private education

[Fords]

It's all well and good that people have reasons for private or state but?.



What happens after private school did they have better jobs, social circle, what are the real time benefits for you and your children.

[Yeti]

I went to a state comprehensive after having passed the entrants exam for the local grammar...

I see standards must have been low? 😂😂
Bloody spellcheck lol

[100thmonkey]

I had the choice to send mine to boarding school for next to nothing as the firm would pay for them. We asked the kids and they declined. They were offered the chance to go but neither wanted to. They have both left education now and are doing alright because they know how to graft and have the advantage of living in a high employment.

Whilst they might of scores higher or achieved more privetly I didn't have kids to send them away and watching them grow up daily is worth more than any fancy job as a result of a better education

[solwisesteve]

Went to state primary school in the 80s/90s in Leeds. Both very average schools where the best way to get ahead was to keep your head down in class and not stand out from the crowd. You learnt quickly that to stand out for anything (intelligence, hobbies, interests, sexuality) was as frowned upon by the teachers as it was by your fellow class mates.

Luckily, I had a desire to better myself so despite zero encouragement, I went to a Russell Group university (Sheffield) to study a social science that I was interested in.

Coming from a forces background and newly back from spending the key early years abroad unfortunately I did stand out :-( Also living 'up north' when I clearly had a 'down south' accent (parents from surrey) did NOT help. I was the smarty pants posh kid even though my parents probably had less money than a lot of the others. After frequent fights in the playground and after school and being picked on I learnt to keep a low profile. Unfortunately this effected my schooling (and it didn't help that one of the fights was with the son of my teacher - he came out worst from the fight but teacher got his revenge) so I missed passing the 11+ so ended up at the secondary school. More fights and being picked on. I learnt to make myself scarce at break and luck time. Despite this I vowed to work hard so I could escape the proletariat and frequently came top of the class and got a few school academic prizes. Went onto university, got a PhD etc... So, for me, going to a state school was an incentive to work harder in order to not fall into the same pit if ineptitude and bigotry that was prevalent in my fellow school pupils.

So I came out okay. However there is no way I'd want my children to have to go through that. I don't have any kids but if I did I'd want them out of that. I went though 7+ years of unhappiness and upset having to mix with other kids who really didn't give a damn about learning and just wanted to persecute any other pupil that did and disrupt the lessons as much as they could.

[Glamdring]

I had the choice to send mine to boarding school for next to nothing as the firm would pay for them. We asked the kids and they declined. They were offered the chance to go but neither wanted to. They have both left education now and are doing alright because they know how to graft and have the advantage of living in a high employment.

Whilst they might of scores higher or achieved more privetly I didn't have kids to send them away and watching them grow up daily is worth more than any fancy job as a result of a better education

I read with interesting an article about boarding schools and the fact they've set up an organisation to deal with the after effects (PTSD, essentially) that cause a lot of trouble to a surprising number of kids who are torn away from their parents, age seven. Undoubtedly some kids thrive, but they'd thrive anywhere. Others loathe it totally.
For me, they're rich people's orphanages.

[IanBear]

I am lucky enough to have had a private school education; my parents sacrificed a lot at the time to ensure that this was possible, as 20 years ago the state system in Bristol was universally abysmal, wherever you were in the city.

Whilst I have tried my best to make it on my own, eschewing the old boy's network, starting a career in IT, I will never be able to repay my parents for the opportunities that I believe my education opened up to me. Will I be able to afford to send my own daughter to private education? Given the rampant fee inflation, I may not be able to; given the opportunity, even if it is a sacrifice to my own standard of living, I absolutely would.

[Toodlepip]

I went to boarding school - didn't have as much fun as I could, but it did me well. My son wanted to board and is thriving. He was lucky enough to win a place at one of the most competitive schools and it suits him down to the ground.

It doesn't suit everybody but it will certainly develop character far beyond mere exam success.

