Please can we have a non-fighty thread about the advantages/disadvantages of independent schools....

[insertfeistynicknamehere]

I attended one myself but it was a long time ago.

Been looking round and keep seeing references to "dodgy independents"
what are these?

Where we live there are excellent state schools but I have no experience of this at secondary, it seems quite scary - DC attend a state village one-form entry school

My oldest is only 8 so it's a fair way off yet but still...
Promise am not a goady fucker btw.

Another 'con' is that when the school decides to make big structural changes eg merger etc, you have no control over what happens - and the supervision can be very unsatisfactory - of 'voluntary' trustees etc. especially disconcerting if you have paid £1,000s and your child is in a key year. Even if it's not a key year, this can cause huge trust issues that can rumble on for years. It's when you really realise the difference it makes to be educating your child in the 'private' sector.

Greenleave. I live in a fully 11 plus County. My elder DD passed the 11 plus dropping 1 mark (a few years ago now). She did not go to the local girls Grammar (actually called High School). She went to a boarding school which was about the same in educational attainment but 1/3 the size. This meant she got to do all the activities she wanted to do and was never on a waiting list for anything. There was a lot more space,not classes of 33, and the whole boarding ethos suited her down to the ground. The teaching was no better than the grammar school, but no worse. However, she had opportunites to do so much and she thrived. Several years after leaving, she still has a huge number of friends from school.

Her classmates, and their parents, at junior school were amazed she was not going to the local grammar. A few asked me why. I decided not to tell them the truth! I had realised, over several years, that we were absolutely sick of the competitiveness among parents when it came to getting the 11 plus. The tutoring (my DD did a week of exam technique - that is all), the need to be better than others, the preening when their children were selected to do something, and the entitlement of "premier" parents at the school to ensure that their children got x, y and z recognition was overwhlemingly toxic. The continual one-up-manship was truly awful. At the quiz evening the worst parents all clubbed together to make up a large table and were overheard to say: "How did we not win the quiz? We are all graduates!"

The fact that my DD had few friends, mostly because the parents controlled who their children were friendly with, was what really made us pay for a boarding school, where parents exerted less influence over friendship. In all truth, we could not wait to get away from the local parents. The High school she could have gone to is brilliant. I have no doubt about that. It just was not for us and my neighbour's children have not gone there either. Clearly, for many, it is highly desirable to get to the grammar school and I respect their choices. We just felt our DD needed a different experience and a school that would meet all her needs. We were truly fortunate in being able to afford it. However, I can assure everyone that entry to somewhere like Wycombe Abbey is far more competitive and difficult than some county wide 11 plus exams.

Interesting thread with some great points being made on both pro and con wings. We have been on both sides of the fence (one child) and are currently thinking about returning to private. Our experience is that the big difference is that in the state sector, if pupils CBA to do something, they are allowed to get away with it, and there is/was less tolerance of that attitude in private schools. DS dislikes all team sport, but used to be required to play regardless. Now he can just opt out and walk away, which irritates one parent. And the current school's lack of extra-curricular activities (no choir, no music, no plays, no DoE -- all work in progress, because it is a very new school) upsets the other parent.

DS should get into a reasonable RG uni whichever school he goes to (because one school will get cut some slack for being in a deprived area without a track record of academic success; at the other, he'll be competing with peers who expect to do well and so will make the effort and live up to expectations). He has realised quite recently that getting what he wants materially in life will only be possible if he works for it himself. Without wishing to sound smug, that seems a reasonable result in itself.

TedTess - good summary.

For us we have a dyslexic DD that was achieving above average despite no help from school. Her 'outstanding' primary took the attitude that she was doing great, so didn't need help. They were worried about the kids who weren't making the grades - helping DD reach her potential wasn't something they had time for. We felt it would be similar in secondary state schools as they have a wider level of attainment to deal with.

I can hand on heart say that we've had more support from DD's private secondary school in one term then we got in 7 years at state primary.

I appreciate that not all private schools are the same but for us there was just no comparison between what DC's private school offers and what was available in state schools.

