Putting kids through private school, or moving house to get to a better school

[d000hg]

IMO, Ofsted results are useless. Even the "outstanding" schools aren't great.

Based on each person's entirely subjective view of what 'great' entails of course. If you view 'great' as being indoctrinated with precisely the 'right' set of views you yourself hold then you are probably correct.

Also bear in mind that whilst your children our being educated at a state school, they are exposed to all kinds of politically correct nonsense, given the cervical cancer vaccine at 12, taught that "it's the taking part that counts, not the winning" (when we all know, only those at the top of their game do well), etc., etc.

Oh you're one of those. No need for further debate.

[eek]

Based on each person's entirely subjective view of what 'great' entails of course. If you view 'great' as being indoctrinated with precisely the 'right' set of views you yourself hold then you are probably correct.
Oh you're one of those. No need for further debate.

I know a few of those. Its going to be "interesting" hearing their excuses in the next few years.

[SantaClaus]

Based on each person's entirely subjective view of what 'great' entails of course. If you view 'great' as being indoctrinated with precisely the 'right' set of views you yourself hold then you are probably correct.
Oh you're one of those. No need for further debate.

Interpret it how you want, but I'll use common sense, thank you.

In the case of our local primary which is classified as "good", the teachers couldn't control the kids, they weren't stimulated, had no manners. The headmistress of the school actually confirmed to me that they don't push the kids very hard and just meet the requirements of the lowest common denominator, i.e. those kids with learning difficulties.

They were most concerned with something called "intervention" and mentioned it at every opportunity, i.e. their main concerns were dealing with unruly or difficult kids.

[eek]

Interpret it how you want, but I'll use common sense, thank you.

In the case of our local primary which is classified as "good", the teachers couldn't control the kids, they weren't stimulated, had no manners. The headmistress of the school actually confirmed to me that they don't push the kids very hard and just meet the requirements of the lowest common denominator, i.e. those kids with learning difficulties.

They were most concerned with something called "intervention" and mentioned it at every opportunity, i.e. their main concerns were dealing with unruly or difficult kids.

That isn't what intervention means in the modern educational sense. Either you know that and are being an idiot for arguments sake or else you weren't bright enough to admit lack of knowledge and ask the head to explain with examples.

[DodgyAgent]

Based on each person's entirely subjective view of what 'great' entails of course. If you view 'great' as being indoctrinated with precisely the 'right' set of views you yourself hold then you are probably correct.
Oh you're one of those. No need for further debate.

I presume that is because you cannot debate it so instead you lazily sneer at the comment.

[Alf W]

It's a numbers games to me.

The boy's previous state primary school class had 30 kids in it including two with behavioural issues. The focus of attention is on those who have not yet made the required standards for the year which means the 'reached standards' kids get little attention and teaching time. The school was a 'good' school by state school standards.

Current private school class has 15 kids in it all of whom get tailored personal attention. Plus the school knows it has paying customers who will call them to account if they don't deliver.

I went to a State Primary school and a Private Secondary school. If I compare the career paths of my contemporaries at those two schools there is a marked difference in fortune.

I don't agree with the status in school being linked to the wealth of the parents. At my school we never really knew or cared who's parents had the money until 18th Birthday parties started coming around.

Simply, it's there if you want to pay for it. I could have a better car with the money or better holidays etc. It's just how I choose to spend it.

[rootsnall]

If your kids are top set material and you live in a decent area and therefore have a decent comp then I personally don't think it's worth it. If your kids aren't naturally smart enough to get good GCSEs ( and therefore not be streamed with the smart kids ) at the local comp then it's a different matter and it could potentially make a difference going private. I'm facing that dilema with one of mine and so far with a year or 2 to make my mind up.

Locally we've got a highly sought after 6th form, you just need to get good enough grades at 16 to get into the 6th form and you are back in with a lot of the private kids anyway.

[Platypus]

Oh you're one of those. No need for further debate.

Off topic but I'm curious to know why you feel that people who didn't have their daughters vaccinated are "one of those" ?

[formant]

If your kids are top set material and you live in a decent area and therefore have a decent comp then I personally don't think it's worth it. If your kids aren't naturally smart enough to get good GCSEs ( and therefore not be streamed with the smart kids ) at the local comp then it's a different matter and it could potentially make a difference going private.

I tend to agree. If a kid is academically superior to most of his/her peers, they'll be at the top whatever school they go to and on the purely educational side they'll get very little value out of attending a private school. Sure, there's all the extra-curricular benefits, but that's stuff that can easily be paid for outside of school.

In sending your kids to private school based on the educational benefits, you're basically admitting that they're no more than average at best. That's tough for many parents to come to terms with. But it's precisely the average ones who profit massively from the small class sizes, the added confidence (arrogance?), and the extra attention.

If a kid is at the bottom end with regards to academic ability, it may also not be worth it. I at least wouldn't fancy the feeling of wasting my cash on private schooling if the kid just isn't going to put in the work.

But then I still like the idea of having a bit more input as a 'paying customer'. But for more than one kid it's just too much money.

[Platypus]

In sending your kids to private school based on the educational benefits, you're basically admitting that they're no more than average at best.

Often but not necessarily true. Public schools tend to push the kids harder, which means the lazy clever ones, who'd otherwise just doss around, get pushed and get the results they're capable of.