[DavidL]

I went to private school and it was the best decision for me. I don't necessarily think I did any better in exams than I would have but I definitely did the very best I could. I put that down to the environment and general assumption that you did the work.
I didn't have the element of the class who were there because they had to be and were hell bent on disrupting anything and everything. This was what I heard from primary friends who went to state school.
Sure there were the trouble makers but they were in such a minority that they were unusual and were considered so. We had some supremely bright individuals and one or two who were rather not but it is my belief that all did as well as they could and almost certainly better than they would in a more mixed situation. It was just the atmosphere and that there was no stigma to working hard and wanting to do well. 6th form and university were assumed and generally achieved.
My secondary education developed a sense of self-confidence I feel has really helped me over the years and is something I'm very grateful for.
My little boy will almost certainly go for secondary - his Mum is a primary teacher so we have that covered - but I'll choose carefully.

[GIB984]

I've read your first and last questions several times and the answers still don't make any sense. Do you want your son to go to a state school or not?

Not that difficult really; I'd like to think that he could go to a state school and get the same level of education but the reality is I don't think that's probable?

[farmkid]

Going private has huge advantages- smaller classes-better education- more confident children-your children mix/grow up with a better
class of friends ie: less likely to be drinking White Lightening and smoking spliffs at 13 yrs old............ but it's not always a bed of roses-
my niece goes to a small private school and bullying has been a huge problem.....my sister is about to take her away to a different school.
Evidently 15 yr girls can be a very cliquey bitchy lot and psychological bullying is virtually impossible to stop as opposed to physical bullying.
I suppose it all depends on the school - the private school I went to was fine- but some seem to breed arrogant, pretentious awful little sh*ts.

[Seamaster73]

I went to an excellent independent school and sat between the son of a lord and the son of a taxi driver. It was the closest thing to a classless society I've ever encountered. Of course, that was before Labour's spiteful abolition of the Assisted Places Scheme. I'm sure that made independent schools much more "elitist".

[Corporalsparrow]

It's all well and good that people have reasons for private or state but?.



What happens after private school did they have better jobs, social circle, what are the real time benefits for you and your children.

Private school leaves you better equipped to deal with the world, that's all. What you make of that advantage, is up to you.

But don't think, ever, that you are buying an outcome. You're not. And you misunderstand it if you do.

[kaiserphoenix]

private do u mean public school?

[kaiserphoenix]

Going private has huge advantages- smaller classes-better education- more confident children-your children mix/grow up with a better
class of friends ie: less likely to be drinking White Lightening and smoking spliffs at 13 yrs old............ but it's not always a bed of roses-
my niece goes to a small private school and bullying has been a huge problem.....my sister is about to take her away to a different school.
Evidently 15 yr girls can be a very cliquey bitchy lot and psychological bullying is virtually impossible to stop as opposed to physical bullying.
I suppose it all depends on the school - the private school I went to was fine- but some seem to breed arrogant, pretentious awful little sh*ts.

I went to public school but there r theories out there debating this idea that smaller classes are better etc. (Malcolm
Glad well studied this effect) It seems the whole thing is geared towards marketing to parents. If you read his book he states perhaps being a bigger fish in a smaller pond allows you to build and have the confidence to pursue what you really love as opposed to being a small fish in a big pond ie surrounded by super smart people puts u in a very competitive situation and may force one to give up certain topics because it is not feasible to study them.

Even though I'm a public school educated man, I will send my kid to state school I feel happiness confidence is far more important but also being near family.

[GIB984]

I see standards must have been low? 
Bloody spellcheck lol

If you're referring to 'grammar', I'd do a little research - if you're referring to 'entrants' thinking I meant to type 'entrance'.

I didn't.

Standards were and probably still are a little lower though for eleven year olds.

[DavidL]

private do u mean public school?

Private usually means there is some sort of entrance examination to achieve a place whereas public is just a private fee paying school. Anyone can apply and get a place if they put their name down and can pay the fees or get a bursary/scholarship etc. There is no academic barrier.

[Yeti]

If you're referring to 'grammar', I'd do a little research - if you're referring to 'entrants' thinking I meant to type 'entrance'.

I didn't.

Standards were and probably still are a little lower though for eleven year olds.

I was referring to "entrants". It was a joke. No need to get irate. I always thought it was an entrance exam?

[draftsmann]

Private usually means there is some sort of entrance examination to achieve a place whereas public is just a private fee paying school. Anyone can apply and get a place if they put their name down and can pay the fees or get a bursary/scholarship etc. There is no academic barrier.

Are you sure about that distinction? I thought it was a handful of the oldest and most prestigious private schools that are referred to as "public schools".

