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?

Well I am in Kent and we have a fair few boys single sex state non selective but zero girls. I strongly believe in all girls education, not for religious reasons but I do feel girls who have been abused or harassed should have a school they feel safe to go to, for example. As previously discussed STEM is a big thing for DD and computer science, which I was quite annoyed wasn't an option at the selective girls grammar near us. It feels like the state sector fails girls depending on where you live in the country.

I am a big believer of fewer non academic children taking academic subjects post 16 and far far fewer going anywhere near a university (which means the state could support the 10% or so who were suitable for tertiary education).

However, academic selection age 10-11 seems wrong to me, and the comprehensive system can be made to work via setting and good behaviour management. Or, alternatively, go back to the old prep school system but do it in the state sector, where primaries go to year 8, and selection is made aged 13.

The so called ‘super selective’ grammars (which aim for about the top 5%) end up with the older children (a year in age is massive age 10/11) and the ones who are heavily tutored since Year 4. The pressure can really damage children and getting in doesn’t mean doing well. Loads don’t make the 6th form.

There isn't much difference in teaching at senior level, but there is at junior level. There are more teachers, more support workers, more 1:1 interaction. More encouragement, more confidence boosting and more time teaching than dealing with non-educational matters (eg SEN, because they have specialist SEN teachers).

The main reason people switch at secondary level is behaviour - disruptive students are not tolerated in private schools

Totally agree with this. Primary is the time when private school really has the potential to add value and shape a child. This is the time when they learn instruments / benefit from small class sizes & deeper bonds with their classmates and teachers.

We started the private school journey because we didn't get into the local excellent primary, even though it was only a five minute walk away! There were something like three sets of twins, a set of triplets, and lots of SEN children to accommodate that year. So we're unlucky. The alternative was not acceptable.

For secondary we didn't even bother to apply for state, as all our catchment ones were dire.

Why would you send them to a place where the “private school hype” is literally surrounding them? Too much of a risk imo - that you might end up having a kid who buys into it and turns out a pompous A hole

Teaching can be better in private schools because it’s not being disrupted by dc that don’t want to be there and smaller classes. The number one thing you are buying though is the “right” classmates. You are buying into a system that ensures they are mixing with wealthier families without the social issues that accompany poverty. If there are scholarship kids they tent to be very driven from homes that push despite circumstances.

@twistyizzy

there are state girls schools scattered around, was one in Leicester at least that we rejected as I didn’t want single sex education for my children

There may be where YOU live, there aren't any in our whole county which aren't independent schools!

The main reason people switch at secondary level is behaviour - disruptive students are not tolerated in private schools

This is certainly one element, alongside the breadth of facilities and opportunities.

I watched a programme the other day - Educating Yorkshire? - and was simply horrified by the general chaos. How the children learn anything at all I do not know; nor how the teachers have the grit needed to turn up every day.

My DD attends a private secondary school. I was a teacher in state schools for 20 years. The teaching itself in private schools isn’t necessarily better. The small class sizes, facilities and invested parents create an environment in which the teacher’s time is more learning focused and not behaviour/ pastoral.

My DD’s school invest heavily in the pastoral team which has an impressive number of school nurses, welfare officers, counsellors etc. As well as the team who look after the boarders.

This is what I pay for. Brilliant pastoral support, great facilities, extra curricular activities and teachers who can concentrate on teaching. And no, this wasn’t available in our local comprehensives as we live in a big grammar area so it’s grammar or secondary modern.

That’s like saying if you send your kid to state school they’ll end up a different gender and stab someone.

Smaller class sizes

More individual attention

Disruptive behaviour not tolerated/ behaviour largely better so everyone can actually get on and learn

High academic standards and expectations coming from the school

Better sports facilities - lots of team sport going on

Amongst the kids: it’s cool to be clever. It’s cool to work diligently. It’s cool to achieve. It’s cool to aim high and have aspirations. It’s not cool to be an idiot, wasting your opportunities

You make friends with kids who have similar expectations and priorities at home

I was bullied at state primary (too clever/ posh - I was neither!) and went to a private school from age 11. It was a really happy, safe, fun environment.

I sent my kids to private school all the way through from age 4.

“Always assumed teaching would be better in a private school”

this just isn’t true. Many of the best teachers avoid private schooling because they was to help the children who have fewer opportunities and who benefit most from good teaching

Private school can provide better facilities, they certainly can ensure that their classrooms are largely free of disruption from unhappy and misplaced children, children from difficult background who are not given enough to eat , who act out at school because they are not given good quality attention at home, because they sense no one cares about them.

it’s entirely possible that the teaching in private schools is less skilled than elsewhere: they don’t need to be because the aspiration and environment are so much better.

There are two in Leicester now. The Islamic girls school is considered one of the best state girls schools in the country.

It’s not about the teaching though. Motivated parents never rely on the school (state or private) to teach their child and always buy in academic support even before it’s needed. Eg in Outstanding schools in Indian / Chinese areas of Leicester, London and Birmingham it can be normal for even migrant kids to enter Reception at a Year 1 level in both English and Maths. That is true whether the child attends state or private. But state schools tend to overlook these kids as they have the skills while private schools will often stretch them.

