Private education

granjura our children went to independent days schools so had to do their own homework (not prep) at home. They had to organise their time so, when they got to university, they were capable of doing so. They didn't go berserk with sex, drink and drugs although I am sure they didn't totally avoid them.

There are a lot of assumptions made about private education but there is a vast difference between sending your children to Eton etc and the local ex- Direct Grant school which became private after the grant was removed but still offered a grammar school type of education.

mey if you read my post properly you will see that I was referring to one school in a particular location. I did not make a sweeping generalisation about state schools.

glass My children all went to the Ponteland schools to as we live on that well-known estate that you refer to. I can only say that their friends who came to our house , and the children of our friends, and the children I came into contact with when I helped in the classroom, were on the whole well-mannered and well-behaved.
I am sure there must have been times when there was bad behaviour, but the point is how it is dealt with within the school. I think in Ponteland there was good discipline and an expectation that children would behave properly, any disruption was minimised and the children didn't suffer. That wasn't the case in the Northumberland school that I was talking about.

gillybob I agree with you about the young children and I don't know the answer, except that I think as children get older many parents don't support the school in maintaining discipline.

jane it was only the odd incident where this happened. On the whole the school was very good.

The education kids receive from their parents is more important in my view than which school they go to. I agree with mey that attitude makes a huge difference. If children grow up in a family where education (which is not the same thing as schooling) is valued, they will generally do OK.

An Oxford don I worked with used to complain about the bad manners (arrogance) of the undergraduates who had been to private schools

Universities have to take the educational background of applicants into account, it's true, Mey. But discriminating against one group doesn't ensure better treatment for another. Any kind of blanket approach like this will create new unfairnesses. Suppose I choose to send my children to a state school and spend money on extra tuition, books, travel, visits to museums, art galleries, theatre and concerts and spend time discussing their experiences with them. Many people do that and no doubt it gives the children an advantage. Is it an unfair advantage? There was talk under the last government of discriminating against applicants whose parents had been to university. Is that fair?

I do not have many happy memories of school. My primary school was ruled over by a vile bully of a headmaster. I have horrible memories of him smiling while he scared young children into wetting themselves. (Absolutely true). He took absolute delight in standing in front of what he termed the "late line" and any child who did not make it over that line would have to go to his office at the end of school where they were smacked with his slipper.

I passed my 11+ exam and went to an all girls high school without any of my friends who did not pass the exam. The school was overrun by bullies (both pupils and teachers) and I hated it.

Sorry for last rant. I know I was moving away from the subject but just wanted to get it off my chest!

gilly go on you have a rant he sounds a horrible man.

He was a horrible man glass and I still have nightmares about him to this day. He was so much worse with the boys too which often makes me wonder.

Schooling in the UK is still divided on class lines in the UK unfortunately - and history is to blame. Whereas in my country, but also in most Northern European states like Sweden, Finland, Norway, etc - which are DEFINITELY not socialist/communist countries - the rich are 'happy' to pay more so that all the children can benefit from a good education - and where private schools are seen a 'society breakers'. This is not only for altruistic reasons, just to help the 'poorer' to have equality of access (and everyone know that this is only partial, children from well educated backgrounds where reading is the norm, discussion and debate is part of everyday life,, etc, etc- will always have the advantage most of the time)- but also one could say for more 'selfish' reasons, like having a well educated and trained workforce at all levels- which benefits business and of course stops depletion via social and unemployment services- and also because it results in a better, safer and more enjoyable society.

Think how much businesses in the UK suffer from the lack of well trained personel in some fields/areas - and how much a society where we have 2nd, even 3rd generation unemployed, and practically unemployable - young people? And also the social problems generated by this in our towns, which are increasingly not safe, and not due to immigrants! The idea of 'sink' schools where there is a huge concentration of problems, with the other extreme of private schools with small classes, lots of support, etc, does not exist in those countries- and neither the resulting social problems later.

granjura what you say makes a great deal of sense. Unfortunately, since the 19th century in UK there has been total confusion about what the purpose of education is. It swings between purely mechanistic, training workers and to hell with personal development and the idea that education is value added for individuals and therefore private property. And the educational system we have always reflects the dominant ideology. The independent schools have trundled along following their own path and picking up only whatever new trends suit them. Perhaps that's the secret of their success.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if all state schools were so brilliant that the question of private education never arose!?

In the main people make the private choice because they do not think their children will get a good education in the state sector. Some areas have good state schools and some do not and this is what needs tackling. Every parent should be able to feel secure that their children would be well educated in their local school. Tony Blair somewhat failed in his "education x 3" project and some schools are truly useless. The poor staff who have to work under this flawed system have all my sympathy.

I attended state schools, my parents couldn't afford a private education for me, as with my DD and my GD.