[jpjsavage]

None of our five children have ever been near a private school and, even if I had had the money, they would never have been educated there. A comprehensive state education offers brilliant value for money and state school educated children do better at university than their privately educated counterparts. Numerous pieces of research have shown that over the years.

Recent reports have shown institutional bias at leading red brick universities such as Oxford and Cambridge that work against state educated students. I have acted as an external examiner for PhDs at both these universities on countless occasions and know how their admissions processes work. They inherently favour privately educated kids but, even within that system, those state education students who do attend out perform their privately educated companions. I was proud to go to a university like UEA whose motto, 'do different', neatly summarises the kind of alternative ethos that one can find outside of the class entrenched status quo.

None of this alters my general belief that state educated children are socially more adept and rounded than privately educated children. They outperform those children from private schools academically later in life and, although I am not aware of any research relating to this, I suspect they do better £ for £ in their employment too.

Clearly, many folk here buy the myth that a private education is value for money. It isn't. But, of course, everyone is free to do what they want and long may that continue. But, whilst we are on the money side of things, the charitable status that many of these schools enjoy should be removed. Many make little if any charitable contributions to wider society and the tax breaks they enjoy are iniquitous in my view. If you want to educate your kids privately, then pay for it yourself and don't drain the state of valuable income which could be used to improve the educational system for the vast majority of our children.

[andy tims]

I haven't.

State education was good enough for me - I put the effort in and expected my kids to do the same.

I also don't expect to pay all the tax / NI I do and then "pay again" for my kid's education.

Further more, we have several friends who paid to have their kids privately educated and many of those seriously flunked.

I appreciate others will have very good reasons for paying and that we are blessed with pretty decent state schools locally, but those are my reasons.

[dougair]

None of our five children have ever been near a private school and, even if I had had the money, they would never have been be educated there. A comprehensive state education offers brilliant value for money and state school educated children do better at university that their privately educated counterparts. Numerous pieces of research have shown that over the years.

Recent reports have shown institutional bias at leading red brick universities such as Oxford and Cambridge that work against state educated students. I have acted as an external examiner for PhDs at both these universities on countless occasions and knows how their admissions processes work. They inherently favour privately educated kids but, even within that system, those state education students who do attend out perform their privately educated companions. I was proud to go to a university like UEA whose motto, 'do different', neatly summarises the kind of alternative ethos that one can find outside of the class entrenched status quo.

None of this alters my general belief that state educated children are socially more adept and rounded than privately educated children. They outperform those children from private schools academically later in life and, although I am not aware of any research relating to this, I suspect they do better £ for £ in their employment too.

Clearly, many folk here buy the myth that a private education is value for money. It isn't. But, of course, everyone is free to do what they want and long may that continue. But, whilst we are on the money side of things, the charitable status that many of these schools enjoy should be removed. Many make little if any charitable contributions to wider society and the tax breaks they enjoy are iniquitous in my view. If you want to educate your kids privately, then pay for it yourself and don't drain the state of valuable income which could be used to improve the educational system for the vast majority of our children.

They may do better at University, but that really doesn't matter...who gets the highest paying jobs? As has been mentioned already, exam results are only half the picture. But it's a personal choice and my kids will be going private.

[jpjsavage]

They may do better at University, but that really doesn't matter...who gets the highest paying jobs? As has been mentioned already, exam results are only half the picture. But it's a personal choice and my kids will be going private.

For me, it is about the quality of the education and you don't measure that in what you earn. It is not solely measured in exam results either.

[Keyser]

I went from prep to public and a state grammar for 6th form.

If I have children I plan to take a similar route with them

[anton863]

None of our five children have ever been near a private school and, even if I had had the money, they would never have been educated there. A comprehensive state education offers brilliant value for money and state school educated children do better at university than their privately educated counterparts. Numerous pieces of research have shown that over the years.

Recent reports have shown institutional bias at leading red brick universities such as Oxford and Cambridge that work against state educated students. I have acted as an external examiner for PhDs at both these universities on countless occasions and know how their admissions processes work. They inherently favour privately educated kids but, even within that system, those state education students who do attend out perform their privately educated companions. I was proud to go to a university like UEA whose motto, 'do different', neatly summarises the kind of alternative ethos that one can find outside of the class entrenched status quo.

