State vs Independent

[DeliciousDishes]

Hi, I have a 3.5 yr old summer born daughter. We are torn between a good state vs an average independent school in central London. My goal is to prep her for 7+. Do you think the independent school will give her a lot of advantage or am I better of just tutoring her for the next 3 years?

@afternoontea86 would u mind sharing the prep name plz? Uv got me curious :)

Hi @Razzmata , I've sent you a PM.

We did state til 8 for our younger DD, she was very behind on the required curriculum for the 7+ we had to do a lot of tutoring and worksheets in the background! Plus my MIL doing a lot of work with her! A full on team effort. She joined the prep in bottom set for maths!! Is now in middle but shows how far behind our outstanding state school was.

@RubySunset82 that's usually the case in state. By the time parents realise how far behind they are, it's usually quite late to catch up with middlers.

As a secondary school teacher in a top independent, I really disagree that state primary school causes kids to be behind. My experience is the state primary educated kids often outperform their privately educated peers

I appreciate you have to do a lot of tutoring for 7+, we did for our son even when he was at a very competitive prep school. Do you reckon an average indie is way ahead in the curriculum in the first 2-3 years?

@arlequin this conclusion cannot be generalised. There is substantial data available on state attainment and leaver destinations compared to indies. But this also is highly dependent on child's individual + parents motivation and contribution. Nowadays, for eg, state kids are heavily tutored to get into grammars and indies do u can't tell anymore how much comes down to school itself vs the rest.

I just don't want readers to think it's easy to prep at home urself and pass 7.+, 11+ anymore, unless the child is bright and a natural learner. It has become a really really hard journey, and parents must embrace for impact

I just don't want readers to think it's easy to prep at home urself

In my opinion a parent will do a far better job than an independent tutor. DS currently has a Maths tutor and English tutor but quite honestly they are not as good as either DH or I. But due to lack of time we have to outsource to them.

No independent school is going to prepare your daughter for the 7+. A school like Brighton College would in theory prepare your child for the 11+ but Francis Holland is unlikely to prepare for the 11+ even cause it's an all-through school and the biggest reason parents choose it at Primary is so that their child won't need to go through the stress of the 11+.

You've definitely missed out on the academically selective schools such as Falkner House and Glendower. However, even those schools don't prepare for the 7+ and expect the child to be there until 11.

If your heart is set on City Girls at 7+ then you will probably need to teach your child yourself or hire a tutor regardless of the school she goes to.

Bousfield is a top state primary school and is definitely a good option but if you are keen on independent then I'd personally recommend Hill House. It's not academically selective but gets relatively good results. You might get in there if you go in person and chat with them.

Definitely independent. A few years at State primary gave my child so many issues that we are still trying to unpick. I wish every day that we’d gone private from the beginning.

Bloody hell poor kids !!,

Have just read the entire thread . Completely horrified.

You do know that they ALL end up at STATE universities don't you ? (Unless you go for a pointless private one with no 'kudos' ...

How about just letting them be.. I have 7.

No tutoring as I do not want them pressured by my 'needs' .

1. Chef (after being first intake at London Bakery School)
2. Oxbridge zoology. Now a ZSL doing research.
3. Nurse
4. In and out of work left at 16 but now a R&D production chief at 22
5. Apprentice in town planning for local authority
6. Oxbridge . Design engineer and Jaguar Land Rover
7. Still at Uni

'Best paid'. No. 6.
Happiest at work. No.1

Just let them find their own thing for goodness sake.
Above all else they are HAPPY. Have good friendship groups and are well rounded human beings who could have tea with the King and sleep in a ditch if the circumstances required.

State school did it all. Save your money and help them buy a bloody home. That's the truly expensive bit.

If your heart is set on City Girls at 7+ then you will probably need to teach your child yourself or hire a tutor regardless of the school she goes to.

A parent set on City Juniors at 7+ may well be better placed in the private sector every time, even if they still hire a tutor in Y1. We moved from prep to state primary , both in London ( partners business blew up) and the lack of what another poster said '360 education' is severe.

My DC has gone from regular before and after school clubs of tennis, yoga and coding , swimming once a week , specialised French and specialised Music, indeed music lessons for cello in school time ( this was extra cost, but at least in school time) after school care and breakfast, no waiting list to dip in and out of , school bus, in her state primary she has nothing, NOWT.

Just for the utter pain in the ass of organising all these things privately, I would advise any parent to go private for early years if they can afford it.

On the flipside I have a friend, multi-millionaire who does state till 8 as in his words , 'I'm not paying nearly 100k for 3 years when I can get away with a 50 quid a week private tutor for a year before exams.'

In my experience, schools geared up for the 11+. do an accelerated curriculum from reception onwards. You can ask the schools but I would expect that your DD even at the private schools you mention would have covered more of the curriculum than at state school- state schools focus more on greater depth than acceleration for the brightest.

It would be an easier prep for the 7+ from an indie. If its worth £100k is subjective based on how much money you have.

Yes, Falkner and Glendower would have been good choices. Thanks for the recommendation, will check out Hill House. Also good to hear that Bousfield is a decent alternative.

@waitlistt

"Just for the utter pain in the ass of organising all these things privately, I would advise any parent to go private for early years if they can afford it."

Exactly this - this is why we are shelling out for private. I have neither the time nor the inclination to shuttle my kids to after school activities every day.

"On the flipside I have a friend, multi-millionaire who does state till 8 as in his words , 'I'm not paying nearly 100k for 3 years when I can get away with a 50 quid a week private tutor for a year before exams.'"

