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....

just a thought but if it's the university place you're really thinking about (comment long way down thread somewhere but daren't go back and re-read it all) then maybe awful state school supplemented by loads of private tuition at home is a better guarantee of a good place - Oxford would prob offer 2 E's for a genuine working class salt of the earth innercity school student to show to the govt they really are inclusive.
Ohmygod I'm terrified and am off home to get sloshed;

Umm ... glass of Bolly anyone??

willow mentioned about housing costs around good schools - I have a couple of friends who have considered moving to better state school catchment areas. In one case, a similar house would cost them around 60k more, but they felt this was a better investment than putting the money into someone else's pocket by paying for private education.

My decision had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that 55% of students at the schools I visited didn't speak English and everything to do with the overwhelming feedback from the teachers concerned that they did not have the resources with which to deal with the situation. This was by no means the only factor - our decision was made after lengthy visits to all the potential schools in our borough which is one of the three most deprived in the whole of the UK.

The school we have chosen is ethnically diverse as it happens and is about as far as one could get from the "Lord Toffington" image. We chose it simply on the basis that of all the ones we visited, it was the one by miles which suited DS best.

And like Prufrock, I am also involved with a reading programme at my local primary and have been for the past 4 years.

Dropping my Hs and double posting too. What would my private tutors think of me if they could see me now??

One thought that occurred to me is that surely gaining a better education based on your ability to pay is no different from gaining one based on your religious beliefs? We can afford to send our children to private school if that need arose but if we were devout C of E or RC, we wouldn't have to. We would not have needed to move nearer to better "ordinary" state schools with all the costs that involves. Is this not discrimination too? Whilst we're doing away with private education in order to improve state schools, let's get rid of all the church schools too to even things out.

I am not for one moment seriously advocating this by the way.

Have just read through all this and really agree with WWW's comment that "I think it's incredibly unfair that in some areas of the UK a child gets a good education if his parents can afford to pay for it and he doesn't if they can't". That's the reality.

morrocco - can I just take up your point (whilst ducking furiously). I used to take part in the Oxford access scheme- we used to do a joint presentation with Cambridge. We would go to a state school in the area- invite all the local state secondary schools and spend a morning trying to dispel the Brideshead myth.

The same schools came year after year - and they had a pretty good record at getting their students into Oxbridge. I had a friend who attended a secondary school that never came to these things. She wanted to apply for Oxford- she certainlyhad the academic ability- but her school refused to process her application. They actually said to her "people don't go to Oxford from schools like ours". What????? Well no - not if you don't let anyone apply!

Now ducking rapidly out of the firing line.

Terribly unfair agree Gracie. But it's also terribly unfair that my son will get a crap education because he's autistic without a big battle from me.

Also terribly unfair that you can get far superior medical treatment by paying for it.

There will always be people with more money who can pay for a choice. What should hapen though is that the state system should be so good that no-one wants to pay for the alternative.

We considered moving to be in a better catchment. However, the housing is so expensive to start with AND catchement areas change - more often than many people may realise. You also have to have been in the catchment areas for a while too. So it isn't as simple as moving.

Also, canm I reiterate that I am definitely NOT being ractist by wanting a school for my child where English in the main language. If I swend her to a school where most children are still learning the English language (throughout primary and secondary) she will of course be held back. If a class size is large a teacher must conceentrate on the majority's needs. Our local state primary had more than two thirds with english as a second language, therefore the emphasis will be on teaching basic english skills. DD will not need this (hopeully, but will cross that bridge if we need to) so she could indeed be missing out of what she needs.

Well, got to go. Bell just gone so my first class of this term will be arriving any minute. So called GCSE class - however, they may need to start behaving if they are to pass! Even have the one who threw a chair at me last year in the group - so lucky aren't I? So, please don't accuse me of not understanding the state system. Oh well, here goes.

Why is it considered acceptable to choose where you live or move based on access to good state schools but not to send your children private if you live in an area with poor schools?. Isn't the end result the same i.e. parents who (the argument goes) could potentially make a difference to underperforming schools are choosing not to?.

Oakmaiden - What a lovely idea! I'd love to teach DS myself in theory, but I'm afraid that I'm the breadwinner in our house, and don't really have that choice.

Now that I think about it though, I'd probably not take it if I did, as I don't think I'd be able to provide the same opportunities for social development as school would.

I really wasn't meaning this to happen- new to mumsnet and didn't realise it would cause such fireworks! I was just interested in others reasons for going private, TBH not that interested in the political arguments. That said, were we also wrong to pay for her to see an eye specialist about her squint rather than wait 12 months for an NHS appointment???