None of this alters my general belief that state educated children are socially more adept and rounded than privately educated children. They outperform those children from private schools academically later in life and, although I am not aware of any research relating to this, I suspect they do better £ for £ in their employment too.

Clearly, many folk here buy the myth that a private education is value for money. It isn't. But, of course, everyone is free to do what they want and long may that continue. But, whilst we are on the money side of things, the charitable status that many of these schools enjoy should be removed. Many make little if any charitable contributions to wider society and the tax breaks they enjoy are iniquitous in my view. If you want to educate your kids privately, then pay for it yourself and don't drain the state of valuable income which could be used to improve the educational system for the vast majority of our children.

Comparing kids who achieved similar grades from state and private schools (ie kids who done enough to enter higher education or specifically Oxbridge) and their outcomes at university and after is missing a huge part of the argument.

People are arguing the value of the private school is in helping kids achieve the height of their potential, so the argument being that a kid who got AAB at a-level at a private school may have achieved lower results at a state school. And in turn any kid who did achieve top marks at a state school is going to inherently outperform a private school pupil with the same grades in the future, due to the personal motivation they needed to ignore any negative outside influences, larger class sizes, less studious enviroment etc etc

You need to look at the outcome on the average child from the point where they enter private or state education not when they leave. All results from the latter cannot be compared to each other when deciding on the merits of private vs state education.

[Wolfie]

Comparing kids who achieved similar grades from state and private schools (ie kids who done enough to enter higher education or specifically Oxbridge) and their outcomes at university and after is missing a huge part of the argument.

People are arguing the value of the private school is in helping kids achieve the height of their potential, so the argument being that a kid who got AAB at a-level at a private school may have achieved lower results at a state school. And in turn any kid who did achieve top marks at a state school is going to inherently outperform a private school pupil with the same grades in the future, due to the personal motivation they needed to ignore any negative outside influences, larger class sizes, less studious enviroment etc etc

You need to look at the outcome on the average child from the point where they enter private or state education not when they leave. All results from the latter cannot be compared to each other when deciding on the merits of private vs state education.

There's some mighty big assumptions there... Class size aside, my kids enjoy an atmosphere conducive to learning...

Also how do you measure kids reaching reaching the height of their potential...? If, as I assume you are relating too, good exam results or finding other kids from wealthy backgrounds who may or may not 'scratch backs' in the future, then that, in my opinion, is a pretty narrow view of what any child's true potential might be...

Ben

[Wolfie]

Would you send your kids to private education if you could ? If not , why not ? Reasons for and against please, experiences.

Anyway Dave... Have you an opinion to offer now duck?!!!!

[anton863]

There's some mighty big assumptions there... Class size aside, my kids enjoy an atmosphere conducive to learning...

Also how do you measure kids reaching reaching the height of their potential...? If, as I assume you are relating too, good exam results or finding other kids from wealthy backgrounds who may or may not 'scratch backs' in the future, then that, in my opinion, is a pretty narrow view of what any child's true potential might be...

Ben

I'm not putting forward a view one way or the other, the example arguments were just some from the thread.

The point of my post was making clear you can't compare future outcomes (which were academic in this case) from similar pupils at the end of their secondary education you have to do it from similar pupils prior to the education you are comparing.

Sorry if that wasn't clear.

[jpjsavage]

Comparing kids who achieved similar grades from state and private schools (ie kids who done enough to enter higher education or specifically Oxbridge) and their outcomes at university and after is missing a huge part of the argument.

People are arguing the value of the private school is in helping kids achieve the height of their potential, so the argument being that a kid who got AAB at a-level at a private school may have achieved lower results at a state school. And in turn any kid who did achieve top marks at a state school is going to inherently outperform a private school pupil with the same grades in the future, due to the personal motivation they needed to ignore any negative outside influences, larger class sizes, less studious enviroment etc etc

You need to look at the outcome on the average child from the point where they enter private or state education not when they leave. All results from the latter cannot be compared to each other when deciding on the merits of private vs state education.

I would bet a lot of money that the value added data that state schools use to track pupil progress from entry would compare very favourable to that of the progress pupils make in private schools. I've not researched this but, if I get time tomorrow, I will look to see if there are any comparative studies. It is an interesting point well made.

