Are private primaries really worth the money?

[wheelsonthebus]

What can be achieved at a private primary that state education and good tutoring can't achieve - and isn't it sometimes advantageous to be at a state school if you are planning to sit your child for a grammar (or doesn't it matter?). Thoughts please.

Errr not sure what you mean? IMO any 7 year old not able to wipe their bum or get themselves dressed would probably have some, maybe unidentified, special need. Bugger all to do with the fact that they were being state educated.

Also IME most kids won't poo at school!

I agree it was rather a poor show of your previous state primary's head to start a recorder group then abandon it, although Im not sure what the problem is with identifying the more able children in year 5 (unless your dc wasn't one of them of course!). My experience of state primary has been completely different though - the school pays for someone to come in a do recorder tuition, and for someone to do French, and for Hockey training after school. All free. As are quite a few other after school clubs (although some we do pay for).

I didn't wait to find out whether my child was going to be identified or not, we left this year, but shouldn't they all have a chance to take it ? Rather than the ones that the head saw potential in, I felt that was unfair.

yes, Doodlez, that was what I was saying in my post - was countering something that someone else had said and saying ALL these generalisations are meaningless. EVERYTHING cuts both ways in someone's experience or another.

I would leave it to the school to decide if my ds was capable of doing the 11+. They will know his academic ability probably better than me. Of course the school can make recommendations but they cannot actually ban a child from taking the 11+ if that is what the parents want.

No MolliO but they can not tutor them and that was my gripe, I actually am still glad we moved my DD even if she doesn't pass because I think the little boost will serve her well if she goes to the local comp.

From what I can gather parents don't rely on what the school does because it is so limited, at least in Bucks. Lots and lots of tutoring goes on around here and personally I can't see the point. If ds can't master the technique after doing two or three practice papers then he won't be capable of doing well at gs. I had friends who passed but weren't expected to (I am old so no tutoring in my day and everyone did the test). They spent a miserable year at gs before being moved to the secondary where they thrived. Ds gets in on his own merits or not at all.

We made the 'mistake' of visiting a lovely local prep school and could really imagine our daughter thriving there but were concerned about the financial commitment to continue her in private education to 18 and then find the money for university.

In my mind it became a choice between sending her there and having another child as we couldn't afford two sets of fees.

We decided to look at our local primary which has an outstanding ofsted report and is in our catchment area. I was ecstatic that very little seemed to be different in approach and curriculum and what was offered in terms of clubs, languages, IT, sport - you name it really. The only real difference was class size and even that was not a huge difference.

In some ways the local primary had better facilities as the building was purpose built a few years ago and so was more geared up to modern needs.

The local Grammar takes 50% from prep and 50% from state schools so my concerns about DD feeling like the odd one out were allayed on that score as well.

On another note - I must say the tone of some of the posts about state schools is very shocking to me. I was educated in the state system and am amazed at the ideas people seem to have about it. Talking about children at state school as if they are an inferior breed - children are children. Some catch on to getting dressed etc quicker than others. There seems to be an implication that obviously their parents are less well off and therefore don't care to teach them the niceties.

There was no implication of the sort, the parents at the state school had far more disposable income than 80% of the parents at private, myself included.
More a let the teachers do it, why should I attitude.

My dd actually did a poo in her pants at school. (whilst in reception I hasted to add).

I do blame it on the teachers; she was so absorbed in her work that she didn't make it to the toilet in time.

If they created a duller atmosphere then she would spend all day on the toilet, I'm sure.

More seriously, when people say that state schools are Sats obsessed, they seem to forget that in many private schools they do loads of tests all the way through.

And, many state schools don't make a big deal about sats. Our area doesn't have grammar schools (just comps) so Sats aren't a big thing.

And, what is so wrong with being beholden to the NC. It's so extensive that it covers plenty! And teachers are always looking for exciting things to do.

A few teachers I know say that if it's a choice betwee private for primary or secondary, go for primary as that's where the attitude to learning is formed.

Ds frequently tested the resolve of his teachers in reception by doing poos in his pants. We even got to the stage of them personally escorting ds to the toilet and making sure it was clean before he'd use it. Felt as if I got my money's worth those terms .

Hullygully that is what a friend's sister said (head of a prep).

I was a state school teacher and I sent my ds to a fab prep school. I deliberately did not send him to the local village school as they taught to the SATS, and there was an endemic culture of bullying that had not been addressed.

