What state primaries in London to get into top private secondaries?

[newbieLdn]

We’re thinking of buying a house in London within a year or two. Baby's on the way, hopefully followed by second at some point.

We’d love for the kids to eventually go to Oxbridge, but will not really have the money for top-class private education for both kids for the whole 14 years. Or put it differently, even if we do think we have the money now, we may not have it in the future. We figured it’d be more sensible to put aside some funds for really good secondaries in the future, and in the short term, buy a property in a catchment area of a really good primary. This is, at the moment, the best we can afford. I’d definitely want to avoid the kids the trauma of being taken out of a good private school that they already got used to because daddy can now no longer pay the tuition fees, etc.

Initially, we thought they’d go to really good state primaries and secondaries; but looking at Oxbridge acceptance rates, it seems that all the top schools are private, at least in London and South East they are…

Does our plan sound sensible? I want to stress we’re both quite academically-oriented, and will always strive to help kids with homework, read them stories at bedtime, etc.

A friend of mine insists that at the top secondaries (the likes of Eton, Westminster, St Pauls) majority of students come from private primary schools, ideally – a prep school affiliated with the given secondary. Is it really that difficult to get into these top schools from good state or religious primaries? And which state/religious primaries in London would you recommend?

We were thinking of buying in Islington or Putney/Wandsworth/Southfields/Wimbledon; some place close to the Tube for our commutes. But we’re very open to suggestions!

With each post, OP, you betray yourself as having (sorry) absolutely no fucking clue.

I think you need to grow up, relax with the control freakery. Life can throw many, many challenges at you, you are hypothesizing (on fallacious factual grounds, when it comes to both school fees and house prices) beyond any realm of reasonableness. I hope you continue to have a gilded life, and that your future DC have the same. But please be open to the fact that things don't always work out that way - and posting in a public forum in the way you have is a sign of just the kind of hubris that leaves you horribly exposed later in life. I speak as someone who has had every privilege in life (just the sorts you are talking about, and then some) and is lucky enough to have DC who have the same (for now). But I also have had my fair share of setbacks and have seen many, many people trip up along the way. They all started off sounding just like you.

Money + right decisions does not = Oxbridge/"success" in many, many instances. Life is just not that simple.

Especially that on top of academic achievement, all Oxbridge graduates that I've met over the course of my life here in the UK were, almost without exception, fantastically bright, open-minded and with great friendships from said universities, so the benefits of graduating from Oxbridge clearly go far beyond just obtaining top-class education

Absolute tosh.

Oxbridge isn't the top in all fields, isn't the best for all children.

Not all people who graduate from there are open minded.

In fact there is nothing that you have said ^ that couldn't be applied to many other universities in the country.

You are seriously coming accross as a pushy parent who may very well find that you push your DC which haven't even been born yet away.

What if your DC aren't academic what then?

Newbie
You've been in London for 10 years but by the sound of it have not absorbed much of the English ways.
I've been here a lot longer than you and am pretty much fully assimilated.

Top grades from top unis are just one of the ways that people succeed in life in Britain.
Because the UK has not had an agricultural society for over 100 years and much of the economy has become post industrial in the last 50 years
the striving of incomers is seen as a bit of an oddity.

Work hard, aim high, yes
but plan and scheme is a bit "Tiger Mom" and seen as rather nouveau
learn to chill a bit.
You can clearly afford to live pretty much where you want.
Look at where you'd like to take your toddler for walks.
Where you'd like to have coffee after doing the school run - or at least where the nannies look friendly.

You've got 20 years ahead of your life no longer being your own, no matter how meticulously you plan
learn to shrug your shoulders every now and then and the English system will make more sense.

OP, as I said above my children are in their late teens, and so have the benefit of hindsight. We live in Central London, I'm possibly a fifth generation Londoner (dad working class made good), and we work in the Public Sector, the latter points being pretty rare on the private school run.

Your goal orientated approach is common. As is what seems to be a frustration with the British. Well paid City workers are in a bubble and quite isolated from a British reality, and often seem to have different values. Status often seems to come from the size of your annual bonus or the school your child goes to. I remember one, very senior lawyer, almost keeling over when he discovered my son was at Westminster. His son did not get a place, so how could ours, presumably though never stated, given we earned so much less than him, and because we were English.

