Does private schooling help to get a nice career?

hamstercheeks_2

barnaby-bear wrote: »

Exaclty many state schools fine but if your unlucky enough to be in area where the choice isn't good I can see why people who can do go private.

Education should be free for everyone - even the private schools

feepaying school just feeds snobbery

[Deleted User]

I don't believe all the 'it helps you network' rubbish. Not all fee paying schools are equal, and some are only marginally better than state schools. My parents made the decision to send me to the local comprehensive, but gave me the option at 6th form of going to private.. a decision I guess I regret (since I found the 'freedom' of the college I went to too enticing and slacked off too much).

I've know 4 people who all went to the same private school. One is a millionaire now, one is a surgeon, one works in a call center and another is a data entry clerk. Same school - lots of different outcomes. All 4 went to good universities also.

It's the person, not the education.

hamstercheeks_2

ringo_24601 wrote: »

It's the person, not the education.

totally!

it's also about opportunities and the get-up-and-go that certain individual has!

hamstercheeks_2

it's not who you are when you're parents are responsible for you

it's who you are when you are left to your own devices

e.g.

http://living.aol.co.uk/careers-and-work/too-cool-for-school-famous-school/article/20090209021209990001

grahamliza4

Private schools can help kids who are disruptive, mainly because it's easier to deal with one hyper kid when there are 12 in a class and not 35. The lessons are more structured and interesting and there is less bad behaviour overall. I cant get over some of the things DH says they did at his (state) school. We'd have been expelled on the spot.

Highly intelligent kids are regularly failed by state schools as there isnt the capacity to let them go further. With less kids in a class it's easier to let some do the next bit while helping those who are stuill stuck on the previous bit. When there's 35 of them I imagine it's hard to strike a balance.

Standards are overall higher in private schools - this had rubbed off on me, and I'm not sure if I like it. A friend of mine has always said she got 'good' GCSEs, and we've never gone into detail. Recently I found out she has something like 5 Cs, the odd B and some Ds. I wouldn't call this 'good' at all, and was quite shocked. I was envisaging mostly As and Bs as 'good'. Although any standard only applies to the individual. I have a mix of A*s, As, Bs and one C and an E, which I consider a real let down for me, as I know I was capable of all A*s and As. Truth is I had no support at home, did no work and shouldnt have been in a private school anyway, so the issues surrounding the school basically ruined my exam results. But on the other hand some people would argue in a state school the home issues would still have been there and maybe I would have failed the lot. So again you see it's all about individual circumstance.

I think exams are over-rated anyway. Some of the papers I handed in were appalling, half filled in, and I still got Bs, and this was 10 years ago. I really do think exams are dumbed down. I'd love to see what they are like now. One crazy thing I want to do is a charity exam take. In something like March you get people to pick a GCSE to take in May/June, they revise for it from school books and then sit the paper. Then people sponsor you depending on what mark you get - £5 for an A, £3 for a C, etc. This would a) raise £ for charity, b) prove GCSEs are far too easy, and c) be fun. Anyway that's totally off topic, sorry.

[Deleted User]

grahamliza4 wrote: »

Highly intelligent kids are regularly failed by state schools as there isnt the capacity to let them go further. With less kids in a class it's easier to let some do the next bit while helping those who are stuill stuck on the previous bit. When there's 35 of them I imagine it's hard to strike a balance.

I'm going to stand up for my comp here - from the very beginning, we were 'streamed' in maths and English. After a year, we were then streamed in all other subjects. I started off in 'middle' streams, and eventually ended up in all the top classes. If you were in those classes, only an A was a good GCSE result (with B's being frowned upon).

They also implanted extra classes for a group of us designated as 'upper end special needs' (a.k.a. high achievers). No one went because we didn't like the label But at least the school tried!

I got 5 A*'s, 3 A's and a C (no me gusta espanol) because my state school dealt with us as 'streams' and not a big mixing pot. I'd never send my child to a state school without streaming.

barnaby-bear

ringo_24601 wrote: »

I'm going to stand up for my comp here - from the very beginning, we were 'streamed' in maths and English. After a year, we were then streamed in all other subjects. I started off in 'middle' streams, and eventually ended up in all the top classes. If you were in those classes, only an A was a good GCSE result (with B's being frowned upon).

I got 5 A*'s, 3 A's and a C (no me gusta espanol) because my state school dealt with us as 'streams' and not a big mixing pot. I'd never send my child to a state school without streaming.

But what if there wasn't a state school with streaming in your area or it was oversubscribed. Streaming is a type of selection as are grammars - a way of grouping kids with similar abilities (often just to to sit down) and learn. Some LEAs quite militant to avoid such selection to ensure all equal. A lot of people are defending good state schools, often access to those good state schools is selective upon your ability to buy a house in catchment, have parents who are clued up enough to apply for the right hierarchy of choices etc.... all selection and attempting to make choices. A teacher's job is to deliver the syllabus not compensate for bad parenting or the need for a child psychologist - they shouldn't be dealing with kids throwing desks. If they are wasting time dealing with a child doing this it is harming the kids who are behaving and it harms those with parents without the education to help them catch up the bits skimmed because the teacher was dodging desks, frog-marching Tommy to the cool-down room and filling in forms rather than marking the other kids work and preparing good lesson plans.

barnaby-bear

hamstercheeks wrote: »

totally!

it's also about opportunities and the get-up-and-go that certain individual has!

The opportunity to hear your full syllabus rather than watch the teacher dodging desks is rahter essential to getting reasonable results and it's not about failing just not quite hitting full potential - the kid who just misses an A in chemistry so does midwifery rather than medicine - successful career, generally ok but slightly restricted choices.

grahamliza4

barnaby-bear wrote: »

The opportunity to hear your full syllabus rather than watch the teacher dodging desks is rahter essential to getting reasonable results and it's not about failing just not quite hitting full potential - the kid who just misses an A in chemistry so does midwifery rather than medicine - successful career, generally ok but slightly restricted choices.

Another thing I will say is I find that the general all round knowledge of people who have been school privately is better than those at state school. I dont mean knowing all your capital cities etc, I'm talking in a very general sense here. Sometimes my state schooled friends will ask me about something and I'm amazed they don't know anything about it. Examples include how the UK political system works, who was JFK, how an ultrasound scan works. I'm quite horrified at gaps in what I see as general knowledge. I don't think this is down to intelligence levels either, I'm pretty sure 99% of people I was at school with would never ask these questions. It seems they (state schooled) were just never told these things at school.

Spendless

grahamliza4 wrote: »

Private schools can help kids who are disruptive, mainly because it's easier to deal with one hyper kid when there are 12 in a class and not 35. The lessons are more structured and interesting and there is less bad behaviour overall. I cant get over some of the things DH says they did at his (state) school. We'd have been expelled on the spot.

hmmmm this thread and the other one prompted me to go and look at the 2 independant schools in my towns website (purely being nosey). The first (to yr 6 only) I was surprised how 'cheap' it was. £400 a month. This school has a 'satisfactory' ofsted in comparison our town has several 'outstanding' Primary state schools.

So then I look up the other independant school. I know the fees are more expensive here cos I know of someone attending it (they don't publish their fees on-line) and goes upto yr 11. This school if you are joining wants a report on both your academic and behaviour from your last school before if offers you a place. It's website says it will not offer a place at the beginning of the september term for this reason.

Perhaps this is why they have fewer problems with behaviour, cos they don't take anyone who might be a problem in the first place?