What Annoys You About Independent Schools?

[zanzibarmum]

Me? Independent schools who:

• tell applicants not to tutor their children when the entire prep school set up is precisely about cramming for common entrance exams;
• refuse to explain content of common entrance exam, again which discriminates against state school applicants;
• entrance exam papers which are clearly biased - Latymer's practice paper asks a question about the size of a hockey stick;
• poo poo league tables when their whole raison d'etre is to churn out As and A*;
• promote all the sport they do but in practice do very little for most children;
• who do not standardise entrance exam scores for age - selecting therefore the oldest not necessarily the brightest (cf churning out As and A*;.

Clearly, there are lots of good things about some independent schools but generally they have an easy life and probably coast on the back of the intelligence (innate or prepped) on their students.

Because people think they have a choice but the idea of "choice" between state and private being a genuine one is specious. People have different ideas of what "choice" ought to mean.

"If it's all about the quality of education and not about separating yourselves from the rest then why have an expensive, bespoke, conspicuous uniform?"

Good point, and yet another annoyance. An good few parents (who exist in real life, not in my head) seem to enjoy parading their kids round town in their private school uniforms. You can spot them a mile off because they are not bog-standard polo-shirt and trousers stuff. It does rather seem to add to the idea of the whole thing as a luxury accessory.

Can i just say i couldn't give a castlemaine about uniform - i just want my son to go to a smallish school where he is nurtured and encouraged - and that aint gonna happen (not the staffs fault - its the fault of the blooming institutions)in the state system round here.

The calf length tartan skirt shudders and not being allowed in the boys dorms (although obviously that was got around!)

I had a phone call this evening from DS2's form tutor to discuss a piece of missing homework. We discussed strategies and agreed that he responds better to carrot rather than stick and came up with a plan. I don't think this would happen in the state sector after a piece of missed homework would it?

If I was paying what you are I'd expect a 'phone call too - and one made from a golden telephone at that!

A lot of the elements which people point out as being better in the private sector and reasons why they are happy with their private school are things which one ought to expect in any school, but which people have come to expect that you're often only going to get if you pay. Decent uniform. Decent standards of behaviour. Teaching beyond the requirements of the test. Well-equipped schools. As long as we accept that, if you want these things, you have to pay, we are contributing to the undermining of our own state system.

It's the same attitude that leads people to accept a three-hour queue to see the doctor. "Well, it's the NHS, what do you expect?"

After all, if the state system is brought up to par, what excuses do those who don't like the very idea of it have any more?

On the other hand, if you are spending thousands of pounds on something every year, you are bound to be in a mindset where you see all the good facets of it, in order to convince yourself that it's worth the money. It's like when people pay £150 to go and see a stadium concert (plus parking and travel) - they aren't often going to come away saying "actually, it was a bit crap."

I think one of the things people value most about independent schools is the small class sizes though- which is why I was shocked to see in the Times the Head of the Independent Association of Prep Schools advocating that schools increase their class sizes

I think he is barking up the wrong tree there, surely.

UQD- if the state system were brought up to par, then I think many parents who currently pay to go independent would save their money and use the state system tbh- truly I do.

There will always be those who will sneer at the state system, no matter how excellent it became, even if it were the best in the world, even if it were better than all independent schools. But there are people like that in all walks of life I'm afraid- and their attitude does not just apply to education, but to all aspects of society- some people just have to compete, even over nothing- Oh, how many people do you employ? Where do you live? How many children do you have? What car do you drive? Is that a Cartier or a Patek? etc etc etc
Some people cannot help themselves- doesn't mean we have to like them, or that we don't snigger at them once they're gone

UnquietDad, Actually if I pay for something I am likely to be far more demanding than if it's given free and be far more critical of small dissapoimtments.

Just wondering, if all the children from independent schools were to move into the state system, where would the money come from to accommodate them? Thier parents are already paying the taxes that pay for state schooling, so it's not like they are taking money out of the system by taking thier children out? Surely having fewer children in the system makes the money go further?

Yes, I think UQD's point is a really good one. If we removed private education - and therefore remove societies ready sure and definite supply of future lawyers, doctors, writers, architects, businesswomen whatever - would the government have to pull its finger out, for the good of society, to ensure they educated people to fit the jobs they need them to do? But would education then become about meeting the market place - as determined by the state - rather than something which should open up opportunity? We'd all be pawns to the state's desires of what we should do, what we should become?

The reality would probably be a similar situation which we have now. That the middle classes would attend the schools equipped to supply those professionals - like the old grammar system say, and the 11 plus wouldn't be pure and open to all because the wily old middle classes would ensure their children had the get ahead - and then there'd be schools which wouldn't do so well.

I can't think of a way that the education system could overcome the inherent inequalities in our lives nor make sure a tip top education was available to all at the point of need.

It's an interesting thought though. Who is responsible for the fact this hasn't happened? The independent schooling parents or the governments?

Bubbaluv - we'd have to PAY for it. All independent school going parents know that! We'd all have to pay for it - it'd be impossible to do without v. high taxation.

Also the NHS thing is true, I think that about queues. But I think that's because I can see that whilst needed and wanted, the welfare state system is flawed and over-stretched and does the best that it can to deliver what it can. It can't be perfect though - it has neither the funds nor the resources to be perfect. The expectation that it should be is unrealistic, I think, anyway.

Though also, on reflection, the state system does do a good job of educating the majority of people in this country, doesn't it? It's flawed, it's not perfect, but it's not all bad either.

