groaning under the weight of private school fees!

[pearso]

Hello,
I've got one child at private school, the other still at state primary for another year and we're dreading the decision next year about what to do. It's very unlikely we'll be able to afford a second set of school fees. Is anyone else in a similar situation? I'd love to hear from you if you are.... I'm also writing about it in my column for the Evening Standard so wouldn't use names but would love to hear what people think, especially in London and about any experiences good or bad.
thanks!

Litchick, if you bothered to read my post properly, the point I was making was that just because you pay school fees, does not mean that it is any good or that the progeny will do better than they would have with state education.

Hence why I wrote "Just don't understand why it is presumed that if you pay for education it is automatically better than what the state provides."

Believe it or not, some private schools are not very good, just like some state.

scienceteacher here

Thanks, snorkle

The LEA I live in has just over 20% in independent schools, and the one I teach in just under 20%.

"I often wonder what's going on in people's minds when they choose to pay an extra £10-20k a year on schools when they live in perfectly good school catchments."

The answer, UQD, is polyester trousers. Having girls wear woollen tunics rather than polyester trousers is surely worth 10K per year?

That's high scienceteacher, but it could be worse: 89% in City of London!

Oh, and Pearso - personally, I'd either move to an area with good state schools (although I belong to that smalll group of people who have never seen inside a state school and are thus terrified of the very idea of them), or I'd home educate. I think I'd probably home educate if it came to it. My DCs must hope that it doesn't ever come to it...

Failing those, can you claim membership of the clergy? You can get a good discount for that - and for being in the armed forces.

I don't understand privately educating if you have good state schools around you but where we are its 11 plus or rubbishy comps (I know cos i have taught in them) The single sex 'high schools' are ok for girls and do fairly well (again i have taught in them) but the option for boys is awful. What am i supposed to do with my DS? Let him go to one of these schools and be swallowed up by more streetwise kids with loads of low level (and more!) disruption (he is not very academic and so will not be one of the lucky ones to be in the top sets-which also have poor behaviour sometimes ime)Ime bright kids do well regardless of the school they are in. Average kids (my boy) tend to fall by wayside as teachers focus on getting weaker ones p to grade C and more able ones pushing them up from 'B's to A's

There are reasons beyond the like-for-like academics, which is why private schools still thrive in areas with adequate state schools.

Lord there are all sorts of reasons we spend the cash. In no particular order:
It's round the corner.
It doesn't slavishly adhere to NC and SATs which I think are the work of the devil.
It has 20 weeks holiday a year which I love.
The sports, music and drama are superb.
The classes are under twenty.
Setting is introduced in year three which allows children to go at their own pace.
Whilst not being very selective or remotely hot housey it gets terrific results.
It is set in the most beautiful grounds with acres and acres of green site.
And I suppose one of the main factors is, and I'm being brutishly frank here, we can afford it so why not.

Litchick - thank you for saying it all for me (though we can only just afford it!!)

I was amused by your 'work of the devil' analysis of NC and SATS. Too right.

Well I just feel that all this narrow curriculum stiffles good teachers surely. And everyone hates the testing so I chose to opt out.

Well I just feel that all this narrow curriculum stiffles good teachers surely. And everyone hates the testing so I chose to opt out.

I would say that coming from a teacher perspective, the lack of bureaucracy and politics wins hands-down, as does not doing SATS (and just getting on with the business of teaching). Not having to deal with discipline issues (beyond forgetting a pencil case or lab coat) and never having a class I dread, and being gutted when a class is cancelled for a whole school event.

From my children's view, the longer holidays, small class sizes, pleasant behaviour (ie proper discipline). The sense of belonging to a community is important too - whether part of a long-standing foundation which valued education, to being a member of a House (properly organised, not just your form with a new name for sports day only).

From a parent's point of view, being able to do everything at school (sports, music, prep...), and the general mutual affability.

And I suspect if you asked other parents why they made their choice despite good state schools you'd get a plethora of answers.
One of the parents in DSs class actually teaches at the local outstanding, stand in the queue and profess you're faith school but she still choses the independent route.
I fully own up to cross questioning her choice after a few sweet sherries.
From her perspective it's the class sizes which as she pointed out are even more of a problem in oversubscribed schools.
She also pointed to the lack of resources which even the very best schools have to face.

We are very lucky where we live as not only do we have grammar schools but excellent comprehensives too. We could afford private schooling but our DCs were lucky enough to attend/did attend a 'top' grammar school. I have no particular disapproval of people choosing the private sector, it is entirely a personal choice.

However, the fact that children at private schools achieve generally higher grades at GSCEs gives them an inflated sense of their actual raw intelligence. And this is what I object to. There are plenty of state educated children who are just as bright, if not more so, who are not achieving these high grades and it is simply so unfair as it is purely down to financial reasons.

My older DCs now at Russell Group universities see many privately educated students with strings of A*s etc, and products of re-takes at cramming schools etc who simply can't do the work at university. Boffin mum makes the point earlier that Oxbridge entrance sorts it out to some extent, which I agree with, but there are many straight A students at GCSE who are not really at the top of the pile but are just the product of the private schooling system.

I accept I will never win this argument because in the eyes of some people this is what you are paying the money for, and why not indeed? However, for 90% of the population (myself not included) this is not an option. I suppose the point I am trying to make is you cannot 'buy' intelligence but in the current education system you most certainly can 'buy' results.

I don't think some parents are 'buying intelligence'. I did start ds off in a good state school, he's always been a very clever boy, I was upfront and honest about what he could do yet within a year he was showing signs of depression and anxiety because they didn't know what to do with him. He didn't want to play, he wanted to learn. I wanted him to play but it wasn't what was best for him. I moved him into the private sector because of the head's experience and knowledge of working with highly gifted children. I think I would have failed him if I had left him in the state system. He was too far ahead and too much of a handful for a class of 25 children. I'm buying him a small class and the pastoral support he needs. I work very hard so that I can do this for him. I would rather this then the child I had before, it is really horrible to watch a 5 year old cry and wish himself dead. It's horrible watch him cry with tummy ache and have diarrhoea 24 times a day. I wasn't buying into an elite group or a posh lifestyle. He's not there for the exam results.

idealist - well, that's London. The average nationally is 7%. If figures like that are happening in London the it goes goes to show how low the figures are - and hence how irrelevant all the pontificating is - for the rest of the country. I live in Yorkshire, btw.

So Londoners aren't real people?

Just discount everyone that isn't exactly like you - you and Seeker, two peas in a pod.

UQD - ooh, I had always assumed you lived in London. So am I wrong about you reading the Guardian as well?

Just think: we could be neighbours up here...

I'm struggling under the weight of a mortgage and feeding 3 DCs. Anyone else in the same position?

D'you know some state schools are really quite passable.

Has your mortgage headed dramatically north recently, orm?

Has your mortgage headed dramatically north recently, orm?

No indeed thankfully. But we are at quite a risk of losing one of our jobs this year. Is that worrying enough?

So you are not a current fee-payer who is having difficult decisons to make?

No. Not atm.

So what? Does that make me any less liable to care about the choices I make for my DC? And have had to make in the past?