In my time working in education I have visited hundreds of schools of all types. Choosing a school for your child is a highly personal decision and, generally, I wouldn't want to give any parent specific advice. However, it is my strong personal belief that a private school education is not worth the inflated fees charged in any shape or form. Private schools prey on parents fears and the problems perceived about state education are inflated in the media. Many of my postgraduate students are shocked at how orderly and pleasant state secondary schools are in the north west of England when they start their teacher education.

[Wolfie]

I'm not putting forward a view one way or the other, the example arguments were just some from the thread.

The point of my post was making clear you can't compare future outcomes (which were academic in this case) from similar pupils at the end of their secondary education you have to do it from similar pupils prior to the education you are comparing.

Sorry if that wasn't clear.

Appologies... I've re-read your post and you're quite right, I didn't register the all important 'people are saying' as I had fixated on the 'negative external influences'

I suspect any data on the topic will be in favour of state schools, but, not because they're offering an academically stronger experience... If you measure it as value add, then parents motivated to send their kids to orivate schools are generally motivated to get them 'pre-school ready'... So, there is likely to be less scope to improve - if that makes sense? It would be interesting to see methodology employed on any data comparisons... As the alternative could be true and that parents are adding value to their children's academic progress rather than school whilst going through their schooling... Measuring this kind of data is likely to be frought with issues!

[dougair]

I would bet a lot of money that the value added data that state schools use to track pupil progress from entry would compare very favourable to that of the progress pupils make in private schools. I've not researched this but, if I get time tomorrow, I will look to see if there are any comparative studies. It is an interesting point well made.

In my time working in education I have visited hundreds of schools of all types. Choosing a school for your child is a highly personal decision and, generally, I wouldn't want to give any parent specific advice. However, it is my strong personal belief that a private school education is not worth the inflated fees charged in any shape or form. Private schools prey on parents fears and the problems perceived about state education are inflated in the media. Many of my postgraduate students are shocked at how orderly and pleasant state secondary schools are in the north west of England when they start their teacher education.

Two kids were stabbed inside the 'good' state secondary near me, that's not a perceived problem or fear it's an actual one. This is just one of the many reasons I will be choosing a private school. It's not the right choice for many but my experience leads me to believe the state system cannot provide what the private system does, and neither should they have to but I have lots of friends from the private system and the difference is stark. Horses for courses I suppose.

[anton863]

Appologies... I've re-read your post and you're quite right, I didn't register the all important 'people are saying' as I had fixated on the 'negative external influences'

I suspect any data on the topic will be in favour of state schools, but, not because they're offering an academically stronger experience... If you measure it as value add, then parents motivated to send their kids to orivate schools are generally motivated to get them 'pre-school ready'... So, there is likely to be less scope to improve - if that makes sense? It would be interesting to see methodology employed on any data comparisons... As the alternative could be true and that parents are adding value to their children's academic progress rather than school whilst going through their schooling... Measuring this kind of data is likely to be frought with issues!

Yep exactly. It's always interesting when there are many ways to interpret data which can give opposing view points, all of which can be valid!

On top of your example you could go the other way and say that some parents who are willing to pay for private education could be more likely to offer help at home on school work or provide other support which helps learning. Which would then improve the private school results despite it having nothing to do with the school itself!

And jpjsavage, would be interested to read anything you find, so do share it here.

[Corporalsparrow]

It's a pity, I thought there may be a reasonable, politics-free discussion about private schools but I imagine this thread is going in the bear Bit before very much longer.

[kaiserphoenix]

Private usually means there is some sort of entrance examination to achieve a place whereas public is just a private fee paying school. Anyone can apply and get a place if they put their name down and can pay the fees or get a bursary/scholarship etc. There is no academic barrier.

Mate, you're saying I can just apply and get a place at Eaton?? LOLOL.

KNOW YOUR FACTS. MOST public schools have far far more stringent entry exams.

[kaiserphoenix]

Are you sure about that distinction? I thought it was a handful of the oldest and most prestigious private schools that are referred to as "public schools".

This is more correct. Eaton, Harrow, Tonbridge, Cheltenham etc All prestigious Public Schools where kids go to Oxbridge, LSE, Imperial.