(I manage rental property and a couple of Russian girls were able to tell me confidently that Russians were much brighter than the British, whilst a couple of Chinese girls laughed at the idea of DS taking maths A level given the British were no good at maths. This type of assumption became a bit of a problem when my daughter was about 12 and a girl in her friendship group used to repeat what she presumably had heard at home about the English being lazy, incompetent etc. The sort of thing that has effectively been said up thread. DD felt this was being aimed at her as she had the least international background, and she felt strongly that it was racist.)

The problem can be that what is considered "the best school" is actually a measured on different criteria. So you might find an outstanding Primary that other people love, too relaxed. Certainly some parents seem disappointed with Westminster for not being as results focussed as they had expected. And more than one parent is frustrated at the way some highly academic schools go out of their way to discourage competiton in the classroom. As one poor mother (who I liked, not least because she was open about her frustrations with the British system) explained, if she did not know where her child was in class she did not know which subjects to tutor in to ensure he was/remained top of the year group. Class placement was an important concept in her country. The boy was already receiving external help in about five subjects despite being top set in everything.

This is why I think you may be best off focussing on finding a school where other parents have a similar approach, similar sucess profiles and similar ambitions. If state, Tiffin or one of the North London Grammars or possibly St Olaves may be as good as anywhere. If you go private from the get-go, then I would look at living in Fulham or Shepherds Bush (both cheaper than Chelsea or Kensignton) and then send your DC to one of the preps: Faulkner House, Thomas' Kensington, Whetherby etc, which have a sound track record of getting kids to the next stage. At secondary St Pauls and SPGS are the really sought after schools. Westminster perhaps a little quirky.

Or as TiP suggests, relax a little. We have seen quite a few kids falter along the way. Too much parental expectation seems to be as problematic as too little. Grades really are not everything. And in case I sound overly negative, I think it has done my kids no harm to be surrounded by, and to some extent pick up, the high aspirations of others. And as a parent it has meant that we have not needed to push.

In fairness to the op , while senior politicians , top lawyers and financiers, Royals wear their OB and Bullingdon ties so proudly it is easy to see why she may be under the impression that Public school and Oxbridge is the only way to go. The media currently seems preoccupied with networking and nepotism to the point of obsession.

Newbe, I can post here as long as I like so long as my posts are within MN rules. You have lived here 10 years but don't know anything about the education system? Do you not read the papers or have any friends/colleagues who have been through the British system, or who have kids in the British system? Actually, I don't think you are capable or even qualified to have a discussion on this. You are not yet a parent, nor even pregnant. Again, you make assumption after assumption. Don't you know that babies are a GIFT? You cannot ASSUME anything, let alone give a shit that they may go to Oxbridge. Most NORMAL parents are just thankful for healthy offspring, the rest is the icing on the cake. We are currently planning our 3rd. I don't for a minute ASSUME he/she will even be healthy/ok. I pray they will but who knows? And I wouldn't for a minute be mapping our his or her education. Go away and grow up a bit then come back and have a discussion when you have a 3 year old.

Candycrush
Give the OP a break.

She's young, bright, no kids.
Chances are that all of her friends are yuppie dinky couples
school reality is nowhere near any of their radar
her social life will not involve "child friendly" places
and chances are there are lots of non British in her social circle

Personally, I have no problem with someone aiming for a good school for their children. She doesn't know what her children will be like, and she is making assumptions about them based on herself. That is perfectly normal. Hopefully she will adapt her perspective to what her children are like as she gets to know them. She and her husband have a lot of money. Fair enough. Lots of people buy education. That is life. The fact that she wasn't born her should be irrelevant, in my view.

OP , one flaw in your plan is that Oxforqd and Cambridge are not necessarily the best universities in the country for every subject .

So you'd be better to decide now what subjects your children will study and work back from there . Might be worth checking out the best departments for their PhDs too .

I think a lot of people are being too harsh on the OP.

We may feel she is misguided and lacks understanding of the British system, but ultimately she is still a parent (to be) agonising over how to do the best for her child.

Ultimately, does she want to be laughed at behind her back for her perceived try-hard, child-pressuring madness for the next 20 years?

Does she want to cause - albeit unknowingly - regular offence with "Where we're from we value education" (subtext heard: "not like you lot")?

Some mumsnet straight-talking now must be better?

