German expat questions value for money of top English private schools

[Bonsoir]

Article

bonsoir I'm not lecturing on economics, though why you assume I'd be worse placed than you or granola I'm not sure.

I've also seen threads where you've argued very strongly in line with what I'm saying .

And I'm not smug about what has happened/is happening to the middle classes. I'm ambivalent.

I accept that it's not pleasant and that those affected will try to fight it. Self preservation is a natural human instinct. But let's not dress it up as some moral issue.

I agree that the European/Western MC is under pressure from globalisation. But your lawyer- speak overstatement of your case does you no favours and is at odds with the moderate voice of economists.

But over the last 20 years schools have closed, St David's closed in 2009, didn't Putney Park close about 4 years ago? A few schools (Kew House, Harrodian, Kew Green, Hampton Court House spring to mind) may have opened in West London but they & the area, are not typical of the UK private school market.

east I thought numbers of privately schooled pupils rose quite sharply in 2014?

bonsoir fortunately, I've no interest in currying favour.

I'm simply stating my view, which is not remotely controversial and in line with many an economist, moderate or otherwise (and in line with your good self on a different day/when a different mood strikes).

If I'm wrong, then no harm done.

"Moderate" or "miserable"? (I AM qualified...poor DD is the only member of the family who has not or does not plan to study economics. She complains she has had a childhood of miserable dinner time conversations.)

Linking this to H. Holle, whilst on the educaiton journey I came across a few proper second or third generation Notting-Hillbillies. A different tribe, though one I liked. I suspect several of the mums had gone to SPGS, but they were not the types to broadcast things like that. Their children did not, and indeed probably did not try. I don't feel at ease with the super-striving, grades are all important, success is measured in monetary terms, aspects of London culture, and see successful education as something much broader, equipping young people to cope with and enjoy life, however it pans out. Go to University because it broadens your horizons, do different things, travel etc because it does the same. Work hard, be honest, find a career that matches your personality and skill set. I assume I am not alone.

The nice thing about the private sector is that schools are different and people have a choice. So you can choose schools which deliver great grades and list amazing University destinations, or you can choose ones which are less selective, provide a wider mix and more grounding.

Poor H. Holle seems to have picked up his fellow non-dom banker views on the "best schools" (and Sevenoaks is popular with London based Europeans, whilst the Hall has a reputation for being both very affluent and quite a hot house) but failed to understand that people sharing his concern about diversity often make different choices.

In my little corner of London/SE, the problem is that state secondaries have not kept up with their change in clientele. A lot of tricky parents with high aspirations for their children are now in the state system because they cannot afford not to be. I am not sure this has actually driven up standards but the frustration is palpable. The educators are stressed. A bit more streaming and setting would take some of the heat out, but there are countervailing pressures from other groups who do not want to create academic hierarchies within schools and therefore find letting the most able/prepared/supported get ahead anathema.

needmore you are not remotely miserable, if your posts are anything to go on .

TBF to H. Holle, the German system is very prescriptive. Education is driven consistently and inflexibly by the state (for example, home ed is illegal).

The free flowing nature of the independent sector in the UK may have been a bit of a shock.

That said, it would become achingly obvious what was on offer at The Hall after two or three years. If he didn't like it, he wasn't forced to suffer it for another decade.

Needmoresleep: "The nice thing about the private sector is that schools are different and people have a choice. So you can choose schools which deliver great grades and list amazing University destinations, or you can choose ones which are less selective, provide a wider mix and more grounding."

In your view, which London private schools best exemplify the latter? Are there schools that are highly academic but not obsessive about grades and value the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake?

Whattodowithmum - IME a group of educators within a school can be a very rigid/inflexible thing with few notions of how to respond to the evolving needs of families and often a resistance to doing so on principle.

Yes, exactly Bonsoir.

GladtoBeDone, we went and looked at loads of private schools, both more traditional suburban ones and "name schools." My general impression was that the teachers generally were more interested, "in the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake," while the prospective parents tended to be, "obsessive about grades," and "amazing university destinations."

For me, I hope the latter is a happy consequence of the former. DD is leaving a state primary for a "name school." We'll just have to see how it all pans out. I feel very comfortable with the teaching staff and intimidated to bits by the other parents. Frankly, they just blow me away.

WhattodowithMum - as a matter of interest, are you concerned about your reaction to the other parents, the effect those parents' attitudes will have on their children and the effect their children with have on your children?

Yes.

Eastpoint both St David's and Putney Park suffered from a poor reputation. I can't say how far it was justified, certainly I heard good things about St David's (whose site is now another private school) but ran a mile after my visit to Putney Park. However in general the demand for private schools in West London is increasing fuelled by a big pupil bulge, in Richmond the number of pupils leaving Year 6 will have increased by 17 % between 2013 and 2017, and the failure of local authorities to cater for it. A well publicised battle over state school provision in Richmond, the fall out was the LA got away with sponsored the founding of an exclusive Catholic School and a Free School was left without a site, plus hearing the experiences of parents in successive rounds of state school applications, outstanding comprehensives oversubscribed by over a 1000 on first preference, the last one saw parents offered places at a new free school they could only access via a pedestrian footbridge across the Thames a couple of miles away, and footpath through a wooded common, means parents are increasingly anxious. They are feeling the need to get involved in a parasitical tutoring culture to get into private schools which are getting record numbers of applications with the resultant increase in the level of competition. Even prior to 2013 Richmond had more than half it's secondary pupils in the private sector.