Anyway, there are no comprehensives in our area, it's grammars or sink school. This is a big consideration for us. Unfortunately both the parish school and the community school are a no go, and this is a "nice" area, just rubbish schools. Thanks to those of you who have commented on reading etc.. pre-primary. I think we're going to look at a couple more of the private schools and see what happens.

Claireandrich how does your DD find an all girls school? I have avoided looking at one near us because of my own miserable experiences.

I'm going to bow out of this one after replying to agree with what Gracie and Soupdragon have said about some kinds of parental choice being seemingly more acceptable than others.
We're practising Christians and have a place at ds' nearest C of E Primary because of that. Nice enough school, good-ish results, well-managed - but we just didn't feel it was right for ds. But it will be right for other families, at least one of whom on the long waiting list will benefit from our surrendering the place. Would we be criticised for considering a faith-based education for our son if we were non-Christians, I wonder?
If we had posted on here saying that our misgivings about aspects of the state primary system in general (class sizes, early emphasis on literacy, narrowness of the National Curriculum) had led us to home ed or go for Steiner (which I would have been very interested in if there was one local to us), would we have been criticised as snobby or insular for that?
Like everyone else here I'm sure, I chose the school I felt would offer my son the best education for him. We missed out on the other school that we felt best suited him because it is understandably oversubscribed. As it happens, if we hadn't gone private, ds would be facing an uncertain future at a school that is not bad but we feel is wrong for him.
Whichever school he would have ended up in, we would expect to play an active role in supporting its work and contributing as parents. And unfortunately, the political party I have supported for many years, which has by far the best policy on funding state education properly in my view, seems unable to secure a mandate in the UK because not enough of the general public are prepared to pay a bit of extra income tax for schools.
Education is a hugely important issue for us all and this thread makes thought-provoking reading. But I don't think criticising individuals' choices or rationales helps.

Hear hear Marina!. I also think that some of the remarks here demonstrate ignorance about the demographics of various areas. Where I live isn't like Islington. There are almost no "middle class" people living locally who have school age children. If every single one of them sent their child to the local schools it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference to the shocking state of these schools.

In any event, I loathe all this labelling of people by class and social type such as referring to people as "Waynetta's" and so on. It is just completely irrelevant to the issue of education.

ghosty, a lady after my own heart!

My own two have been at private, 3 -7 state 7-11 then 11-13 at a top comprehensive ( mixed) and then both back to private at 13. (single sex)

They both know that's where they should be and are happiest at, DD got 10 A*, last summer but would have got the same at the state school.

Private education does not turn children into snobs, only the parents do that. Mine have several languages, school, home and grandparents speak!

We stuggle to pay fees of £8500 a term each, but is is worth every penny for the extra's, as Rhiannon said, teachers take so much time and care, far beyond that can be offered in state school, though I have nothing but praise for the state primary they went to, - the teacher borrowed books from the secondary school for maths for DD, hence her doing Maths A level in a year, a year early, because she adores the subject.

Their state school was fantastic, I was a governor there for 8 years and still a governor of another state primary and nursery, so I see both sides of the equation on a regular basis.

They left the secondary school as there was no pastoral support, DD was ill and didn't go to school for 4 months, they jsut kept saying, she's so bright it won't matter at all. She missed school, it was important to her, but they did nothing despite visits and letters from me.

DS just hated it, it might be the 5th best comprehensive school in the country, but it was full of very arrogant (sorry about this) London kids, who were tough and too streetwise for their years. They were very bright, and they used it in many ways, clever at being manipulative, cunning and schemeing to pick on the weakest, or any one who stood out for any reason.

My son was bottom of his class with an average of 85 % in his exams, and he was made to feel stupid.
At the private school. he is Mr Average and very, very, happy, his best is good enough and valued.

I just regret the wasted years at the state secondary, they both got places at independent schools ( 3 each) at 11, but as they got into the comprehensive, partially selective ( 1600 kids for 90 places( that's where they wanted to go, it was there choice and they now know it wasn't the right choice.

You have to do what is best for your children

Actually I just re-checked and in our Borough it is 64% of students speak English as a second language. So around double the rate in your are Badmomma.

Alibubbles do you REALLY pay £17,000 a term in school fees - does seem a little high!!!?

I'm kinda glad I went out last night - I would have been sozzled if I'd stayed at hime with all the wine flowing as it did!
IMO half the problem with these discussions is that for many of us the state /private decision can ONLY be made in a specific set of circumstances ( ie ability to pay, set of local schools) and with regard to a given child.
None of us on here can really know what the schools that are others are describing are like - or indeed the children that should or shouldn't be sent there so how can we really judge others' decisions?
My only other ''hobby horse'' with regard to how to improve state education is to re-open all the special schools where we could send kids who are ''off the wall'' in the classroom because of either incedibly low academic ability or specific emotional needs and who just can't cope in the mainstream and so cause havoc for the other 29 in the class. They need staff with specialised training and incedibly small groups - not teachers who are on the edge of a nervous breakdown because they are trying hard to cope with that child's needs AND get the rest of the class thru GCSE.