I have absolutely no problem with anybody choosing to get their children a private education. Why would I, it's not for me to say who, how or why private education is chosen for another parents child. I have no green eyed monster that says if I can't have it, nobody should have it.

What I do find disingenuous is the parent who has sent their child into the private school system and the person who has received a private education commenting about others who have also had a private education in a hostile/negative way. An example would be a journalist who has sent his/her child to a private school but then kicks in the teeth the likes of MP's and Ministers who have had the same education. I don't get it, is that not hypocrisy?

I hate class vilification.. It is not worthy of an intelligent mind. There are good privately educated/public school people, no different than there are good state educated people. Surely to goodness it is not beyond the wit of man to establish a persons character/worth by looking and judging what they do, not by how they were educated. That's like saying if you went to a state school you are as thick as pig s--t and will never amount to anything.
Equally as stupid and just as barmy.

Definitely an advantage to have private education. I sent both of mine to independent day schools and it was absolutely the right thing to do. I am hoping DS will accept our offer to pay for GC's education so that they too can benefit.
Jane do you ever eat at the Cafe in the place that will remain unnamed ? DH and I eat there regularly on a Saturday lunchtime.

harri Yes, sometimes go there with DH or with my friend.
Not so often now I'm retired and can't claim to be too tired to cook!

There was certainly never any question of sending me to a private school, we couldn't even have afforded the uniform. I was fortunate in getting into the grammar school and the education I received there seemed to be on a par with our neighbours who were privately educated. My two went to the little village primary school and then the local, pretty average comprehensive. It was attending parents' meetings there that convinced me that private education was a bad thing. It wasn't particularly a class thing, but just the fact that there were so few parents who were interested and articulate enough to influence what happened in the school. Most of them just agreed to any changes with no grasp of what they might mean for the pupils because most of the parents who might have made a difference had got their children at the private school up the road.
Having said all that I still think the most important influence is the home. Both my children have grown up learning far more than they were ever taught at school and hopefully my grandson will be the same.

MY mum was offered a place at a grammar school but her parents could not aford the uniform and bus fares so she could not go. She was thrilled when I went to a grammar school and I would have like the same for my children but there are none in our area. My daughter was fortunate to get a partial bursary to a local independant school and I took on a second job to pay the rest of the costs. I was happy to do so to give her the best chance possible. I believe that school raised the pupils aspirations. It was never" if you go to university" but "when you go to university". My older son went to a state school and also did well and went on to university but the schools in this area have deteriorated and the choices are limited for my youngest son. I cannot afford to move closer to a "good" school ( is this not selection by income?) or to pay school fees as OH only in temporary work. We will however do our best to help our son along and to broaden his horizons.

POGS I saw understand what you mean. Green eye monster is never good nor helpful. But again, I will repeat the point of view of many central and Northern European countries (neither socialist/nor communist) where it is strongly held that private education is divisive and creates a 2 tier society- and that although private schooling in smaller classes, etc, may be better for individual children at the time - it creates problems in society which are to the detriment of all. What is happening in UK society at the moment, with sink estates and kids who are practically unemployable and causing havoc too often, is a terrible illustration of that. The 'opposition' of sink schools versus private is a disaster. And just does not exist in the above mentioned countries. And therefore not worth it in the long term for anybody.

My best friend (much younger than me) lives in an area where the school is 'not a good one' to say the least. But with parental support, her kids have done so well - with the son about to take A'Levels with 4 A* predicted, and the daughter about to take GCSE's with 8 A* and 2 A predicted. My Oh as said, before of parents continually moving, changed schools 9 times during is under 18 education, and got to medical school with flying colours. Again, if you look at the top business wo/men in the UK, most have had state education and had to fight their corner to survive - adversity is one of the best ways to motivate many.

I think there is some misunderstanding about what happens in schools on the continent. I am far from being an expert but I do know that our two half french GC both went to private schools for their last 3 years of education. These schools seem to charge "top up " fees paid by parents on top of the state provision. Our family is not especially rich or posh and it seemed that many local families in that area of France chose the private route for the same sort of reasons that most families in UK do. Both the GC did very well and went onto top colleges. There appears to be no discrimination in France against privately educated children.

As I say, I am no expert, just reporting what happened in our family.

I would be interested in some statistics about the realities of success in education and the types of school. Private, comprehensive or state Grammar schools,

What are we measuring as success?

I will take it as given that some children are brighter than others to start with.

In general those children from privileged back grounds have parents who are usually bright and highly motivated towards education. That is already a head start.

In order to judge the success of different schools properly you would need to assess every pupil at every school on exactly the same factors, say at 5years!
You would need to look at so many factors, the childs aptitude, parental motivation, housing, finances, diet, family functioning. Basically an impossible task.

I think many state schools do try to do a value added assessment based on improvement over the key stages. Which is probably as objective as you can get.

