private or state: how did you decide?

[marialuisa]

We're in the fortunate position of being able to pay for DD to go private, but we're really unsure whether we should.
Our local primary is dire but there is a strong possibility that DD would get into the neighbouring parish school (we're R.C.) At the moment this school has class sizes of 22, nice "feel", good academically etc. However a new housing estate on the way which will push up class numbers and reduce the chance of DD getting a place.

We have looked around and found that if we want DD to go private we should put her name down now for nursery class in January. Thing is I've not thought that any of the schools were particularly fantastic, indeed been quite horrified in some...

So, do we risk it and stick with the state system or put in the private nursery and perhaps move her if the state school is still ok when it's time for her to go there? An added pressure is that we live in a county with the 11+ and people tend to pay to make sure kids get into the grammars as the alternatives are not great!

So, sorry this is so long, but would like to know how other people decided....

Jimjams, I have a fine bottle of Penfolds Bin 128 Coonawarra Shiraz 1999 here if you would like to share.... Found it on the bench today after DH had been to the supermarket yesterday

I am glad I don't have to worry about our daughter's education. It's bad enough watching her throw up her food at every meal and trying to get the best out of the NHS because of a physiological problem she has let alone having to battle a school as well.

Badmamma, in all private schools there is a huge range of social class backgrounds, it's about being able/willing/struggling to pay the fees! In my area, the private schools are greatly populated by many children from "self-made businessman" backgrounds,who want to give their children a "better" start than they had.
My particular school is very uncompetitive, each child is treated as an individual.
SATS take up too much of teachers' time which would be better spent doing other things. Teachers do not need SATS to know how well or otherwise a child is doing, they are not about individuals but produce average statistics.

CAM how much are your fees per term?

Marialuisa, you will know the answer to your own question in time.

Our DS goes to a private school and I was concerned about the cost with DD and we decided she should go to the local church school this Sept(she got a place) until the juniors then she could transfer to DS's school.

The idea was then to save like mad for her to go. After she got the place, DH and I looked at each other and decided she had to go with DS and we wouldn't accept the church school place and that we would start saving now.

I felt it was unfair to let her make friends and then move her to an established class perhaps with her unable to keep up.

When DS started his prep, he had done a year in state reception class. He has had a great deal of trouble with his handwriting as he was never formally taught how to form his letters. OK now though thank goodness.

I love the fact that they know what he ate and didn't eat for lunch.

I love the small class sizes.

I love the school nurse, she gives them medicine, she looks after them. She even washed my son's clothes after an accident.

I love the fact they have time to talk to me when I want to talk to them.

HTH.

Badmamma, I also went to the local comp (not very good and it was dangerous to be keen and/or bright, and I do mean dangerous). I lived in a terraced house, with parents who had left school at 14. I come from one of the most deprived areas of the UK. I am not a snob. I also care deeply about the state system, and am working in it at the moment (student) and am hoping to get a job at the school I am in. I would love to be able to send my kids to the local primary, but I am not prepared to so so because it is crap. I am more than happy to pay my taxes, and voted for the only party that had the guts to say that more taxes were needed for eduation.

The school my Dd goes to has no enterence test, and this is true of the senior school, however the local comp has a 'volentary' enterence exam. And if the kids don't sit it , they don't get in. I don't want my children under that sort of pressure. So which of the two schools is more selective? Dd's school is the most ethnicaly diverse in the area, and at the senior site she will mix with a greater range of children than if she went to the local state school. It has nothing to do with my wanting her to avoid the 'working classes', too late for that, she is my daughter! I sent her to the school that suits her needs best. It shouldn't be like this, but it is.

badmamma - I have some sympathy with your idea of clubbing together but it doesn't always work. Last year I took part in a national campaign designed to increaase the awareness that autistic chiden face- this year we will be concetraiting on education. worked bloody hard to organise stuff down here- local radio, press. The people organising the whole campaign - AIM- Autism in Mind- they have a website- slogged there guts out- and a year later nothing- despite collecting 6000 signatures. Depressing. I know the education will be the same. In some areas parent shave managed to club together- but they've then had to start their own schools- the most famous one is Treehouse- attended by Nick Hornby's son. What I'm saying is it isn't always that easy- and often the easieer route is to pay to get the best for your child, It doesn't make that person evil.

I have to say as well- there is some major social stereotyping coming from your end. I have been on the receiving end of this reverse snobbery for a lot of my life. It is only now that University memeories are a decade ago that I find I'm not judged in this way- and it's not fair. Where I went to school/University has had very little influence on my outlook- especially when compared to other things that have happened to me.

