[Alix23]

I'm currently at a state grammar school, and next year I'm moving to a private school for 6th form.
My school gets exceptional results, but the teaching isn't great. It's all to do with smart kids coming in and the high numbers of priate tutors hired for exam prep (the schools in a very middle class area).
My parents will pay £40-60K for me to do this, and I have three brothers as well, but their school (linked with mine) is much better, mostly just becuase it has staff that care, so they won't move for 6th form.
Most of my friends don't understand why I'm doing this, but it's mostly just that the priate schools far exceed our school in a few areas, mostly UCAS help, extracurricular provision and support for those exceeding the norm.

[jennifex]

(Original post by roh)
That must be very rare. I have a couple of mates who went to original Public Schools Act places and even they mention having the odd bad teacher. That's just lucky for the school, because they won't ave been paying any more than other states due to the banding system and even private teachers don't earn much more.

Much as I love doctors (I hope to spend my life defending them against malicious malpractice suits!) surely there's some not so great ones in a place as big as a hospital? Particularly given there's not the sort of streaming by grade you see in Law (Magic Circle), Accountancy (Big 4), Investment Banking (Bulge Bracket) etc.?

I can't judge how they served other pupils because my school was entirely setted. I only ever saw the top 1/7th or 1/14th of the school so only saw what they did with the top end. Friends in middle sets seemed to think most of their teachers were good though, but that's just hearsay I never saw it myself.

I think the class sizes help and they are probably on average better, largely because there are no bad ones (due to market forces) compared to states. My original point was just that private doesn't automatically equal better, every parent should do and check schools themselves.

I think the actual standard of teaching is probably the same (teachers are generally a pretty lefty bunch it seems and often don't teach privately on principle) but the numbers is a major advantage private schools have in spotting pupils falling behind.

Yes I agree private doesn't automatically equal better. I don't think it was down to luck that my school did not have a single bad teacher, it was due to a very competent headmaster who had very stringent selection methods. That doesn't mean the school paid any more, just that they were selective of who they employed. It was a desirable place to work so there was never a shortage of people to choose from I guess, unlike a state school where you might only have a few applicants (not really sure how competitive it is!)

With regards to hospitals, you said that every hospital would have a bad doctor. Doctors have to go through all sorts of extensive checks of ability, knowledge and competence before they are allowed to practise. Whilst some will slip through the net (as in all aspects of life) I would certainly hope that it is nowhere near as many as one in every hospital! Although of course it depends how you would define a "bad doctor" and of course I'm going off the topic of the thread a bit here :P

[roh]

(Original post by jennifex)
Yes I agree private doesn't automatically equal better. I don't think it was down to luck that my school did not have a single bad teacher, it was due to a very competent headmaster who had very stringent selection methods. That doesn't mean the school paid any more, just that they were selective of who they employed. It was a desirable place to work so there was never a shortage of people to choose from I guess, unlike a state school where you might only have a few applicants (not really sure how competitive it is!)

With regards to hospitals, you said that every hospital would have a bad doctor. Doctors have to go through all sorts of extensive checks of ability, knowledge and competence before they are allowed to practise. Whilst some will slip through the net (as in all aspects of life) I would certainly hope that it is nowhere near as many as one in every hospital! Although of course it depends how you would define a "bad doctor" and of course I'm going off the topic of the thread a bit here :P

A lot of heads would love to have the option to be stringent but not always there. One of my parents recently advertsied for a load of Maths teachers, all on what's called Advanced Skills Teacher wage ie. more money. Only 2 applicants even had a 2:1 in Maths, another couple who were good anyway and after that they just had to take the others as there were only as many applicants as jobs. It's far from rare in STEM to get only 1-2 applicants for a job and sometimes they get none. Unfortunately at that point you have to just take the person who's qualified, even if you have reservations about their ability to teach

I realise the work they all do, girlfriend's a medic. By bad, I don't mean making bad mistakes (though those ones will keep me employed ) all the time just in the bottom 5% of Doctors generally.

[EmilyStevens]

I went to a state school, which was known for being a pretty bad school. But I came out with really good GCSE's and a lot of good experiences. I always wanted to go to Private School, because they alwasy seemed to have more oppurtunites than state school kids, however, my friend who went to a private is in the same position as me. Just shows that they don't always end up on top.

[MHRed]

I would send my kids to state schools - a decision that's not influenced by expense at all. I don't know an awful lot about private schools, but I feel state school shaped me in a lot of ways (dealing with idiots, working hard, being able to integrate into a variety of social groups, etc) and feel it has done me no harm. I'd like my kids to have a similar experience.

[Darkphilosopher]

All this stuff about going to a state school = more social cohesion is total bs. I had far more friends at the private school I attended (though tbf I was living in Thailand at the time and didn't speak Thai) than I had/have at state schools in the UK.

[LETSJaM]

It's the guardian = the lefty equivalent of the Mail.