I suspect most private schools have entrance exams to cream off the brightest. That automatically pre selects that school for success and rules out any objective assessment of whether or not, those pupils would have fared as well in a reasonable good state school.

This means that the private schools have a higher proportion of clever children to start with so should quite naturally have a higher proportion of good exam results at GCSE. The beloved criteria of the governments league tables.

So school results, and how good the teaching at the school is, is difficult to assess with any real objectivity.
Some state schools are clearly failing though I dont deny that it might have more to do with bad leadership than anything else.

I dont know if there are any studies about this?

This is quite interesting www.suttontrust.com/news/news/ten-private-schools-produce-a-tenth-of-the-countrys-elite/. You can't compare the pre- 1970 grammar schools, which took between 10% and 20% of the age group all over the country and grammar schools today which are restricted to only a few local authority areas and are even more selective than in the days of the 11+. Most of them became comprehensives and some became independent. It's too early to tell whether academy and free schools are doing a good job. they don't have to publish all theirvresults and there's so much spin around them anyway. NB. Haverstock School that Ed Milliband went to, is listed as among the top 10 state comps in the country.

If you look at the league tables, you will see that the 'top' private schools almost invariably outrank the best comprehensives, but you will also notice that some private schools do considerably worse. These are, I suspect, the schools that have to be content with the children rejected by the top schools. Well, that's selection for you...

Life isn't fair, well known fact. Our children were educated privately with help from grandparents and for that I am grateful. However, unlike a lot of their friends educated in the state system, they did not have numerous holidays abroad, or computers/Tv in every bedroom, dancing/gym/or whatever after school activity, Dad driving an expensive 4x4 etc..... It was our choice to go down that route, and yes they were in receipt of a lot of grief from their friends and, sadly from friends parents, because of that choice, and no, they weren't all happy that they were 'different' at the time. It did, however, 'put hairs on their chests', and I firmly feel, prepare them for the big wide world, taught them to think for themselves, to be prepared for what was going to be thrown at them in the future without having to resort to asking for help all the time, a good all round education and no, none of them were particularly high fliers. Perhaps they would have been the same had they gone to the local comprehensive, we will never know, but you do your best and what is right at the time, and no one, but no one, has the right to criticise you for that. They all became confident, all rounded adults, able to converse equally with our local man of the road and 'aristocracy' alike, and they all now appreciate that we did what we did for good reasons, so much so that the daughter who hated 'private education snobs' is now talking about private education for her own children! One friend (sister of a Labour Party leader - no names!) could not get her head round the fact that by educating our girls privately, we were saving the State money which could be redirected elsewhere; she was so obsessed with the iniquity of it.

In a perfect world all children would get the education they deserve - however it isn't always the case. I live in an area with good schools and we still have Grammer schools down here which rate highly on the 100 best schools in the Sunday Times. However, if I could afford it I would love to send my 2 grand children to private schools, they live in a good urban area with good schools but I would prefer the smaller classes you get in a private school.
I went to 19 schools so towards the end my education was suffering. For this reason my parents sent my brother and me to a local private school to enable us to catch up. The classes were small and at times we even had one to one education.
Some years ago a friend of mine took a post-grad course to enable her to teach. She was in her late 40's at the time. She got a job at a local secondary school in London ,a Catholic one so she assumed that being a Church school it would be good. She lasted one term, due to the appalling behaviour of the students who didn't seem to want to learn anything. Also the teachers were so disheartened they seem to have given up. She felt she was policing the students from 9 to 3 not teaching them.
British education was always declared to be the best in the world. Not anymore compared to schools in Europe, the US, India and Jamaica - there are black parents who send their children back to Jamaica to be educated.We still seem to think our education is the best because of this attitude we aren't improving a failing system.

I think POGS and Gally have made very good points.

People will always be green-eyed when someone has something they envy, whether it is schooling, holidays, cars or whatever.

A couple of years ago we went to a small local pantomime where most of the audience were school children. There was a clear difference between the appearance and behaviour of the children from the private schools and those from the state. We also noticed that the state school teachers sat together and the private school ones were interspersed with the children!

I don't think I know whether any of the people I have ever worked with were state or privately educated so don't think there is any difference when we get out into the world of work.

DS3 went to the Royal Ballet School and at the age of 16 had to live in a flat in London. Some of the RBS students went a bit wild when they were 'free' as has been suggested when they go to universities but then so did some of the ones who had not gone to the RBS but to state schools. I don't think their previous education was relevant as much as their upbringing.

Yesterday I had a private hospital consultation, my choice. I think that by so doing I saved the NHS money. It is the same with private education, we all pay for state education whether we use it or not so if anyone chooses to pay additionally for they child's education they are saving the rest of us money. Their choice. Yes, I know private schools get charitable status but that does not equate to the cost of the fees and nowadays they have to do things for the community to retain that status.