Private school fees (merged)

posh*spice

emsywoo123 wrote: »

Who would have thought that when this thread started, it would turn into what it has?!

Not the op that's for sure - she's *cough* long gone;):rotfl:

posh*spice

Discodee wrote: »

What on earth are you doing on a money saving forum with all your dosh??
And for goodness sakes girl, when you've read this, go and eat some cream cakes!!!

Posh is back (with cream on her lips:eek:) - but please don't tell David I've been eating;)

Lunar_Eclipse

Tim_L wrote: »

You need a critical mass of demanding customers to improve standards for everyone.

parents can't be blamed for doing this.

The problem is that the state system is crap. Point your anger at that,

Fantastic post. My sentiments exactly. I have left the key points in, for me anyhow. You have totally hit the nail on the head re: the state system, in my own very recent experience.

Both my children are in the top sets in their respective classes. Eldest goes to the number 1/2 top performing primary school and youngest at the feeder Infants. When eldest was in Reception (3 yrs ago) and we were discussing her reading books at parents evening her teacher told us 'we can't let them get too ahead you know'. Her exact words. I was absolutely stunned and horrified beyond belief. Get ahead of what exactly? She was 4 years old. Thankfully the Junior school is much better, but you are right that all the additional resource and focus goes to the least able, to bring them up in line with the national average. If a child is operating at Level 5 for Key Stage 2 (Y6), they are not inclined to do any more with these children. We have friends in this situation at the moment, the children are saying they are so bored at school.

The system is a shambles. And yet I consider myself lucky that comparatively my schools are 'outstanding' and secondly, the children are not struggling. But they are also not reaching their full potential by any means.

Lunar_Eclipse

setmefree2 wrote: »

if someone offered me a place at a private school I would not take it, even if you paid me a million pounds;).

You've obviously got far too much money then! Or you're mad.

setmefree2

Tim_L wrote: »

Totally agree about the area in the middle being the one that's squeezed.

I think a lot of this argument is really about parents being concerned and squeezed and defending their own choices, especially when they feel that others are buying advantages for their children and resent that (or from the other direction resent the idea that they shouldn't be able to pay for a different type of education). And I think personally that you have to try to understand where parents are coming from and accept that they will all just be doing the best for their children, rather than to try to make relative value judgements in different circumstances.

It will always be possible to pay money and improve life chances, and you can always find rich idiots pulling themselves up with their old school ties. But ultimately if you skip on 10 or 20 years, you see that people tend to find their own level. There's a contemporary of mine who took the apprenticeship route at my school, and he's now running the sales division and making a mint. I was academic, and have a lesser role, but you can see from the type of person my colleague is that he was always going to succeed in a particular direction. So fundamentally I'm happy with my own choices for my children, but they may well be outshone in some areas by (say) discodee's children who took a different path, or indeed by someone very talented from a "sink" comprehensive. It's really about recognizing the individual and their talents and providing a route for them to shine, rather than treating everyone as the same and celebrating mediocrity.

Hi all,

It's this bit that keeps the argument going for me, I'm afraid. I totally refuse to accept that state High Schools have to be referred to as "sink" comprehensives. The majority are highly successful and are providing a great education for all - including those who are in the top sets. Why do you have to be so disparaging? If you are so comfortable with your choice why do you have to refer to state High Schools in such derogatory terms? State High Schools are populated by the majority of kids who don't need (or want) to hear their schools (that they love) being referred to like this.:rolleyes:

Lunar_Eclipse

Discodee wrote: »

she doesn't expect to have to do anything with her kids because that's why she sends them to school!!

Well to a certain degree, she has a very valid point. They go for at least 6 hours a day afterall.

I send my children to school to learn some basic academics. I help them with homework if they ask (they're only 6 and 8) and they aren't struggling (which is a significant difference). If they were of course I'd help them.

But ultimately I do expect most Maths & English to be taught at school. My children read to a parent helper once a week in school. The least able read to the class teacher every day. As a parent, I am expected to read with them daily. Which I accept, although I think it is unjust. All children at 5, 6 & 7 have a lot of improvement to be made, not just the least able. So my impression is that the school does not believe reading is that important, or all children would be given individual help in how to read and then how to read well, using expression etc. Although it perhaps explains why we have such a high illiteracy rate in this country!

setmefree2

Lunar_Eclipse wrote: »

You've obviously got far too much money then! Or you're mad.

Neither, I don't think:rotfl:I like my kids school and I wouldn't swop it for "a different type of education" and a million pounds. I refuse to sit and let someone call my kids school a "sink" comprehensive though...

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

Tim_L wrote: »

I think you have to ask people objecting to private education whether they would turn down a scholarship for their child to go to a public school?

No surprise I suppose - but that'll be a yes - I would turn it down. Like another poster said not even if you paid me a million quid.

Lunar_Eclipse

Tim_L wrote: »

It's really about recognizing the individual and their talents and providing a route for them to shine, rather than treating everyone as the same and celebrating mediocrity.

You're good. Very very good.

Lunar_Eclipse

setmefree2 wrote: »

Neither, I don't think:rotfl:I like my kids school and I wouldn't swop it for "a different type of education" and a million pounds. I refuse to sit and let someone call my kids school a "sink" comprehensive though...

I like my kids school too. Although I'd happily hate it if it meant they were happy and thriving. Also, I know that it isn't the best school in the country for them.