State until eight - experiences please

[DappledOliveGroves]

Prompted by the independent school thread currently kicking off on AIBU, I am interested to know more about the "State until eight" ethos.

DD2 is 20 months, so we have a bit of time to think about things.

My husband and I were both privately educated - me from aged 4, him from aged 7. My DD1 (now in her early 20s) went to independent school for secondary only, then a state sixth form. The sixth form was disastrous, though this was not necessarily the school's fault, more that DD1 chose the age of 16 to fully get into teenage rebellion, though the A-level choices she went for weren't especially inspiring at the Sixth Form.

I credit a lot of my academic success to having had an excellent grounding from aged 4 onwards. Things like knowing times tables by rote, by aged 4. Spelling lists, regular tests, being stretched academically at every level from the word go. However, I don't have much to compare this to as I don't know how I would have fared had I gone to a state school.

DD1 went to state school in London from Reception and I feel that she never had the grounding that I did. There were no regular spelling tests, no learning by rote, no languages taught by native speakers, no science labs etc. Having said that, she is very different to me and has never been especially academic.

What I want to know is whether adopting a "state til eight" approach is sensible, or whether this risks missing the fundamentally important basics being taught at the best possible level, meaning that DD2 may not get the right grounding if she went to a state school for the first few years.

Finances, wise, we could go private from the outset, but would prefer to have a few more years to save under our belts.

Does anyone have any info they can please share about whether starting independent school at 8 has worked well for your children, or if you feel they may have missed out at all?

Many thanks.

Being unusual is fair, I agree. I can only speak for our prep which is competitive.

Everyone I know who does "state through to eight" has done it simply because they couldn't afford a full run of private schooling (or couldn't guarantee they could in future). I don't know anyone who has done it as an "ethos" or in the belief that starting at 8 is genuinely better for the child than starting at 4.

Honest to God, what on Earth am I reading? MN is mental.

But neither my daughter nor my husband's state-educated-at-primary children (all of whom are now in early 20s) can tell you times tables answers if you ask them. They'd have to look it up on their phone, or start working out on fingers. If you said "what are seven eights" they wouldn't immediately answer "56". They all went to different primary schools. All were academically average or above. Yet none know their tables

So ALL people attending state schools get a terrible education based on your survey of a few people? FGS.

I'll blow your classist perception to pieces. All state educated:

Me - Working class. Comprehensive. First to go to uni in my family. RG university. Professional career.
DH- Working class. Comprehensive. RG University- hospital consultant.
DS1- Inner-city comprehensive. Maths prizes coming out of his ears. Award from Scottish Government for exam results. Dux of the school. RG University doing Pure Mathematics (he's a modern day, Glaswegian Alan Turing- I have genuinely no idea how his brain works, it's unreal).

DS2 - Inner-city comprehensive. Another Maths genius. Starting Engineering 2024.

That enough proof that they know their tables at state school?

My friend's child went to a prestigious, Catholic private school- his mental health was ignored, as was his neuro-diversity. He left with zero qualifications.

This thread (and the other one) is madness.

Mine went to the local private school's nursery, which was brilliant, very outdoorsy and benefitted from the school's facilities. They have gone all the way through, so there was no scary move for the first day of school or anything. Same place! Same people. I know it's difficult to compare as I wont know how they would have fared at a different nursery, then primary, then joining the school aged 8, but they are happy and confident, which I put down to feeling safe and secure. The kids who have been with him since nursery are similar. Every year we get an influx of new mids who take a while to settle in, cry at drop off etc. So, I would do the same again.

Oh, and mine didn't do times tables or anything like that in reception. Reception to Year 2 have a big focus on learning through play and fun projects. They definitely benefit from smaller classes (less than 10 in a class in reception with a teacher and a TA) so can pick up easily and focus on areas your child might need a bit more help.

If you can easily afford it, why not start them off in pre-prep and leave the state places for people who need them and are planning to stick with the school in the long term? I know that things change, but it was always a bit galling seeing all the kids at my DCs lovely rural primary who you could tell would only be there for 3 years, and then the school really struggled to fill those spaces later on.

@Puffalicious it's nothing to do with class. For comparison, my grandmother (born 1914), my parents (born in the 1930s) all went to state schools (and all left at 14 with zero qualifications incidentally) and could tell you their times tables in a second. They'd chant them daily at school. My mother's maths was fairly appalling - she would never know how to do percentages for example - but for very basic numeracy, the teaching at state schools in those days was sufficient to cope in day to day life and organise a household budget. One reason I am partial to being able to parrot times tables is that it helps children - in my view - with very poor general maths skills, to at least be able to do some very basic numeracy in life using this recall.

If things have come full circle and if children do need to learn tables and to be able to parrot them at state schools, then great.

Anyhow, I don't want to derail the thread with a focus on multiplication. I'm very grateful for everyone's input and experiences.

So true!

I'm quite new here and am a bit surprised about the level of snobbery some people have towards state education.

