at whether she would be happier for the next 8 years in a sink school with slim chance of fulfilling her potential but with a house at the end of it or having a happy childhood where she can fly and live on her own terms, I chose the latter.

I've seen kids who have houses bought for them and they are just as ridiculed for having silver spoons in society as kids who went private. You might as well give your kids some freedom to work in a job they can earn and at least have the pretence of doing it themselves.

I went to private school and don’t want to send mine. I hate the bubble I lived in, and it was full of arrogant bullies. Drugs, drinking etc very normal when boarding. Living with your bully isn’t enjoyable either. My parents had good intentions of course, but I don’t feel it was worth the money spent on it. Teaching wasn’t that great. I was made to drop an A level that I wasn’t going to get a good grade in, even though I enjoyed it. Encouraged to do less GSCE’s, rather than to push myself. Anything to ensure good grades.
There may be situations of course where I can see the value in private, but we live in an area with good schools, and so far my dc are thriving in state.

lol why are you assuming that all kids who go to grammars get private tuition. I never did – I’d never heard of the 11-plus until I sat it.

It increases the chances because of grade inflation and elitism. By the time a privately educated student graduates, that half a grade at A level is wiped out.

"Pupils from comprehensive schools are likely to do better at university than children educated at private or grammar schools with similar A-level results, according to research carried out for the government and published today.
A five-year study tracking 8,000 A-level candidates found that a comprehensive pupil with the grades BBB is likely to perform as well in their university degree as an independent or grammar school pupil with 2 As and a B.

The findings will strengthen demands for university admissions tutors to give more favourable offers to candidates from comprehensives, as they indicate that private or grammar schooling boosts a pupil's A-level results by at least half a grade."

What is true though is that graduates with the same class of degree, from the same University, will earn more and occupy more of the top jobs if they were privately educated.

I would love to live in a country where there were no private schools.

But I'd be open to the idea of private schools existing and the salaries of their teachers and running costs (including premises hire) being paid for by the state, as long as they had the same admissions procedures as non-selective state schools.

It's all pie in the sky though.

It's economically not feasible. And the social elites that run everything in this country would fight tooth and nail to stop it happening - in the way they're currently fighting tooth and nail in our right wing media to discredit Labour for their private school VAT policy.