Would you send your kid to private school?

[stony]

Lets face it, if anyone on here won the Euromillions would they be sending the kids to the brick and mortar shitholes like we all went to, no way.

In a nutshell. Don't get me wrong, I hate the idea of private schools and think every kid should get an equal opportunity. However, given a choice of making a meaningless political statement or getting my kids a top class education and a chance to make contacts that will set them up for life, then its a no brainer.

 

[EalingBlue2]

No. Never. Not even if somebody else offered to pay.

I would close them all down tomorrow. They are an anachronistic throwback to days of Empire, designed to perpuate the elite and maintain privilige.



If they do remain, i would make anyone educated at such a place automatically barred from Parliament, the judiciary and any other public office.

Couldn't agree more - too often private schooling is a parents attempt to outsource parenting and to abdicate responsibility for education . The only circumstance I would go against my deep held principles is if my kids were ever the victim of bullying or had s special learning need that only paying could help.

For the money I would spend on private education my kids could have hi days around the world (this is where you really learn, could have music or sports of whatever they want and most importantly m wife and I would be able to earn a bit less so we can spend quality time with them, helping them read, talking to them, walking and learning about the world etc.

Nothing sickens Me more than parents who spend a fortune on education but spend no time with their Kids teach them nothing , and think they are wonderful parents to the kids they can't relate too because they go to a posh school!

 

[EalingBlue2]

My 3 year old has gone to a private nursery that leads onto a private school next year since he was 18 months old. The missis and I are skint because of it, we also moved closer to the school, again doubling our rent. We haven't had a big holiday in 2 years and don't really spoil ourselves with many nights out etc but we think education is the most important thing we could offer our son. Of course it's pretentious and the other parents drive Bentleys etc but my missis and I both have normal working class upbringings. This I think leads him to be grounded somewhat by us. He at the moment is streets ahead of any 3/4 year old I know and is mistaken for a 5 year old due to his vocabulary and ability to write already! Money well spent in my opinion![/quot

At that age smart kids will catch up in no time kids who have been taught and coached before school, coming from about 5 generations of teachers and academics we studiously avoided any reading for our daughter before kindergarten - some kids who had been taught early started the year 15 reading levels ahead , 8 months later the 2 or 3 really smart kids in the class had caught up.

Before 7 years old, kids (especially boys) need to learn through play, exploring, interaction, trying too much classroom learning early can be detrimental.

In australia a lot more people are privately educated but 9 of the 10 top academic schools in NSW are state schools.

It is also proven through research that s state educated student with identical grades to a private educated student will achieve higher marks at university than their private school compatriot. That said the students getting good grades will likely have come through good state schools.

 

[EalingBlue2]

Both my kids have been through private school and have benefitted enormously from it. As someone mentioned earlier, you get more motivated parents who want to take an active part in their kids' education so fundraising activities are much better supported, but there are plenty more reasons:

• You get a mix of races and cultures that mirrors the area where the school is located, something the state sector doesn't manage anywhere near as successfully.
  Not having to follow the National Curriculum means that private schools can concentrate on teaching kids the things that actually matter, rather than the cack that some committee in the House of Commons dreamt up.
  There is more of a culture among the teachers to actually teach: much less of the largely discredited 'child centred learning' that is still favoured in state schools who hang on to the outdated notion that kids will go and learn if you just allow them to.
  The teachers are much more likely to fully involve themselves in their schools so there are more extra curricular activities.
  The kids are expected to have manners and to behave well toward one another and this is taught and insisted upon.
  There is a culture of expectation. Kids are expected to behave and to succeed and they know that they are. Excuses for poor behaviour or performance are much less tolerated.
  Generally, although paid a lot worse than their state counterparts, private school teachers are better qualified in their subject area, with a higher proportion of teachers holding masters degrees and doctorates.

bullshit

You could have put any sentence in that post in bold and called it bullshit.

Have to say I couldn't disagree more with the main post, it is incorrect on nearly every point!

 

[EalingBlue2]

The bitterness is tangible

Im not bitter at all.

In my world nobody would have to pay to send kids to a private school as all schools would be superb. The most intelligent would get the best education and chance to expand there horizons and the least intelligent would get the best education and the chance to expand there horizons regardless of social standing or wealth. Argue against that if you can?

Lovely idea that all state schools were superb but the fact is that they are not.

Our local state primary school was failing my twin daughters so we felt that we had to take them out and put them in a private prep school: we did not believe that the local options for secondary eductation in the state offered the standard of education that our daughters needed and wanted to make sure that they could get into a suitable private secondary school. The difference was massive and now they are in year 9 at one of the top 20 (maybe 10) girls' schools in the country.

