Do you think private schools give your children a advantage in life ?

[mistybear]

I am thinking of going back to work full time so I can send my dd to a private secondary school. My husband and I keep going around in circles of whether or not there is any advantage to a private education. We are not rich hence having to work full time to afford it and this is one of the questions, will having parents that are not that well off be a massive problem being at private school, we are not in London and the area we live in is not massively affluent. One of the reasons I keep thinking about it is that the people I have as friends and some of my family that have been privately educated are doing well and more importantly doing a job they wanted to do. My dd is hardworking and has already achieved her leaving school targets even though she is in year five, the state secondary schools around us are not the best but a couple are not too bad educational wise but all of them do not have clubs and sports that the private school has. She loves her violin, science and space also her ponies and she loves her warhammer !! she is also a only child x

It's simple mini the sort of education that words DS receives at his super selective school is not remotely in the same league as anything the state can offer. For the umpteenth time it's not all about exam grades but if you want to use that as your bench mark he will leave with fabulous grades, his school is consistently the top school in the country if you measure it by examination grades, he's likely to go onto Oxbridge, they send over 50% there every year and why would he not also have a greats set of friends children in the independent schools do also have great friends. I also think he'll leave with a huge sense of achievement, he didn't go to the school just because his parents had money, he passed a rigorous and exceedingly competitive pre test/entrance exam, he then did well enough in his internal exams/state exams not to be chucked out because these type of schools will chuck out those who fail to perform to expectations and too add to this he's probably discovered that's although he's very bright there are other who are as bright and at the very least in a few area brighter than he is which is likely to make him very level headed. The "lazy" "dense" wouldn't even get a look in. For the "equivalent value of a house" not round here by the way and definitely not in London, he will have received one of the best most inspiring broad educations money can buy. It will stay with him for life. Therefore if you've got it why not spend it?
Secondly in my experience and many others the state is frankly crap at educating the super bright the top 1% and above leaving them often unstimulated and bored stiff.

Maybe you're really rich WF and can give your kids all the stuff that other children have to work for, but Christ - spending the equivalent of the value of a house on schooling, when they could have left a state school with fabulous A level grades, good friends and a huge sense of achievement from having competed on a level playing field and triumphed... I don't get it. If I had kids who were amazingly level headed, hard working and bright I wouldn't have a single doubt about state school.

As long as you have decent state schools in your area - not everyone has .

**

To be fair though , Hakluyt , am not sure that anyone is claiming Renasissance art is the be all and end all .

With reference to value of a house, we chose to live in a smaller house (but still adequate for our needs) and send DC to private school, than live in a bigger house and go to state school. We determined that having a bigger house isn't going to make a difference to their lives, but going to a fantastic school is. And so far, I can see the difference that education (and money) is making.

And dense, lazy kids won't last long in a selective independent ...

mini I do have decent state schools in my area ( and a grammar schools in the neighbouring borough ).

But I choose not to use them.

School is not just about grades achieved. I achieved good grades at a terrible school in the dark days of 80s educational policy. So did my DH. I'm pretty sure my DC would do okay in most places as they're very motivated and ambitious.

But school is somewhere kids spend 7/8 hours a day. The building, the teachers, the other pupils, the atmosphere, the ethos are part and parcel of their childhood.

So obviously I want all those things to be as positive as possible.

It's only money. I have enough of it . We earn it. We spend it. No one does without anything to pay school fees.

Apologies if you've already mentioned this, but have you the possibility of entering her into a state school selective? Some 11+ state schools are incredible and en par with private secondaries.

I went to a state school and don't feel I was disadvantaged whatsoever. In fact, my mother had great dreams of my going to the local private school and I flat out refused and ended up at a (US) college that was much better than the daughter of one of our neighbour's - and this was one of the top New England prep schools that is supposed to be so superior.

However, our local catchment school is nothing like my old high school so we have gone private for P7 onwards. t's not so much to give an advantage, but to give them the same environment I had growing up. DS was miserable at his old school and is so incredibly happy now. He loves the constant buzz of running from one activity to another and he loves the academic pressure that he's now under. He's a completely changed child. DD is quite happy at her current school, but she's a happy content little thing in general and I think she'll be fine with the transition. I have no idea as to whether or not they will end up with any sort of advantage from going private but hopefully they look back on their schooling in the same way that I look back on mine.

