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....

So if state provision of housing is substandard (and I fully agree that in far too many places it is) is it morally wrong to buy privatly? And if not, how is this different to the private/state school issue?

Started to rant but have resisted.

Mrs whats her name from Father Ted mode, 'Awh, gowan, gowan, gowan, gowan'. The rest of us have had a go!

Can I have the last word please - now fueled with a glass of beer !!!

No one is asking any parent to send there child to a "sink hole" school - I'm not going to do so. And no life is not fair, I don't dispute that.

But private education is divisive, most children who go to private schools tend to come from more privileged backgrounds or from families who have a strong belief in education. As such they tend to have less access to people from different social and cultural backgrounds - where else will they get this experience ??

Private education buys you privilege - its not just about education. Better facilities, smaller classes, an old boys network, friends with the right social credentials, hook ups with Oxbridge colleges.... Our society is still rife with class division and it all starts with the right prep school.

Private education means that kids don't have to deal with the obvious divisions that exist in our society - the huge gulf ( which is getting worse ) between the people who have and those don't.

Call it social engineering - but is important.

I also believe that sectoring schools on any basis is wrong - church schools are just as bad.

kas33, and so are private houses. Do you ban those too? How is buying your own house to avoid a sink estate any different? Children on private estates could be argued to live in a more privelaged world, and have less experience of the range of life present in the UK. Why is one OK and the other not?

Firstly Mum2toby/Rhubarbyes yes oh yes
Croppy - yes yes
and Jimjams for putting my thoughts in words also.
I am a product of private education I did well enough academically but I boarded and I can guarantee you that (way) back then the all round education was unrealistic for handling LIFE when I came out. I went wild and did BAD things I had no idea where the boundaries lay I couldnt relate well to the opposite sex..(ask dh he still agrees I'm a harpy or dysfunct anyway) I had no idea about real issues that affect the lives of the 95% of the population who dont go private. I am learning. I have not learnt how to be part of a family I only saw them 20 weeks a year from the age of 8.
But I really really want to see my children at the end of every school day. I want to hear what they have to say what has bothered them (I had to save it up over a 14 week period and it never felt the same) I want to see who their friends are ( my parents never met mine and I have kept none from that time). I want to be in the way and irritating but INVOLVED. I do not want to handover the raising of my children academically pastorally socially politically or whatever to any one body. State or Private it doesnt matter.
Reading that back I realise that what will happen is that I will become so annoying to my children they will be begging me to send them off to some Mallory towers fantasy land just to get me off their backs!! You just cant win can you?

But your argument is that is because everything is not totally equal - we shouldn't try and level the playing field.

Some children are brighter, some have more ambition, some will stay on the sink estate all their lives and some will work hard and make loads of money. What I am talking about is trying to give all children a chance to reach their full potential.

I know its not that simple, that you cannot give all kids the same start in life. But that's no reason not to try and give all kids an environment in which if they have the skills and the will they can suceed in what they want to do.

Private education muddies the playing field at Day 1.

I don't believe in communism, it was a social experiment that doesn't work - which I think is what you are saying the logical thrust of my argument is.

A lot of parents aren't buying education - what they are buying is privilege. Its a different thing.

That was in response to hmb

I guessed...

Hear hear Kaz

I used to beg my mother to send me to boarding school - would have done ANYTHING to get away from home. Had to wait till I was 16 instead!

That was in response to Bubbly!

We chose a small village school some 2.5 miles away, because DD was more than ready for school at 4.5, when the village school would take her, but the local one wouldn't take her until she was 5.25.

A large housing estate was built next door to the school about 5 years later & the school rapidly increased from 3 classes (age 4-11) to 8, within 2 years. Children were joining the school every week & the education of everyone was being disrupted.

We'd expected DD to go to grammar school, but we were told she didn't have the right attitude! She passed the 11+ but wasn't allowed a place & the Head fought us all the way. She got an Assisted Place at a private secondary school, & at the same time their junior school took DS2 into Y3.

This school has a high proportion of Hong Kong Chinese students & students from Russia & Africa. It also has a lot of Forces children. At no time did either of mine feel they were "better" than anyone else, especially as their 2 brothers were still at their old school.

The school gave them both confidence and wonderful manners. They were able to go in early & leave late, to accomodate our working day. My DD was very much "younger" throughout her time there than her peers in state schools.

Most of the parents were "ordinary" people in normal jobs who had gone without cars & holidays to pay for their children's education. What makes me really mad is these people who have new cars & expensive holidays then say that private schools should share their facilities.. even on an Assisted Place we struggled, and all our money went in fees. I don't see anyone paying for our holidays or letting us share their car.

DD did her GCSEs then moved to a state grammar for A levels. She finds the state system "appalling". DS went to state grammar after passing the 11+.

