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?

there has been an existential change to private schools with the imposition of VAT. Of course the big Public/London day schools will be largely immune and will pull ahead in terms of results and outcomes for their 50/70k a year. Every other private school in the country is having to adapt. Merging, going co-ed and increasing class sizes are necessary to survive. Cutting extras, dropping entry standards etc. In fact small class sizes nowadays is probably more a sign of a school in trouble than a selling point. There are good private schools and bad ones. At least it will be easier now to see through the marketing to find the good ones...

@Spookygoose - in a way this is exactly my point, it’s simply not the case that any private school is ‘better’ than any state school. But unfortunately, the really great private schools are likely to provide a better quality of education because they have better resources and can attract teachers who are top of their game.

Again, it’s not an absolute- but if you are an expert in your field and have to choose between a 50k salary teaching smaller calmer classes in a lovely environment with longer holidays, versus a 30k salary with more challenging kids, a less appealing premises and shorter holidays, what would you opt for? This doesn’t apply to every single teacher, but it’s quite straightforward why many would opt to teach in a private school…

DC attend one of the top private schools in the midlands. They have small class sizes but just more classes in the year. Eg the local state schools have approx 60-70 children in Year 1 divided into 2 classes that are combined when it suits the school. The private school has 55 divided into 4. Class sizes only go up materially past 20 from Year 3.

Because PIL and H said our boy was going to be privately educated. MIL was sending off for information from various private schools when DS was 4.

DS went to state primary ( much to the disgust of all
three of them) .

DS now goes to private school , has been since year 7.

For us, we chose an international school for the following reasons

-To meet children from all over the world and be globally minded
-Learn other languages alongside the usual Modern European ones.
-Be involved in wider sporting competitions.
-Social capital
-Smaller classes
-More flexible curriculum.

Eh??

@CurlyTop1980 yet on so many private school threads, parents are at pains to say that social capital is not a thing that happens within these establishments!

You don't. State academies don't have to employ qualified teachers. 80%+ of state secondary schools are academies.

In England.

Yes because the PP I was responding to initially didn't say they weren't talking about England

We moved DS at 8 because the local private school offered specialist teaching for: Maths, English, History, Classics, French, Science and a very enriched and inspiring music and sport offer. The outstanding Primary, top in borough, had a class teacher who taught the children that the y axis was horizontal and the x axis vertical. It was not good enough.

DD had a better experience at the primary and got into the holy grail cofe secondary in an adjoining borough. We moved her at the end of year 8 due to behaviour issues that were barely acknowledged and certainly not dealt with, persistent low level disruption and some diabolical teaching.

Our experience of private teaching standards was that they were consistently higher and if there was a problem, parents were heard and it was dealt with. For example, DS's maths teacher in Y6 or Y7 was removed after a term and the boys had catch up lessons on Saturday mornings the following term.

Poor pupil behaviour was also dealt with immediately and consequences significantly reduced its prevalence.

Finally, the local private schools whilst not necessarily more diverse were more inclusive of all, whereas the local state schools were very "us and them" and it was more than a little ugly. Both the children's friendship groups were diverse.

DD has just moved from teaching at a state school to a private school. Her view is that things are better organised for the staff, the parents are more engaged and the children have consequences for poor behaviour.

Our biggest reason was that if parents are paying, they care about education which results in better behaviour and better outcomes.

That's not to say parents in state don't care. Most do. But not all, and it's the few that don't that ruin it for everyone. I wasn't prepared to take the risk over my child's education.

Other considerations were clubs and extracurriculars, boarder curriculum, staff turnover and the fact our eldest is a lazy sod and it benefited him to have a school where the staff wouldn't let his results slip and keep him on track.

Where is this? And how much to 4 bed houses cost? I’m putting my house up for sale tomorrow 😆

The thing is, private schools are not homogeneous.

Most are small - half have fewer than 273 pupils and a quarter have fewer than 142 pupils. There’s not a lot of scope to build flashy contacts at these really small schools.

One in five pupils at independent schools have some form of SEND. Over 40% identify as something other than white British (60%) in London.

For me, one of the very attractive things about independent schools is that they are independent of the UK government. They can (and often do) follow the national curriculum but are also able to choose what they think is important. Governments are too short term to do sensible things with education - I remember teachers at my (comprehensive) school being really fed up because yet another “initiative” had been rolled out.

I had never thought my DC's would be privately educated. But, for the purposes of work we found ourselves in a region where our salaries are strong (low housing/living costs etc) and the state secondary provision isn't great academically. So, we looked into it and decided it was worth the investment for our DCs circumstances.

I can't comment on whether the teaching is better, possibly in some subjects and maybe less so in others; I don't know because we haven't experienced both. But, for us, what private education at secondary level did offer were slightly smaller class sizes, much better behaviour, a peer group who had been academically selected so 'coasting' was less of an option, a wider curriculum, more opportunity to personalise education with less rigidity over exam-subject choices, the requirement to be physically active multiple times per week as part of the curriculum, excellent facilities (swimming pool, theatre, music studios, astro etc), and more opportunity to try a wide variety of co-curriculars.

From the perspective of co-curriculars - yes - my DS could have continued learning musical instruments with the local music service and attended their ensembles. But, I can guarantee he'd have dropped out by teenage years because it wouldn't be cool among his state peers. His indie school peers don't see it that way and those who contribute to the school through orchestra/bands are valued. Equally, my DD could have just stuck with playing club hockey and football once a week each. But, her hockey skills have developed exponentially by training multiple times per week with school on top of her club. Also, her fitness is well beyond those of her state school peers who she continues to play football with. Sport matters to her and is likely to be her career; private education offered her opportunities that will support this beyond that which any state school or outside of school club could have done alone.