Not sure what I'm drinking SueW- but it's nice.....

ooohhhh no I'm terrible- AIM works to raise profile of autistic adults as well- I'll be strung up alive if I'm seen to miss them out... correct correct

Personally, I wouldn't risk sending my kids to private school. I think the scorn of my family if I did so would kill me! My kids will have to suffer the state system, since I am perfectly happy to sacrifice their education and prospects to poverty, wet liberal principles and fear of family ridicule. So the private system will definitely be spared the joys of educating my brats unless either of them present as desperately unhappy at some stage and this coincides with a huge double payrise in the house of scum.
Still, at least they won't have to wear the poncy blue uniform of the local private establishment. Proper divs those poor wee kids do look to be sure!

@ scrummy

Me, I don't care! I'll have a glass of whatever is going

Australian red going over here..... anyone?

Marialuisa- bet you're pleased you asked your question....

Just half a glass for me please

THERE IS NO WINE IN THE HOUSE!!!!!!!!!!!

I have loads but can't drink it - can't wait 'til this one's late and I can justify lots of red wine sex and curries. Sorry am I getting off the point here?

Message withdrawn

I'm not pushed about state v's private (we're lucky, mine go to a state catholic whhich is fab)Two observations though
1 I find it disturbing that people describe a school by the number of non-english speakers, it does sound racist to me
2 Cam All Private schools do not have a huge range of social class backgrounds

All I've got is some dry sherry from my last Ken Hom excursion - oh well, that'll do. Scummymummy I know exactly where you're coming from.

Like Jimjams, I spent time in private education but only from 11-16. I was state-educated both before and after and my place at the private school was 50% funded by the school because of my ability (assisted places having just been withdrawn).

My experience of both systems and the area that I live in have, I admit, influenced our decision about where to send our daughter, as has our level of income and my husband's experience of education (state in NZ 5-11, private in NZ thereafter).

Like JimJams, I worked every Saturday (from age 15) - in Woolies initially, then WHS. I also worked whenever possible in school holidays. When I went to sixth form I took a job glass-collecting in a pub one night a week and signing up members for their Sunday evening club. My life at the weekend consisted of working from 8pm - 12.30am Friday, 9am-6pm Saturday and 7pm-11pm Sunday, IIRC plus school holidays.

I was similar to Sue W- my original message sounds like I was in private from 5, I wasn't. I was state primary 5-9, private 9-16 then state grammer 16-18.

The biggest difference between the two systems was in extra-curricular activities- and opportunities to learn muscial intruments and play in orchestras etc. It's a shame this sort of added extra doesn't come so easily to the State system- of course it's difficult to provide that if you are struggling to provide teachers.

There is something about this in this weeks TES- I only browsed it, but it was about partnerships between State and Private schools.

Unfortunately I don't think that banning private schools would improve state schools. It could make the situation worse as suddenly there would be a lot of extra children needing state education. Surely if the state schools were improved then there wouldn't be this argument as everyone would want their child to go to a state school. Why would you pay for something when you could get what you needed for free. Unfortunately it doesn't work like that- maybe the discussion should be more about how to improve the education that can be accessed by the poorer families (lets face it catchment areas are selective). I was being tongue in cheek but maybe some sort of grammer system would be good- BUT and this is where it falls short the alternative has to be equally good and well thought of if not academic.

I taught in a state school in Japan. It was an agricultural high school. It was not for academic children, but it was very highly thought of, some of the children came from the other end of the region and boarded. The students left at 18, and pretty much all of them went straight into jobs- be it bus driver, tour guide, sushi chef. Other schools specialised in getting the kids through the university entrance exams- ie were academic schools. Obviously there were still dodgy schools (I taught in one of those as well), but there were good options for children acoss the academic spectrum. I thought it seemed like quite a good system.

OK - here goes... sorry it's a long one.

I've been following this thread, but not adding for a while, because I'm in all camps here.

Before DS was born I'd have been firmly with the anti-privates on this one, but since I think that if you're not rich but live in an area of poor local state provision, there's no practical winning stance to take.

Before I wade in, though, my credentials:

a) My mother (staunch lefty & lifelong state education provision supporter) taught in a sink school in Walthamstow until last year.
b) I was educated at a girls state grammar school and hated every regulated 'our gals' minute of it.
c) Was married to privately-educated man who was severely emotionally handicapped by it (prior to DP who was barely educated at all!).