Of course they're going to love in on state schools

<3 x

[PointeShoes-x]

(Original post by Amhorangerdgerriug)
My experience of state school was living in fear every day because I was an above average student and was threatened daily for trying to make something of my education. My fellow students were primarily obnoxious wannabe gangsters who spent their time beating each other up and dragging their knuckles along the floor. The idea that you get a more balanced education, learning about society is absolute *******s; it is simply the excuse of the parents who decide to send their kids there. At my school there are kids from all different backgrounds, about 30% are on scholarships and others have parents who sacrifice a large proportion of their income to send their offspring there. Unless you have experienced private schools, I'm afraid you have no right to comment, and vice versa.

I think this is very unfair. This might be true about some state schools but certainly not all of them. I went to a good state school and a good state college and I don't think I could justify it if my parents had spent thousands of pounds on a private education. I came out of school with only two As, the other 10 of my GCSEs being A*s, and out of college with 3 As (I was ill, otherwise I probably would have got some A*s). I don't think I could have achieved much more at private school, maybe there would have been slightly more extra-curricular opportunities, but it's not like I didn't get any, I did a lot of dance and there were plenty of sport and music opportunities etc. My brother went to a state school in a worse area than me, with more bad behaviour etc and he's done even better than me and is probably off to Oxford soon, so to be homnest private schools would have been a massive waste of money for our parents.

I know that some state schools are bad, but some are very good. If I can afford it when I have children I will definitely consider private school, but I'd rather live in an area with good state schools as I believe that it's perfectly possible for many people to achieve their full potentials there, and spend the money on other things.

[habs10]

I have experienced both, and whilst I regularly speak with those from state schools, I have experienced the huge gulf between them, first-hand. I find that in state schools, the pupils aren't exposed; by that, I mean bluntly, no offence intended, a good portion of them can't hold a sensible converstion with an adult. I'm currently attending a private school, I'm not a snob, my parents are middle-class working parents, and each yeah\r, they barely pay for my school fees. I'm on a 50% scholarship, and my parents decided to send me to a private school, not because of the academic difference, but for the reason that I mentioned above. In my opinion, private schools are worth it.

[habs10]

Furthermore, in regards to the Guardian article about people not being exposed to 'wider society', it is completely invalid; as it depends on where you were brought up; I've been brought up in a low-income, predominantly Asian area, and although I attend a public school an hour away from my house, I have been exposed to what lays beyond my school walls.

I do not mean any disrespect to those who attend state schools; I am merely saying that I prefer private education over state.

[Amhorangerdgerriug]

(Original post by PointeShoes-x)
I think this is very unfair. This might be true about some state schools but certainly not all of them. I went to a good state school and a good state college and I don't think I could justify it if my parents had spent thousands of pounds on a private education. I came out of school with only two As, the other 10 of my GCSEs being A*s, and out of college with 3 As (I was ill, otherwise I probably would have got some A*s). I don't think I could have achieved much more at private school, maybe there would have been slightly more extra-curricular opportunities, but it's not like I didn't get any, I did a lot of dance and there were plenty of sport and music opportunities etc. My brother went to a state school in a worse area than me, with more bad behaviour etc and he's done even better than me and is probably off to Oxford soon, so to be homnest private schools would have been a massive waste of money for our parents.

I know that some state schools are bad, but some are very good. If I can afford it when I have children I will definitely consider private school, but I'd rather live in an area with good state schools as I believe that it's perfectly possible for many people to achieve their full potentials there, and spend the money on other things.

It may be unfair in many cases, but I was only giving my personal experience - which is as above.

[Scumbaggio]

I went to a small mixed private school so I can only speak about my experience

I wouldn't say that I've been done a disservice but not everything is wonderful about private schools. I believe you are effectively paying for a small class size and more time spent with each pupil per teacher.

The sports/PE lessons were a complete joke, we had to use other organisation's playing fields and swimming pools. This meant our actual time playing sport was cut short by having to travel in order to do pretty much any sport. I remember PE was cross country running about 75% of the time.

The sports equipment we had was almost laughable compared to local private and state schools, a lot of it appeared to be older than me (I was born in 1987). We were regularly trounced by local schools at sport.

Many of our teachers were actually less qualified than at state schools due to the greater number of qualifications required by state schools (A number of our junior school teachers did not have a PGCE).

I do think they are worth the money in terms of actual grades recorded and in terms of the amount of help each student receives from teachers. I'm generally a left leaning kind of guy but if I had the chance I'd send my kids to a decent private school(certainly better than mine).

I am almost certain I'd have done much worse in my GCSEs if I had gone to my local comp.

[Farah-Lou]

(Original post by HASH1SICKUNT)
I have experienced both, and whilst I regularly speak with those from state schools, I have experienced the huge gulf between them, first-hand. I find that in state schools, the pupils aren't exposed; by that, I mean bluntly, no offence intended, a good portion of them can't hold a sensible converstion with an adult. I'm currently attending a private school, I'm not a snob, my parents are middle-class working parents, and each yeah\r, they barely pay for my school fees. I'm on a 50% scholarship, and my parents decided to send me to a private school, not because of the academic difference, but for the reason that I mentioned above. In my opinion, private schools are worth it.

you've pretty much taken all the words out my mouth! i'm in the same position as you (50% scholarship, hard-working parents).

positive rating

[Paralove]

I guess which type of school you attend is personal choice. But I believe that it doesn't matter, because it is just as much down to the pupil as it is to the teacher. I go to a school which became an academy in 2009, joint with another near-by school who are much better than ours when comparing results. My school achieved 50% A*-C (inc. English and maths) last year, and around 7 years ago, it was on the verge of closure. My teachers have been amazing, with some coming in on weekends and school holidays to make sure we had coursework completed, or to do extra revision sessions on top of our after-school ones.