In that context you can see why a venture capitalist might see a market opportunity and start a very successful secondary school, Radnor House. Other schools that might have been less popular such as Harrodian and Ibstock (which served that niche who wanted a less selective education that valued creativity over results but has now been taken up the league tables by an ambitious Head) have also become competitive to get into.

Glad with the exception of Hampton Court House which offers a somewhat unique proposition and has a mixed reputation that competition has meant most private schools are bent on improving their academic reputation. If you wanted an education in a less selective school with a more nurturing atmosphere you would now be pushed to find it in a school that wasn't faith based, ie outside the St James's (boys and girls ) and St Catherine's.

Glad, I accept it is variations on a theme. Private education is economically selective. There is also no alternative to looking round and deciding what feels right for your child. Plus schools seem to be responding to parent demands for supurb league table places, University destinations etc, and are changing. So schools like Ibstock and Latymer Upper which a decade ago might have been seen as places where you could avoid the worst of the must get A*s in everything culture, possibly are not the same now.

It so much depends on the child. DS drifted into Westminster and gained a place at SPS. We had no idea how competitive it was, and only learned that others prepared for pre tests etc once he had a place. He was a studious child who enjoyed education, made some lovely (from diverse backgrounds) friends and though realised some of his peers were either over-anxious and pressured, or serious party goers, was not affected. I think he was very lucky to be at a school where nerdiness was normal.

DD (dyslexic) was much more insecure and was more suited to a school with a broader intake. She did a lot of EC so met children from a range of West London schools. It is clear that if parents are putting a lot of focus on their children getting into one or two brand name schools (and the amount of tutoring some got was phenominal) those children will pick up the idea that other schools are not good enough, and that the children in those schools are somehow lesser.

She says if she were in Yr 6 now she would want to apply to Kingston Grammer. Wimbledon High also has a nice mix. Yes some Wimbledon Village girls, but a catchment that spreads through Merton, New Malden etc. GDST schools have an advantage on the diversity stakes as their fees are lower. To be honest, the ex pat Chelsea crowd might sneer at schools like Emanuel, but all these schools are high in National League tables and all are more than capable of getting good students into good Universities. Its about where your child will thrive, and also (H. Holle) about what you want from a school.

It's about where your child will thrive

It seems to me that the answer might be "not London".

(just to wind up Bonsoir)

whattodowithmum from the other end of this I would say that whether it a name school or not teachers enjoy the pursuit of an education in Year 7 to 9 but it becomes a part time activity in Years 10 to 13 when it is all about getting the best grades. As the Head of sixth form put it, we would prefer to educate you widely but you need the best grades to achieve your ambitions so we have to teach you how best to pass the exams. Ever more prescriptive mark schemes to accommodate less qualified markers have made it all a bit of a game and my DD has struggled in the first year of uni to present ideas and argument rather than what the marker wants to see. I can only imagine that the changes to the exam system are going to make that worse. To be fair the teachers will stand up for a pupils personal ambitions in the face of tiger "Oxbridge STEM subjects or bust" parents but they are doing their best in the face of a system. As far as I know Winchester is the only school with the confidence to completely shun the exam system in some subjects.

Since my DC are receiving/have received in which they thrive, for a fraction of the cost of London schools, I might also indulge in a bit of gloating

needsmore your experience chimes very much with mine.

DS, also at W, is spectacularly unaffected by the over-anxious or the party crowd.

His friends are clearly clever but extraordinarily ordinary. Football, play station and pizza still feature highly on a list of priorities.

The other parents have almost no impact on our day to day lives.

I'm sure there are some awful ones, but you'd get that everywhere.

WhattodowithMum: I hope the teachers will prevail. Totally agree that the focus should be on learning for its own sake.

Poisonwoodlife: Thanks for your response.

Bonsoir, you may gloat and I recognise a consistent theme of MN has been the superiority of the French system, yet oddly with pupils who then want to attend British Universities. However my experience is that quite a few from Lycee CDG are keen to swap to British schools at different points during their education. As one father put it, and his did not move to a school that carries quodos in H. Holle's circles, the day his children left the Lycee was the day they started enjoying their education.

I also suspect the school your children attend is not representative of the majority of French schools. In short your DCs schools provide what you are looking for, but this may not be what other parents want.

Last year Kingston Grammar School had 1000 (year 5 pre test and year 6) applicants. The new Head made the decision in the face of the numbers to do away with selecting pupils based on looking at all the evidence in favour of first past the post in the exam (he comes from a state grammar) . I can't help feeling that may signal a change for the worse both in the ethos and the grounded pupil body

London certainly is made to sound like a pit of snakes on Mumsnet! .

Anyone care to share what is actually nice about living in London, rather than just visiting it from time to time?

senua I very glad my DC did prep school out of London ( and a few years ago).

We were utterly spared all the competitive/ high anxiety hoo-ha.

I'm also glad DD was spared when she moved at 11. I was all for joining the throng but DD and DH had other ideas.

So she spent years 7 to 11 in a low anxiety, highly nurturing environment.

Now at 16 she is ready to join the throng! Bolstered and well armed.

DS was always going to be impervious to the throng.