is private REALLY better?

[ChuppaChups]

just out of interest, i would appreciate some OPINIONS on this area as i am seriously considering the move to private from state. The main reason being is we are now financially able to do so.

So, is it better and why?

Thanks

Where it comes to education, I don't think it's ever fair to make generalisations -

"I think the longer a bright child is left in state, the more they will fall behind their potential"

might well prove very upsetting to someone who has bright children but cannot afford private education. There's enough out there to make parents feel guilty!

We moved three of our children from state to private in the last year, and the differences are quite amazing. Smaller class sizes are a given, but the breadth of the curriculum is something that a lot of people might not appreciate.

Sorry if I come across too strong! Had some really bad experiences of state recently. Of course there are good state schools but IME they are a very rare bread!

For G&T provision I mean!!!

With respect his experience doesn't mean that all schools are the same. Believe it there are bored children in Private education

At least small class sizes & entrance tests mean they stand a chance!
Maybe things are different in richer parts of the country

yes, but Chupachups has a dc with REALLY high targets in science...

karise - you ARE aware, aren't you, that only about 7% of children are at private school?

You are really writing off the other 93%?????

We've also been struggling with the public/private issue.

Due to a house move, we've been finding it difficult to find a decent school place for dd as they're all full (the London bulge stuff that's going on) so were looking private as well.

In the end, we decided against private for now.

Partly because we felt it too much a financial commitment at the moment because dh's work isn't secure, even though we could scrape by.

Partly because of dd's character. While we liked a lot of aspects of the private schools we saw, some of them were way too disciplinarian which dd would not react well too (one of them had kids sitting at desks facing front in reception, another had even the nursery kids wearing full uniform with a tie and standing up when an adult walked which I thought was just ridiculous - they're 3 years old!!).

I do prefer the smaller class sizes but after a year at state school with 30 kids in a class realised that dd is thriving - she's a confident, quite outspoken and very independent child. I'd probably be less inclined to state schools if my child was quieter or more withdrawn.

After weighing it all up, we decided to give the state options a go and consider independent for secondary (when dh will hopefully be more secure or we'll have more savings), depending on what the state options are at that point. We'll also have the money available for extra curricular activities or tutoring if we feel she needs to be stretched a bit more - still far far less than going private.

So, like other posters said, it so much depends on your child and the options available to you. That said, if money were no object, then I think i'd plump for a couple of the private schools I saw - but for us as a family right now, it would be too much of a sacrifice given that I think dd will do very well in the state as well.

Am open minded about private, having attended a very good private prep in London and have friends who have been very happy with NLC, Westminster & Haberdashers, whilst dh is very pro-state school.

We now live in a different part of the country and visited the best local private school for dc1 and I was quite frankly disappointed and dh felt vindicated!

The buildings were poor, teaching was uninspired, the children pleasant but placid and the rising numbers of pupils as they went up through the school suggested it was a default choice if state primary went wrong. Certainly not worth the 8k 'investment'.

Private doesn't always equate high standards of education, I'd always look at pupil destinations once they leave and reputation.

Being able to afford private education simply extends your choice of schools. As someone who would have no choice of state schools, that has been very valuable to me. But everyone has different options in terms of state and/or private schools, and it is very hard to double-guess somebody else's choice. Certainly you cannot assume that private schools are better than state schools. You cannot even assume that your local private schools are better than your local state schools, but being able to pay extends your choice - it just doesn't guarantee a certain level of quality.

I also think that because private schools come in so many different shapes and sizes you do have a better chance of finding a school that suits your child. There are for example very few single sex primary schools left in the state sector (though we do have some in the Outer London borough in which I live), yet these can suit some puupils very well.

Here we go again, more ill-informed state school bashing. This same subject, in different guises, turns up on here with DEPRESSING regularity.

State schools which do well are a "rare bread"? At least we know which side it's buttered...

Actually UQD you should find the thread quite balanced, with many people supported state education. Infact there were only a couple of people who slated state education for whatever reasons. Most said it very much depended on the school.

Infact for a thread concerning private or independent education it has been very calm and without too many prejudiced views o either side. A rare thing for MN really.

Well, maybe my alarms go off at the critical comments... I did only skim it. Will read properly at the weekend when I get the chance.

The anti state comments always seem to be so sweeping and based on so little knowledge, though. "My dh went to a state primary school in the 70s and was bored and unhappy, so we're not even going to consider anything but St Custard's for our children"

To be fair, so do the anti private school comments generally.

There are often so many ill informed prejudices thrown up about on both sides, which means really the threads ed up being pointless for the OP.

Hopefully this one will stay pretty balanced on the whole, esp as the OP has made their decision anyway.

They are sometimes of the kind that seeker cites above, and sometimes of the "oh, well everyone has told me that all the state schools around here are awful so we're not even considering them" variety.

read the first two pages....well done all for NOT having the usual slanging match over this topic.

no easy answers. I use private but agonise over whether i need to and what is best for DCs. May never know the answer. If i sent then to state schools i would agonise as well as i might save money but be wondering if i give them the best chance....but that depends on what state schools are like. Some great state/grammar schools. I always refer to Watford grammar (and QE boys altho' some people think thatit is too full on) in N. London as examples.

In both sectors the league tables/results don't tell the whole story as some schools stop students who would not get A's from doing the subject at A'Level. Then exams isn't everything. And then happy parents bring up happy children so no point on having to work too hard to bring home dosh for private school and have unhappy abandoned child.

i don't like the fact that so many private schools are single sex. Especially for DSs. Altho' i am told that it may be better for DD she likes to compete and mix with boys.

Question: can teachers at state school cover national cirriclm plus do other exciting stuff. We PS parents love to say that we have the edge because schools have more freedom re:cirrculm but is this a valid/relevant claim?

Sadly, the biggest factor in how well children do at school is actually nothing to do with the school they go to, it's how well off the family they come from is. And private school parents are a well off bunch. People will come here and tell me that their school is full of the children of window cleaners and unemployed street sweepers, but it's not really true. Generally, the sort of children who go to private school would do well anywhere, because their parents have money and have spent some time thinking about their education. My children are doing very well in the state system - because I am the sort of parent who thinks about and supports her childrens' education.

That would be fine - if the Establishment in this country didn't persist in thinking that the only background that an authority figure should come from is a privately educated one.

The smaller class sizes and generally co-operative students means that you can wonder off track, let a student follow their own interests or push them along at a quicker rate more readily than if you have a class of 30 in front of you. However, not having to follow the Nat Curric can also mean following the quirks and interests of the teacher, which can be both a positive and a negative (Have my own horror story on the negative)

Yet the two most interesting and inspiring teachers who took us off the beaten track in terms of teaching and thinking were experienced HoDs at state school. I used to come into school early in prep for Oxbridge and discuss with them Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, the Lais of Marie de France and Ibsen, both giving freely of their time.

seeker and Heated - i am very interested in what you have to say above. I shall revisit tmmrw after a few winks... night night