[CamCG]

None of our five children have ever been near a private school and, even if I had had the money, they would never have been educated there. A comprehensive state education offers brilliant value for money and state school educated children do better at university than their privately educated counterparts. Numerous pieces of research have shown that over the years.

Recent reports have shown institutional bias at leading red brick universities such as Oxford and Cambridge that work against state educated students. I have acted as an external examiner for PhDs at both these universities on countless occasions and know how their admissions processes work. They inherently favour privately educated kids but, even within that system, those state education students who do attend out perform their privately educated companions. I was proud to go to a university like UEA whose motto, 'do different', neatly summarises the kind of alternative ethos that one can find outside of the class entrenched status quo.

None of this alters my general belief that state educated children are socially more adept and rounded than privately educated children. They outperform those children from private schools academically later in life and, although I am not aware of any research relating to this, I suspect they do better £ for £ in their employment too.

Clearly, many folk here buy the myth that a private education is value for money. It isn't. But, of course, everyone is free to do what they want and long may that continue. But, whilst we are on the money side of things, the charitable status that many of these schools enjoy should be removed. Many make little if any charitable contributions to wider society and the tax breaks they enjoy are iniquitous in my view. If you want to educate your kids privately, then pay for it yourself and don't drain the state of valuable income which could be used to improve the educational system for the vast majority of our children.

Just a minor point, but if you've acted as an external examiner for Cambridge and Oxford I'm a little surprised you've described them as 'red brick universities'.

As for some of your other statements, they seem quite sweeping.

[TheFlyingBanana]

It's "Eton" by the way, not "Eaton".

[seikopath]

Anyway Dave... Have you an opinion to offer now duck?!!!!

I've learnt alot from reading this thread.

I do have opinions, I wasn't really asking the question looking for political answers regarding the relative merits of state v private education but it's interesting to see those opinions expressed

I think general educational standards have fallen dramatically in this country over the last generation. I think the democratisation of higher education has only contributed to it's decline, ie turning polytechnics into universities hasn't meant that the standard of education offered at these places has increased.

Regarding the decision of whether to send ones kids to state or private, I think it obviously depends how much that is going to cost vs your income. I am continually surprised by some of the sacrifices people will make for their kids.

I asked the question for practical reasons of my own and wanted to use the forum as a sounding board.

PS why are you calling me duck

[stooo]

Do you have webbed feet?

[seikopath]

Do you have webbed feet?

yes but thats because i was born in the fens and all my family have webbed feet. it doesn't mean i am actually a duck.

[stooo]

Watertight anus?

The similarities can mount up.

[Dan88]

yes but thats because i was born in the fens and all my family have webbed feet. it doesn't mean i am actually a duck.

Ah, so you went to Wisbech Grammar School. And I thought the feet thing was a myth. No wonder no one wears flip flops round here!

[Chris_in_the_UK]

I've learnt alot from reading this thread.

I do have opinions, I wasn't really asking the question looking for political answers regarding the relative merits of state v private education but it's interesting to see those opinions expressed

I think general educational standards have fallen dramatically in this country over the last generation. I think the democratisation of higher education has only contributed to it's decline, ie turning polytechnics into universities hasn't meant that the standard of education offered at these places has increased.

Regarding the decision of whether to send ones kids to state or private, I think it obviously depends how much that is going to cost vs your income. I am continually surprised by some of the sacrifices people will make for their kids.

I asked the question for practical reasons of my own and wanted to use the forum as a sounding board.

PS why are you calling me duck

Sadly, some of the muppets have waded in, which is no surprise,

There are tangible benefits for those that have done it, less so for those that have not and have no personal experience of it.

[Wolfie]

Yep exactly. It's always interesting when there are many ways to interpret data which can give opposing view points, all of which can be valid!

On top of your example you could go the other way and say that some parents who are willing to pay for private education could be more likely to offer help at home on school work or provide other support which helps learning. Which would then improve the private school results despite it having nothing to do with the school itself!

And jpjsavage, would be interested to read anything you find, so do share it here.

Ok... We are both guilty now... That's exactly what I was attempting to say in the last bit of my response!!!

- - - Updated - - -

It's a pity, I thought there may be a reasonable, politics-free discussion about private schools but I imagine this thread is going in the bear Bit before very much longer.

How could this not become political?

[Wolfie]

I've learnt alot from reading this thread.

