Private primary vs state

[Iwonder08]

I would appreciate your thoughts and experience on private primary vs state..
We have 1 child, won't have any more. Live in London, there are quite a few both state schools and private primary ones around. All state schools in the area are Ofsted Good, there are some private schools that are considered excellent. I can't decide if the extortionate amount of money is worth it for a primary school. There are no very good state secondary schools or grammar schools around so it is likely we will consider at least secondary private.
Literally 50%of people are telling me it is a waste of money to pay for a private primary and the other 50% think the child will struggle in a private secondary after state primary (assuming they can even get in the highly selective secondary schools around us).
We can afford it, but not very comfortably.

There are pros and cons. For us, the lack of homework and general stretch at state primary was made up for by the plentiful time to do lots of other things after school because no homework and it was so local (music, dance, reading, playdates, sport, drama) which they really enjoyed and which make them more rounded.

They each had a couple of bad years (disruption, bullying, teachers leaving unexpectedly), but the school dealt with it fairly well and I think it could have happened anywhere.

The pace is slower than in a prep, and it can be frustrating. And music and sport are done by class teachers rather than specialists, so that’s a massive difference in quality.

But overall (one now in Y9 at a selective private), I think state until 11 was probably the right choice. I don’t like to see tiny children with tons of homework and no time for other things. A bit of boredom and some disruption seems, on balance, a fair price to pay for a more relaxed primary experience and time to find the things your child really loves doing.

And it made no difference to DD’s ability to keep up at secondary school (apart from having to work a bit harder in Maths in Y7, as she hadn’t covered the topics the preps had done in Y6).

For the non-selective private secondary we chose, state school attainment wasn't a problem, and both our daughters have easily kept up with - even outstripped - their privately educated classmates, but for the other much sought after selective private secondary we could have chosen, their state school wouldn't have come even CLOSE to getting them past the entrance exam and they'd be having a stressful time now.

There's also SO LITTLE music, sport, resources for anything at all at state so you have to do a lot of running around to pick up the slack after school. It's all done for you in private, which can be heaven!

We've bounced between both state and private for primary, and while academically it made little difference, if I was doing it again and had pots of money, I'd go private all the way through.

Pick your secondary now, if you can, and base it on that. If the 11+ is going to be an important outcome, then I would go private or be prepared to throw a lot of time and money at tutoring in Y5 and Y6.

Though there won't be a pandemic every year, this was what made many parents at our private school decide to start their kids right away, when they may have waited until secondary before.
The provision that our school provided from the very first day of the first lockdown was amazing. Even the very youngest children had some sort of provision, and from years three and up a full day of classes (school is from nursery through sixth form). Some teachers were better than others at converting to online teaching of course, but that is true of in person teaching. What did suffer was the hands on subjects such as music, art, DT and science, but alternatives were tried with hit or miss success - the school was doing their upmost to ensure little loss in learning and progression.
The families who may have had older kids at secondary and younger at state were soon convinced that if possible, waiting was no longer an option.
Our own intention was to have our children at one of the three excellent state primaries in our area. Unfortunately, we did not live close enough to any of them so did not get a place, and were offered one on the other side of the borough with a fair rating (I don't think 'fair' is used by ofsted now). So we went private the start.

Most preps don’t do SATS anymore but when they did results were typically 112 to 116 for top academic preps across categories.

Most preps stopped doing SATS well before the 2016 change from National Curriculum levels to the 80-120 scale. However, if 100 corresponds with the old 4B, and the 120 to the old 6C, the range you give is probably broadly correct.

I suspect many stopped doing SATS because it became obvious there wasn’t that much value add compared to really good state schools.

The reason most preps gave was that they didn't want to spend time training their children to take the KS2 SATS. That was supposed to be one of the selling points of an independent primary, that they weren't forced to practice for those somewhat arbitrary exams. Instead, they spend their time practicing for different, though still somewhat arbitrary, exams.

@expat96

The raw scores have been scaled with the aim that 10 percent of pupils should achieve 110 which is equivalent to the number that would have achieved 5b. 100 was meant to be equivalent to 4b. The scaling is slightly off that but hasn’t been reset.

There are plenty that indies still doing SATS post the change. I was tracking the information to help me decide so still have it. Guildford High’s junior school still does SATS and their results are very similar to what other selective preps were achieving.

Honestly though when you look at the performance most selective schools achieved relative to their selective cohort, an above average primary can deliver the same. Not an average school though.