My kids are bright and we take education seriously so I'm pretty sure they would do well in either system. I went to a bog standard comp myself and then on to Oxford so I'd always believed that the school didn't really matter as much as the child themself but after I saw what was available and as we are fortunate enough to have the cash to pay for it, I couldn't deny them the extra opportunities.

They are still in prep school as we carry on to 13 but for us the big pros are:

• small class sizes with high staff numbers - 3 staff per class of 22 kids. This means they get enough one to one time for the teachers to really get to know them and help them each reach their own full potential. It isn't enough for a child to be doing well when compared to their peers, they want them to be the best that they can.

• not tied up in knots by ever changing national curriculum and endless standardised testing. They are more able to adapt to the children's interests.

• it's a selective school so the DC are surrounded by bright, high achieving children. They all take pride in each other's achievements as well as their own and push each other to do well. It is a culture in which education and achievement are really valued.

• teaching them a good work ethic. Coasting is not accepted and with fewer kids and more staff is spotted and stopped in its tracks.

• facilities are phenomenal: world class sports facilities, music auditorium seating 100s, drama studio, photography studio, animation studio, observatory, numerous libraries the largest of which is bigger than our local council one, etc...etc...

• huge wealth of opportunities. The extra-curricular options are endless, all the usual sports, music and drama clubs, chess, climbing, fencing, pistol shooting, kayaking, public speaking, gardening, martial arts, cookery, art appreciation, bee keeping, squash, golf, coding, computer game design, philosophy, astronomy, mandarin, Russian, weaving, creative writing ...... I really could go on and on.

• frequent talks from visiting professors, film directors, explorers, successful sportsmen and the like. From age 7 they are regularly listening to and asking questions of Oxbridge professors on subjects as diverse as robotics, divinity, art, medical ethics ....

• results. Leavers go off to the best public schools, over half of them on scholarships.

I think the only Con is, as others have said, that because of the financial barrier to attending the school they do only encounter other (relatively) wealthy kids. That will hopefully be less the case when they move on to public school at 13 as their are then far more bursaries and scholarships.

Innocuous the school is clearly what everyone would like their children to experience. The big question is how does our/any society provide some of the same advantages to all the DC that would benefit from such a great opportunity? If it were possible for all the children with potential, then surely society would thrive. I wish I knew how this could be spread generously across the whole country.

"The big question is how does our/any society provide some of the same advantages to all the DC that would benefit from such a great opportunity?"

It can't, because part of the benefit of private education comes from the fact that it involves social apartheid - well off and clever children benefit from being clumped together (which helps them learn at a faster pace) and being shielded from the disruption caused by less educationally engaged, poorer and more socially disadvantaged children.

Private schools entrench privilege, and this damages children in the rest of the system by undermining our meritocracy.

I personally don't think that anything will ever happen to improve this situation because a huge proportion of the establishment have their children in private schools and are benefiting from the inequality our divided education system creates.

"If it were possible for all the children with potential"

all children have potential The least bright and able children deserve as much or more support to achieve their potential as the brightest.

At present we have a situation in the UK where many of the brightest, the most able, and the best supported children have at least twice as much spent on their education (by being privately educated) as disadvantaged children who are achieving poorly. What would make a HUGE difference to this country's economy and social well-being would be to concentrate resources not on those children who already appear to be thriving, but on disadvantaged children who are NOT thriving educationally.

I know, pie in the sky. :-(

well that sounds like the government's pupil premium to me.

our school's funding plummeted with massive implications, pushing parents like me into the private system.

I do think this is all down to your local schools.

Some of the pros on here for private actually apply to my ds's school, but that is because he is at a single sex super selective grammar.

Private wasn't an option for us due to cost, but I went to a indie myself.

TBH his school is so good, that I wouldn't have paid for an indie even if we could afford it.

BUT he travels to his school over the county border. The local comps are much less good.

His grammar has high discipline, zero toleration of low level discipline, high academic achievement and expectation. Lots of clubs and opportunities.
He is in a single sex school which we wanted for him, because he has discovered lots of other boys who are clever and cool and that has been very important for him.