To be fair Intradental, if you look at the GCSE results by ethnicity recently released there is a point to be made about the underperformance of white children, and whilst that's not quite the same as culturally British children it's a decent proxy indicator. There are a variety of possible explanations but "attitude to education" surely has to figure.

I'd love to see what happens if you carry on those statistics up the income quartile rather than just splitting into FSM and not-FSM.

Personally I don't care if people laugh behind my back at decisions I make in the interests of my children. We all parent differently.

I might not agree with tiger parenting, but I wouldn't laugh at a parent who chooses that path.

I think the issue seems to be more the o/p's perceptions of the English and the English education system seem to be at best wrong, at worst downright insulting.

o/p, if I said I wanted my unborn child to get into the Royal ballet, as that's the best in the world, and posted to ask which ballet school should I put them in age 4 that would get them into the RB Associate programme at 11, you'd think I was mental, no?

I think most of you are being very unfair to the OP.

My DS goes to a grammar school which is almost exclusively Asian, despite it's catchment being massive and nowhere near exclusively Asian.

I'm not sure if this is because Asian parents value education more than White parents, or because most White parents don't want to send their child to an almost exclusively Asian school.

I do know that at my local primaries the majority of bright Asian children sat the 11+ and the majority of bright White children didn't.

When the OP said she was aiming for Oxbridge I didn't take it literally. I assumed she meant the best academic education for her child, because that is what Oxbridge is often a shorthand for.

If anybody thinks White British parents have the same attitude to education that 1st generation Asian parents have, they are crazy. There really, really is a world of difference.

She's not trying to do the best for her child. She deciding on the future that SHE wants for her child, without having met them, and knowing their strengths , weaknesses and abilities . Let alone what the child might WANT to do .

Children are not a status symbol like a car . This is all about the OP and how she wants others to see her . It's certainly NOT about her child and his or her best interests .

That's why posters are critical . It's not because they are slightly offended at her assumptions about them or their attitudes to education.

o/p, if I said I wanted my unborn child to get into the Royal ballet, as that's the best in the world, and posted to ask which ballet school should I put them in age 4 that would get them into the RB Associate programme at 11, you'd think I was mental, no?

VERY fair analogy.

agree with Washediris

Why OP do you not assume that even the single mother on the 10th level of a council estate does not want the same for her kids? She just can't pay for the "right" postcode to get them there. They will be just as sharp, clever and have massive potential, yet they may be lacking in a new suit, or not be driven to school in a BMW, and it is to THOSE children that places should be reserved for.

Yes, aim for the top, but don't assume that all doors will be opened and all information will be shared with you on how to achieve that for your children.

OP, sorry but the initial hurdles start once the baby is born. You have to prepare yourself for when your baby may be the last to walk, talk and write out of your circle of friends, or when your child decides not to do something super academic.

Children are not a status symbol like a car . This is all about the OP and how she wants others to see her . It's certainly NOT about her child and his or her best interests

That's why posters are critical . It's not because they are slightly offended at her assumptions about them or their attitudes to education

It's mad and mildly offensive on several levels.

There's also the issue that she's not listening. I've lost count of the number of times she's been told that Oxbridge departments are NOT the best for ALL subjects.

To be fair Intradental, if you look at the GCSE results by ethnicity recently released there is a point to be made about the underperformance of white children, and whilst that's not quite the same as culturally British children it's a decent proxy indicator. There are a variety of possible explanations but "attitude to education" surely has to figure.

Anyone, please could you provide supporting evidence for the underperformance of white children? As far as I am aware, there is some underperformance is white working class BOYS but I am not aware of any underperformance of WHITE CHILDREN all together. Are you saying ethnic minorities outperform all white children in the UK? Have to say, the school where my WHITE BOYS go, is frequently criticised for getting excellent results because of its white middle clause intake. Apparently life is a lot easier if you're white and middle class. So which is it?

Oh and grammar schools are frequently oversubscribed, and favoured by certain ethnic groups because they are, er, free.

The last sentence was just a personal throwaway wistful statement about the incompleteness of the data. White non-FSM children appear to outperform black non-FSM children very slightly but I'd like to know whether that changes if you split the economic groups a bit finer.

Oh and here's where I saw the figures. The table's in the middle and pretty self explanatory.

If those stats are correct, how does that help OP point? Are you saying she is even more entitled because she comes from a country that prioritises education MORE than English people and, according to those figures, her (unborn) offspring might outperform some poor white boy from the local council estate?