'Why I send my child to a private school' Guardian piece...

[PollyParanoia]

Is there no thread on it? Surely there must be.
www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/jul/23/why-send-child-to-private-school here
It's just so badly written with lots of fatuous unsupported statements. She's been so suckered by that clever thing that private nurseries do to encourage parents to sign up until 11. Our local one makes the nursery children buy and wear the uniform in the pre-reception year. Especially if the uniform has an expensive boater as hers does (I always notice that the most prestigious schools around us have the least pretentious uniform).
And as for 'Katy's exceeding national expectations', well, a good section of children in a state school will do the same, doh, as you'd know if you really were an educational expert.
And that bit about how lots of children would thrive in a non-academic environment/technical school. But not her child of course.
Oh and she lives in Kent so I think we know the answer to her point about her going private if she's not happy with the secondary school provision.

DD was not offered a state primary place in our London borough, in spite of living in close proximity to many schools. Instead we were given a list of schools miles away in other boroughs which still had places.

Sending DD to a private school will enable her to go to a local school and make local friends. Unlike most people, we are lucky that we had private as an option.

I thought it was an excellent article, if you take out the bit about comprehensives (really had no place in there, a totally different conversation).

The point being made here is, why should you feel you have to justify a private education. If you can afford it, and you think it is right for your child, then why not? Schools around here are excellent, with fantastic provision, and a good mix of pupils from all backgrounds. We also have some of the best in the country private schools, and there are parents who opt to send their kids there. That's their choice.

What bothers me HUGELY about the article are the comments underneath. Who are all these people? Why is it always the mother who gets told you shouldn't have kids if you aren't going to stay at home - why don't they tell fathers that?

The real issue for me isn't public/private, but my hard earned cash being spent on religious and free schools. Sure if you want, send your kids to a religious school, or one run by creationists, or people who think you should hop everywhere on a Thursday. Just don't use my money to do so.

It always amuses me how many BBC employees leave London and come up to Oxford to put their DCs in private school.

Class size is often an acceptable way of saying we want to avoid the 'problem families' of the local school. Just as fretting about EAL can be a covert form of racism. The author of the piece wasn't in the situation you mention Tiggy, of no schools or the wrong-sex, she 'threw away' the application form for the ofsted outstanding local state.

No one is forced to use a private school, to say there are is ridiculous.

She's an only child so we have an over-inflated sense of the malleability of children..."

PollyParanoia, what has being an only child that got to do with anything? Presumably as the writer (in the loosest sense of the word) thinks no state school will meet the needs of this child, it would surely not meet the needs of any subsequent children either.

Only child digs are cheap, unlike a private education

I know no one that uses a private school, us plebs are happy with the local primary and comprehensives.

Maybe I'm lucky to live in a truly comprehensive city, no grammars here either thank goodness.

Usualsuspect, one of the problems is that, like us, many are unable to access their local school.

I'm not digging at only children, sorry if that came across like that, but I do see that there are an disproportionate number of only children in our local private schools partly as I say because of affordability.
But also I think it's because when I saw the differences between my own children, I realised that they are more themselves than the products of us and our influence. That may well be unique to me and that other parents don't think they can exert a great influence on the personality of their first-born. I kind of realised that they would be them, whatever I did and wherever I sent them to school, to some degree.
Hmmm haven't explained myself at all well and I do apologise if it sounded like I was making an only child dig.

I don't live in London, so don't really get all the school angst on MN tbh.

Everyone here just sends their children to the local schools.

Consider yourself lucky!

I don't understand all the guilt and justifications either. You can spend your own money however you see fit, surely? And since when was it a bad thing to choose the school you feel will best suit your child, if you're lucky enough to have the means to do so?

Class size is a huge factor. Good teaching is essential, but if you have a class of 11/12 just think how well the teacher knows the children and how much one on one time they get with them. The teacher actually gets to teach! TAs are used very sparingly. You don't need volunteers to come in and listen to reading because the teacher can do it themselves!

It's better for allthe children, from the very bright ones to the average quiet ones who can be overlooked to those with learning difficulties and behavioural issues. No-one gets overlooked and work is truly tailored to ability. And, as the article says, at good private schools the facilities aren't always new and shiny. They spend the money on keeping class sizes down.

