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?

Not everyone who goes to private is hothoused. You seem bitter about something? Were you someone who was hothoused but turned out to be ‘thick as mince’ anyway?

I wasn’t meaning you, was I? I was talking about the circumstances OP describes, trying to hothouse children from birth for highly academic institutions, with no understanding as to whether they will
be capable of it or not, given the very early stage at which they make these plans. I was not referring to disabled children at all( who I most certainly would never describe as “thick”. I fully understand that sometimes
specialist independent provision is the only option available to parents of some children with disabilities. I am sorry if that wasn’t clear given the OP and apologise for any offence.

My DS goes to private because the alternative where we live is on par with young offenders institutions. Seriously.

How many children are demonstrably highly academic or capable from birth or even before, which is what the OP was
talking about?

StrictlyCoffee · Today 15:47
They also seem blind to the possibility that their kids may end up being as thick as mince

How can someone ‘end up’ being ‘thick as mince’? Unless you think going to private school lowers students’ IQ?

How am I being ableist? You’re the one who seems to be saying that someone who is disabled cannot be intelligent - not me.

To me, and my reading of it, the OP was asking about people who prepare from when their child was a baby or even before birth for highly academic institutions. That’s what I took from the OP. The point being that it’s just not possible to discern at those stages whether children are going to have the capability to attend highly selective schools, Oxbridge etc, at that stage in development.

Again, I’m sorry for any offence but you’re accusing me of things I didn’t mean and haven’t said .

“Turn out to be” then, Jesus some very touchy people on here tonight. Insecure in their own choices maybe?

I wanted my children to be in smaller classes with no disruption from poor behaviour.

I wanted them to learn in an environment where it’s ‘cool’ to give things your best shot. ‘Cool’ to do well. Where it’s a bit sad to not care about these things.

I wanted them to achieve their academic potential, whatever that was, to keep their options open so that they could choose a career path that was right for them.

I wanted them to choose friends who come from backgrounds where education is valued.

The regional accent local to us is not great. I wanted them to continue to speak in a neutral accent.

I wanted them to have nice grounds with lots of space and great sports facilities plus excellent opportunities for music, drama and other extracurriculars.

If all of this had been available to us in a state school we’d have been mad to spend the money we did on school fees. But I looked at the state options near us and they were not right for our family.

We have never regretted our choice. Our kids are happy, healthy, grounded, well-rounded, kind, fun people - in great careers - and in marriages to wonderful people with the same values.

My child went to a state school and has a place at Oxford to study medicine with no tutoring, just hard work and a dream.

I teach in an academic pre prep school with the aim of children passing the 7+ to gain a place at prestigious independent schools. Parents have chosen us for that reason but for some of the children it is simply the wrong path. The pressure is immense with many having tuition in addition to our daily homework and I can see some of the children just can’t take the pressure. Late developers or those with SEND struggle and their self esteem is whittled away. Sadly, the response of parents is to increase the tuition and add more pressure - I can’t imagine the mental
health struggles those children will endure as they reach their teens.

The pitchforks are going to be out for you saying you didn't want your kids to have a regional accent.

I can’t imagine the mental health struggles those children will endure as they reach their teens.
@Waspalert
have you pointed this out to these parents?

I’d have been happy for my kids to have many regional accents - but not the one local to where we lived at the time.

Not that I need to justify it. My kids, my money, my choice.

We started in state and moved to private. My child wasn’t coping and felt worthless. They’re now thriving and happy and absolutely love school. We’re very lucky we could make that choice.

I teach at a state primary school and it’s a factory.
Writing and maths all day long and barely any art, no drama, one day of DT per term. History and geography when we can shoehorn them in. Classes of 30 with so many needs that the ‘good kids’ are overlooked. The system is wrecked.

