What do parents hope to gain from the private school arms race?

[Abladeofgrass]

Genuine question about the private school “arms race” - what’s actually the end goal?

This is a bit alien to me as I live outside the capital and my kid is just a baby, so genuinely asking rather than being obnoxious. But I read so many threads on here about the trajectory towards a “top” education, especially in and around London - feeder nursery for the 4+, then prep school, tutoring for 7+ or 11+, then one of the big-name secondaries, all aimed at Oxbridge or a “good” university. Sometimes this planning seems to start before the child is even born.

I get that everyone wants the best for their DC, but I’m curious what people feel the actual payoff is? There’s only one PM, only so many top media/barrister/City jobs, and surely plenty of those are filled by people from state schools or less famous privates. So what is it people are hoping this level of selection and competition actually gives their child - is it the school name, the network, the confidence, something else?

I just want my child to go to a school with no disruption.

We live rurally and DC go to state school. However it’s a lovely school with decent outcomes.

If I lived in London and earned London wages, I’d be looking at paying for an education that gives better outcomes. I’m not an expert on state schools in London but this week, my kid has been sailing, surfing and had theatre training with a top producer all subsidised by school. We are incredibly lucky here.

London state schools outperform those in the rest of the country.

This is one of the arguments against private schools, why should a few people be able to buy a 'better' start for their child?

Sadly I think the majority of the jobs you mentioned are filled by people who follow that path. Eton and Harrow have produced a significant number of Prime Ministers for example.

DS is in a private prep that is mentioned on here frequently as a 4+ target but he joined later from a less academic private prep. The less academic prep was absolutely brilliant with him age 4 and supporting his additional needs/development delays and he’s flourished and is now at a school which suits him well. We are looking at 11+ and academically he’s capable of going to a super selective grammar or top private school but it doesn’t suit him or us as a family so will
choose a different school for him.

I have concerns about the rat race and how it affects children. I’m not sure it’s the best idea for them.

I want the best outcome for the money I have. That means that, when I was told by my private specialist on Tuesday that I needed an mri for something really serious, I phoned my private insurance and had the mri on Wednesday. Called another private specialist I’ve been working with yesterday for an opinion on the mri result, and have the correct private specialist booked for a full consultation next Tuesday. Should I have gone through the nhs for month instead? Of course not. Do I feel absolutely terrible that in this country you need to pay a small mortgage to do what I was able to achieve in a week? Absolutely. It’s awful. However I won’t stop doing it because my neighbour can’t.
Same with private education. Is it right that I spend £40k per year per child on their schooling and someone else can’t? Nope. Will I stop because someone else can’t? Absolutely no. While I was in a (private) hospital (again, is that fair?) with a newborn my husband was filling out forms for primary school applications. Does it make any sense? It’s mental but it’s how it works in this country. Also, they either go to Oxbridge or (maybe) a couple of London ones, or they’ll go abroad. The other universities here don’t stand a chance and might not even be standing in less than a decade.
I don’t want them to be PMs. I want them to be as happy as they can be. And for us happiness means ability to choose, but to choose you have to have the tools, and we firmly believe that those can be earned through education.

I think you are wrong about the jobs.

very, very wrong.

My kids all went to state schools. All three are in tech, in their 20s and earn more than me as a teacher.
You don't need to go to a private school

I want my child to be able to learn and actually enjoy school. I want my child to eat healthy and have a decent amount of exercise every day. I want my child to learn more than the bare minimum. I want my neurodiverse child to thrive.
Which means private school. None of these are even remotely addressed in any of the state schools I have access to, and houses in the catchment of the 2 excellent state schools cost much more than private school times 2.
A huge number of the parents in both of my children’s schools are state school teachers who make significant sacrifices to send their children to- for good reasons.

I’m exposed to this system as a parent in London.

I think it’s part just driven by lots to ‘type A’ competitive parents just behaving in the way they do about everything - they want the best, expect the best etc etc.

I think that generally the path to success will be easier if you tick all the right boxes en route, learn the required skills and so on….

I agree that you can probably achieve the same results with state schooling and engaged parents who have the knowledge to ensure their children are exposed to the right opportunities.

I also think status plays a big part. Like having the big house or car, little Johnny’s going to Westminster - it’s all part of the lifestyle.

I feel very conflicted by it all - I want the best for my children, but you are looking at £30k+ a year even from reception now, some of the private day schools are getting on for £40k at secondary… it’s just such a lot of money, there are so many other ways that could be used to help your kids.

I had a school refuser talking about how sad and worthless they were. I now have a thriving happy child.

People make choices for all sorts of reasons. I just feel incredibly fortunate we were able to pay our way out of our dire local schools. The difference we have seen personally is the time and energy staff have to let each child be who they are and succeed as themselves, rather than be forced to adapt to fit a cookie cutter shape that works for the school.

I think the motivations must be as many and varied as there are parents. For some, it is the default, it's just what your family do, no more thinking required. Others, as demonstrated on this thread, have specific concerns for their child and are able to pay to choose the setting which best suits them. Some will see sending the children private as a status symbol, much like having a fancy car on your large drive, you don't need to but you want to. Some will be very focused on academic and career success and want to give their children what they see as the very best chance. Some are snobs and pay to avoid the hoi polloi. Some have bad experiences with the local state schools and can pay to send DC somewhere a lot nicer and calmer. And a thousand other reasons I'm sure.

Is it fair? No. Can we fix it....? We can only dream. Surely all parents would love an excellent and well suited education for their children which they don't have to pay for.

Why do you make healthy, nutritious meals for your DC and restrict sugary snacks and junk food?

Why do you read them bedtime stories, and talk to them about the world?

