What are the main reasons for choosing a private school?

[beelegal]

My sister-in-law and I were chatting over tea this afternoon about private schools for my nephew, who’s coming up to secondary age.
She’s been to a few open days earlier this year and was particularly taken with one school nearby. However, during the headteacher’s speech, he said: “The teaching is the same in all schools — what we offer is more outside the classroom.”He then went on to highlight the school’s pastoral care, facilities, and wide range of sports and activities.

Perhaps we’re being a little naïve, but we’d always assumed the teaching itself would be better in a private school. For example, my daughter once had Maths taught by a PE teacher at her state school. We thought that in the independent sector you’d have subject specialists — a highly qualified Maths teacher for Maths, for instance.

We also imagined class sizes would be much smaller, with more opportunities for a child who isn’t particularly sporty but enjoys academic study. Yet the average class size was around 25, which isn’t especially small.

Pastoral care is so vague that schools all seem to determine themselves if theirs is good. All the private schools claim excellence.

So it does raise the question: if the teaching really is no different, why not choose a state school and simply join a local hockey or swimming club at the weekend — which would be far more affordable?

Given fees of around £25,000 a year, what are the real advantages of private education, and what justifies that cost?

A friend who moved her child from state primary to prep described the difference to me like this: in the independent school, the teacher chooses to spend her time with the children playing chess and getting to know them better; in the state school that couldn't happen because their jobs are so busy they've barely got time to shove a sandwich down their throats. Now my son is at a prep I can totally see what she means: the atmosphere is relaxed, because there are enough staff per pupil to make everything manageable. This means that things are done well (not just as well as they can under the circumstances), staff are relaxed and happy, and so children are relaxed and happy.

No, you don't. Academies which make up the majority of state schools don't require qualified teachers

How to say you know nothing without saying it!
Most independent schools arent "super duper" high profile. Eton et al make up 1% of the independent schools in the UK. I doubt anyone will have heard of DDs indeed school outside of the immediate area.
Read the comments about why parents actually chose independent schools.

Another ignoramus.

I would say it’s the behaviour issue. Private schools do not have to tolerate the behaviour of unruly pupils which state schools have to put up with.
My DCs went to a state school. It was excellent at PE. Several pupils have gone on to be professional sportsmen and women.
Some have competed for team GB at the olympics.
At one stage the school was going to go for the title of specialist sports school ( or words to that effect) but for some reason didn’t go through with it.

Again and we have all said it - it depends on the school. My kid in Y7 state school learned an instrument and the school had many private lessons (guitar, drums, piano etc) that could be paid for but take place during school if you want to do that too.

As for class size, my kids in lower years were around 25 and 15 for GCSEs. Bear in mind that state schools (some) have SEND units and can specifically cater better rather than in some private schools the kids are there because some state schools can’t or don’t cater for them or their parents think a small environment is best. So private school classes can have many kids with learning issues (our local estimates 1/3 of the class to 1/2 for example).

OP this question can’t be answered unless you visit your local state and see for yourself. Your conclusions are only right for some schools and making sweeping generalisations is wrong. Private schools aren’t all Eton.

I have hired many many many people in my life up to Board level and have never hired one person because of the senior school they attended. These kind of ignorant statements perpetuate the feeling that private is better which is just wrong.

I really don’t think it is worth it how the world is changing

great qualifications aren’t needed unless you’re going to go down Dr, Lawyer type route.

Everything else, you can get an apprenticeship BTEC etc

better to spend the money on tutoring if it’s really important

Oh dear. There’s no one as touchy as a middle class person being made aware of their middle class privilege is there?

Having to refer to Eton doesn’t prove or disprove anything. If you have to use an extreme example then your argument isn’t very robust.

To be extremely clear, I am not saying parents choose private because of the connections their children make, I am saying their children are just more likely to make them. That is all.

No amount of pretending changes that. It’s not like I'm judging . I take advantage of the connections my kids make. I’m not embarrassed about it. I just appreciate I have it.

The thread asks for reasons for chosing a Private school
For the vast majority of people who do networking really doesn't feature

Only that is exactly what you did say in your first post. That wasn’t a factor for us, or for my parents nor my PILs. I’m 54, still waiting for those influential contacts to come along and help me out.

I’m assuming one factor is that your child will make influential contacts that will serve them all their lives and even for their own children. Doctors, lawyers, CEOs, politicians etc.

And middle class privilege exists in whatever educational setting middle class children end up in, including the local comp. I didn’t need to send DD private to acquire that, if that’s what I was after. I think the pretence is more from MC parents who send their kids state and try to pretend that’ll some how negate their MC privilege, and that that’s a desirable thing.

I said I assumed, not that I presumed to know.

Genuinely am interested in knowing why people make these decisions and it seems quite varied.

Regardless, a by product is a higher probability of good connections.

Unless DD wants to be a farmer then I'm not sure what "connections" she will gain from her independent school. Or what connections the kids at another local independent school will get considering it costs 6K per year and only has 100 children.
You base your assumptions on stereotypical views of the high profile independent schools when reality is that sector is incredibly diverse.

It's not just how many children are in the class, but what kind of children they are.

Being in a class of 30 children, some of whom are disruptive, disrespectful and may have complex needs which can't adequately be met in a mainstream school, is very different to being in a class of 25 children from privileged backgrounds who can easily be expelled if they don't behave themselves.

I would imagine that what the HT meant was that the children end up doing the same public exams, so the curriculum is broadly the same. Private schools may be more likely teach more around the curriculum though, and not just “teach to the test”. (I am not trying to imply that no state schools do this!)