I think I might be in a minority though, because I don't go private because I think the state system is shit. It's not shit where I live, it's good, and used by the majority. I went private because I liked the school out of all the state and private ones I saw. The second on my list was a state school, but it had no places, then another state - no places. The other private schools here seemed mediocre to me.

Not sure always about class sizes, a friend who teaches in a local prep school has classes of 24 while my DD in a state school is in a similar size class.

However, the prep school doesn't have the half dozen or so children in DD's class (yr 3) who cannot read, sit still, or who throw things in class so can get on with the intended lesson. There is no problem with the state school system they just have to cope with every type of child who lives in the catchment and cannot pick and choose.

UQD - "As long as we accept that, if you want these things, you have to pay, we are contributing to the undermining of our own state system." I do agree with you and I'm far from without conscience about it. But the key question is this - do you sacrifice 'your' child's education for the eventual greater good? I didn't intend to go to the private sector to educate my children, they went to (the most local) state primary in all cases and DS1 went to what was supposed to be a decent comprehensive local to us. He spent 2 years there and I was surprised how poor it was. It was my experience of state secondary that lead me to the private sector not the fact that I am a private school type - I am a grammar school girl and assumed the state would provide my children's education too.

The vast majority of politicians don't sacrifice their children's education for the possible eventual greater good.

Because it's not realistic - as society stands - like imagining the NHS shouldn't have queues. Though it's an ideal which somehow people have come to believe is their right to expect.

leosdad- where we are all state classes are 29 or 30, legal maximum. In some cases the older year groups are over 30. Independent ones range from 8-20 depending on school.

We have talked ourselves into a situation where it is seen as a "sacrifice", though.

John Mortimer said he was a Socialist, and when his wife was amazed at being asked to check out the local private schools, his answer was "being a socialist doesn't mean playing Russian roulette with your children's education." I think it's very sad that educated people think like that.

After all, there are no special roads for people who pay extra to drive on, no special dustbin collections, no special playgrounds for their children to play on (well, only in very exclusive areas), no special ultra-quick luxurious ambulances or police services, and no special air for them to breathe (unless you are Michael Jackson with his oxygen tent).

It can't all be about class size though, as in Aus independent schools often have classes of 25-30 students, yet a good third of the population is educated privately.

If a grammar school existed in your city UQD would you pay for your dd to have extra lessons to go there? If there was a good, no-nonsense non-boater wearing independent school which you could afford, would you send her there?

I assume not - I assume not because you agreed with Gunnerbean and therefore I presume you are happy and comfortable with what the state offers you by way of education.

I don't think its sad that educated people chose to behave differently to you. Swedes didn't talk herself into thinking her ds's education was below par in the state system, that it didn't compare to her own. She experienced that. There's no arguing with that really is there?

I agree with 100x that the state system seems to be absolutely fine for the majority. But similarly, I chose my DCs school not because all the local schools were crap ( some are, some are 'outstanding') but because I was looking for something very specific which they couldn't give.I wish I didn't have to pay for it but there you go.
And I certainly don't think it's the case that fee paying parents wear rose tinted glasses about their schools - they are pretty demanding and frankly, vote with their feet. I for one would not hand over thousands for something I was not extremely happy with.

UQD - I don't think we have talked ourselves into the sacrifice situation at all. I was there - faced with the option of limiting my son's education or paying for something that I received courtesy of the state. And I didn't opt to pay because I want him to get top grades in exams (although that's nice as a by product) I did it because I want him to have a good education to draw on and give him pleasure for the rest of his life.

The uniform thing is funny. I am proud that my DS looks smart in his blazer (we don't wear the cap generally) and proud at the amount of times strangers comment on him looking neat and tidy, saying please and thank you etc. I believe children should make an effort with their apperance but some schools do take this over the top. But a middle ground is good.

Rose tinted glasses about private? Not at all, DS is hugely into music, the school he is going to wrap that round in day to day life, makes it easy for us, no extra rushing around outside school. No helicopter parenting here.

Pushy because of paying? The pushiest parents I know are state. Constant comparison over who does what, who reads what which I find horrific.

Independent is just that, works with each child independently as a single person and I am pleased to be in the position to provide it but wish with all my heart it was there for everyone. I truely believe that a great education is the best thing anyone can possibly experience.

It is not about the A-Levels, or the SATS, it is about learning as a pleasure in an environment that has time and facilities to do that.

As for being pilloried over it ? well that will never end, we are all independent with independent views. There are the cliched henrys (or Prince Harry's as are the Waynettas of this world. Do what you can within your ability for you and your child because this one size fits all approach fails too many.

Ranting, damn right! As I have been reprimanded once to often for doing what I want with my child. I wouldn't dare do that to someone else, its crass vile and smacks of bad feeling. I am passionate about education, books, music, art, sport and more books and the moment the government delivers that for every child I will be right there.

I have been asked in RL so often to justify our choice which I find bizarre, its so personal!

UQD: Let's have a straight answer. I believe I'm right in believing that your children attend a state school.

Is this your choice?

Would it still be your choice if you won the lottery?

If the answer is yes to both of the above, why should anyone else's choice be a problem to you?

LIke it or not, an awful lot of people do have choice in education. And few people are going to send their children to schools they don't consider suitable (for whatever reason - not necessarily because the schools are rubbish) just for some idealistic notion of the Greater Good, to be achieved -if at all- at some unforeseeably remote point in the future.

(Litchick and Swedes - you are writing my posts for me!)