Logical Discussion About Schools With Other Parents Or People Who Attended Private School Please ?

[iLegallyBlonde]

Am pulling my hair out with inability to make a decision right now and the days are ticking along.

We've given state education 4 years and whilst their SAT results are glowing, frankly we don't believe it and know roughly where we both were at their ages. In comparison private education because quite simply the standards are higher, our current state school is ofsted outstanding but I'd say 2 years behind the private school children locally.

So my logic is we've negotiated 1/3 off the price, a very good deal that simply wouldn't have happened 18 months ago.

We have the savings, we also have the house. If anything truly terrible happened the inlaws would bail us out.

But I cannot bring myself to commit to a new pair of tights at the moment let alone fee's.

So has anyone been through and come out the other side ?

[Guest X-QUORK]

We've given state education 4 years and whilst their SAT results are glowing, frankly we don't believe it and know roughly where we both were at their ages. In comparison private education because quite simply the standards are higher, our current state school is ofsted outstanding but I'd say 2 years behind the private school children locally.

Ummm...did you read this paragraph before posting it?

[worzel]

Am pulling my hair out with inability to make a decision right now and the days are ticking along.

We've given state education 4 years and whilst their SAT results are glowing, frankly we don't believe it and know roughly where we both were at their ages. In comparison private education because quite simply the standards are higher, our current state school is ofsted outstanding but I'd say 2 years behind the private school children locally.

So my logic is we've negotiated 1/3 off the price, a very good deal that simply wouldn't have happened 18 months ago.

We have the savings, we also have the house. If anything truly terrible happened the inlaws would bail us out.

But I cannot bring myself to commit to a new pair of tights at the moment let alone fee's.

So has anyone been through and come out the other side ?

Why not private tutoring to make up the shortfall? Got to be cheaper than full time private education.

[iLegallyBlonde]

Ummm...did you read this paragraph before posting it?

What am I missing ?

[juvenal]

Am pulling my hair out with inability to make a decision right now and the days are ticking along.

We've given state education 4 years and whilst their SAT results are glowing, frankly we don't believe it and know roughly where we both were at their ages. In comparison private education because quite simply the standards are higher, our current state school is ofsted outstanding but I'd say 2 years behind the private school children locally.

Are you qualified to judge? On what criteria are you basing this?

What do you see (honestly) as the aim of their education up to the age of 18?

[iLegallyBlonde]

Why not private tutoring to make up the shortfall? Got to be cheaper than full time private education.

You're right and we have been doing just that but it's a) hours in the day and finding the quality of tutors c) unfair on them when their friends are off playing they are having to fill the gaps in their education that should be provided by the state and I fear will get worse and worse.

[iLegallyBlonde]

Are you qualified to judge? On what criteria are you basing this?

What do you see (honestly) as the aim of their education up to the age of 18?

Qualified in the sense that I can see the work being produced at the private school v's my children and their peers, it's stapled on the walls for all to see. It is really difficult to judge but equally my MIL is an ex teacher and she has real concerns about the middle girl but her SATs say she is exactly where she should be academically, who do you believe ?

I just want them to enjoy their education, would be great if they gain the bits of paper that let them fullfill their dreams but realistically I'm not expecting doctors or lawyers of course I wouldn't be upset if they were though.

[Guest Skinty]

Why not private tutoring to make up the shortfall? Got to be cheaper than full time private education.

Learn to earn!

Set them a task, such as learning about cell biology and tell them that there is a maximum of £50 that they can earn. The more indepth and more correct the essay the more they will earn. Deduct money for spelling mistakes etc. Quiz them about the essay before handing the money over.

Teaches the children independence and initiative.

[iLegallyBlonde]

Learn to earn!

Set them a task, such as learning about cell biology and tell them that there is a maximum of £50 that they can earn. The more indepth and more correct the essay the more they will earn. Deduct money for spelling mistakes etc. Quiz them about the essay before handing the money over.