He may also have been trying to be diplomatic, and didn’t want to imply that private school teachers were intrinsically better than state school teachers (I don’t believe they are - I think you get good and bad at every type of school).

It is probably true though that you will get a subject specialist teaching their own subject at a private school, whereas at state schools your are more likely to find a teacher teaching a subject that is not their specialism.

Multiple reasons:
Better results at GCSE and A'Level
Smaller classes - dd struggled in state primary with noise and chaotic set up
Single sex - as above, boys hugely disruptive and sometimes rough, girls told they were "sensitive" if they complained
Parents who care about education - kids more likely to focus
Similarly the kids mostly recognise the cost and appreciate the chances given
Less pressure to grow up and be porn-ified - kids can stay younger longer without being bullied
STEM excellence - no way comparable to any girls in state schools other than super selective London ones
Being able to do computer science which the local grammar did not offer to the girls
Not having the pushy competitiveness of the local grammar
Having dyslexia support that suits her
Loads of after school clubs and talks on various subjects at lunch etc
Great range of countries visited for various subjects
Huge choices of subjects
Full break down of what each subject gets with exam results
Kids are held to account for behaviour and there is a strong school ethos I just don't see in the state sector at all
The first reason was actually the attitude of the girls in primary going to the local grammar who bullied dd about her dyslexia - their parents all COULD afford private, but chose not to.

It’s a really complex and multifaceted question. Ultimately, like any school choice, it is about choosing the right school for your child.

I am not sure the teaching is better at private schools and some would argue it is worse, as private school teachers have a much easier job. But subject knowledge of the teachers probably is better, especially in STEM subjects, as there is a huge teacher shortage in the state sector. If your child is looking at Oxbridge or Imperial in a STEM subject, this will maybe come into play, but most teachers should be able to cover up to GCSE comfortably.

Private schools also offer smaller class sizes, more extra curricular, better sports and more wrap around care. This is really important for some children (the smaller class sizes) and parents (the wrap around care). Also, classroom behaviour is better in private, so less wasted time, especially for pupils who struggle to focus with noise around them.

The downside of private schools is the (generally) fairly remorseless focus on results and the resulting spoon feeding and ‘support’ that takes place. This doesn’t really allow pupils to fail and learn from failure until a much later stage in life (maybe uni or career).

And, of course, private schools allow parents to step back from parenting a bit, as the school will pretty much do it for you!

For parents who have the time and motivation to do what is disparagingly called ‘state plus’ on these boards and what I would term active parenting, which consists of making sure your children are succeeding, offering limited support where necessary and helping them access extra curricular outside of a school setting, this can be better for both parent and child.

But there isn’t one sort of child, one sort of parent and one sort of either public or state school. So you have to look at your child, your local schools, your finances and your ability to help your child to learn and make a decision that is right for you.

So I can boast to my friends about it and my DD can grow up in the knowledge that she’s better than 93% of the population

I don't think the teaching is the same at all. The teachers may be of similar quality but the teaching is very different because private schools are selective. Disruptive pupils are removed from class immediately or kicked out if they don't learn to behave. Children generally tend to come from homes that set a high value on education and encourage hard work, completed homework. This means teaching can be at a higher level. there's less trying to ensure everyone reaches level 4/5 and more help to get level 7 students up to level 8/9.

DC went to a private school where it was super-cool to be bright. If you were top of the class people wanted to be your friend.

At the state school i went to, even some of the teachers thought you were a bit of a swot if you came top, and they tried to lower not raise our expectations of life. When I said I wanted to apply to Oxbridge, they said they couldn't help. People from our school didn't go there. Put down Manchester instead. I never wanted my DC to go to a school with that attitude to learning.

To me, extra curricular is less important. DS1 enjoyed it, but DS2's main extra curricular was nothing to do with school.

Not all independent schools are selective, many aren't.

My children and GC have gone to an assortment of state and private.

What did private add?

• smaller classes
• wider curriculum
• an atmosphere where learning and working hard were the accepted norm and no-one was seen as a swotty nerd.
• decent behaviour in the classroom
• excellent art/music/drama teaching that was not seen as a sideline but as central to the education of a rounded adult.
• a huge array of extra-curricular activities.... bands, sport, orchestras, chamber groups, trip to St Paul's to sing, playing in the Edinburgh Festival - the list is endless.

The downsides:

• the mock election at one school revealed some nasty far right views floating about among some pupils - a surprise as this school was generally a very loving environment. I do not think the staff dealt well with this.
• some snotty parents - not all by any means
• a slightly precious atmosphere with little opportunity to grasp what the lives of many others are like - we sought to redress that ourselves.

In the main I felt that those of our children who went to private schools were well-served - we did take them out for 6th form when they went to the local 6th form college and thrived there too - best of both worlds we felt.

Agree with @twistyizzy ours has an entrance exam to set but isn't selective. We did look at another that was selective and dd just didn't pass the entrance exam (her CAT is 133) but we hadn't done work for it as hadn't expected to move. No concessions! She's far happier without the selective environment so that worked well for us. Not all are selective, particularly not in the sense that the super selectives in London are, for example. I'd actually suggest only those in the top 100 in league tables select at any level at all, and maybe fewer than that.

Our private school has an outstanding Btec programme, and a number of students every year leave not for uni but for apprenticeships- including some very prestigious/ competitive programmes.

Private schools also vary in their quality. In some good schools the teachers are Oxbridge/Ivy League educated in their subjects. This doesn’t of course make them a good teacher. If teaching is an important factor for you then look at the individual teachers and ask for student feedback surveys and speak to students on open days

Do you know the grades required to get into some Apprenticeships?
Many independent schools offer BTECS etc. DDs does.