But, private is not always best. It is always going to depend on the child and the school options. A child who isn't going to get involved in the co-curriculars, combined with good academic state provision or a less impressive private option, then it would be a different story.

I only took ours because I originally got a good bursary deal whereas I had every plan to go state.

Junior teaching isn't actually that great but the classes are very small so lots of attention. I think in 5 years now, the only issue ive heard about in the school is one disruptive ND pupil who was managed out. SEN ADHD kids are around 50% of the class.

Parents share a WhatsApp group and have similar ideas on education, social media so they are quite driven to avoid giving phones etc. I don't think you can do that in state with the class sizes.

My niece is in state and very smart but you have the troublemakers there who clearly have issues but the school just can't deal with it so the same kids mess it up for everyone. Those children would be managed out quickly where I am.

For DS who we moved for P6 (Scotland - upper primary), it was definitely about education. Added bonus is he excels in sports and is now in various sports teams too. He wouldn’t have been involved in hockey or cricket at the local school.

He was struggling in maths in a very disruptive class and at his private school they stream by ability (seems to be controversial in state primary here). The difference in his maths now is amazing - he’s about to be moved to the top set. He’s dyslexic and needs taught in a certain way which he gets now. He’s also very immersed in the school culture which is quite traditional but he loves it.
DD might stay in state as she’s a totally different child. Financially that would be far better for us. In any case if we move her it’ll be for secondary only.

I wouldn’t say the teaching us the same. The quality of the teachers is the same, but teachers are given the resources to teach, and not just crowd manage.
I have two academic but neurodiverse children.
State school was clear on my oldest - he would never pass his SATs, no change of GCSEs.
Private school, and he’s on track for grade 7 or 8 GCSEs (ASD and strongly dyslexic)
Youngest (ADHD) is academically extremely able, but needs some serious stretching (he is in year 4, works on year 8 level in maths and english), otherwise he gets bored and acts up. Not a chance of him being stretched enough with one teacher and a class if 30. Not because the teacher would want to, but because they have their hands full.
State school leaves kids with SENDs behind, especially academically able ones.

Better facilities and more sports is def a benefit, but also the peers. We wanted schools where the children would be pushed more academically and around peers that were interested in learning. In Primary school there were some children who were not interested in learning or played the "I am too cool for school" role. I did not want my children around that. I wanted them at schools where getting top marks was cool.

The teaching is NOT the same in all schools. What a foolish thing to say. I'd cross that school off the list straight away.

I only looked at private schools because the place we were offered by the council was in a failing school where GSCE maths pass rate was 40% for boys. Ofsted said it wasn't safe, bullying was rife, younger pupils were at serious risk of sexual assault by older pupils (charming!), and the staff had no idea who was on site at any time, or what the sixth form were up to. A year after that they fired the governors and wound up the trust.

Meanwhile ds and I looked at three small local independents, we agreed which one we preferred, worked out the logistics and then DS applied for and won a scholarship. I had enough saved to cover the first four years and figured I could get him to GCSE year.

In the end, he has stayed there for 6th form too. He has 10 good GCSEs, is a different person in terms of confidence and maturity, and is on track for three good stem A'levels and on to a degree in engineering.

It's cost me all my savings and life has been pared to the bone for the last 7 years but I would absolutely do it again.

@Meadowfinch - one hundred percent agree that ‘teaching is the same everywhere’ - utter nonsense! You might as well say all children are the same everywhere 😂

Also a bit selfishly happy to hear that it’s cost you all your savings as we are in exactly the same boat! But my kids have absolutely thrived at their amazing private school. They’ve had a wonderful time and have made lifelong friends, and my eldest went off to Oxbridge this year. It has crippled us financially but this is the choice we made - and I don’t think I would change it either.

Where? In Scotland you certainly do.

In England

Our reasons for putting DC into private:

Disclaimer: The local state primaries near us are perfectly fine.

They're "not bad, good village primaries".

However, the secondary school is on the only one in catchment, and is DIRE. Something like 23% pass rate A - E (!) or whatever the equivalent in numbers these days is. There's just no way on earth we'd send DC there, so it would be a case of having to move before end of year 6 to somewhere with a different secondary or private. We like our current house and current location. Moving would be a risk that we'd lose space / amenities / location

To get into the super selective single sex secondary private near us, you need to be in the prep school system.

The local prep schools spend 2 years practising for the secondary entry exams. 2 years of debate, interview prep, exams, general knowledge etc etc.

Yes we could have added to the state primary teachings with (extensive) tutoring for about 3 years prior to year 6 starting, and of course DH and I would do extra curriculars etc but we just don't think we can compete with 2 years dedicated study towards the entrance exams that the prep schools are putting in.
Ultimately we're working backwards and preplanning for DC's education from age 11, and thinking about this at age 3. It's going to be a very expensive 14 years, but if we can offer DC the support, variety and concentration that private offers, then I'm bloody well going to do it.

We may still decide to move prior to year 6 and try for a grammar area etc, but at least this way if we stay put, we've pretty much hopefully got a good prospect of getting into the private secondary.

@OneOrTheOther how much do you think it’ll cost over 14 years? It’s hard to predict how much fees will rise. That is a big concern.