Private schooling

Person_one

emsywoo123 wrote: »

Exactly.

Why are people just hazarding guesses at things? I never said NO ONE was, but this "majority scrimping" etc just isn't true at DDs school.

Who said majority? I said 'a lot'.

emsywoo123

Person_one wrote: »

So there are no parents at that school who are making huge financial sacrifices to send their children there? I suppose if she goes to Harrow or Eton that's probably true.

Most private schools however will have a lot of people who are not particularly well off but decide to prioritise private schooling and go without for many years to pay for it.

I know they exist, because I've met several of them, and I've also seen them share their experiences on here.

But MSE is hardly a fair slice of private school parents is it-hardly somewhere to base such a sweeping statement on

Anyway, I am DETERMINED (kind of) to debate no further. Besides, I have to pop off to a street corner now to raise next terms fees

Person_one

emsywoo123 wrote: »

But MSE is hardly a fair slice of private school parents is it-hardly somewhere to base such a sweeping statement on

Anyway, I am DETERMINED (kind of) to debate no further. Besides, I have to pop off to a street corner now to raise next terms fees

I don't understand why you're taking general comments so personally.

emsywoo123

Person_one wrote: »

Who said majority? I said 'a lot'.

And I never said no one.

emsywoo123

Person_one wrote: »

I don't understand why you're taking general comments so personally.

I'm not? (message too short)

Kiboko

Life is about choices, I choose not to send my daughters to private school (even though I went) mainly because I am not prepared to make the financial sacrifices and they have a supportive family who are fairly well educated and happy to give time to help them. I wouldn't want there not to be the choice between Private, state selective and state non-selective, not giving choice and saying there is only one way to educate your child is very restrictive IMO. We aren't all born equal, and saying we should be isn't going to change that any time soon. Even if all schools other than state non-selective were banned you would still have the haves and the have nots, you would still have parents supporting and just plain being there for their children and those that don't give a damn, a child with a happy, supportive family is generally going to achieve more than a child with parents who regard it as the education systems job to educate them in every way.

angelil

Person_one wrote: »

The parents aren't paying for better teachers or better facilities/equipment/enrichment, they're just paying for smaller classes.

I repeat: this is NOT always true. In my private school I routinely teach class sizes of 30+ (though to be fair, I also have classes with fewer than 10 students). My homeroom this year had more than 40 students just for me to look after :eek:

sneezyboots wrote: »

No 'proper' private school will employ anything other than the very best teachers. Many of mine were even doctors in their field and had ended up teaching in the private sector as they were highly educated and most educated in it themselves so it was what they knew.

"The very best teachers" does not necessarily mean those who are most highly educated. It's all very well to have a doctorate in a subject but if you cannot explain your knowledge well, then you are as good as useless as a teacher.

If you are going to bother sending your child private you should always do your research first!

This!! For all the reasons I mention above, and more.

Person_one

angelil wrote: »

I repeat: this is NOT always true. In my private school I routinely teach class sizes of 30+ (though to be fair, I also have classes with fewer than 10 students). My homeroom this year had more than 40 students just for me to look after :eek:

I repeat: I was referring to one specific school.

MrTeacher

I am a Prep school teacher. I try to ensure our parents and pupils get value for money and a unique educational experience. We have longer school hours than normal, so my pupils finish the National Curriculum by year five; the curriculum we teach is an expanded version that includes elements of a classical education, from philosophy to Latin. By the end of Year Six our pupils have usually raised thousands for charity, written and published novels, and won national awards for various things. Unlike many Private Schools we foster an equal enviromnment; a parent of one of my pupils recently recieved a seven figure pay bonus; another class member has a Dad who is a bus driver. The pupils do not use income or other social status indicators as a discussion point.

For your money, we offer:
Warm and friendly teachers
The best technology
Specialist teaching from the Senior Staff
Individual tuition
A guarantee of rapid progression
and most importantly... our girls love school.

When I worked in the state sector I was repeatedly told "you're teaching them too much", which always seemed a little crazy. As long as they are enjoying lessons and learning, how can discussing anything that is technically 'non-curriculum' be a waste of their time and interests?

For my own children (see my other thread, now having problems with their mother) I intend to privately educate them and then let them pay for University themselves. A pupil educated in my school will hopefully have developed enough clever ways to make money that they can subsidise their own tertiary education; for instance we have just seen a number of girls graduate with websites that make a good amount of money.

My final thinking point is that in a class of thirty I'd usually have thirty minutes of each lesson to spend supporting or working with the pupils once the intro, classroom management, and plenary were taken away from that time. If there was any bad behaviour that time would be eroded further. Across a week a pupil could expect to recieve five minutes of support in maths or English if they were lucky. With a class of twelve and ten hours extra on the curriculum each week I think our parents are paying for that extended amount of closer tuition.

Sally_A

A state educated child with the right attitude will achieve, and have a much better rounded attitude to life than those in a private school who only mix with the "haves".

We could have really scrimped and given our daughter a private education...when it hits you is they just want £2000 for a hockey tour of Malaysia, or a mere £1500 ski trip (provide your own equipment).

Having mixed via sports clubs (outside of state or private schools), I've seen !!!!!iness at it's worst, one state school girl was really friendly with a private school girl...next thing you know, brainwashed by their flakey designer driven mums...she was being treated for anorexia and other problems (no she was never overweight), as size 0 was the thing to be.

75% of the mums of private school kids are "wannabes", all big hair and lipstick, a car no older than 2 years old, designer everything, need to chat at the school gate to try and belittle other mums. Strange that me and my old car was the one doing the ferrying for these kiddies as "posh mum" couldn't be bothered - basically they'd paid the subs and weren't going to do any more.

The rest of the private school mums were lovely and appreciated that they had the means; albeit some of them cannot comprehend how people can be "poor".

One of the mums (hope she doesn't come on here) had a well paid job before she had children, but everything she did was so serious, it was like she couldn't let go from being recognised in the medical world and having an esteemed surgeon as a husband. She joined us in a childrens netball weekend at a holiday camp....3 bacardi breezers down, she was totally different as she never had a front to put up, giggled at every joke to the extent I thought she would wet herself (also did her first ever crossword puzzle at the age of approx 40 ish.).