Paying for private means you're paying for smaller classes, better facilities and ensuring your child's social circle mainly includes children from similar backgrounds to themselves. It's not for me but I understand why some people do it, if they can afford it, as smaller classes and better facilities will naturally increase chances of academic success. It's not some sort of superior level of education though.

But you're right, people have to justify it to themselves somehow and I guess convincing yourself your child is being taught to a better standard would soften the financial hit somewhat.

My ds went to a small state primary, rated good by Ofsted. It had an intake of 17 a year so had combined classes. Years R-4 were good. Ds enjoyed himself and progressed well. However years 5 & 6, the teachers focused on getting everyone through SATs and DS, who was already there was very bored. They went over the same stuff repeatedly, and by the middle of year 6 he was alienated, angry and frustrated. I'm sure this was down to limited resource and flexibility.

He moved to independent in yr7 and cheered up immediately. He caught up in yrs 7-9 and by the start of GCSE he was back achieving where he wanted to be.

My daughter had weekly times tables tests in year 2 (state school). They had to answer 14 questions in 1 minute and get at least 11 right to move up to the next test the following week. She did well and passed all her times tables up to 20! (As in 12x20). She is generally very bored in whole class maths. In some ways I would love to move her to private now for increased academic challenge but are sticking with state for other reasons. (Closer to home, friendships, longer days not right for DD, overall the value added is not worth the cost sacrifice for us)

Within seconds though, I've told myself 5 times 8 is 40 and 2 times 8 is 16 therefore it must be 56. (Or 8×8 being 64 is a fact that did stick for me, so I'd subtract 8 to get the 56).

Both DS and I are the same. Neither of us have instant recall as we could work out times tables quick enough from age 5 so there was never the push to learn them by heart. DS was not as fast as others when they were timed but he understood maths concepts years before the rest of his primary classes.

It is unfortunate that your ds was in a school that wasn't able to cater for his specific needs. That must have been really frustrating, but he might have cheered up similarly in a state secondary. You will never know.

I actually think that most kids get to a point at the end of primary school where they're ready to move on to something new, and the transition to secondary can often be reinvigorating for them. I remember my own dd being ready to change at that point, despite being at an absolutely fabulous school that bent over backwards to stretch her appropriately and meet her individual learning needs. I think she had simply matured to a point at which she was ready for the next step.

I would have a look at some of the research on what a good early years curriculum is like - I don't want to sound harsh but your ideas are very out of date.

My DS is at a state primary in a deprived area - he started times tables at the end of year 1 because his teacher thought he was ready and the whole class is doing them now in year 2. But reception was - as it should be - very play based even though they got him reading by October half term.

I think knowing your times tables is very useful but I don't think you need to know them at 4 and it is an easy thing to teach at home, I wouldn't be paying for a prep school so they know they tables.

Mine went to state schools and then did learn their tables and spellings, they were sent home for homework.

But OP it IS about class. As only the upper middle classes & above can afford private school. I totally agree with Boleynmemories, you're not paying for superior teaching. Both older DS were stretched in an excellent state primary (inner-city catchment- very mixed with many pupils on FSM etc). DS had a different Maths syllabus than others in his class from around age 7 (he was in a group with older pupils) and DS2 with 2 other children from around age 9. There were links with their secondary (also catchment- we don't have grammars in Scotland, thank God) to stretch them, including width ways with learning applied in new situations. The teachers had resources from NASA & Code-breaking organisations & engaged them in Maths Competitions. Both knew TT off by heart early.

I'm not getting into a wider discussion about state and private schools, it's pointless, but I did need to make the point that it's not about superior teaching in any way.

Have a look for HPL schools. Schools that employ High Performance Learning methods. It’s about teaching them how to learn, how to link information etc. So rather than just learning by rote with no understanding of how to apply the information, it propels them further with the same information.

Really ? I am 47 the first time I had to do rote learning was either in yr9 latin ( failed) or 1st year at medical school. Certainly not in my state primary.

I am early 40s and learned times tables by rote at my state primary.

How can you have a 20 month old and parents born in the 1930's ? If you are 42 that means your DM was also in her mid forties when she had you ? and is now in her mid eighties ? Is there not a generation missing in the middle here born in the 1950's/1960's having babies in the 1980s ?

Unless you are really awash with it, state till 8 is going to be fine, and most probably state till 11, with tutoring from 9. Local private day schools almost always have a big state intake at 11

If you are 42 that means your DM was also in her mid forties when she had you ? and is now in her mid eighties ?

This isn’t exactly a very rare situation.

Well it can often be, depending on your state options.

And because the timetable is typically more structured, good private schools will teach a wider curriculum than their state equivalent.

I think it’s disgusting that parents put their children into primary and remove them at age 8 for private schools - there is one poor kid that’s potentially missed a place at that primary for your child that’s then going to leave half way through!

It is fairly unusual, I know only 1 family like this. Sadly the GM died when her GCs were only 10 &12 😓

In the UK ? I suppose no national curriculum school could do what they liked. We did an awful lot of art, drama and creative writing. Maybe half an hour of maths in the morning ?