Are Private Schools worth it?

mike_paterson

gizmoleeds wrote:

£4,500p.a. it costs the state (which I know from studying politics - it is up from £2,500p.a. under Major ).

I have just done the maths.
School fees have been going up by 7-8% per annum in the private sector due to new government regulations around schooling. These changes are applicable to state and private sectors. Based on these rises the £4,500 per annum currently spent Labour is actually LESS in real terms than the £2,500 you quote for John Major !

I am sure from your statement that you were trying to imply that Labour are spending more, and indeed they are - they are spending more because of the additional bureaucracy and red tape that they have added and the poor students (and parents - taxpayers!) have to suffer a worse service as a result.

savingpennies

I'm not sure that one is any better than the other. All my cousins were privately educated and you can count the number of O levels/GCSE's they got collectively on one hand. My brothers and I all went to the same state school. Between us we have between 45 and 50 O levels/GCSE's and I went on to University. I don't always think that the school makes a lot of difference - it's the parents that matter.
My aunts and uncles basically sent their kids to private school so they could mix with a 'better sort' and seemed to think that that was all they had to do for their children to come out with topnotch grades, but didn't really care about the teaching/learning, whether they did their homework, etc. My parents on the other hand were much more interested in what we did and our progress. My mum and dad encouraged us to read, bought us books, took us to interesting places, and asked us our opinion on all kinds of issues. I now teach in the state sector and its parental involvement that seems to me to make the difference.
My own kids are in the state sector: primary and secondary. We're lucky that we have good schools. The eldest's school is one of the best comprehensives in the country. But the best and most expensive schools in the world wouldn't matter what matters is her attitude to school and our encouraging of her.

Rikki

If you are lucky enough to have access to a good school for your children. Then there is no reason not to take advantage of it. Some of us are not that luck and to avoid a bad state school we have chosen to pay for a private education.

We do not all have the advantages like Tony Blair where by you can bend the rules and get your children into a good grammer school and not the closest school they should have gone to.

MyUserNamesTaken

funky-footprints wrote:

we will most definately be sending our children to private school at 11, both my husband & I are privately educated, and so may be more for private education because of our experiences. I am an only daughter with 3 brothers who went to comp all destined to work in my dads business so i understand why dad wanted to offer something better to me, i was admittidly a lazy child and would of fallen behind in the local comp, but in a class of 15 I was made to work, as i had no body to hide behind.

I'm not picking on you personally, but your post is a very good example of why private school education is not necessary. I've highlighted only two of quite a few grammatical errors in your post in order to demonstrate exactly what I mean. If a private school does not teach you that it is "would have" and not "would of", then it's money down the drain. It's "definitely", not "definately". Please don't take this the wrong way, but if you pay a lot of money for an education, the least the school should do is teach you basic grammar. I won't even mention the run-on sentences.

Incidentally, I went to an single sex grammar school. There are still quite a few about, although you may need to move to the catchment area and competiton for places is fierce. I would say that private education is not necessary if you focus the child's attitude correctly in the formative years. A child with the right focus will do well no matter where you send him. Another point to remember is that private school does not suit every child. Many children find the increased pressure to achieve too much to take. Also, bullying can be worse in private schools.

As stated earlier, Funky, please don't take my comments as a personal attack on you.

MyUserNamesTaken

Wings wrote:

Having received both state and private education, I can strongly recommend private schooling. Private schools offer opportunities that your child would never receive from a state school education, for example travel, flying airplanes and connections.

Not knowing the state school’s secondary syllabus, your child will have the option of studying several languages, Latin as well as the classics along with the standard required subjects. On top your child will have the possibility to learn how to play musical instruments and several sporting activities that will give your child an advantage when applying for University.

Without realising it, your child will learn discipline, teamwork, social skills and finesse, therefore character building and finish. Mixing with those with money will open doors!

I'm sorry, but everything you've stated as being exclusive to private schools can be found in the state sector. My grammar school offered (and still offers) everything you've claimed as being exclusively available in the private sector. My son's middle school (state) offers everything you've mentioned apart from Latin and Classics, but they only teach up to Year 8.