Having ds at prep meant that I got wrap around care, small class sizes and the higher expectations mentioned earlier. Appearance does come into it in that the uniform had to be worn and was policed if it wasn't. I got bored to the back teeth of trying to ensure that the 600+ kids I taught at secondary per week didn't have white trainers on; weren't showing tits, tums and bums; that their skirts (when worn) covered their groins, and that trousers for either sex weren't worn so low on the hips that butt cleavage/thongs/boxers weren't on view.

I also used a prep because the NC is limiting and doesn't allow the breadth of education you receive at prep. Nor do state primaries provide hours of sport each afternoon and the facilities for that. Yes, they did internal exams at the end of each academic year, but that is all to the good as they learn how to cope in an exam. There were no SATS either.

The big advantage imo of a prep is the smaller class sizes. There is nowhere to hide and the teachers get to know the students well and can pitch the work to the correct levels. As there are less children, they each get more attention and help. I would send ds back like a shot if we had to do it all again.

Ok 4/5 yr old kids poo their pants, we know that, did they then 2 years later stand at the toilet door with their kegs around there ankles whilst the teacher - who canot help them - gives a step by step instruction on how to wipe their bum ?

And I agree with Hullygully; get it right at primary and secondary isn't so much of a concern.

millymollymoo - you continue to say the same things which are basically parents at state schools take less responsibility for their children. It is completely untrue.

There really are all sorts of people in both sectors and I think it is better to look at the state and private schools and what they offer and how they would suit your child.

I can only speak as I find/found having sent my children to state for 4 years and private for 3 in total.

I believe the teachers do their best under very difficult circumstances in the state sector.

MillyMollyMoo - I have found the opposite of you tbh - in my sons prep about 3 of the boys in his class waited to be fed in reception year at lunch. So thats 4-5 year olds.

Still lots of them in year 1 struggle to get dressed after games etc.

I think its because they are mollycoddled so much more.

And how can you generalise about the 'state sector' as if all schools were the same - they are all different - private or state - individual schools with differing pluses and minuses, just like our dcs. [exasperated sigh]

domestic

are you serious ?
You aretelling Milly off ( quite rightly in my view) about stereotyping schools and DCs and then spout some shite nonsense about prep school children being mollycoddled.

Fight with Milly on the issue you disagree with. Don't count prejudiced nonsense by spouting prejudiced nonsense of your own.

My DS1 startd prep perfectly able to get himself dressed, including the tie and the long sock. All the boys in his class could. I doubt that they were exceptional

Ds is completely mollycoddled from 7.30am to 6.30pm most days. That is what I pay for. The lavish attention that his teachers and before/after school care offer is excellent. He is 5 and imo the more mollycoddling the better.

btw - how do f/t working mums with kids at private schools cope with the hugely long - eight week - summer holidays? aren't summer camps just another expense?

Summer camps are an additonal expense but no other option and still cheaper than what my CM charged.

It depends on what you want I guess and how you judge "worth it."

We don't have grammar schools in our area so that is of no importance to us.

DD is in Y3 of her school. She has enjoyed every year so far. She is really happy there, enjoys her small class, gets on well with all her classmates, and looks forwards to each day with a smile. She is making excellent progress and her teachers are ehlping her develp in so many ways. She is confident and will attempt anythign put in front of her.

The academic side of things is irrelevant to me at present. DD is 7y, her emotional wellbeing is of greater importance.

Is it worth it? WEll, yes to have a happy confident daughter makes it worth it.

Could she have got the same in a state school? Quite possibly, depending on the school.

Do I think I chose the best school for my DD at the time? Yes, and would do the same again.

Ds have been to private and then to state. Both schools with very good ofsteds. No point of comparison. Smaller classes, higher expectations, a more personalised approach to education, care and even emotional needs. Wrap around care and even a headmaster that would hold your hand if the family is experiencing trouble.

Obviously, there are some small state schools that can offer such service for free, and there are some private schools that despite the expense are rubbish. But, if I were to judge one or another, just based in my experience, I would say that you get what you pay for...

FWIW, my DD-7 is supremely happy and confident, and doing also extremely well academically at her state school. This is certainly within the realm of possibility.

Have not read the whole thread, so I might be repeating whats been said.

Prep schools do not prepare for 11+, they prepare for public school entry at 13 by common entrance. If you want to take 11+, you'll still have to get them tutored cos they won't necessarily be covering the right stuff.

If you want your child to transfer at 13 most good prep schools have a relationship with the public schools and the transfer should be quite smooth if you choose the appropriate one for your child. If you don't use this route you are on your own.

They take sport seriously with probably 2 afternoons a week devoted to it and matches etc on top of that.

I think there may be a difference between what people call a private primary and a prep school though. Private primaries may be more appropriate for 11+ transfer.