On the other hand, my child has hours of drama, art, science, sports. They have the opportunity to find out what they love and spend time on what they are good at. There is time for open ended discussions. I leave my work to go and do school pick up and it makes me so sad that there is such a discrepancy between what I have left behind at my school and what I see when I arrive at my child’s school.

I don’t know how it can be fixed for everyone but I’m so glad that my child is so happy. Getting rid of private schools isn’t the answer, the government needs to learn from them.

Oh and to add, I don’t care if my child becomes prime minister or goes to university or any of that. What we’re paying for is the now.

Thanks for this. I think this is what I was trying to explore, and perhaps I poorly worded my OP or at least the thread title.

I do understand that there are many reasons why people choose to privately educate. I’m sure that the experience at a lot of private schools is wonderful, and that the education offered at some of the top schools is incredible.

But, I suppose what I’m trying to work out is what the super competitive, “tutor your kid from the age of two or three, and then essentially keep them competing at every step of their education” type of journey adds, in comparison to just a really good school. It must add something, otherwise why are all these children doing the 4+ and 7+?

To my mind, the benefit has got to max out somewhere. Like, how much extra value can be added beyond a certain point? And is there not a tipping point for some (not saying all) kids where the extra pressure to get into the Top School, kind of offsets any problem that might have come from only going to the Top Ten (but not Top) School?

Also, whilst I accept that wealth may correlate with success and academic prowess in some cases, I do think it’s funny how all the kids whose parents have signed them up for the 4+ just happen to be really bright and studious (according to the MN threads). And it’s nothing to the parents having one eye on the assessments from the embryonic stage? As if the 93% of kids going to state schools and ~6% of kids going to other private schools just so happen to be the clever ones?

They'll say all sorts of crap. But its obviously so their child will get an unfair advantage over other peoples' children.

Who says it's "better" ?

If a child is as thick as mince sending him/her to a private school won't fix that.

I don't get it either. I sometimes read threads about the subject and the parents are stressed about 4+, 7+ or whatever and I think well you've brought it on yourself.

Surely even if you decided to go private, why the need to go to a hyper selective place?

Surely the DC would be just as happy at a more mixed ability school, and if they were super bright, they'd be nearer the top of the class..??

Not all private schools set out their stalls to be the most academic. There are private schools where children of less stellar abilities are nurtured and able to thrive. These schools are often especially strong in extracurricular areas like sport, music and drama.

It takes all sorts to make a world. A child may not be A* material - might have eg dyslexia or another challenge - but they will likely benefit from small class sizes and a nurturing environment that a good private school might offer.

Whoever my child was, I’d just want them to achieve their own natural potential, whatever that was.

I agree totally with what you say.

Not every child is academically inclined.

That's why IMO we need more apprenticeships to teach young people a Trade.

I totally agree. Pushing everyone to go to a university at 18 is not working well.

Degrees have been devalued and there are not graduate-level jobs for all these kids.

I can’t afford private school, but I could afford to move from an area that had a very large number of Eastern European immigrants where a lot of the kids starting school didn’t speak English to a more affluent area where the majority of kids starting school do speak English, even if it’s not their parents first language, people want the best for their kids, for some it will be smaller classes and better teachers, for some it will be making connections and the ‘old boys club’ not everyone wants their kid to be PM but making sure they get the best education available in your price range means they’ll have more opportunities to do what makes them happy.

Sadly it really works, that's why.

The public school system creates an elite. Once you're in, you're in. Once youre out, you're locked out for your entire life.

It's not academic, it's social status and network. And by that, I don't mean just the kids they go to school with. Once they leave, they quiz each other about schools amd who they "know".

If I'd understood it, I might have tried harder to get my kids in. I'm probably "middle" middle class, and my kids went to brilliant, high performing state schools. However, both of my girls have left there ill-prepared for mixing with private school kids, and they form most of the worlds they want to access for work.

The British class system is decided by age 18, sadly.

Same reason why some people choose to fly business class…. Generally a better experience / journey overall and not necessarily about the outcome / destination.