DS1 meanwhile is at the local High school & is very happy there. The school has home school contracts (as do both grammars) & is very strict on discipline & uniform. 10 years ago it was a sink school. Now it is over subscribed.

When DS1 left primary we also moved DS3. We drive him 22 miles to another state primary. It has classes of 34 but it is a good school & he has done well there. We moved him when we found that he had spent a WHOLE TERM in Y2 sat outside the Heads office for disruption, and we had NOT BEEN TOLD! He had also had 2 years with a Down's boy in his class who had no speech & a mental age of less than 2. ALL the teacher's time and energy was spent "containing" this child. The rest were left to their own devices. Integration is fine up to a point but when a child is so severely disabled that it affects everyone else then he is in the wrong place. We tried every school in town & all said we were not in their catchment. We had no option but to try another town.

I'm finding this thread really difficult as, for the first time in ages, I find myself strongly disagreeing with lots of people I really love and respect on this board. (Yes, get out the sick bags- but, seriously, there are a huge number of you that I think are extremely fab and really DON'T want to offend.) While I want to rant and rave and post up strong opinions galore, I feel constrained because people I now regard as good friends have such different views from me on this one. But perhaps it is ultimately quite important to be able to state our opinions even if we are afraid our friends won't like them and may think less of us for them... At the end of the first Harry Potter book Albus Dumbledore gave Neville Longbottom 10 points for standing up to his friends and I think that was a nice touch- even if it did take place in an elitist boarding school!- so I'm gonna try and be brave like Neville; no hard feelings anyone, I hope.

Deep breath.

I basically think that our two tier education and health care systems are indicative of our deeply divided, unequal and unjust society and that therefore people who use the private sector are covertly (or overtly in the case of MABS- very brave of you to admit this- much respect!) condoning and perpetuating such divisions, inequalities and injustice. I consider the principle of equal access for all to health and education services to be of absolutely fundamental importance- in my opinion it is just WRONG that family finances, canniness or connections should dictate the quality of a child's education or health care.

I can quite understand the urge to go private when state systems seem not to be good enough- some of the posts on here and the health thread have described this very eloquently. We all want the best for our children and if they are particularly vulnerable and the services they need are just not available I can imagine that the temptation to pay your way out of the situation must be well nigh overwhelming. But I don't think we should gloss over the fact that in so doing people are complicit in maintaining a divisive, unfair and unequal system. I think that if abolishing private schools and imposing a strict compulsory nearest school policy is unrealistic then the least we can do is take responsibility as individuals for our choices and admit that these have implications for social justice. Every time a child enters the door of a private education or health establishment its family is perpetuating inequality because they have rejected the state options as inadequate and were able to do so only because of their relative richness.

OK guys, you may now feel free to petrify me...

message withdrawn

Kas33, and my answer is that you tax the rich to raise up the standards of the state schools. ( and state housing)And when you buy your house, you are also buying privilelge, you just don't want to admit to it.

If all private schools were abolished, where would the pupils go? There won't be any extra money brought into the education budget by abolishing the schools and you'll have 100s of children trying to find space at state schools. Of course, they could stay where they are and the private school become state but that school will still (probably) be far better than any ordinary state school in terms of facilities and teachers. Therefore the cost of housing surrounding that school will increase dramatically - particularly if you instigate a strict "closest school" admissions' policy . And there you have it - a two teir state school policy governed by the cost of housing.

You could, I suppose, insist that they take 50% of their pupils from families with an income lower than £x to even out the social mix but that would penalise another child whose family earns £x+1 and falls into neither "closest school" or "low income" categories. That's not fair either is it?

How would you propose ensuring that all schools have an equal level of education? What happens to the "poor" headmasters/teachers when failing schools are taken over by "good" headmasters/teachers and turned around? This is an honest question actually - where DO they go now?? All teachers are not equal. You will get excellent teachers who switch on their pupils to learning and teachers who lack that charisma and skill and simply hand over information to their pupils. I've certainly been taught by both sorts. There's also the problem of what to do with disruptive children or children who are failing because of their home situation. How to you go about ensuring they get the education they deserve and reach their full potential? How do you ensure they don't drag their peers down with them without excluding that child? Some children will never be suited to main stream education - my autistic cousin certainly wouldn't have been. What happens to them? (I realise that this is a separate issue about special schools v integration).

I'm not arguing with any of you personally They are your beliefs and you're entitled to them. The fact that we can argue about this here shows that at least Mumsnet is a diverse society! I'll probably be backing you up about something else on another thread on a different day. Anyway, I'm off back to the yurt for an decaff EBM cappuccino.

Scummy, don't worry about disagreeing with people!. I for one like to have friends who hold diametrically opposed views to my own on a range of issues - that's what makes life interesting.