The advantage over an indie is that he mixes with a cross section of society, who are there on merit not money, and I think that is healthy.

that should be - zero tolerance of low level disruption

My DS is currently being assessed at 10+ for two local private schools. My reasons for doing this are a lot to do with access to facilities, teaching and variety of options that aren't typically available in our local state secondaries. In addition the results at GCSE and A Level are considerably better than any of the good local state secondaries.

But, if he doesn't succeed we will most likely apply again next year but in conjunction with local grammars and state schools.

FWIW there is an absolutely amazing state secondary in my borough. It is named on many lists as being outstanding and has a private school feel to it. But you either have to live no more than 300 metres away or score in the top 60 in our borough test.

"The advantage over an indie is that he mixes with a cross section of society, who are there on merit not money, and I think that is healthy."

No - he's not mixing with a 'cross section' of society. He's mixing with bright, hard-working children from supportive families. His class won't include children who are struggling academically, it won't include children whose families aren't interested in education, and there will be disproportionate numbers of m/c children, and children from graduate families.

From the Sutton Trust report:

"The Sutton Trust was quoted by Jonathan Brown in the Independent in a report on new grammar school research.

Grammar schools contribute to social inequality and lead to a widening of the income gap between rich and poor, according to new research.

The study represents the starkest evidence yet of the long-term harm suffered by those who miss out on grammar school places – as well as of the impact of selective education on the communities where it has been preserved."

"A 2013 study by academics from the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the University of Cambridge and York University found that more than four times as many of the 22,000 Year Seven entrants into grammar schools each year were likely to come from private schools, compared with those on free school meals."

"well that sounds like the government's pupil premium to me."

The pupil premium is less than £1K per annum per pupil. Outside London each secondary state school place costs the tax payer about 5K per year. A private school place costs 12 - 15K.

"FWIW there is an absolutely amazing state secondary in my borough. It is named on many lists as being outstanding and has a private school feel to it. But you either have to live no more than 300 metres away or score in the top 60 in our borough test"

All schools should required to use 'fair banding' or a lottery system to select their intake.

Another advantage of state is their support of special needs.

Ds has mild brittle bones and when he last fractured a femur he received 2 hours a day of one to one support to enable him to participate in sports etc. This continued for over 6 months at no cost to us. If he needs additional support in future I am assured that it will be quickly put in place for him.

"well that sounds like the government's pupil premium to me."

The pupil premium is less than £1K per annum per pupil. Outside London each secondary state school place costs the tax about 5K per year. A private school place costs 12 - 15K.

That £1k makes a difference when there are 700 kids in a school! Due to a middle class area, dds state school saw TAs cut. G&T stopped. Reduced sport. No drama. Music all paid by parents.

The focus now, rightly or wrongly, seems to be those who are not supported at home. Who are not listened to read. Whose parents cannot/do not support their education. And i understand why. but don't blame those who can for "abandoning" state education.

As mentioned elsewhere, private schools are overrated as the academic achievement of a child is determined mostly by genes, then by parental involvement in a child's education and least of all by the school they attend. Reasonably bright middle class children will generally perform just as well wherever they go as long as they don't get too distracted by girlfriends/boyfriends or drugs -the latter probably being more of a risk at London private day schools than at most state schools. When DH and I analysed our own MC families (including cousins and in-laws) going back over a forty year period those who had attended state schools -including some rough comps- had clearly outperformed their private school counterparts. The idea that private schools have incredible extra curricular activities which provide their pupils with all sorts of opportunities unavailable to state pupils is also misleading. Extra curricular activities such as music, drama ,dance, football etc are almost always taught to a much higher standard outside school if parents can be bothered to ferry their children around or organise activities themselves. For example, DD's music teacher comes to our house without extra charge for a one hour lesson each week and I am always amazed at the way parents at expensive private day schools will allow their DC to miss lessons in other subjects to attend music lessons at school especially since the DC are always late (and any music teacher will tell you that a half hour lesson at school is never more than 20 minutes). I think one reason for the overrating of private schools is that the richest 10% of society -virtually all of whom traditionally send their DC to private schools- own 45% of total household wealth in the UK so that private school children's families own nearly half the nation's wealth providing their offspring with a headstart/more security financially and giving them a greater career choice.