Primary, Secondary, both, neither?

[KCSIE]

I have 2 DC, eldest will be starting school next year, youngest to follow in a few years time.

We are keeping options open and looking at local state and local private schools and all the permutations of fully private, fully state, part private part state (and which way around?) etc.

We've done our sums and can afford to send both to private for their full education if we want to (allowing for year on year increases VAT).

But I'm so torn. Especially when they're so young. It feels like a huge decision to be making and I'm quite overwhelmed by the prospect. Especially of my 1yr old in 17yrs time, e.g.

What path did you choose for your DC, if you had the option, and why?

LO has settled in remarkably well. Their prep is selective and very academic. We had a private tutor once a week for six months before the entrance test. LO did very well and has settled in and is still in top sets. However they are obviously behind in French, Latin and they are not at all confident enough to take part in the public performances- music and theater.

However, the school offers extra language teaching to all the children that joined from state schools so it has been fine. But again, if money had not been an issue I would have liked LO to have gone to this school since reception.

I completely agree with this post. We weren't in a position 9 years ago to even consider private for primary, so both of ours went to state. Our ND eldest did struggle even with support, she's bright but easily overwhelmed. Our NT youngest is genuinely exceptional in maths, and his primary would brag that he'd complete all the work for the week during Monday's lesson, so he'd help them teach the other kids the rest of the week. Stretch goals aren't really widely used in a class of 30 as they just need to make sure as many kids as possible hit a certain level (I've heard this refered to as level 4 but not sure what that means) and those who are never going to achieve it, or can comfortably achieve it get lost somewhat.

We moved our eldest to an academically selective private for secondary and at the end of her second term she told us she couldn't remember when she last felt overwhelm, compare this to 8 months earlier when every day she used ear defenders, had to step out of class when it got too much, came home and fell apart in tears from masking etc. She is able to function in class 99% of the time as any NT child would. For us this is worth any amount of money (and we've made huge sacrifices to do private school, between us we now work 3.5 FTE jobs which is just the start). She's also emotionally supported now, she had some lovely teachers in primary but again just spread too thin to give her that time.

We ended up moving our youngest in year 5, if you'd asked me at that point to describe him I'd have said he was bright, but chronically shy (literally wouldn't talk to most people unless he knew them well) and his teacher was ex-military and shouted a lot so he used to just come home so scared. I'd call upstairs to say we were leaving in 20 mins and he'd burst into tears because I'd raised my voice above a very mild decibel. Having seen our eldest go through year 6 which was just an exercise in slogging for SATS to make sure the schools numbers looked good we moved as soon as we could afford the second set of fees so as not to waste that year of schooling and I'm glad because he's settled in and made friends before secondary, he has started to hear that he's good at things which is building up his confidence, and we've discovered he's not just good at maths, but actually working at a level around 5 years above where they'd expect. He will now offer opinions on things and talk to a stranger eg to order a meal in a restaurant, something he's never been confident enough to try until lately.

I will describe it as state schools are almost always doing the best they can with what they have, but what they have isn't enough. Not enough time, teachers, resources, support. A handful of teachers aren't good, but they're keeping them because they're so short staffed (a friend of mine works in a secondary near us and says they've not had a physics teacher in over a year now so have had to withdraw the a-level option, likewise my daughters year 8 friends in our local state haven't had a qualified maths teacher yet this year). Our sons class in primary had a class cello, everyone gets to bring it home one week a year. He'd never played other instruments not even the recorder class I remember from primary. He'd never been on a school trip except one outing to the post office in nursery. Now he does music weekly, art with materials other than paint and recyclables, DT where he actually makes a project out of wood, metal, electronics or textiles not just cardboard boxes, he does sport daily, he has access to a theatre and sports pitches not just a boggy field, he has after school options of chess, robotics, debating, fencing, rugby, windsurfing, horse riding, coding etc - there are a minimum of 8 clubs to choose from for year 3-6 each day, his primary had 4 clubs a week and none run by external providers with specalisms in that skill like they used to have when our eldest started in 2015. Every half term they have a class trip to support their learning, and 3x a year they have an optional overnight trip such as a sports tour, cultural visit or oudoor education within the UK (they add in overseas in secondary). It's just another world. We haven't encountered a single teacher at his prep who hasn't been enhusiastic about their role in developing the child, they don't seem worn down or snappy with him. His prep have recommended councelling though due to his extreme nervousness and tears if even minorly told off (things like 'you've left your trainers there Bob, might want to put them in your bag' has him shaking like a leaf) - they've described it as like seeing someone with PTSD.