Teaches the children independence and initiative.

I like your thinking.

[Doom Lord]

Am pulling my hair out with inability to make a decision right now and the days are ticking along.

We've given state education 4 years and whilst their SAT results are glowing, frankly we don't believe it and know roughly where we both were at their ages. In comparison private education because quite simply the standards are higher, our current state school is ofsted outstanding but I'd say 2 years behind the private school children locally.

So my logic is we've negotiated 1/3 off the price, a very good deal that simply wouldn't have happened 18 months ago.

We have the savings, we also have the house. If anything truly terrible happened the inlaws would bail us out.

But I cannot bring myself to commit to a new pair of tights at the moment let alone fee's.

So has anyone been through and come out the other side ?

If it's an outstanding school not in an inner city then I would go down the after school tutor route.

If it was in an inner city and I could afford a private scool then I would go down the private school route.

At the moment I have tutor for my son because I live in London and last year we didn't even have a teacher!! The tutor has proved to be a rock.

[Guest X-QUORK]

What am I missing ?

Does it read well to you?

[iLegallyBlonde]

If it's an outstanding school not in an inner city then I would go down the after school tutor route.

If it was in an inner city and I could afford a private scool then I would go down the private school route.

At the moment I have tutor for my son because I live in London and last year we didn't even have a teacher!! The tutor has proved to be a rock.

I'm going to sound an ungrateful cow, but it's not inner city, it's lovely single entry school that does it's best, is a bit old fashioned but you know when you have that nagging feeling that there's something better out there and you should be providing it for them.

[Jadoube]

Am pulling my hair out with inability to make a decision right now and the days are ticking along.

We've given state education 4 years and whilst their SAT results are glowing, frankly we don't believe it and know roughly where we both were at their ages. In comparison private education because quite simply the standards are higher, our current state school is ofsted outstanding but I'd say 2 years behind the private school children locally.

So my logic is we've negotiated 1/3 off the price, a very good deal that simply wouldn't have happened 18 months ago.

We have the savings, we also have the house. If anything truly terrible happened the inlaws would bail us out.

But I cannot bring myself to commit to a new pair of tights at the moment let alone fee's.

So has anyone been through and come out the other side ?

My four kids (2 step-kids) attended four different secondary schools. Two state, two private.

Best by miles was state. worst was state. Given their advantages of small class sizes, selection and so on one might conclude that the private schools (or the teachers) were not as good as they might have been.

My ex is a teacher, private schools. Likes to say private is better but has rejected working in a number because of their low quality. The high standards you perceive from outside are sometimes spot on, sometimes not. If you're sure they are there, good.

My ex is concerned that the economy is putting lots of private schools at risk of closure. If you've negotieted a big discount does this increase or decrease your confidence? Would having to move your kids because the school closes down outweigh any benefits gained in the time they were there?

The fees are all very well. What about all the extras that appear on your bill with every private school? Have you included these in your budget - they can be an unpleasant surprise. As can the unilateral increase in fees that will occur from time to time.

My personal experience is that the head is a large proportion of what makes a school good. Also that a good head will often do things that do not fit the prejudices of the parents - its their job to do well by the kids. If the state school is doing that well there is a fair chance the head is a good one. Check out the private school - ideally should be as good or better. Good ones will be.

You can't complain to private the way you can to a state body. There's nobody higher up to go to. Private means they are free to tell you to sod off, and will. You are stuck with a terms notice to pull your kids out if you don't like it.

Personally I thought private education much better for primary school ages, and state much better at secondary school ages. Your mileage may vary, and they're your children. Only you can decide.

[Jadoube]

If it's an outstanding school not in an inner city then I would go down the after school tutor route.

If it was in an inner city and I could afford a private scool then I would go down the private school route.

At the moment I have tutor for my son because I live in London and last year we didn't even have a teacher!! The tutor has proved to be a rock.

