Advantages of state over private?

[CakeLoving]

Our girl starts reception next year. Her grandparents have offered to help with the cost of private school, and there are a couple of pretty good prep/4-16 private schools close by.

But part of me thinks (having seen step siblings go through the state school system- I went private) that there are distinct advantages to going to the local community school.

I'm interested in what others feel these are. We are in London and some of the threads on here make me feel like an awful mother for even considering state...which seems completely skewed!

Of course, there will be "some" private schools for the elite/blue bloods, but they're the exception rather than the norm

I don't know a decent private school at secondary level that's less than 6k,a term. Add on extras and that's 20k0a year after tax.

Ridiculous to suggest that there are kids 'from all walks of life'! There simply won't be if you do the maths.

Lowdoorinthewal1: You speculate and incorrectly at that. Will those same people be able to get to Oxford having completed a state school? You simply can't tell (nobody can). Your perception of somebody being smart is a function of their education. Then of course there would be the predominant majority of non-neurotics?

Scabbersley: What about bursaries? Some top schools target having 25% of pupils on them.

Most people I know do state for infant age and private age 8 plus.

OK Londonmum. You win. Only you have made the right choice of school. Only your DD and her classmates will go to Oxbridge and get top jobs with Goldman Sachs. The rest of our DC will end up feckless wasters.

Well done you.

State schools, non-selective schools, schools NOT in London!! ... we are all so stupid and naïve compared to you.

Infant age state education means making lots of local connections and local friends.

The thing is, if you say 'X private school doesn't contain kids from all walks of life', then someone will be able to point to the outliers - the 1 child of a plumber, the 1 child of a refugee family etc.

The point is about statistical representation. The socio-economic mix of state primary will fairly accurately represent the community that surrounds it - yes, it may have a lower proportion of professional people if there is a 'honetypot' state primary nearby that such families apply to disproportionately, and faith schools often have intakes that don't represent the area immediately around the school, but in general terms, a state primary will have a socioeconomic mix that is similar to that of its catchment.

A private school will not have a socio-economic mix representative of the area around it. Some groups are likely to be over-represented - children with parents in the professions, for example, or children of business owners, or children from particular ethnic minorities that very highly value education. Some will be under-represented - children from families who have been on benefits for more than 1 generation, children from Traveller families, children who have arrived in the country in the last 6 months as a refugee. Yes, there may be 'outliers', but they will not be present in the same numbers as would be expected from the area around the school.

Lowdoorinthewal1, sorry you ended up revealing the underlying chip on your shoulder. Don't worry too much about Goldman - the way the things are going with Brexit most of their London jobs will end up going abroad (but a good education might still help assuming DCs can get a work permit).

I read a recent study which suggested that once they actually get to university state educated students actually out perform privately educated students with the same grades. Here:

www.timeshighereducation.com/news/state-pupils-on-same-grades-as-private-counterparts-get-better-degrees/2012325.article

So, to me that suggests a state education gives you other skills in terms of resilience and the ability to study independently.

But for me the most important advances of state education aren’t about the grades. I know what previous posters are saying about bursaries and meeting people from “all walks of life” at a private school, but it just isn’t the same as the mix in a state school - it couldn’t possibly be. And for me, that’s an important real world experience that I had and want my children to have too.

Anecdotally, my Dad taught at a very good private school but my parents didn’t want to send my brother there - or me to the girls equivalent - because they felt it was too much of a pressure cooker/ bubble. They chose to send us to the v good local comprehensives instead and we both thrived there.

Interestingly (and again totally anecdotally) almost all of my top set friends from High School (many of whom had parents who could’ve afforded private schools but chose not to use them) now work in public sector/ third sector/ politics and of the lawyers/ engineers I know from High School several work in international development/ human rights law. So, I do wonder if a state education instills a bright, driven young person with certain values... Which may or may not be what you want.

Ultimately, it depends so much on the child and the school I think it’s almost impossible to compare.

Londonmum my DD is in her first year at Oxford having come from a very average state school, and in her teen years has suffered and still does suffer from PTSD. I think you are far too dismissive of all state schools - your experience may not have been great, but that is not to say that it is a conclusively worse option.

And regarding bursaries - sure, that creates a (vague) variety of financial backgrounds for children, but the bottom line is these will still most likely be socially middle class children, with elaborate code and whose parents are very much interested in their education. In my DD's friendship group of 8 three went to university (Oxford, Birmingham, Salford), one is doing a business apprenticeship, one decided AS levels weren't for her so is in her second year doing a BTEC course, one is an athlete so in her third year doing A levels while targeting Tokyo Olympic Games, and the final two are just working - one as a copy editor and in leaflet distribution and one in a supermarket. What I think really worked for her, as a bright girl who could motivate herself to work, was having friends who didn't see grades and education as the be all and end all. She wasn't stressed about her grades or work during her time at school, because nobody was telling her she needed A*s. I think it was also good for her to realise how lucky we are - we go to Cornwall every summer, she was able to do all the hobbies she wanted. Not all of her friends could afford such luxuries - one of them had never even seen the sea until we took her on a day trip at the end of year 11. I think it was healthy for her to witness that.

People want different things from schools. I don't think there's any need to be so disparaging about the choices of others.

scabbersley DD's Private school is excellent - non selective and gets results equivalent to the local grammar
It's also much less than £6k per term, we are in Yorkshire though which helps

Dds state comprehensive school got more pupils to oxbridge than the local three private schools combined!