You read a lot about how a bright child will do well in exams anywhere, and that may well be true, but they may not have a rounded skillset in presenting, debating, confidence that backs these up. It's that unknown unknown, how can you know what you're missing if you've never known it's there to miss? We toured the state schools first and one of them actually really impressed us, and then we toured the privates and it really is a different world. My husband works in tech and after talking to the state schools he said they all had the same issue, lack of time for the kids to get a strong grounding (one lesson a week or fortnight until GCSE, which fits with the state school we were at where they had one lesson actually using a computer per half term - this has been a big adjustment for my eldest to catch up on moving to private where she has a chromebook for every lesson), but also a curriculum that wasn't updated anywhere near enough to match the skills the tech sector needs now or is likely to need in 5 years, rather than what they did need 10 years ago. He said anyone of the kids at 16 from the private we ended up using could get a £45k+ starting salary with the bredth of what they are taught in a tech field.

I would also caution against reading too much into ofsted reports, the primary both mine went to has a big banner outside proudly proclaiming they're outstanding. Their last inspection was before our eldest was born and she's now year 8. In that time they've changed headteacher twice, and less than 15% of the staff are the same. They've also gone from a single form entry to a 2 form entry, doubling the school size. The 'outstanding' state secondary (recently inspected) near us has had 2 kids hospitalised in the last year due to violence. The benchmark for what makes a state school excellent is on a different scale entirely to what makes a good private excellent.

I intend absolutely no shade to anyone teaching in a state school, one of my parents is a state school teacher, but even they said to use private as soon as we could. I fully believe that state schools are doing the best job they can for as many kids as they can, but it's not enough and they should have more. Without being able to change the system for all we have opted to do the best we can for our kids and for us there isn't any question that smaller classes, a nurturing mindset, individualised learning and a huge bredth of oppertunities offered in the private sector is it.

We did state primary up to end Yr 6 then currently indy Yr7-11. Yr 12 + 13 will depend on subjects chosen.
IMO money is best spent for secondary years.
DD at state primary got GD for Yr 6 SATS, put in top sets in Yr 7 indy above many of the ex-preppies. Because indy schools don't do SATS they don't tend to be at the same level as state.
Secondary is where the difference really shows value wise in favour of indy schools

Yes, our DS was on target in English and at greater depth in maths in the Y6 SATS at state. We did a lot of prep via Bond books for the maths/English entrance exam for independent and he got 83% in the maths test, in top sets for maths still in Y10, English still good.
State school set him up well for secondary and he had friends from all walks of life. Local secondary full of behaviour issues and poor GCSE results so that was the time to spend the money.

My DDs go to an amazing state primary and we have loved the sense of community and being able to walk to school / having friends in our road. I wouldn’t change it for the world.

I went to a private primary and didn’t have friends nearby. We drove to school every day and I wanted something different for my kids.

Now DD1 is applying to secondary and we are going private. We’re in a bit of a state catchment black hole and I think she would thrive more in private. I would say that prepping for the 11+ from state primary will take some work because prep school children are, (by the nature of prep schools!) generally better prepared. We have a tutor and have been doing lots of practice tests at home. But it’s more than doable. Whichever path you choose, I’m sure your children will thrive and there’s no right or wrong answer.

We did state primary (which was excellent), private secondary to GCSE (which was ok, but had problems) and state 6th form college (excellent again). Very specific to locations and schools because we know that the college is outstanding, and was better to get DS out of the single-sexed, spoon-fed environment even though the school was academically superb. Saving £50k was also nice, though not the main consideration.