IF our catchment school had been on a par with my state school I doubt we would have gone private.

Short answer: yes it will.

But I think it also depends on where you live. In certain places in the country, I would be quite happy and prefer to send my LO to state school.

I went to a state school and don't feel I was disadvantaged whatsoever

I did and, and I do, Taz1212 but that's probably just me.

Due to a large amount of very good comps in the next authority, and grammar schools aplenty where we live, the private secondary schools are few in number and dull as ditchwater.

However, having looked over into the walled garden of privilege, and been invited in and made to feel welcome, I can't imagine why any parent would not want that for their child, particularly if DS or DD wanted it too.

It would be dereliction of parental duty IMO, to reject it out of hand, and not to encourage a talented DS or DD to try.

thecat that's how I feel.

Before I had DC I was pretty certain I would use state schools.

Then I had kids. Then I actually went to look at a prep school. And I just thought, how can I not?

I was pretty certain I would use state schools

In our family, that's all we know, so it's a minefield for us, TheWordFactory, especially when we really, really can't afford it.

DS really wants a change of scenery now in Y5, but we can't offer him one 'til he's 11 or maybe 13. If he's still interested in Y9, we will definitely try.

Happy in my experience and many others the state is frankly crap at educating the super bright the top 1% and above leaving them often unstimulated and bored stiff.

In my experience (for myself, obviously long ago in the black and white era, and for my daughters) that's not necessarily correct. Some state schools are crap at educating the super bright, some are not. Just as some private schools are crap at education the super bright and some (eg Word's DS's school) are not. You have no experience of top level state education yet you continue to make these sweeping generalisations.

"Some 11+ state schools are incredible and en par with private secondaries."

Are they? Which ones are on a par with the very best the independent sector can offer? Non are in terms of exam results/university destinations I doubt any are in terms of facilities, class size, extra curricular activities etc. either.
I'm not saying they're aren't good state schools out there but generally even the most hardened anti independent education poster on here agrees that no state school can compete with the very best in the independent sector.

Gently I do have experience of an "outstanding high performing" academy I personally wouldn't describe it as a "top level state school" but many would.I didn't think the needs super bright were being fully met, neither did a couple of teachers I talked to by the way. I also looked very carefully at a top performing state school (top 10 state school in BBC league table) when DS got a place a few years ago I'm not disputing it's wasn't a very good school and was attempting to meet the needs of the super bright but IMO the right independent sector simply does it better.

"Some 11+ state schools are incredible and en par with private secondaries."

Are they? Which ones are on a par with the very best the independent sector can offer?"

Most private are not on a par with the very best the independent sector can offer!

Happy 'none are in terms of exam results/university destinations' Not correct. 'I doubt any are in terms of facilities, class size, extra curricular activities' - you might have a point re facilities (well - you do. No question. But I was educated in mainly portakabins and ended up at Cambridge so excuse me if I don't think classroom fabric actually matters) and class size (although I believe I've seen some reference to the fact that small class sizes aren't necessarily best? Anyway. DD1 is in a class of 4 for one of her A level subjects). Not on EC activities though. You may be confusing quantity with quality and you may be confusing choice/preference with quality too - I suspect few state schools offer polo. That's not a failing in my view.

Even if the school you 'looked very carefully at' was indeed one of the top state schools you were probably comparing the glister of your DS's school with their offer and not seeing the wood for the trees. Being able to do polo is not a prerequisite for serving the needs of the very bright. Nor, in fact, is offering greek and latin (examples of subjects available in the private sector that aren't available in the state sector, generally speaking (I know some state schools do offer these)). While I do actually feel that it's a shame that kids who might be interested in these subjects don't get a chance to find out if they are, they aren't automatically the birthright of the very bright and not being interested in them doesn't exclude you from the ranks of the very bright.

There are many advantages to going to top or even mediocre private schools - but the tendency of private parents to denigrate the educational offering of all state schools qua state is clearly one drawback of being part of that milieu.