Fucks me off hugely that I have to spend all that money on education on top of the tax that I pay but nothing is more important to my wife and I than our children and we deem the sacrifices involved in getting them the best possible education worth it.

I agree with you that it is outrageous that anyone had to pay for private education for any other reason than religion or snobbery. Education is the future of any country and sny half decent country should have s great system of state education that caters to all and means private education is an unnecessary luxury and never as you say an educational necessity!

My comments in prior posts relate to where a good state education is available of the local schools are crap then something clearly needs to be done s out it and the government responsible should be turfed out

 

[Chancy Termites]

bullshit

You could have put any sentence in that post in bold and called it bullshit.

Have to say I couldn't disagree more with the main post, it is incorrect on nearly every point!

All of you are welcome to expand your points beyond their current "Oh no it it isn't!" level. Until then though, "Oh yes it is!"

 

[Bozzie]

Don't think anybody would disagree that, in an ideal world, there would be no requirement for private schools because all kids would have access to a top quality education. Unfortunately that isn't generally the case in the real world.

As the product of a '70's comprehensive school, whose only real claim to fame was being chosen as the subject for a World in Action documentary on truancy, it's impossible to know how you would have fared in a private environment. One thing we did have at our school was some absolutely fantastic teachers, we had some shite as well don't get me wrong, but some of them I remember with admiration and gratitude. The other thing I had personally was a father who was almost obsessed with our education, it was a huge blow to both me and our kid when he died when I was 12 and she 14. That definitely had a massive impact on what we achieved academically, far more so than the quality of our school and/or teachers.

The only thing I would say to anyone who puts their child into a private school is, don't think that paying for your child's education absolves you of responsibility for encouraging, assisting and taking interest in their education. Parental involvement is as important to your child's education as is the quality of the school they attend.

 

[ColinBellsjockstrap]

Money always rules, always has done always will do......it's shite, but there it is.

If you were seriously ill with a liver complaint (say) and the NHS said we can fit you in in two weeks, but you could have it done privately tomorrow, and you had £200,000 in a savings account/shares, what would most people do?

It's all about freedom of choice, in an ideal world everyone would be forced to go to a state school, but would that really be an ideal world?

Parents in China (a communist country) send their kids to England because of the kudos that comes with an "English" private/uni education.

Forgetting about the actual education benefits, one advantage going private is there may only be fifteen in the class instead of thirty five.

But yes, it's a difficult one...

 

[117 M34]

Both my kids have been through private school and have benefitted enormously from it. As someone mentioned earlier, you get more motivated parents who want to take an active part in their kids' education so fundraising activities are much better supported, but there are plenty more reasons:

• You get a mix of races and cultures that mirrors the area where the school is located, something the state sector doesn't manage anywhere near as successfully.
  
  So state schools don't have a mix of races and cultures? Everyone I've ever worked in have reflected the local area's mix of races, one of which had very few non-white children and one which had very few white children - but both reflected the local area. Others had a mix of races, with roughly % of the immediate area.
  
  Not having to follow the National Curriculum means that private schools can concentrate on teaching kids the things that actually matter, rather than the cack that some committee in the House of Commons dreamt up.
  
  Academies or free schools also don't have to follow the NC - are they proving to be better than state schools? No! There is a NC for good reason and not having following it means that the curriculum that is taught in the school is open to interpretation by the head teacher. So, if for example the head teacher is a religious nutjob, they will end up being taught the ins and outs of the bible. This can be substituted for any other interests of the given head teacher.
  
  There is more of a culture among the teachers to actually teach: much less of the largely discredited 'child centred learning' that is still favoured in state schools who hang on to the outdated notion that kids will go and learn if you just allow them to.
  
  You mean chalk and talk? Very outdated and there is a good reason why that isn't seen as the best way to teach.
  
  The teachers are much more likely to fully involve themselves in their schools so there are more extra curricular activities.
  
  They are paid to involve themselves in their school - state school teachers do not get paid extra for leading extra-curricular activities, they do it for the good of the children and for free.
  
  
  The kids are expected to have manners and to behave well toward one another and this is taught and insisted upon.
  
  Generalisation
  
  There is a culture of expectation. Kids are expected to behave and to succeed and they know that they are. Excuses for poor behaviour or performance are much less tolerated.
  
  Generalisation
  
  Generally, although paid a lot worse than their state counterparts, private school teachers are better qualified in their subject area, with a higher proportion of teachers holding masters degrees and doctorates.
  
  Where are you getting the stats for this from? Do you think that having a better qualification makes someone a better teacher?

 

[Kippax Street 1880]

No. Not even as a billionaire. If I was a billionaire I wouldn't send my kid to school at all.