And actually I essentially agree with your post. You couldn't live where I live and not be aware of the searing inequality and injustice of life. I am no doubt a hypocrite because while I like living in a multicultural, vibrant, mixed area and shudder at the thought of living in a white stockbroker ghetto (with good state schools), I just cannot let my DS go to our local primary. This is not a decision taken lightly and was made after 4 years of being involved with that school and lengthy visits to the others in the area. At the moment, I'm afraid I feel my commitment to my son is greater than my commitment to eliminating social inequality given that the latter would impact disprortionately on him and in the greater scheme of things, would achieve relatively little.

And I don't see that moving house or choosing where to live in order to secure access to a "better" state education is morally superior to going private.

Oh damn!! I hate not having the internet at home just now. Look at all this I've missed!!!

I have to work, I am the main earner. I got a job off my own back. I pay for Nursery. There ARE NO state funded nurseries. And again it is nothing to do with Elitism. It was the only Nursery available. The government have provided enough SCHOOL places for EVERY child in Britain. They do not provide Nursery places for children under the age of 3...... so I haven't chosen to send him to a PRIVATE nursery. As far as I know there is no other sort!

With the new tax credits the government have made possible for everyone work and pay for childcare.

People send there children to private schools for a number of reasons. Including: believing state education is crap, they'll fall in with a bad lot at 'that nasty comp school' etc etc IME. I know there are many other reasons but these 2 are the ones that get right up my nose!

I CAN afford to send my son to private school, but I don't want to put him in a situation to be bullied by the people who live closest to him who all attend the state school, and turn into a (for want of a better word) snob! As 95% of people I know from Private schools turned out to be.

few... taken me about an hour to wade through all this heated debate... being a primary school teacher in a supposed 'rough inner city' school, i have many many views... but i think it's all been said... having said that (you just can't help commenting on this thread can you? )

i would like to think that when it somes to school dd will go to the local state primary school, we're great believers in getting involved with the school (PTA etc) to ensure that the school is doing right by our children... (dh already a member of the parent committe at dd's nursery!)

but musn't enter this dabate as this thread is huge enough!!!

just wanted to say

Scrummymuumy - beautifully put, i wish i was as eloquent as you!!! 10 points to your house!... and if you do get pretrified... my mandrakes are almost ready!!!

Damn! I really should preview my postings before the whole world gets to see 'em!

that should be Phew! ... not few!

We have excellent state schools where we live in Scotland. The secondary academy is one of the top three in Scotland yet it serves everyone in the community, from the children of the unemployed to those of MP's. I only know of one child who is being educated privately and I think, without exception, everyone regards the parents as barking! But they are the type that have a price tag attached to everything.

So, why does the standard of state schools vary so much? What is it that 'our' school does that other schools don't? It isn't money - they get one of the lowest per capita rates in Scotland. Why isn't someone looking at these successful state schools and applying their secrets to other schools? Is there some sort of reverse snobbery going on around them? One good state school in the area was refused permission by the council to feature in a new book about successful schools in case 'other schools feel inferior.' Oh, puhleese! All the schools are in the league tables anyway and shouldn't we be applauding success and encouraging others to follow their example?

This past year, because of a house move, we have had experience of private education and sadly, it failed to come up to our expectations. It is rigid, obsessed with results and riddled with racism and snobbery. My teenage DD was reduced to the depths of depression by this school and chose to return to her state school and has since flourished.

Soupdragon, I can tell you what happened to one head teacher who, over about 15 years, pulled his school down from being a centre of excellence to being castigated roundly in its Ofsted report. He got to retire early on a full pension. The depressing thing was, there was absolutely nothing in that Ofsted report that parents couldn't have told you about 10 years previously. Those in charge need to listen to the parents, even if they don't like what they hear!

Right, I'm off to pitch my yurt and have a lie down. "Do Not Disturb"!

To those who made constructive comments-thank you.
I'm afraid the title I gave the thread may have sparked off some of the insults that are flying, it was really not my intention.

suedonim, your experience of private schools overseas is interesting. I've looked at the schooling in Geneva (accidentally but there is a chance DH might be offered permanent work there so it was interesting) and decided against the British school. On paper, the Swiss state schools sound much better for someone my daughter's age (6/primary). They offer extra French lessons to catch up for those for whom it is not their first language. Their state schooling is apparently of a generally high standard.

So if we moved, DD would not go privately, as far as I can see from here. Anyway, since she has a pre-exisintg unusual medical condition we might have problems with healthcare so the money would be better spent elsewhere - like trips back to the UK to see her consultant privately (ooops!) cos we wouldn't be eligible for NHS care.

Chief inspector of Ofsted says today some of worst schools in Britain are in private sector and some may even be closed. Methinks there are lots of people who like the idea of the private "brand" - ie we re paying for it so it must be better, it s exclusive because only top people like us can afford it - and are so beguiled by fancy uniforms and prospectuses they don t notice quality of education.