I do have opinions, I wasn't really asking the question looking for political answers regarding the relative merits of state v private education but it's interesting to see those opinions expressed

I think general educational standards have fallen dramatically in this country over the last generation. I think the democratisation of higher education has only contributed to it's decline, ie turning polytechnics into universities hasn't meant that the standard of education offered at these places has increased.

Regarding the decision of whether to send ones kids to state or private, I think it obviously depends how much that is going to cost vs your income. I am continually surprised by some of the sacrifices people will make for their kids.

I asked the question for practical reasons of my own and wanted to use the forum as a sounding board.

PS why are you calling me duck

"Me duck" - coz I'm Leicester http://www.bbc.co.uk/leicester/aroun...ctionary.shtml

Are you rally confident that educational standards have declined??? The polar opposite is true...

[jpjsavage]

Just a minor point, but if you've acted as an external examiner for Cambridge and Oxford I'm a little surprised you've described them as 'red brick universities'.

As for some of your other statements, they seem quite sweeping.

Clearly a quick summary but happy to reference them fully if needed.

[Andyg]

I haven't.

State education was good enough for me - I put the effort in and expected my kids to do the same.

I also don't expect to pay all the tax / NI I do and then "pay again" for my kid's education.

Further more, we have several friends who paid to have their kids privately educated and many of those seriously flunked.

I appreciate others will have very good reasons for paying and that we are blessed with pretty decent state schools locally, but those are my reasons.

My state education was horrendous , but I agree. My son attends an academy, rated outstanding by OFSTED and is doing very well and more importantly is enjoying school - something I could never claim.

In year 6 we did fund some additional math and English tuition, but that was just make sure he was fully prepared for secondary school and to get him in to the higher streams - which he did.

All children are different and learn at different speeds. The most important thing is to find an education system which suits them, find challenging and more importantly enjoy.

Also remember that the school and the exams results is not a guaranteed to health, wealth and happiness in later life.

[PipPip]

Just interested in the perception that privately educated folk get the good jobs. Do people really still experience this in commercial businesses (outside politics/civil service)? I work for a huge company and was just thinking about the senior management team. The CEO went to state school (and actually grew up in a Glasgow tenement). Just about all the rest of the leadership team went to state comprehensives: the COO, Strategy Director, HR director, Distribution director, Comms Director, IT Director etc. Only the Investment Director is privately educated as far as I know. Perhaps my experience is too narrow and in other companies you need a private education to make it to the top. Definitely not so in the global finance company I work for. In fact these days in our place I suspect it almost counts against you a bit as you are not perceived as getting to where you are on genuine merit and intellect.

[Bristolian]

My father made it to grammar school despite being orphaned at a young age, but left at 15 as he had no support to go on to university - and anyway, there was a war on.

He was deeply convinced of the benefits of education generally and decided that private education was the way to achieve this for his own children. I was always well aware of the sacrifices my parents made to pay for this. Inspired by what I received, have paid for my child's education, although I've occasionally doubted the value for money offered, particularly of some of the secondary education.

In hindsight, Im sure that if we'd relied on state provision, we would have been in the game of renting flats in catchment areas, attending church etc to wangle a 'good' state school place - so Im glad we didnt get caught up in that.

Ultimately what's far more important is your parents' attitude to life and their (hopefully good) example, your inherited cognitive ability (clever parents generally have clever children) and the circle of friends you grow up with (that's often what makes private education worthwhile). The marginally better teaching and facilities have little overall effect : not my view - but that of Levitt & Dubner in Freakonomics.

[DavidL]

It's "Eton" by the way, not "Eaton".

Isn't it just. Funny how some people bang on about facts yet can't quite get it right themselves LOLOL ;-)

I did a little digging and the difference appears to be regarding their funding and their history although that isn't a hard and fast rule. There does appear to be little about academic requirements I grant you but more an entrance selection requirement. I imagine there "may" be some OBN here, or there may not. There has to be some way of deciding where the places will be awarded if demand is very high
My school was purely an academic entrance examination as many independent private schools are.

[kaiserphoenix]

It's "Eton" by the way, not "Eaton".

There goes to show going to public school doesn't help!! haha I can't even spell right and I have a MSc and all that haha. Send ur kids to state school !