Good post Marina.

I think it is true that many factors come into the shcools we choose. I too would love to send ds2 to the local Steiner school. It is fee paying(cheap by pirvate schoo, standards) - but I don't think anyone could accuse seomeone of social snobbery for sending their child there.

Because it is a half hour drive away the only way I could send ds2 there was if we home edded ds1. If we do home ed ds1 we will probably send him there.

If school works out for ds1 (and I have my doubts) then we will send ds2 to the same school as ds1. It's a church school- we're not christians. It's a half hour drive away in traffic (different direction to the Steiner school). We're not in the catchment area. Our local school is very well thought of. People move to get their kids in there. It does better in the league tables than ds1's school. But I don't beleive it is capable of providing an education that is suitable for ds1- so I'll be turning down our place.

People choose their schools based on all sorts of criteria. One factor depends on what is available locally. If there is a private school that is right for their child and they can afford it then I don't really see that it's a big deal. Locally I know there are only 2 schools I would send ds1 to. He has a place at one, and I think the other will be too oversubscribed. If we hadn't been offered a placeat either of these I would have home educated him. What does that make me/ Wierdo, socially eclusive, - and then ds2 would go to a steiner- wow I must be really arty, organic, grow my own vegetables and knit chunky multi-cloloured jumpers.

There sems to be lots of social sterotyping going on on all sides. People aren't automatically snobs because their children go to private school, and people aren't automatically clueless because their children go to state school.

bayleaf- you know I'm the mother of a SEN child and I totally agree with you. Not because my ds1 is off the wall, aggressive or anything like that, but becuase he can't speak. I actually worry that he will be forgotton in a class of 30- he's too passive. That happened to him at his first nursery- they used to leave him sitting on a chair on one room whilst the other children played in another.

He can't speak, he can't learn phonics (he can learn the sounds, but not how to spell with them- how can he learn "b" "u" "s" when he can't say b he can't say u he can't say s and bus is pronounced "an".

I've already been told (by professionals) to be very very careful that he isn't forgotton as he has no behaviour problems- he's too good.

But the government in its wisdom has decided that he doesn't qualify for a special school place now. The only way mainstream will work for him is if he is given totally individual attention for the entire day. He will need a totally different system set up for him. For example at nursery he cant answer yes to the register, and he can't sign (too dyspraxic), so they have produced a hello pecs card for him which he gives to the manager when his name is called. This sort of individual plan will have to be set up throughout the entire day. Of course this is not cheap- and I will not let him in school a minute longer than the time specified for one to one on his statement. However even with that I still have doubts that the level of support he needs can be provided by an unqualified TA.

So I would like special schools back- but not really for the other children- he isn't aggressive - I don't believe his behaviour will affect them- but I would like special school back for him.

Well said Bayleaf.

Can I just add though, from the otehr side- some schools seem to do their utmost to make life fairly intolerable for children with Aspergers/ADHD etc. If they just learned a little about the condition- and I would say that was a necessity if a child was in your class with something like that- a lot of problems could be dealt with. Instead things seem toescalate out of controlIt would help if teachers would actually read the statement as well.

It's no accident that they fastest growing group of home educators is those with special needs children- especially those on the autitstic children. I know of too many children who have been suicidal by the time their parents have withdrawn them from school- and in many cases a bit of undestanding of autism from the school would have made the world of difference.

We just went for ds1's statementing paediatrician meeting. He commented on how well behaved ds1 was- and then spent about 15 minutes warning me that if he went to mainstream school (about which we have no choice) I have to be very very careful to choose one that will attempt to work with him rather than against him. I would pleased that a peadiatrician recognised the problems faced by our children from inclusion.

Marina, I wasn't trying to criticise anyone's choice of education be it based on faith or ability to pay - I hope you realised that. I was trying to find out why other posters were up in arms about people getting better education for their child because of their ability to pay when it is also a fact that some people get a better education for their child based on their faith.

The sad fact is that all education is not equal. People shunning private education in order to bolster up the state system is not going to work as there are so many other fators detremining a child's education. The schools you are able to apply to will differ depending on the family's financial situation, whether their parents are practising christians, whether they are a boy or a girl... and probably a few more I've not thought of.

No, no, SoupDragon, I agreed with you that the multiplicity of choice was a thought-provoking issue! Like you, I felt the debate ought to be more about parental choice in its various manifestations, but preferably not polarised around ££££ = bad and no ££££ = good.
Definitely off to skulk in a nearby yurt now. Is it lunchtime yet, I feel a yearning for blue string spaghetti.