What I would say is that it's quite easy to go from state primary to private secondary but would be difficult to go from prep school to state at 11.

Also, if it's one or the other, then state primary first allows you to gauge the fees and affordability in 7 years time. You might think you can comfortably afford it but a lot of private schools hike their fees by double inflation each year. Ours was £16k in Y7 and is £25k now, and VAT on top. At that rate it'll be £40k+ by the time yours gets to secondary and £60k+ by 6th form. You might think there's a limit to how far they can go, but maybe not.

We went State Primary and Private Secondary.
We had an excellent State option at Primary but not for secondary.
Both Dc started Private at 11 and were a lot more streetwise and mature than a lot of their peers. There was no knowledge gap (school not selective) and they both fitted in just fine.
DD went to State 6th form as well and so will DS as there is no 6th form and again DD adapted to a large college environment better than some of her friends and she reconnected with some old Primary friends, hopefully DS will be the same.
Absolutely the right decision for us

We did state primary and private secondary. Our local secondaries have improved in recent years, but aren't great. However, we had an outstanding state primary nearby. We couldn't really afford all the way through, so secondary was our priority. But, with hindsight, I don't think I'd do it differently if we'd had more money. They made lots of local friends by attending a school at the end of our road. Also, the coverage of the English/Maths basics was really rigorous at our state primary, because they were determined to maintain their excellent SATS results. We were worried about a step change in expectations/levels between the two sectors. It's difficult to judge whether this was the case for my DS - he moved from Y6 state to Y7 private during peak Covid so there were lots of other factors at play. But, I can say with certainty that DD didn't find herself behind in any way at all. In fact, the children who were achieving the best grades in mathematics towards the end of year 7 were those who had come across from the state sector - I think all the practice they did for the SATS really did make sure they had a strong grounding in the basics! For us, the one area where we noticed a step change was in the co-curricular activities. DS had never played rugby and found himself at a disadvantage that he could never recoup. Luckily, his state primary had subsidised music lessons from the local music service, so he had learnt an instrument already and he has found his niche in the music societies. For DD we were able to plan for this a bit more - she is sporty and so we got her involved in hockey outside of school. This meant that when she joined the private secondary she was already a strong player and found her place in the sports squads relatively easily.

I would also recommend state primary and private secondary. My son went to a state primary school and I was happy with the education he received there. He went to a state secondary school and by the time he reached Year 9, there was a lot of disruption in lessons. I moved him in Year 9 but I wished I had moved him sooner to private school. He was not behind at all when he went to the private school but then he has always been very academic. He has not had tutoring either to catch up.

I fully plan to send mine to private in year which is soon enough

just wondering though, I assume most children do not have their peers in year 7 if they carry on to the local state school? How do they cope? Do they make good/better friends?
This is the sense of guilt that won't stop me using private, but it does play on my mind !!

I agree with PP who recommended state until Y5. In most primary schools in the state sector the early years are fine. Y5 is often where it starts to go wrong for a bright child, who will start to get bored as the school starts focusing on ensuring that the weakest children are going to reach the minimum accepted standard by the time SATS comes around in May of Y6. However best to move then to an all-through school that goes to age 18 - or possibly a prep that goes up to y8 so long as you have good options with a y9 intake - as it wouldn't be beneficial to move again after only 2 years for y7.

We unintentionally managed to sample every type of education between our two!

DD - small Christian private school for years R and 1, state primary to year 6. very selective girls independent years 7 to 11 and state grammar for sixth form

DS - state primary to year 4, home education for years 5 and 6, state grammar for years 7 to 11 and a state comprehensive for sixth form!

I really liked dd's independent school for years 7-9, but I felt that as soon as the exam years set in, it just became a slog - like any other school - too much focus on the exams. Dd felt a little intimidated in year 7 by the prep school girls who'd already done French and netball, but she wasn't really behind. And she'd been to a primary school in special measures in a very deprived area where 2/3 of her year were on pupil premium. She didn't get bored in years 5 and 6 - quite the opposite actually, as they split off the top 10 or so in Maths and taught them separately.