Haha what chip is this?? You are making yourself sound a bit batshit.

A friend of mine has recently moved her child from private to state because there were only 8 children in his class, of which 6 were girls. No capacity from team games or sports, fairly “forced” friendship with the other boy, little out of school socialising with schoolmates.

I can’t imagine there are many state schools where the classes are too small!!

Bear in mind that if you go for private then when your DD gets to 11 or 13, her private senior school options might be skewed by where her friends are going, any SEN that she may have, or any specific talent that may have developed. The local private day school may not cut it, and there may be pressure for her to attend a different private school.

Currently, the annual fees at a fair number of private schools exceed £37,000 a year. Less for day pupils, but not massively less.

Dds old private school was like this. There were 15 in her year. 4 were Chinese and didn't mix. 3 were Spanish and only there for a year. It was crap.

Final note to OP in case she even cares about this overextended thread anymore.
About 7% of children attend private schools at primary level, therefore we can expect around 90% of posters on MN to have no recent direct experience with them and -
as you can see - vehemently resent them due to their inability to afford, socialist beliefs etc. People post some ridiculous biased studies comparing degrees in Fashion Promotion at University of Sunderland with Theoretical Physics at Cambridge. It's very hard to find useful information. Probably the best advice here is to really look hard at the particular schools, ask directly about them on MN and wherever you can. If you think the state school might be a good option (and is sufficiently academic), and the private school offers 7/8+ then you can start at state with the backup plan to jump over but obviously get ready for the extra work to ensure that your DC covers the gap between the state school curriculum and what's required at 7/8+. Good luck!

Lol. Two of mine went to private prep. Don't let that knock you off your perch!

And ROAR at theoretical physics at Cambridge good luck

LondonMum - if you’re referring to the report I cited, I’d suggest you examine your own prejudices a little more carefully:

According to the report, 73 per cent of state school students with the equivalent of eight A grades at GCSE go on to gain a first or upper second, but this proportion drops to 69 per cent for independent school students with the same GCSE profile.

State students with 8x A grades at GCSE do not tend to go on to study “fashion promotion at Sunderland” so I’d think through your argument a little more carefully.

A lot of people and institutions have a lot of money to make from perpetuating the myth that private schools are always a better option to state. Otherwise wealthy families wouldn’t waste thier money on them.

Obviously, some private schools are better for some young people. Some state schools are better for others. Look at both schools and make your own judgement. But as LondonMum rightly points out, over 90% of children go to a state primary school. Most seem to do all right. So, there must be some advantages.

I’m pro state and more caring pastoral private schools. I dislike the grammar hot housing and aknowledge the link with mental health. One problem with private is that year groups are tiny (particularly at secondary age) and therefore friendship choice is extremely restricted. If two or three very bitchy girls join her year group the dynamics can be distorted massively. It can make a child’s life hell. In a larger year group there’s wider variety and bigger choice of friendships and bitchy kids can be given a wide birth.

The best thing to do is to look round all potential schools a couple of times and talk to staff.

Hermagsjesty did you even read my post? Again, such comparisons are meaningless given the vast spectrum of degrees involved. A more reasonable questions are: what's the average UCAS scores (280 for state, 340 for private), or how likely is someone to get to Oxbridge from comp vs selective private vs non-selective private vs grammar.

I did read your response and was responding directly to this: People post some ridiculous biased studies comparing degrees in Fashion Promotion at University of Sunderland with Theoretical Physics at Cambridge.

Increasingly, not everyone wants thier child to go Oxbridge. So, how many kids they get into Oxbridge is not necessarily the most important measure for most people. And for me, how many UCAS points is not the most important measure either - those points only get you into University, they aren’t a measure of how well you do once you get there - which is why the study I referred to is interesting and important. And surely, what matters most isn’t even university either - it’s how you succeed after, in your career, your personal relationships, your financial security, your emotional well being. Life and social skills are surely as important as the academics. Different kids thrive in different school environments - they feel supported, stimulated, inspired and secure in different ways - and that’s what will make a difference in later life.

We can discuss how enriching exposure to estate ghetto culture in a free for all state school can be, but the "benefit" is ultimately difficult to quantify. The academic ability as measured by UCAS scores is more objective.

Londonmum,

I don't think that the split is as poloarised, in much of the country, as you represent it.

If your child is attending a highly selective primary and the state alternative is in a challenging inner city area, then obviously the difference will be very marked between the intakes of each. However, for the vast majority of the country, the choice available at primary area is between a mixed ability state primary - most will contain children from across a very wide spectrum of backgrounds - and a mixed ability (though selective by income, and generally speaking without SEN, so lacking the lowest ability) or somewhat selective private primary.

UCAS points aren't a good measure of private PRIMARIES vs state PRIMARIES, surely, which is what this thread was about? By the time a child reaches A-levels, they may well have attended schools in different sectors - a state primary and 11-16 school, then a private 6th form; or a private primary followed by a state grammar school; or private 4-16 followed by a state 6th form. the impact of the primary school (whether state or private) within that can be hard to dissect out.

Locally, private secondaries (with 1 exception) are generally for those who fail the 11+ (partially selective county) and don't live in the catchment of the great comprehensives - so their results come a fair way down the tables in comparison to the state alternatives. Hence I wouldn't want to make sweeping statements about e.g. UCAS point averages that refer to the whole country but not the local area.