I think this generalises that 'all' private school kids want to be there - they don't, they are kids, they don't all love school. Smaller classes can be great, but then there are local private schools that don't have the ability to have sports team due to so few children. And a lot of kids in those classes didn't get on with state school for various reasons including learning difficulties, so the learning isn't always better. It's about 1/3 to 1/2 of the small classes in the local private to us. Grades aren't better.

No, it isn't 'wealthy' families in private schools only. In fact I would say that my kids peer group is 'wealthier' at state school. In fact because of fees, these families tend to have less disposable income, travel less and can afford less.

So, I think this is again the narrative people tell themselves that private is better. It isn't. It can be better but it also can not be too.

BUT this is because our local state school is amazing so parents don't feel the need to send to private and around where I am it's seen as a bit of a waste of money, entitlement or your kid needs to go there.

I think this is a good point. Grammars have a lot to answer for in terms of segregating kids. We don't live in a grammar area (thank goodness!) and our local state offers all of the things your DD's private provides - so it does really depend on your area and what is on offer.

Class sizes, behaviour, flexibility for child to compete in chosen sport without it being unauthorised absence(!) and location, the private school is actually the closest. DC can also be onsite 8am-6pm if needed, which is incredibly helpful with two working parents who occasionally have to travel/get stuck in traffic etc

Which shows how well girls can do if they are allowed to learn in single sex schooling.
If we had state all girls that weren't selective in Kent my dd would have gone there. It is unfair that some parts of the country get this free and boys have more of these free single sex school options than girls.

@beelegal - alarm bells would ring for me on hearing ‘the teaching is the same in all schools’. I’m not saying all private schools have better teaching, in fact in some cases it could be worse as there’s less accountability- but within the truly great private schools, yes - the teaching is likely to be ‘better’ than in state.

There’s a whole host of reasons for this and I know various posters will get cross - but I’ll just compare the teaching at two schools local to each other that I know very well -

private - a lot of teachers are experts in their field, teach at universities also, write books, run extra clubs on their subjects. Vast majority of kids get all 8s/9s GCSE’s and Astars/As at levels

state - teachers constantly changing/quitting, lots of supply teachers, behavioural challenges from disruptive kids, so less time to actually teach, results above national average but not great

Teachers at private school are paid more, have longer holidays. They work in a beautiful historic building surrounded by leafy grounds.

Obviously this is one example of two schools I know - and there are, of course, amazing state schools where the teaching IS better than in private. But broadly, for a number of top tier private schools, they will attract a higher calibre of teacher than in state - and the teaching will be better.

I know people will try to argue with this but it’s true.

Yes I agree with this.

To give my example:

All 3 local state primaries within walking distance from me are ‘Outstanding’. As it’s an oversubscribed area they each have 2 classes 30-35 children per year.

One school teaches them all together for everything using 2 part time teachers and 4 TAs.

One school teaches them seperately for English and Maths but together for everything else which means things that music / sport are a waste of time as there is just no hope of individual attention.

One school combines the year for class room subjects and year groups for sport / music. They often have external music and sports people come in for 120 kids at a time.

All of the schools target literacy and numeracy and view that as a benchmark for how good they are. Their figures are only 80-90% depending on the school. This is despite the local council recently admitting that c99% of the children come into school already being able to read and write a year ahead. As a result of this PE is only one a fortnight with ‘structered play’ for 20mins every week other times.

Compare this to local private schools where class sizes are max 14-20, they do PE everyday, have subject specialist teachers from Year 1, and children are stretched based on their base ability in Year 1.

IME
Smaller class sizes
Better pastoral care
Improved confidence
Very high expectations (works both ways- parents and staff)
Wraparound included in cost
High standard clubs and sports
A real feeling of "proud to be a part of the school"
Quality school dinners and allergies well catered for
Good facilities i.e. range of courts, swimming pool, auditorium
No bother if take kids out during term time (this is a bit tongue in cheek, but it is nice to get cheaper flights a few days earlier)

Obviously you'll get some of the above in state, but some is the important word there

I think a big misconception some people have is that all private = better than all state. I spent the first half of my secondary education at a co-ed state school & the second half at an all girls private, when my parents got a bursary to send me there (this was only the early-mid 2000s). Even they now acknowledge it was a huge mistake. Teachers at the state school were motivated, dynamic, generally younger (which IME equals more passionate and better able to relate to the students), I had a good, diverse group of friends and was doing well, because the teachers made the lessons interesting and engaging. When I moved to the private school in year 9, my grades dropped massively. All the teachers were dinosaurs, who’d chosen to work there because the pay was better, not because they were passionate about teaching. Classes were beyond dull, the teachers were distant, un relatable, unmotivated and SO boring. I never really felt like I fitted in, every other kid was a carbon copy of each other - middle-class, white, usually snobby, suburban girls. In my previous school I had friends from all kinds of different backgrounds, cultures, beliefs and values. The whole energy there was also just more exciting, hard to describe, teachers & lessons were engaging, kids were given more respect and their voices were heard. At the private school it felt like no one really wanted to be there and school was something we just had to “get through”. I left as soon as I could, after year 11, with below average GCSES. I went straight to a state college and found out I actually did like learning after all and got straight As there in my A levels. I’m aware this is just my experience, but I do think a good state school is miles better than an average private school

Small classes
No fire fighting behaviour
High expectations
Belief in the children abilities
Facilities
Children encouraged to debate, practice critical thinking.

No particular order.