Private school vs 'hippy*' cheaper school from reception

[mrstina]

*used to convey meaning on a public forum rather than any form of disrespect, I consider myself to have some of these elements in certain aspects of my life

OK, we are unsure of what to do with our child's (now 2 1/2) education from next year.

The options are as above, but if the latter option to move him to that private school prior to 11+, as we have good selective state schools here. Obviously I understand all children are different, not all private schools are good etc. etc.

Is the education at reception really education, or just fun playtime which could be done equally well at the 'hippy' school? Will moving schools be problematic (I moved school aged 7 and it didn't affect me at all).

i.e. is it worth spending lots of money for a prolonged playtime, or does structured stuff give long term benefits?

I'm happy to name schools if allowed and no threat of retaliation etc.

Many thanks for any advice.

Nobody, IME locally (superselective system), the large majority of people have tutoring, whether they are from private schools that provide 11+ teaching, or from state schools who have none.

Yes, the specialist 'teach to the 11+' schools and their recommended tutors do gain a number of grammar places - but so do the state school pupils who have had DIY or private tutors. Yes, there probably is an advantage from attending one of the specialist 11+ schools, especially if you are a relatively marginal candidate in a superselective system - but the dichotomy between what the schools provide is IME a false one, because the deciding factor for many 'non-exceptional' pupils seems to be much more around the tutoring / preparation that happens outside school for pupils from both sectors.

Exceptional pupils from both sectors, again IME, would be fine with just a small amount of familiarisation - but at 2.5, you won't know whether your child is even of grammar school calibre, let alone whether they are of the calibre that needs nothing much more than familiarisation.

teacher yes, I agree with everything you've said.

.... I think I would still choose the 11+ school rather than the Hippy or Sate option though, because I still think there would be some advantage, plus the OP seems to have no good reason not to choose it (she hasn't mentioned concerns over school fees etc).

Does mrstina = Mr Stina/Steiner?

When you have a 2.5 year old, you can set your sights on 11+ but you have no way of knowing if they are going to pass... By deciding on 'grammar' you are actually more likely deciding on 'secondary modern'.

My advice is to pick a school with happy children and the happiest teachers you can find.

Alexander Technique is a lovely added extra. Musicians use it a lot for improved posture in Perfirmance but I wouldn't say it's a Deal breaker.

I think it depends on the child. Are they an anxious child who doesnt react well to pressure but are still quite intelligent? If so they may get a lot out of going to the 'hippy' school. If they react well to goal setting and competition id go for a more mainstream school. Stiener is not the evil its sometimes made out to be on mumsnet but it does have unusual philosophies that you should look in to and understand before sending a child there, just so you know what you are signing up for. They dont actively teach these philosophies like a religion or anything however they do influence the teaching style. We have a stiener near us and by all accounts its amazing so i am going to consider it for my LO come the time. xx

I'd imagine if the child is 2.5 you can't tell yet, so you'd just go for the kind of school you'd ideally want then move later if it doesn't suit??

No, money is an issue. We could afford the fees without having to forsake food and water, but it would mean cutting back and perhaps viewing expenses as x% of years education etc (presumably like the majority of parents).

It is in part coming down to is it worth spending £x on education in reception. Would there be a significant difference in his educational attainment at the same age if he went to a) educare b)state school (especially bearing in mind we wouldn't get into the religious schools).

We do anticipate he would eventually go the the private school at some point.

I had a look at Educare on Google Earth. It looks a bit tiny! What facilities/outdoor space does it have?

State with 11+ prep and tutoring sounds right.

EAL children consistently outperform their peers, they are often from economic migrant families who are exceptionally motivated.

If private is going to be a squeeze on finances, don't do it until you have to.

Look at the fisher family trust and raise online for value added scores and attainment. Value added gives a greater insight to performance than SATS

I would argue that experience and education from birth to seven are actually the most important stage... By 7, neural pathways are set and many of a child's attitudes and resilience in life and learning. Personally, I would tour the private and state settings, looking carefully at the levels of engagement of the children and the enthusiasm for the approach used in the setting by the staff. I would be looking for somewhere that encourages independence and self motivated learners rather than adult focused worksheets and flash cards. This depends so much on the leaders in each setting and many private schools are still limited by archaic ideas rather than research and best practice around the world. Point being, at seven, it is more important your child knows how to be a good learner than the actual particular knowledge they have. The best school at this stage is just as likely to be good state school... And you can enjoy a walk or scoot in the morning rather than a long commute (a big waste of precious time for anyone - especially four year olds who could be busy sleeping or learning about the world). At seven you may then wish to change setting depending on your child's needs.

OP, I'd imagine it probably depends on the child and the schools involved.

If you say you want DC to end up in the private option at some point then perhaps if you think after touring both that the private school is better and can afford it then do. If you're unsure then perhaps find out how competitive the entry to the private options later at 7+ / 8+ will be, and if it sounds fine then perhaps do state first then private, if it sounds like 7+ / 8+ to private will be a nightmare then it's a harder choice!