With the proviso that there are some bad private schools in London so be careful. They think they have a captive market because of perceptions of the state system.

After inteviews my ex turned down the chance to work in the private London schools to which she applied - citing their poor quality. (She worked on the assumption our kids would go to the school where she taught. A topic worthy of much discussion in its own right, lets not go there.)

[iLegallyBlonde]

My four kids (2 step-kids) attended four different secondary schools. Two state, two private.

Best by miles was state. worst was state. Given their advantages of small class sizes, selection and so on one might conclude that the private schools (or the teachers) were not as good as they might have been.

My ex is a teacher, private schools. Likes to say private is better but has rejected working in a number because of their low quality. The high standards you perceive from outside are sometimes spot on, sometimes not. If you're sure they are there, good.

My ex is concerned that the economy is putting lots of private schools at risk of closure. If you've negotieted a big discount does this increase or decrease your confidence? Would having to move your kids because the school closes down outweigh any benefits gained in the time they were there?

The fees are all very well. What about all the extras that appear on your bill with every private school? Have you included these in your budget - they can be an unpleasant surprise. As can the unilateral increase in fees that will occur from time to time.

My personal experience is that the head is a large proportion of what makes a school good. Also that a good head will often do things that do not fit the prejudices of the parents - its their job to do well by the kids. If the state school is doing that well there is a fair chance the head is a good one. Check out the private school - ideally should be as good or better. Good ones will be.

You can't complain to private the way you can to a state body. There's nobody higher up to go to. Private means they are free to tell you to sod off, and will. You are stuck with a terms notice to pull your kids out if you don't like it.

Personally I thought private education much better for primary school ages, and state much better at secondary school ages. Your mileage may vary, and they're your children. Only you can decide.

Agrhhhh am more confused now

It is primary we are considering, couldn't entertain them going all the way through.

The school is in good financial shape, have checked that out, it's a bursary we're getting because we have so many of them.

The heads in both schools are brilliant, I truly believe both are doing the best job they can do with the means available to them, I imagine the state head is probably better because she can't throw cash at every problem that crops up.

[juvenal]

Qualified in the sense that I can see the work being produced at the private school v's my children and their peers, it's stapled on the walls for all to see. It is really difficult to judge but equally my MIL is an ex teacher and she has real concerns about the middle girl but her SATs say she is exactly where she should be academically, who do you believe ?

I just want them to enjoy their education, would be great if they gain the bits of paper that let them fullfill their dreams but realistically I'm not expecting doctors or lawyers of course I wouldn't be upset if they were though.

You concede it's 'really difficult to judge', and put 'enjoying their education' as a top priority, but your anxiety and use of tutors rather suggests that this masks ambitions of much bigger things for them. Most parents would be over the moon to have good, highly rated local schools nearby, and kids with good SATS results.

Here's my two pennorth, and I have no intention to offend. After 10 years interviewing for places/teaching/ awarding degrees as a university senior lecturer I see no difference whatever between state and privately educated students.

There is a culturally pervasive fear of state schools among middle-class parents. Justified on occasion, but more often than not based on a mixture of social aspiration, snobbery, irrational fears, and a naive belief that 'if you pay for it, it must be better'. The many parents I've talked to at Open Days usually know very little about education, but are driven by a very understandable desire to get the best for their children, without real any idea of what the best might be, or where it might ultimately take their offspring.

If your final aim is a top university or medical school (which I rather think it might be), be aware that kids have a habit doing what interests them, rather than what their parents want. If they are intelligent, they will get where they want to go. You don't need to try to buy them advantage, let alone spend your money on something possibly available for free in what sounds a very good local school.

[worzel]

Here's my two pennorth, and I have no intention to offend. After 10 years interviewing for places/teaching/ awarding degrees as a university senior lecturer I see no difference whatever between state and privately educated students.

