Teachers - is it preferable to teach in private schools?

[Horseradishes]

I have some teacher friends who teach in private schools and love it, sing the praises of the schools etc. I know it's impossible to generalise, but do private school teachers get better pay/conditions etc? I'm talking about selective primary schools, so possibly the children are all motivated by keen parents.

I think private schools are less constrained by curriculum and have smaller classes, so I'd imagine could be less challenging to teach teach but I'm not sure. I get the impression state teachers are dissatisfied (strikes) but what about private?

Oak maiden-when do you eat lunch? Who looks after the children then?

Often teachers eat with the children whilst TAs have their lunch break and then they supervise them outside for the second half of lunchtime.

Talkin - 'He much prefers non selective state schools for all age groups.'
Does your DH prefer non selective state schools in that he considers them better for children's education, or that he prefers working in them?

working

and it influenced our decisions
as I was a private school brat who had "issues" with state schools : his professional experience overrode my prejudice

I've worked in both and enjoyed both- but glad I am in an independent school now as state schools are becoming more and more micromanaged. My HoD comes in to see me teach etc but I don't feel that I am being watched/monitored/checked up on all the time which seems to be going on in state schools. I work hard and feel that I am trusted to do my job. Occasionally get parents with unrealistic expectations asking why their child isn't getting an A etc but that is rare- they and their kids are generally wanting the best for them and appreciate your efforts to support them. I don't get paid anymore than state schools but do get about 2 weeks more holiday per year.

rollon - I eat with the children.

Some really judgemental, sweeping statements on this thread

I shouldcocoa, what desperately sweeping statements did I make? I can be a bit too frank sometimes but I really tried to rein myself in there!! I gave my own impression of MY private school in which I work, and my own view of what my children would lose out on if they went there (don't think I haven't considered it!). But I don't think I made any crass generalisations, did I?

I wouldn't want to work in the private sector. I don't agree with it as a concept.

The most rewarding job I had was working in an inner-city school with a large percentage of Somali refugees. Most had tales of the Taliban killing family members, often in front of them. Those children really loved school and really appreciated everything they had here. They desperately wanted to learn and when they had their 'light-bulb moments' it melted my heart. Most of the parents spoke little to no English but they pushed the children to do their homework and they reinforced the school's approach, including supporting the teachers and their behaviour management.

Juniper do you not agree with any paid for service then? most people seem to have no problem with the concept of luxury goods or hotels or holidays etc - why shouldn't people spend their own money on education if they choose? Unless you give every penny of your salary to charity then you're choosing to spend money on goods poorer people don't have access to, it's hypocritical to pick out private education as somehow morally corrupt if you allow for the concept of other paid for services which many people can't afford.

OFSTED does not inspect lots of private schools. They have ISIS which is a much easier proposition! Therefore they don't necessarily need the high quality teaching expected in state schools.

Unlike state schools, private schools have different motivational forces at play. That is true. Individuals' potential, higher academic achievements (often over and above those directed by OFSTED, as appropriate to each individual) and parental objectives and expectations. These combined, mean that it is in most schools' best interests to employ excellent teachers, Milly. High quality teaching is about effective teaching - not the box ticking, pupil relegating exercise so often at the core of state school objectives who are interested in achieving X number of Level 4s, 5s and 6s. Not to mention the degree of pressure that the schools and teachers are under to achieve results and excellence in teaching practice from fee paying parents who can vote with their feet by leaving or by choosing to go elsewhere with their money!

Individual. Not individuals'

Yes, Milly because the inspection and paperwork demanded by OFSTED is known for the truly excellent teaching it produces.... not.

The school I work for hires people with the highest academic qualifications and rigorously tests their ability to communicate in the classroom and control a room of 20 lively kids before employing. About 1/3 of the staff have PhDs in their subject and/or are published authors. The school will also pay for you to do a PGCE on the job and encourages teachers to do this. Our results are superb - in my subject we had 98% A-A* GCSE grades last year (a compulsory subject and a year group of c.150 pupils).

I don't agree with the notion of paying your way for a 'better' service, when a perfectly adequate option is available. I don't agree with a system where entry is based on the ability to pay, and not on the child's own merits.

That is not the same as paying for holidays or hotels .

So you would never pay for a 5 hotel when a 'perfectly adequate' 2 was available? Based on the ability to pay, not on your merits...

I am not a teacher, but suffice to read the various threads about teachers instate schools desperate to leave the profession to answer your question op.

I've got a small class and hate it .... find the small size to be a disadvantage
The idea that state schools are full of chair throwing children with poor behaviour is laughable (just as the idea that independent schools are full of motivated angels)
As is the idea that state schools are full of WALT and WILFs (personally never met either - as a teacher or a parent)

Everyone is different which is just as well or everyone would be jumping ship and heading for greener pastures and as we know the other mans grass isn't always greener when you get there.

I think it's excactky the same, juniper and it's naive to try and argue otherwise. It's a fact of life that money will buy you a better service in this world - maybe that's unfair but it's the way it is. If you want a system based on merit then argue for grammar schools, not against private schools. As long as there are parents with the cash to pay there will be schools set up to cater for the education they want to give their DC, just like there will be luxury handbags and holidays and houses - life very sadly doesn't work on merit, capitalism is founded on money.

I think it's extremely naive to believe what you get is automatically superior because you paid for it.

Mrz I don't think it is automatically better. Of course you have to be smart as a consumer and do your research into what you are buying, there are certainly state schools which are as good as or better than very many private schools. But to complain that you don't "agree" with the existence of private schools because they work based on money and not merit is to complain that we live in a capitalist society, which is a fair enough complaint but a much larger one than just a debate about education. It's not reasonable to single out one thing and say it's not fair to pay for it, but it is fair to pay for other things, that's a very subjective argument.

I think you need to judge each "product" by its merits and how well it matches your requirements.

Mrz-as I'm sure you realise, most parents of children in special schools have had a fight on their hands in order to get them there.
What makes me sad is seeing children in MS struggling and not getting the support they're entitled to whereas if they were in a specialist setting, coukd be making progress.
Also, as a supply teacher, my county is full of WILF's and WALT's.
sorry, don't mean to 'attack' your points MRZ, just that the ones you made made me want to reply.

Perhaps if you had invested years into successfully supporting a child with SEN you would feel sad to see them move to a Special School especially when the child was progressing and thriving in MS.

One of our children (with autism) I visited had been placed in a class with non verbal children simply because the other group of autistic children had "violent" outbursts ...in a matter of weeks the child had gone from a happy chatty boy to a silent shadow of the child I knew.... It made me cry.