Some of the most well educated people I know went to state school, some of the least well educated people I know went to private school (including big name private schools). And the reverse. It's not a binary sum.

Have had experience of both sectors with my DCs. Have come to the conclusion that the much vaunted "networking" benefits for private pupils are more due to the fact that most parents are wealthy and therefore have connections they use for their DCs. Parents of more modest means will not magically get access to these connections just by paying for their DCs to attend school with the offspring of movers and shakers.

The only good reason for those of us of modest means to pay for private ed is if the state option just doesn't offer a good education. Many state schools do offer this and I have used those options where they have been available to us. A good state school will encourage its pupils to reach as high as their abilities allow.

A good state school will encourage its pupils to reach as high as their abilities allow. - Absolutely. I am sadly aware that not all state schools are good, of course. But then, neither are all private schools.

Yes it is a sad fact that not all state schools are good, and I'm fortunate to be able to choose private as an option when faced with less good state options. I'm aware others aren't that fortunate and we should all demand that all state schools should be good.

It is also a sad fact that some parents who can just about scrape together money for fees by nearly bankrupting themselves are deciding to do that because they think that will buy their DCs a passport to the networks and back door leg ups available to the rich elite. Sadly they are usually disappointed.

And also aware not all privates are good - have moved one DC to a good state from one such private.

Personally I think many 'average' earners (up to £150k say) who send their dc private are playing a risky game.

We have two dc and could afford private. But we don't have a crystal ball and although we are comfortable we're not rich. Redundancy, illness...who knows what the future holds.

So many posts about scrimping and saving and working extra to afford school fees make me shudder. I just don't think it's worth it.

I would rather work less, send the dc to the local comp and spend the extra you have on fantastic extra curricular opportunities...without the worry that if the shit hits the financial fan your dc will have to leave their school.

Parents of more modest means will not magically get access to these connections just by paying for their DCs to attend school with the offspring of movers and shakers

This is an excellent point, and one that is often missed by those choosing to pay for education IMO.

ongoldenpond of course anyone within the network can benefit.

My DDs mate is at her school on a bursary. The family have very modest means.

She is just as able to utilise the network as my DD.

Obviously there might be things that the family's lack if money preclude.

mistybear - be careful with interpreting attainment based on words like average. I think most people think of average as the middle point or the average (i.e. mean).

However, teachers, schools etc have taken to calling anything that isn't in the bottom of top 20% "average". Then when they say your Ds is performing above average, what they mean is that he's somewhere above the bottom 20% threshold.

Similarly, ending 3 or 4 levels ahead of "average" would be quite difficult to measure objectively, as most subjects don't go above level 7. Only maths goes up to level 8.

I don't know for sure, but I suspect, that your school may be misleading with statistics. As Mark Twain said "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.".

Sorry, TheCat I should have made clear that my state school was an exceptional state school (it's one of the top state schools in the whole of the U.S.- wealthy town, high expectations, very large budget due to pots of money collected via property tax) and there's nothing that comes even close to it where we now live- hence our decision to go private.

Well it depends what you mean by ‘advantage’ doesn’t it? There have been lots of people on this thread that have argued that private education confers (amongst other things); confidence, a good work ethic, aspiration, connections etc etc. And I’m quite sure that some do (for some kids)…. And there is no getting around the fact that both Oxbridge /Russell group/competitive careers have a higher number of private school graduates in.
But…. I think you need to qualify what you (not to us mumsnetters…. Just to yourself) mean by ‘advantage’. If you want to increase the chance of your dc gaining a better qualification and a ‘better’ (read well paid/more interesting) job then on paper private schools do seem to assist with that. But I’m curious as to why this is an advantage? It would seem to me that you are making an assumption that a better paid/more professional job will be ‘better’ for your child? Do you assume they will be happier? What does ‘success’ look like? I find it desperately sad that we have as a society become fixated with success equating to earning big bucks. Granted poverty and financial struggle sucks (big style), but in my work (I work in mental health) I see a great very unhappy well paid/professionals (and gasp some of them were privately educated).