That’s why I always say it’s a school by school rather than sector decision. There are lots of mediocre preps and fantastic state schools so it really comes down to what your options are and your budget if it’s worthwhile.

I think it could be argued that a private primary is a better investment than secondary.
They are more likely to be surrounded by those who take it seriously, less class distractions, ,ore enrichment for their developing brains etc which I think would be hugely beneficial in the primary years before stepping into secondary. Great foundation
However this is coming from someone who won't ever be able to afford private. But if you can afford it, I would absolutely.

I have personal experience of UCS and if you can get your DS in their for his Primary education then go for it. Remember it is easier to get them in at 7 rather than at 11. It is an excellent school and you won’t regret it.

@mdh2020 I was wondering how realistic is to get in at 7 given they have only 30 additional places, more than half of which are taken by other private pre-prep students..
Also do you know if it is difficult to get a place at 4? They are very cagey about their selection criteria

@Iwonder08 according to the Good School Guide, 300 apply for 32 places at 4. At 7+ 200 apply for 60 additional places. At 11+ 350 applicants for 40 places. At 11+ it says most applicants are from local primaries.

I hope that helps.

@LondonGirl83

Thank you for the information about the old and new SATS scores equivalence. I’ve not seen that before.

There are plenty that indies still doing SATS post the change

My memory is a little hazy but I read a report by the ISC, with data from about 20 years ago, which indicated that the number of independent primaries administering the SATS had been declining and had fallen below a third, hence they discontinued reporting the information. I can only assume that the proportion has continued to decline over the decades since.

It may also be relevant that not all independent primaries that take the SATS do so under normal conditions. I suspect that they spend much less time preparing and getting the children familiar with the exam. Also, when DD1’s primary still did use the tests, they gave them to the girls at the end of Year 5. The head stated that the main use for them was so that if, say, a girl who achieved at Level 5 on the math SATS was denied an interview the following January because of a poor math 11+ score, she could use the SATS score as evidence to argue her case.

[quote Iwonder08]@mdh2020 I was wondering how realistic is to get in at 7 given they have only 30 additional places, more than half of which are taken by other private pre-prep students..
Also do you know if it is difficult to get a place at 4? They are very cagey about their selection criteria[/quote]
After pre prep kids and siblings UCS will have around 20 places each year at 7. Worth a try. Some will turn them down for Westminster, I know boys who got in off the reserve list at 7.

Not all private schools are equal but I would say that in London they generally good. We have had a mixed bag, but the kids are stimulated and at the best private schools the teaching is really amazing and they instil such a passion for learning.

FWIW my DS did the 7 plus and got in at UCS but we did not take the place. Remember everyone is allying to multiple schools.

We are doing outstanding primary state for ours then private secondary.

Our eldest has just gone into a Private secondary and academically is one of the better ones but the ones from the prep have had more sports and music experience.

We used a tutor from y1 and had to source a lot of local extracurricular ourselves so piano, golf, local football team. It was worth it to keep him close by and be able to walk to school etc.

I know a bit about schools and where we are state primaries are better funded than secondaries. Our local state secondary has brilliant academic results but it's all round education and careers advice is sadly lacking, mainly because the funding and networking isn't there.

@PiglingBland1

I think it could be argued that a private primary is a better investment than secondary. They are more likely to be surrounded by those who take it seriously, less class distractions, ,ore enrichment for their developing brains etc which I think would be hugely beneficial in the primary years before stepping into secondary. Great foundation However this is coming from someone who won't ever be able to afford private. But if you can afford it, I would absolutely.

This very strongly contributed towards our decision. Although DH and I did not, lots in our social circles went to top private day schools (Habs, NLCS, Westminster, St Pauls, Merchant Taylors) - a very small handful of them have actually used the connections from school to get to where they are today. And we know just as many from state secondaries in a similar position to that handful.

If you as parents are professionals and well networked, this will give your children those connections needed to progress in their careers later on.

We don't know what we are doing for senior school just yet but have not written off our good local comp even though we are paying for prep

This is exactly the dilemma we faced for our DD. We opted for state and are in the fortunate position of our local primary being Ofsted 'outstanding' with lots of committed parents, full extra-curricular timetable, thriving PTA, etc. However, I do worry about entry to secondary schools. We are in London and targeting grammars and some rather academic indies.