From my experience, I would agree with this, although its difficult to say whether those from the private schools would have not even got to uni if it wasn't for their superior schooling. Anecdotally, my brother went to Oxford, and said he spent the first year working his butt off trying to catch up with the privately educated students, who had a much wider knowledge than was required to get the grades to get in.

[iLegallyBlonde]

You concede it's 'really difficult to judge', and put 'enjoying their education' as a top priority, but your anxiety and use of tutors rather suggests that this masks ambitions of much bigger things for them. Most parents would be over the moon to have good, highly rated local schools nearby, and kids with good SATS results.

Here's my two pennorth, and I have no intention to offend. After 10 years interviewing for places/teaching/ awarding degrees as a university senior lecturer I see no difference whatever between state and privately educated students.

There is a culturally pervasive fear of state schools among middle-class parents. Justified on occasion, but more often than not based on a mixture of social aspiration, snobbery, irrational fears, and a naive belief that 'if you pay for it, it must be better'. The many parents I've talked to at Open Days usually know very little about education, but are driven by a very understandable desire to get the best for their children, without real any idea of what the best might be, or where it might ultimately take their offspring.

If your final aim is a top university or medical school (which I rather think it might be), be aware that kids have a habit doing what interests them, rather than what their parents want. If they are intelligent, they will get where they want to go. You don't need to try to buy them advantage, let alone spend your money on something possibly available for free in what sounds a very good local school.

I do value your opinion, thank you for taking the time to reply.

I guess that's the biggest fear of all though, what if they aren't, what if they are average. I know plenty of idiots who went to private school in senior positions they have no real right to be in and yet they are. Did their parents buy that advantage, probably.

My worry is always that they won't get a choice, I went to a average comp in the 80's/90's and literally 1 person went to medical school out of our year of 480 pupils, many more went to a good university but certainly not comparable with the grammar schools, which I admit is what I'm aiming for. I honestly have no issues with them becoming hairdressers if they have made that informed decision for themselves and had the opportunity to be whatever they want to be.

[R K]

How much do you intend spending in total on their private educations? (This will depend on their ages of course, and when they start in private education).

A good state/grammar and a bright child will probably have a similar outcome to an average private.

One of the reasons private often appear to outperform state is that the bottom 1/3rd are simply not allowed through the door, so the achievement stats are naturally skewed.

My ex works at a private school - I could tell you all sorts of stories about the dysfunctional parents (several of whom appear regularly in the tabloids) and their poor kids. Often they are probably just as or more challenging and disruptive than most of the kids in your local comprehensive. There is also probably little to choose in the quality of teaching delivered by most teachers in either sector. Although I experienced some really poor supply/temp teachers with my kids in certain subjects from time to time, but they were the exception.

It's similar to the question about and NHS surgeon over a private surgeon. Would you consider paying £100k plus for an operation in the private sector than you could have done for free in the NHS? Perhaps you would. I know I wouldn't.

If you're looking at a 6 figure investment - I'd choose a good state, if you have one, and invest the money for them instead.

But then, I'm a cheapskate and hate paying for something once, let alone twice.

[iLegallyBlonde]

How much do you intend spending in total on their private educations? (This will depend on their ages of course, and when they start in private education).

A good state/grammar and a bright child will probably have a similar outcome to an average private.

One of the reasons private often appear to outperform state is that the bottom 1/3rd are simply not allowed through the door, so the achievement stats are naturally skewed.

My ex works at a private school - I could tell you all sorts of stories about the dysfunctional parents (several of whom appear regularly in the tabloids) and their poor kids. Often they are probably just as or more challenging and disruptive than most of the kids in your local comprehensive. There is also probably little to choose in the quality of teaching delivered by most teachers in either sector. Although I experienced some really poor supply/temp teachers with my kids in certain subjects from time to time, but they were the exception.

It's similar to the question about and NHS surgeon over a private surgeon. Would you consider paying £100k plus for an operation in the private sector than you could have done for free in the NHS? Perhaps you would. I know I wouldn't.

