reasons to go private at reception age??

[MissChief]

interested in why people go private - driven to it thro perceived lack of alternative or automatic choice as no faith in state sch system etc etc?
We originally planned to go for state option as automatic choice - since then first choice rejected and having checked out prospectus & ofsted report, not overly impressed with school's quality either. think the area we're in (just moved) seems to be one where people go private where poss. I now think I'd actually prefer to make financial sacrifice of sending ds private in order to ensure he's in class of manageable size with good discipline, good moral ethos, decent food, daily sports etc. Not having been to private school myself though, perhaps I'm just being naive - is it really so much better (or have the various heads I've met done a good sales job on me!)

Diane Abbott looked at the stats for her LEA (Hackney). Something like 90% of black boys left school with no formal qualifications. She didn't want that to happen to her son, and she had the means to send him to a private school.

As Diane Abbot said at the time - allparents have choices in education; having more money means you simply have more choices open to you. What's wrong with that?

Your school is a selective one then soapbox, mine isn't.

Cam - I chose it when it was on teh basis of first come first served - and as you can probably tell I'm not overly amused that this has changed in the past 2-3 years into being selective. This is not what I chose

Cam - I chose it when it was on teh basis of first come first served - and as you can probably tell I'm not overly amused that this has changed in the past 2-3 years into being selective. This is not what I chose

because she criticised someone who did the same thing (before she made her choice). I am all for pro-choice but I think if you have the audacity (on record) to have a go at someone else who chooses a selective school for their child, you have to expect a bit of stick when you do it yourself!

I agree with Cam and Ameriscot. I think you'll find that most teachers and educationalists would agree that for a verbal/nonverbal reasoning based 11+ test, there is a clear law of diminishing returns in terms of the preparation a child can do. In other words, any school or tutor or set of books from WHSmith can only increase your child's score by a certain amount, I think 5% -10% max, but I stand to be corrected on that. Once a child has done a few examples of each type of question, whether in their classroom at St. Cake's Prep or Local Primary, you can be fairly sure that by this point they are at their natural levelof ability/potential, call it what you want, for better or worse! So primary v prep at this level isn't to my mind creating an unlevel playing field for schools that select at 11+.

Common Entrance at 13+ (usually boys though some girls' schools have a 13+ entry) however is very different - a set of exams for selection to private secondary schools; common exam but different passmarks depending on how academic the school is. Don't get me wrong Ameriscot; I'm certainly against "teaching to the test" for 7 and 11year olds, in a SATS context. I think that really narrows down what a school offers in the rest of the curriculum. My sister teaches in a primary school and has noticed this over the years as the schools are under pressure to have good results.

CE otoh means my ds1 (11 and in y7) gets to study a wide range of academic subjects to a level that stretches him. There are different "levels" for at least some of the subjects, so there is great scope for flexible, ability based teaching. He loves doing 3 separate sciences, Latin, Greek, history, etc. He has friends who did 11+ and even the ones at selective schools aren't covering things to the same depth.
I'm rambling, (lack of sleep{sad})but what I'm getting at is that for my family, a school offering 13+ has I think, meant that ds1 and 2 can and will be benefitting from a broad syllabus, while allowing us time to watch the boys develop without rushing into secondary choices too early.

Americot - absolutely nothing in my book.

Her politics however are totally opposite to that statement.

I'm glad she didn't let left-wing ideology get in the way of her own son's education. She saw the light before it was too late.

Not to overly defend her, but I think that she may have said something about HH's kids still being able to do well in comprehensive schools, whereas in her case, her son would more than likely achieve very little (or worse) in her local comprehensive.

Depends on quality even availability of state provision locally, doesn't it? easy to have a conscience if you have a good choice!

I agree with you Ameriscot and I applaud DA for putting her sons education first - that's what we all want to do without being labelled 'elitist'

all animals are equal some are more equal than others

Stilltrue - I think the original objective of SATs is to measure the school rather than the individual pupils, so it really makes no sense to try to teach to the test. The results are supposed to give a snapshot of how well the school is educating all of its pupils.

Totally agree with you about CE. As a former secondary school teacher, I am absolutely gobsmacked at the level of work that DS is doing in Y8. His achievement in knowledge, skills and attitude is amazing. I also think it is so good that the boys get to stay on for 2 years in their sedate little environment and then be really ready for senior school.

I'm sure DS1 would have been fine in our local comprehensive (had there been any places ), but I despair for DS2 (Y6) had he been in the state sector - he is just not ready for a move up to a 150-200 year group.

ditto, JT, think choice (and the right to choice whatever the reason) is crucial. yes, we're on the waiting list - they won't tell us where though as against policy apparently! This, btw, is not even a good school IMO, simply better than the other state options!

which school did HH send her son to in Orpington? I'm guessing it might be St Olave's as that's the best known (and best) selective shcool in the area. And its a state school (grammar) so if so Diane Abbot does have a bit of a cheek!

yep, for boys especially think quiet, small-scale environment helpful to set them up for sec ed.

I don't know exactly which one it was but it was a selective grammar school (and it was outside the borough that she lived in at the time I seem to remember!).

It was St Olaves, Orpington - and she lived outside the catchment area to add to the controversy

well at least she stayed in the state sector!

(I'm not anti private ed at all- thinking about it for ds2 and ds3- but think labour in general can be very hypocritical.)

This from the bbc news at the time - I just love the quote!!

"Ms Abbott, MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington since 1987, once criticised the then Solicitor General, Harriet Harman, for sending her son to a selective school in Orpington, Kent.

Ms Abbott said: 'She made the Labour Party look as if we do one thing and say another.' "

aah, you're putting me off private schools now!

In response to original post)This is what i thought at first - but i think if it is a big sacrafice (financially) you can end up really resenting it. We have just taken our DS's OUT of private (admittedly into a v. good village state primary). THey are actually happyer - enjoy having bigger class sizes and are doing much better generally (and so are we financially )

my ideal would be v good village primary, however don't live in village or area with good state provision so short of moving, don't feel have much choice. Hopefully will move again when ds is older (if can persuade dh) then will aim for areas with schools such as yours.

Our main reason for remaining in the private sector is as follows:

DD1 goes from nursery (where she is starting to read easy sentences) into state school. (Class size 25, teacher + assistant village school "beacon school" etc).For the first term she "wasn't allowed" to have a reading book with words because "we have to get them used to handling books". It came out at parents evening in the middle of the secnd term that, despite having passed primary school all the nursery ofsted papers and work books, and spoken to the teacher on three occasions, the teacher hadn't realised she could read at all . Presumably my ramblings were dismissed as "pushy parent syndrome".

DD2 goes from same nursery (again where she is starting to read easy sentences) into private school. Class size 20 teacher + assistant. It takes them 2 days to identify what level of reading she could do, and since then she has progressed through the Oxford reading tree books at a rate of knots.

It probably depends very much on the schools in question, but my dds love the school they go to now, and so do I!