This doesn't surprise me. When you're that wealthy, you probably don't have as much anxiety about your kid getting into the absolute best school/uni/career because you know they'll be fine, you can buy them a house and leave them a lot of cash. It's the middle class sorts who are comfortable now but don't have any dynastic wealth who are stressed about leveraging their money into as much privilege and advantage for their children as possible to ensure they'll be able to fend for themselves in future.

Indy preps will not want you to leave at 7 and will not be going out of their way to set you up for this. In fact of have heard of prep schools (not your area but in London) structuring their y2 courses with this in mind. And prep schools who will refuse to take a younger sibling if a child leaves then.

Fwiw I’ve done 7+ coming from state school, we did most of the prep for 7+ ourselves with some tutoring largely on English.

So if your sole consideration as to how much extra help will those schools be for the 7+ then I’m not actually sure it will. There may be some great other reasons to go private but obviously it is £££

Leveraging is using borrowed funds for the acquisition of assets. I don’t think the very rich do this.

My DD1 was the only non prep educated DD at her selective boarding school. She was top set for everything and top 10 for most subjects. I don’t see how she could have done much better. She had not done MFL at primary but was top in that by y8. All this ludicrous competition is not producing bright dc. The ones who ultimately do well just will. Of all the DC I’ve seen who have been tutored, none earns what my dd does. There’s way more to success and happiness than tutoring. At primary, dd did hardly any homework either.

That is indeed the literal, financial definition of leverage. If you look it up in the dictionary though, you will also see another, figurative description, the one I was using here: "To use something you already have in order to achieve something new or better."

Well done to your daughter - she's obviously clever and talented and didn't need an expensive education to succeed. Many children, however, are either modestly bright or average or below average academically, but parents still want them to achieve their full potential and push to get them into settings where, rightly or wrongly, they think that can be achieved.

Many of us (myself included) come from immigrant backgrounds where success was never guaranteed, and people had to work so hard to achieve stability and security, and we want to ensure that stability and security for future generations.

@belladonna22 Financial is what we were talking about!

However a child who is not as bright won’t get those top jobs or top uni places. Tutoring is miserable for so many when they don’t get to the grammars anyway! It’s not success all the way. That’s why common sense should prevail. As a primary child, my DD had swimming lessons. Learnt the piano and violin.Went to orchestra on a Saturday morning. Sang in a choir and went to brownies. Was in the school netball club. She loved doing all of that. She went to an average state junior. She did outperform many at the boarding school. Why don’t you think DC like this have a great primary education?

What makes you think people born here have any great educational advantage. We all know many immigrants outperform our dc and there are tiger parents. My DD is not exceptionally bright. She’s bright enough and enjoyed school.

@belladonna22 correctly said ' It's the middle-class sorts who are comfortable now but don't have any dynastic wealth who are stressed about leveraging their money into as much privilege and advantage for their children as possible.'

No-one suggested the very wealthy do this, so not sure what you're suggesting @TizerorFizz

Middle class parents will stress about education more because the stakes are higher for them than the very rich. If their DC aren't academic there is no huge trust fund or family Biz to fall back on.

This is especially true in London where it costs all your wealth just to upgrade your property!! If we didn't live in one of the most expensive cities in the world, we could afford pre-prep, but we live in an area where 755K gets you a nice 2 bed!! Two parents with a joint income of
around 120K, and you're priced out of even that!

Also, it’s very naive to suggest immigrant children face no more obstacles than non-immigrant backfground children in Britain compared to regardless how tiger their parents are!!

You've never worked in top corporate jobs or the media or law or publishing if you really believe 'However a child who is not as bright won’t get those top jobs or top uni places.' I know countless people who through nepotism and cronyism have climbed to the top and kept their jobs for goodness’s sake, despite lack of talent and ability, it’s the hallmark of the class system of which this country is built on!! Just look at our current and past cabinet for Gods sake!

This is all a strawman arguement anyway, as your children were privately educated beyond primary school. Many people skip private education for the early years because they believe nothing important is learnt, 'falling into line' at 8+ for prep, this has been the case for decades. Its hardly new and very normal outside of London, where there is no concentration of the best schools in the country.

@TizerorFizz if you don’t know why being born in England and being white doesn’t give you an advantage over immigrants then you need to get reading on white privilege and institutionalised racism. You yourself are an example of why a white family has had to do less than an immigrant family for possibly still unequal outcomes, because they can’t change their colour or religion. The risk of the impact of these ‘variables’ are what immigrant parents are buying their children out of, as much as they can, they’ll still be impacted.

Plus also read in ‘cultural capital’ cos you have a tonne of it, and that’s not so easily bought.

Many people skip private education for the early years because they believe nothing important is learnt

the only people I’ve heard say that is middle class. Those who have children at t Paul’s, City etc start tutoring age 3 and are private all the way because they believe teaching discipline from nursery instills the right behaviour so once they start secondary and have less control they don’t need to control because the child is already disciplined.

The unis have very many highly educated dc in them mFrom an over the world and I welcome that. Plenty of people who have been here for centuries do less well. Certainly in some large cities. Anyway. Im not on here to have my background questioned and I’m happy for anyone to do well. Preferably without excessive tutoring.

This is categorically not true.

I got a full scholarship at city (at colligate, and haberdashers) and know about 4 boys who went to Paul’s three went to state primaries.

we all went to local state schools had tutoring in year 5 and 6.
granted this was 20years ago.

our neighbours daughter was at local state primary, HB and is now at Wycombe abbey for 6th form.
our friends kids are going to USC, Paul’s and London oratory from state

personally OP, if you can afford private I’d go state and use the money on extra curricular ( and tutors 🧐 if you really think a 5 year old needs one)