However, you still had the few students who chose to put in minimal or no effort. The teachers can only do so much!

Well, my point is (if this has made any sense), is that going to a state school will not prevent you getting the top grades. I go to one. And my last report came back with me expecting to get a Distinction (BTEC ICT) an A in one subject and A*'s in my other 9 subjects. Your school does not determine how well you do. YOU determine how well you do, and the grades you achieve.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[SneakyDoug]

If you think that you get bullied by academically achieving at a state school you really are quite stupid; if some chav makes fun of you for achieving then you just ignore the comment and laugh at the fact that in 5 years he'll most likely be in jail. You don't take it to heart and move to a private school because you're so upset, bloody hell. I highly doubt you're the only person who cares about you're education at your school and all you need to do is hang around with these types of people - away from trouble. And plus by the time you're like 16 they're all gone anyway; if you can't deal with nasty comments about being smart, if you actually give thought to them, I really think that says something about you.

[Elderon]

I see no particular reason to have to pay for private education unless you want a fast track and almost guaranteed ticket to be taught how to be a true academic success and become a banker in the city or a researcher. Other than that (which is barely any reason at all), there is, I believe no point in paying for private. Private schools tend to have more upper class and higher class people in them who's parents can obviously invest in their education. This increases the risk of isolation from the rest of society (I am looking at you, Mr Cameron!). The great thing about state schools is, although the educational standard and one to one isn't as good, you are on a level playing field with everyone and are at no true disadvantage, where you can show off your potential through your pure hard work and dedication. It also allows you to mix with children from all classes of society and not get trapped in a bubble, that effectively means you are more aware of different views and are I suppose more socially 'liberal. While I do agree the facilities and teachers may be of higher 'standard'. I see many social downsides to it, also economic etc. Don't forget too, you can push a child into private education, but if he isn't a true academic and just wants to be more vocational, state school might be better as state schools tend to cater more vocational courses than private ones. Also, yes I can see the figures saying that top politicians, bankers etc are from private school, these are primarily from contacts that are gained. This is not necessarily an advantage though as if any state school child has the potential and works just as hard, they can be in the same position as any private school child, even grade terms. I see no reason to waste significant amounts of cash on a child that has just as much opportunity if encouraged in a good state school.

[Integral]

(Original post by Elderon)
I see no particular reason to have to pay for private education unless you want a fast track and almost guaranteed ticket to be taught how to be a true academic success and become a banker in the city or a researcher. Other than that (which is barely any reason at all), there is, I believe no point in paying for private. Private schools tend to have more upper class and higher class people in them who's parents can obviously invest in their education. This increases the risk of isolation from the rest of society (I am looking at you, Mr Cameron!). The great thing about state schools is, although the educational standard and one to one isn't as good, you are on a level playing field with everyone and are at no true disadvantage, where you can show off your potential through your pure hard work and dedication. It also allows you to mix with children from all classes of society and not get trapped in a bubble, that effectively means you are more aware of different views and are I suppose more socially 'liberal. While I do agree the facilities and teachers may be of higher 'standard'. I see many social downsides to it, also economic etc. Don't forget too, you can push a child into private education, but if he isn't a true academic and just wants to be more vocational, state school might be better as state schools tend to cater more vocational courses than private ones. Also, yes I can see the figures saying that top politicians, bankers etc are from private school, these are primarily from contacts that are gained. This is not necessarily an advantage though as if any state school child has the potential and works just as hard, they can be in the same position as any private school child, even grade terms. I see no reason to waste significant amounts of cash on a child that has just as much opportunity if encouraged in a good state school.

The first half of your post (which was quite hard to read due to lack of paragraphs) is ridiculous

[Calllu-m]

I'm at an independent boarding school and I will, if I can afford it, send my kids to the school I go to. Not just because of the education, because I'm certain that if there was a good state school they could achieve similar results, but because private schools can make you better all rounders, especially boarding. As much as some TSRers enjoy saying you live in an insular bubble, that's simply not true. A lot of my friends go to state school and I've become a lot moe sociable and confident in large groups since going to my school. I've become a lot more involved in community aspects and charities that I never would have even heard of had I continued at my state school. I've become a lot more diligent and focused, but also find that I enjoy learning now. On top of that I've been exposed to extra curricular activities that have helped me grow as a person and I feel I'm a stronger, more mature person since I've been there. I want that for my kids, and I know some TSRers'll hate that idea because of the unfair advantage argument, but I'd argue that most independent schools are charitable organisations which give scholarships to those who need it and show promise in different areas.