The Fisher Trust website - I have no idea how to use this website!

The point is if early education is indeed so important, why send your child to a 'bad' school early on?

The crux of the question then comes down to what is a good and a bad school.

And I'm sorry, but I'm not sharing everybody's enthusiasm for state education, which to me is education by government mandates and tick boxes. If the non-selective state schools were so good (at a senior level), why are their Oxbridge/Russell Group admissions rates so poor, except in well to do areas (of which Sutton isn't [not poor, but not well to do])?

The pros of the state school are: 'free', local

Cons: Uncertain quality, one size fits all model, unable to get into a selective state

Educare pros: likely more child centred than state, cheaper than prep, parents invested in school and child's education

Cons: Tough commute, small school, little space, no real 11+ 'pedigree'

Prep Pros: 11+ 'pedigree', like minded parents, good quality education

Cons: the fees

That's how I see it plus the question of how important early years education is.

I have been to both educare and the prep school, but have yet to visit a local state.

op so the FFT site is quite tricky, but take your time, it's worth it.

Also- 0-7 well it takes a supportive, nurturing environment and talk a plenty, listen a plenty, give many opportunities to take risks, collaborate, negotiate, share, and you'll have a pretty well turned out little kid.

Ok/

So my ds, very clever, into everything, loves school. His state education has been wonderful, teachers are really nudging him along and he is gifted and talented in 2 core areas. We will start prepping for the 11+ next year and if he doesn't get a place (50 places, hugely oversubscribed) we will go to one of the great private schools for year 7.

You're brave OP for expressing a lack of enthusiasm for State Education on Mumsnet! I agree with you but am too scared to say so in case I get a bollocking from posters again.

I think there is an awful lot of "State education agrees with my leftist principles, therefore it must be brilliant." Well, it agrees with my leftist principles too, but I just happen to also think that like the NHS it is essential to have but also needs to be massively improved.

Obviously there may be individual State schools which are better than individual private schools in the area though. but I've never lived near one

OP and yes, I agree with your assessment of the merits of each of the options and to answer your question about the imprtance of education from YR-Y3, I think it depends so much on the child. Some are really robust and could go somewhere shit then get moved and be fine, others are very particular and need quite specific environments to thrive.

You seem to really want the 11+ Prep. What sort of financial sacrifices would you have to make to use it? Major or minor?

Between major and minor.

We spend about 2 terms worth of prep school fees on childcare currently anyway.

One of the issues is how much we can drop this down. I am in favour of dropping down as much as possible, but my partner isn't. We are fortunate in having parents who are nearby and willing to help as well (although morning drop offs could be difficult between the grandparents, but could be organised through childminder's husband who is a taxi driver).

The worst situation would be to keep the childcare as is, and have either 3 schooling options, particularly the paid ones.

Interesting talk yesterday with a work colleague who basically said educationalists are practitioners of a pseudoscience and that cream rises to the top. He was of the opinion that if your son is milk he may need all that 'stuff' (private school, tuition [which everyone needs for the 11 plus anyway]).

He also said that educationalists are geared towards helping the bottom of society rise up and that you shouldn't really be concerned about what they say.

I put this up for discussion (as in this is the reason I have mentioned it).

On affordability: the real unaffordability/difficulties would come with private secondary without a scholarship. Hence the push with primary education. And like I said/implied, I don't think there's much in it academically between a school like Wilson's or somewhere like Kings College Wimbledon.

The site that gives catchment areas excludes faith schools but not all faith schools have church going criteria so unless you want to exclude a C of E school it might be worth checking them out. Our local one is probably the best in the area and I've been in most.

My experience as parent and school governor in state schools is they are not all the same, that websites and the prospectus only tell you so much and that you need to get through the door and visit to get a feel of the place to work out if it will be right for your child. There are big schools and small schools, ones that seem like SATs factories and ones that bumble along. My eldest would have thrived at one local school where the head encounters performing arts. My second would have hated it.

Good luck.

Not sure I'd take too much notice of your colleague.
This may not be a popular thing to say but I was in a meeting not long ago with a group of Ed Psychs who were discussing some research they'd been looking at. It said that a school can only make 10% difference to a child's outcome. More comes from their innate abilities and of course from family input. This is where it gets tricky for families where both parents work full time, especially if they work school holidays too, as they basically have to outsource a lot of the input a child would otherwise get from them. So while we all want good schools for our children in reality a school can only add so much.

OP I think you know deep down what you want school wise for your child, so asking the question was a bit pointless.

Its seems you aspire to a lifestyle/education you can not afford. Since thats the case you should opt for a 11+ centered prep. Then cross your fingers and hope they pass. If in thr mean time your finances change and you can afford private, then you have nothing to worry about.

As for the reception experience, you may aswell start as you mean to go on.

'like minded parents' Have you considered St Knobjockeys School for the Terminally Snobby?

Paradisecity my thoughts exactly. I'm actually gobsmacked by what I just read! The snobby, up-your-own-ass comments on here! I can't believe there's people who wouldn't send their child to a school because of migrant children...hint of racism? I think so