PollyParanoia - Still sounds like a pop at only children to me.

When I had my only child, I gave birth to an individual whose personality was pretty much set from birth. I do not seek to influence his inate personality nor, God forbid, live my life through him.

The description of parents you give sounds like so many I know - all parents with more than 1 child.

If I can influence my DS to pick up his clothes when he removes them, stop liking Top Gear and to complete his homework with some degree of regularity, my life will be complete.

We taught him to read and fostered his love of books, we taught him to count. His delightful state primary has taken on the baton. If they drop it we will make the decisions we, as his parents, see fit for his education.

Can't think why so many parents seek to explain and justify their decisions and I certainly don't see why others care so much.

If this woman wants to send her child to a boater-wearing private, good luck to her. I hope she stays in the private sector, then 1 more child can have a shot at the place that her DD won't be taking up.

In many of the London boroughs there aren't enough school places. I don't mean places at outstanding primary schools 1 mile from the child's house, I mean any place at any primary within 5 miles of the child's house. Local councils have seen rising births and just stuck their heads in the sand for the past 10 years.

Again apologies RaisinBoys, it's more a judgment on myself.
You say good luck to this woman if she wants to send her child to a boater-wearing private, that's her business, but she's using her platform as a journalist to denigrate state schools and choosing to justify herself.
NarkedRaspberry - the research seems to suggest that class size is a bit of a red herring. Quality of teaching is the crucial aspect which is why Finland, with its highly qualified and respected teachers, do so well.

She is just justifying her actions. It's ridiculous in my opinion. I know loads of people who went to private school (and still more who went to state): some are clever, well-educated, plenty of them are normal and plenty of them are below average. Yes, they have better jobs. But honestly, so what? The idea of buying your way up the ladder makes me feel a bit ill. If that's what you want, good luck to you, but don't try to justify it. Having a good job ain't everything in life.

Polly I agree my two DDs are completely different, despite going to the same pre school and primary.

I think parents and schools can encourage a respect for education and for other people, but not a great deal more.
If you have one child you may feel all their good and bad points are the effect of home and school. With two or more the cracks in this logic rapidly show.

I live In leafy rural middle England, we have good primaries and good secondaries and yet people who need neither child care or sports facilities still feel it's their duty to bankrupt themselves going private. Either because they did or their snobbier friends do. They have clever A* grade DC they would excell anywhere.

What irritated me most about the article was not the author's choice but the fact that she seemed to feel the need to 'justify' it by taking a swipe at state education in general - and doing it in a completely DM way.

So I commented on it (same name, am on the first page of comments) because I just get sooo tired of all state provision being labelled as crap and catering to the mediocre.

raspberry my DDs have always gone to state schools with large classes, and every time I have spoken to any of their teachers, it has been very very clear to me that these teachers know my DDs to a T. It really is all about good teaching and good teachers. (And yes, I do know that I have been very fortunate).

I totally agree with these points - I am amazed by how well the teachers (esp the good ones) know each of my children. Sometimes they know them better than I do and come up with a really fresh (but accurate) way of looking at them.
And yes, fair enough that she felt that her daughter was so delicate and also that she fell for that making-the-nursery-provision part of the school trick, but what on earth has that got to do with comprehensives supposedly promoting mediocrity. And also trotting out that line about how much more honest she is than everyone else who is pretending to be religious or moving house. I've done neither. The vast majority of people ditto.

That is truly one of the most bizarre exercises in self-justification I have ever read. So you chose prviate school, so what - only in Guardian-land (and MN of course, which is broadly speaking the same place) is this even vaguely an issue and even there they can't actually sack you for it, so what's the fucking problem?

I went to a private primary and then grammar and that's what I'll do for my kids, they are better schools in some cases than your catchment area. I thought her article was very honest. I really don't want to send my children to private secondary but if that's where they wil get the best education, then I will.

She came across as precious, self-justifying and self-obsessed. She was spouting a lot of unsubstantiated views/political opinions and one or two quite offensive opinions with no data whatsoever to back her up. To lower herself to writing such tripe can only damage any opinion I ever have of any proper journalism she attempts in the future.