Why do you comfort them when they're frightened, and help them understand and deal with their emotions, talking through problems they have with their friend?

Why do you take them swimming, and out to the park, and encourage them to try out different activities which help them strengthen and learn?

It's all the same - and it's the most natural, healthy thing in the world. Parents want to help their children to grow and develop, and to become the very best version of themselves they can be - because being the best version of themselves helps the child every single day of their life in every way.

Why on earth do you see schooling as any different to any of those things?

Sure, the state provides a tax-payer funded education for any child - just as it provides libraries, playgrounds, free council swimming sessions at council pools, free breakfast clubs at school, and CAMHS support for mental distress. Do you judge people for buying their DC books, signing them up for a bushcraft holiday club or for swimming lessons, for making them a healthy breakfast before school or talking through emotions from an early age?

Do you think all those things should be illegal - and children only given any kind of development and support if the state provides it?

Do you think it's wrong of you to have maximised your child's physical health by feeding them well through their childhood, and grown their character and mental health through strong parenting and healthy childhood experiences? Would it be better for the child with a worse childhood if you hadn't supported your child as you have?

Should your child be deliberately held back in university and career from making use of the health and personal and emotional strengths you helped them develop?

And before you say 'but school's different. It's OK for everything else to be completely unequal in childhood, but not school', just think clearly for the tiniest second about whether that's true. What do you think is more important for your child's future happiness and success? Your parenting (including all the things I gave above) or their experiences at school?

So why do you think everyone makes such a huge deal of private schools, to the point of mocking private school children and actively trying to destroy their education?

(clue: it's sure as hell not for pro-social or altruistic reasons)

We left London to avoid the insanity. Little kids being actually interviewed for school places!

You can buy a better version of almost anything if you have enough money…!

I’m not in the UK but I work in a private school, live in a wealthy part of a wealthy city in a country thats known for being elitist. I am surrounded at home and at work by parents who have very high aspirations for their children. Many of them are high flyers in their own careers and they absolutely expect their children to achieve accordingly, and they are very willing to invest in this. They care hugely about status (whether that’s expressed though career success, wealth, material possessions, multiple houses, cars, holidaying in certain places or whatever) because it is proof that they have succeeded. A lot of their pushiness is driven by fear - fear that if their child doesn’t get into the right school / right subject / right university / right profession then they will ‘fail’ at life (whatever that means).

You ask what does participation in this ‘arms race’ give the children? It gives them:

• a superior educational experience - smaller classes, better facilities, less stressed teachers, more trips and sports and music / arts, more discipline / less distractions etc
• networking opportunities - the old boys (and girls) network really is a thing. It gives them an ‘in’ when building a career if they already know families and individuals who are well established in business, engineering, law, the arts etc. Work experience / internships are easy to arrange.
• The confidence that comes from knowing they are part of the elite. Being part of a select few, and knowing it, is an advantage that non-selective comprehensive schools cannot offer, no matter how good they are academically.

This. .

My ds was middle of class and slightly nerdy. In state primary he wasn't happy and wasn't achieving much. He was bored and fed up.
.
I moved him at 11, to a school with small classes and a wider curriculum, where he was drawn out of himself, got more involved, made more friends. Little bullying, no disruption, outstanding teachers.
Within a term he was a different child. Happy, involved, interested, enthusiastic.

I'm not interested in him being PM or a lawyer. 😁 Education is not all about getting a top job, it is about being confidence, self knowledge and having faith in one's own abilities.

He's left now, forecast AAB at a'level, then on to read a good engineering degree. Has been employed part time for a year. Already developing professional skills.

But mainly he's happy, confident, optimistic for the future.

I expect they just want the best for their kids and to give them as many opportunities as possible to fulfil their potential. It’s fine not to be fussed by all that but I think it’s pretty obvious why someone would do that. When the time comes for your little one to go to school, you probably will find that you start very much caring about which school they go to.

Some people just want the best for their children I guess

We chose private as returned to uk for dd to start year 10. The council was obligated to find her a place in a state school, but we would not have a choice re which school and I believed certain schools in the area would not have been suitable for her.

I’m on the bones of my arse (not in London) and DD goes to private school, with the help of a hefty, permanent scholarship - but still not free. We decided we would send her there because she was absolutely miserable in comp.

I’ve never known her as happy as she is now, and she’s streets ahead of where she was academically too. Worth every penny, although it pains my socialist heart to say it.

They want their kid to get into Oxbridge. I worked in a national newsroom once where it was very unusual not to have been. The networks you get there grease the wheels of your career forever. You know (or are the friend of a friend) of everyone worth knowing if you play your cards right and join the right societies.

I think you’re just describing the ‘demand’ exceeding supply issue for all kinds of things and services in London. State schools, private schools, maternity - not enough rooms to give birth in the hospital, childcare, healthcare, housing.

And how some people react to that.

To be clear, I’m not talking about “normal” private schools. I can appreciate why parents might make that choice. I can see why parents want to give their kids the best in all areas.

I’m more curious about the particular, I think mainly London (could be wrong), trajectory of feeder nursery - 4+ assessment - selective prep - more exams - super selective secondary.

Are these schools just enormously better than all other schools? So it’s along the continuum of wanting the best for your kid? Are they the happiest places?

Totally get that you might pick a nice private school that appeared to totally suit your child. But I don’t really get why so many kids have the above pathway almost laid out for them before they are born? Is it just to be the best of the best of the best? Not everyone can be the best? It strikes me that it could backfire.

Can’t afford it but I would move my DS to private in a heartbeat if I could. He’s not thriving in (a ‘outstanding’) local state school and I just think he would do at private. It’s the exposure to some behaviours that is draining on the kids who just want to behave and crack on.