If you're looking at a 6 figure investment - I'd choose a good state, if you have one, and invest the money for them instead.

But then, I'm a cheapskate and hate paying for something once, let alone twice.

Lol

The exact figures, for primary I am praying they will pass the 11+ for which competition I am expecting to rocket as the credit crunch affects people who would have gone for private senior, is £96,000 in total.

My main concern is confidence in their and my ability to get them through the 11+ in truth, god knows what I'd do if they failed.

I have about half of that saved the rest would come from salary.

Trust me I do agree with you, it's the cuts that I know are already happening that are scarring the life out me.

[Si1]

Here's my two pennorth, and I have no intention to offend. After 10 years interviewing for places/teaching/ awarding degrees as a university senior lecturer I see no difference whatever between state and privately educated students.

but isn't that a selective bias - at whichever university you have taught at, it is likely to have recruited students of a similar minimum standard - intentionally - so you could plausibly have got mediocre private school students and put them against strong state school students, for example

[juvenal]

but isn't that a selective bias - at whichever university you have taught at, it is likely to have recruited students of a similar minimum standard - intentionally - so you could plausibly have got mediocre private school students and put them against strong state school students, for example

Why would any institution do that? Unless they were so far down the tables they couldn't fill courses. Where I worked at one time we had 8/9 applicants for every place. You recruit to get the best possible students, who are likely to get the most out of the degree, and eventually get into a career in their intended field.

Where they come from is irrelevant. It's qualifications already gained + decent UCAS personal statement and prior relevant achievments + interview performance/attitude/personality (if applicable) - that gets them accepted or rejected.

[Si1]

Why would any institution do that? Unless they were so far down the tables they couldn't fill courses. Where I worked at one time we had 8/9 applicants for every place. You recruit to get the best possible students, who are likely to get the most out of the degree, and eventually get into a career in their intended field.

Where they come from is irrelevant. It's qualifications already gained + decent UCAS personal statement and prior relevant achievments + interview performance/attitude/personality (if applicable) - that gets them accepted or rejected.

forgive me I think we may have wires crossed. If they go for the best students they can get, then this implies a bottom level below which you wouldn't recruit - I am not meaning to suggest they try to lower standards!?! . Same difference. And also implies that other higher rated institutions may cream off the very best, suggesting you have distinct ability level limits in you intake - neither the very cleverest who I might expect to go to Oxford, nor the less able who may not be high up in your list.

(on re-reading wht I originally wrote, I did word it quite badly... I meant there wasd a common lower standard below which you would not recruit, not that they are all recruited to match the lower level only... doh)

Back to my original point - an intake at a given university department is likely to be selected to be within certain ability limits - so comparing state with private school students won't say much, because of course they wil be of similar ability, they were selected within the same limits....

[juvenal]

Back to my original point - an intake at a given university department is likely to be selected to be within certain ability limits - so comparing state with private school students is disingenuous, because of course they wil be of similar ability, they were selected within the same limits....

No problem. But one doesn't have an upper ability limit. I've had students who got, but later rejected an Oxford place. Given that Oxbridge offer a limited range of courses (they can't do everything), and they don't top the league tables for everything they offer, there will always be less high profile or niche places which are known to be the best in the UK for a given subject.

This is where parents are often in the dark. They know the names of Russell Group universities, and assume anything else is less regarded. It all depends on what one wants to study. If computer animation is your thing, I don't think you would be looking at Oxbridge. But you would still be needing some serious Maths A levels.

Sorry if I've strayed off the OP's original request.

[eightiesgirly]

Children who have the ability will do well in any reasonable school. Most of the rest can be aquired later, many kids waste opportunities at college or university and decide to return to education later in life with a better appreciation of the need for study. Sometimes they need to make their own opportunities.

I think if you do decide to go private it would be wise to make sure you can afford the fees for the whole of their school education. Going from private school to a state school would be a bit of a trauma methinks.