Here's my old school's website. That's a state school. You tell me that private schools are better.

Oh, just noticed that my old school is the most effective Grammar school in England! Check out the Ofsted report! Good Schools Guide report here.

"Competition is intense: 900 candidates for 120 places" - told you competition for places is fierce.

Go on the Good Schools Guide website and search for Forest School (London) and Bancroft's School (Woodford Green). Compare their G.C.S.E and A'Level results to Woodford County High School. Private versus State.

MyUserNamesTaken

conradmum wrote:

What a complete (complere) load of BS!!

Anglo (angli)-Saxon and Norman French are the basics (basis) of English.

Private (privatus) school (schola) education (educatio)? This poster (ponere) obviously (obvidere) has little knowledge of English history (historia) or etymology.

I went to a bog standard (stare) comp (comprehendere) and even I know that.

I think this just (iustus) about sums (summa) up this debate (?).

The words highlighted in your post all come from Latin. The words in brackets are the Latin forms. Care to re-evaluate your opinion?

gravitytolls

As a child, I attended Catholic schools, and my step sister went to state schools.

In the last 16 yrs, we've had experience of 2 state primaries and 1 faith primary, and Catholic high school.

I would dearly love to be able to send my children back to a faith school, but there simply isn't one within a 10 mile radius of us. I truly didn't believe there could be such a huge difference, and there really is.

Based on this, I now know that if I could ever afford to send my children to private school (particularly as our nearest is Gresham's and they're reputation is fantastic), I absolutely would.

mike_paterson

gizmoleeds wrote:

What kind of school did you learn your Maths at? :rolleyes:

School fees going up in the private sector doesn't mean that an 80% rise in state funding per student is actually going back in real terms! They are two completely separate sets of data. You could only do this calculation with inflation.

The rise is mainly due to the additional bureaucracy and increased pay for teachers plus also changes to pension payments and increased insurance premiums.All of this is applying to the private sector because it applies in the state sector, and not instead of it applying in the state sector.

I learnt my maths at various schools (I attended 4 schools over the years in both private and state systems) and received A grade passes at O and A level and also an A/S level.

£2,500 increased by 8% compounded over 8 years = £4627.33.

Whatever way you look at it, based on the figures you quoted, funding that actually affects the schooling being given has not improved in the last 8.7 years.

ReportInvestor

MyUserNamesTaken wrote:

"Competition [for Woodford County High School] is intense: 900 candidates for 120 places"

Go on the Good Schools Guide website and search for Forest School (London) and Bancroft's School (Woodford Green). Compare their G.C.S.E and A'Level results to Woodford County High School. Private versus State.

To compare like with like on the basis of selection, it might be more accurate to use St. Paul's Girls or some other incredibly selective private school that is spoiled for choice of pupils.

I'm finding several arguments and examples based on (the few remaining) grammar schools misleading and unhelpful. Grammar v private & Comprehensive v private are almost two separate discussions, even before you throw in the catchment area gremlins to add to confusion.

But none of this is to deny that Woodford looks an excellent state school and fantastic value for money (£0 .)

mike_paterson

gizmoleeds wrote:

But where do you get this "8%" figure from?

You are saying, as I understand it, that an average school pays £2,127.33 more per student per year in "bureacracy" and "insurance" - which I would dispute.

I have been in school during this period and the increases in funding, on areas which "affect the schooling", are plain to see: in the new buildings and refurbishment projects; on the new, expensive (and expanding) ICT suites schools now have; and on the extra resources teachers now have at their disposal (electronic whiteboards, new sports equipment, new books).

The 8% is the rise in private school fees that I have had to pay to cover the costs I mentioned (most of which was in improved salaries and pension provision).

You might be lucky in the school that you have experience of with regard to new equipment because it just has not happened everywhere. Undoubtedly some schools now have more control over where the money is spent, and can also raise money locally to be spent on the school equipment, but this is not funded from Central Government.

There is a big plan to rebuild every school that has been announced recently. Personally I'd rather the money was spent more wisely to actually improve the teaching and get more better trained teaching staff.