Living in the relatively poorer bits of North London I realised, before DS was 1 that if I stayed put the choices would be:

1. Local state school. My mother BEGGED me not to send him to a local state school, as he 'would not stand a chance'. With the best will in the world and no racism or malice, I believe that if most pupils in a class come from backgrounds where they do not speak English as a first language, or come from a home where their parents don't give a damn, they will be more challenging to teach, and teachers will not simultaneously (in classes of up to 30-35) be able to provide adequate support for more able, English-as-a-first-language, parentally-supported children. Teachers are not superhuman - they CANNOT do it, and the less-challenging, easier-to-ignore group WILL suffer. I do not want my son to suffer like this - like all parents I want 'the best' for him, and I do not believe that this would be IT.

2. Private school. Which cost a fortune and there were none local (why are they all in HAMPSTEAD? need I ask...). However, I investigated the option. The bottom line was that to afford private education, I was going to have to commit our family to having the most basic existence in the crappiest housing in the poorest districts, all to be able to ferry DS through London traffic for hours each day. What for? To learn how bleeding inferior we were to all the rich kids' families? No win there... In addition, the brochures I received were HORRIFIC. Half-remembered quote follows: "... Discipline is key at St. XXX's. All boys..." [from 2 YEARS OLD - WHAT, are they MAD?] "...must have hats, ties and shiny shoes at all times, and detentions will be held every evening between 4pm and 6pm..." Christ, who'd want THAT for their toddler?

In addition;

• Couldn't afford housing in catchment areas of local state 'better' schools
• Wasn't RC, and wasn't prepared to lie.

The only way out that I've found is to train to be a teacher - in the state system of course. Then I'll be able to stomp off away from London to a nicer area where DS can get a halfway to decent state education and my principles stay intact. (In addition to which my childcare probs for the school holidays are solved.) Wish me luck, my PGCE interview is on May 19th.

For what it's worth, I agree with ClaireandRich that a major cause of the polarisation in state education has been parental choice, but I also think that a huge leap in the perception of this polarisation has been caused by league tables. All the 'good' parents (and that means all of us on this board) who have the time and energy to research which school to send little Johnny to ferret out the info, work out that one school might be more likely to get him 8 GSCEs rather than 1 and demand to exercise their choice. Me included.

Soupdragon - have noticed that you are dropping your "h's" - ain't you got no education?

Don't know what it is like in the rest of the country, but around here the best local states just happen to be slap bang in the middle of the most expensive housing. So in order to get in you have to spunk 3/4 million on a house. Maybe it would be cheaper to just go private?

Griffy - you missed the third choice - teach him yourself!

I teach in a private school and we have small class sizes which means the children to get more attention, but prehaps for me the most important things are the fact they have speciaailedd music, langauge and games teachers. They get 3hrs of PE and games a week with fantastic resoucres. They have a large area of grass to play on at breaktimes and lunch. They have a special DT and art room and when they get to year 5 they are taught by specailised subject teachers.
BUT not all priavte schools are the same. Some are very accedemic and really push children too hard and don't follow what is taught in the state sector. Other snooty parents. Quality of teaching varies from school to school. Hidden costs (such as school trips, ski-ing trips, uniform, lunch etc). And the fact you can't add whats not there - if your child is really bright they will achieve any where, if your child has special needs think carefully (for example I am not sure my school has good special needs support for really weak children). And long holidays!

(Sorry about the typing but dd is trying to help)

BTW good luck griffy for your interview!

Really seems to me that lots of people here are VERY scared of the whole state school thang on not much evidence. I think it's so easy to think the worst of places based on their reputation. I recently visited 4 local primaries and was very pleasantly surprised by what nice places they were and how well they were doing by their diverse community of pupils. One of the ones I liked best I had mentally discounted for my sons, based on extremely negative reports from local friends and aquaintances. It's now my equal first choice.

I guess people's views do depend a lot on their own experiences of education. I attended state schools- nearest primary followed by comprehensive. I've done ok academically- have GCSEs, A levels, degree. Some of the time I definitely experienced being allowed to coast because other kids needed more help than I did. Also being a relatively "academically motivated" and middle class kid was difficult socially sometimes at secondary level but less often than you might think. On the other hand, I met some wonderful people, many of whom I just don't think would have been found in a private school. There were some great kids and some fab teachers too, teachers who really could meet the needs of diverse, mixed ability classes. And I genuinely think I probably learned a lot about the ways of the world from the chaos that frequently ensued when less good teachers were in charge. I wouldn't want my sons to miss out on that, though I fear that they will since standards appear to be improving by the day!