@HighRopes @Biscuits1 @moanymyrtle @CommanderBurnham Your DCs, I believe, were offered places at selective secondaries coming from state primaries? We will start English and Maths tutoring in year 5 for our DD, who we think is academic. But, aside from tutoring, are they any tips you could recommend to prepare for selective secondaries? Are any clubs or activities more relevant than others, and generally what kind of things did you do out of school to give them the best chance?

Thank you so much for your advice!

Yes although the secondary they chose is quite mixed ability they were offered places on bursary at much more selective one as well. It’s more that there were probably only 2-3 kids offered large bursaries of the kind we needed so they must have scored very highly to merit that. We aren’t London or SE though. In answer to the question when did I know they were very bright the state primary reception teacher told me at the first settling in meeting about a month after they started mainly based on their conversation skills and how quickly they picked stuff up. We read a lot and talked a lot at home but other than that did nothing extra. Their primary teachers would tell me it is rare for dc to be as strong in English and maths and so those kids who are bright allrounders do stand out to teachers early on and will obviously then do well on entrance tests. They didn’t have anything special at 11 other than test scores in fact they are quite lazy about stuff outside school. I’m not your typical private school parent though it wasn’t on my radar until we started thinking about secondary - I have another dc who is disabled and was struggling meeting everyone’s needs so a private school made life easier. They both read a lot from early age. You can spend a huge amount of money on activities and tutoring but just reading books probably outweighs all of that. Even at gcse the English teacher would tell me she could tell which kids read a lot. As a guide they were about 4 years ahead in reading by year 6 and my oldest dc would read a paperback a day. I can’t claim credit for that after about age 7 they did it themselves. I was just really lucky with them even at GCSE they cruised through with minimal revision - I guess that’s the potential the school spotted and why they got bursaries at 11. My other dc is at opposite end ability wise so sometimes it’s just luck. Obviously their private secondary is filled with kids who excel in music etc but at the end of the day they trade on their exam results so will always want kids who are just naturally academic too.

So sign them up for a sport if they're that way inclined or an instrument. It seems that our secondary places a lot on trophies and awards so anything that gets them a bit of validation. So golf tournaments, swimming, golf, water polo. Or maybe a chess club. Music to some sort of grade.

I'd also recommend some kind of drama school to get them speaking well and a bit of confidence and poise.

There's also Dance, cub scouts for outdoor skills, karate etc.

It's hard work but whatever you do don't force it on the kids. You'll likely have to sign up for lots of things before they find stuff they like.

I have been in this situation and I have done both with different children. It probably depends on the prep school. Prep was a poor choice for my shy sensitive child, not because of the small classes but because the school wasn't interested in children who were 'difficult', it was very much fur coat and no knickers as they say, lots of excellent customer service and treats for the children but not really offering anything over the state school, at least not at pre-prep level and nothing you couldn't get with a private tutor. My personal experience is that state schools seem to care more and have generally better GENUINE pastoral care based on the needs of the child not the needs of the school's bank balance but again it depends on your individual circumstances and the individual head teacher. State schools also have to sit SATs so you have more of an idea about how children are actually doing but not everyone is a fan of these but if they are being coached for SATS then it isn't much different from prepping for the 11+.

It still really annoys me that you have to give a terms notice and pay an additional terms fees at many schools even if the school is failing your child, it tells you their ethos, many are in it for the money not for your child's wellbeing despite this meaning you cannot transfer them to a more suitable school without quitting your job and home educating. I am sure this doesn't apply to all prep schools just some.

I think if you haven't tried both it is hard to compare!

On my experience I would choose state. I have known people go from state schools to Eton with no problems transitioning (they already came from wealthy families, the ability to fit in had nothing to do with the school they attended but the attitudes they inherited from their parents!).

Also it is true that your should choose the school where your child will have friends and be happy because otherwise they will fail in terms of their personal development.

A generally good teacher - student ratio is also helpful, which is not exclusive to private schools.

You are the most important factor in your child's education, by supporting it, championing them, filling in the gaps, providing extra curricular activities, the school makes only a very marginal difference.

The benefits of any school gets smaller if it involves things like long commutes or very early starts (depending of course on the individual child's sleep habits) which are not good for childrens' health or brain development.

So I say save the money, all the way through!

*without quitting your job and home educating. For a term, if they can't stand to be in there any more or you can no longer stand to see the school any more!

Also children are children wherever they go, no guarantees of fewer disruptive children at prep, my child was pushed and bullied for being shy but the teachers overlooked it because the parents were paying.