Private schools, times a changing?
Discussion
Tom8 said:
"outstanding" in the context of anything public sector means mediocre everywhere else. If state schools offered anything close to private schools people would flock to them, why would you pay for something you can get the same "for nothing"? Wish I could it would save me a fortune!
Nope. Plenty of State schools rated outstanding are as good as (if not better than) some Private schools in terms of educational attainment. I went to a selective Grammar. It was the first choice for a lot of parents who then had to send their kids to private school when they didn't pass the 11+.Tom8 said:
In simple terms what you get is non unionised indoctrinating teachers, fewer crap parents (you definitely do get some crap parents in private schools who try to bulldoze issues with cash), great range of activities and sport, endless competition, lovely facilities, no strikes, no 5 hour days, no caravan dwellers etc.
There is a reason why people shop in Waitrose and not Lidl and it has nothing to do with prices.
You get a better product because you pay (significantly) more for it.There is a reason why people shop in Waitrose and not Lidl and it has nothing to do with prices.
okgo said:
We have almost certainly written off the state options now, have been to see the local two and they were nothing that special. Massive classes, huge range of ages together (blending of two year groups), distinct lack of facilities and space. All what you'd expect in Z2 London.
I've visited a number of schools in more built up areas, and now also a range of those in more leafy parts of the area (Dulwich namely) and honestly some of the latter schools have such an embarrassment of riches in terms of facilities that they make some of the other paid options in say Clapham look quite lacking. One thing I've found is how diversity changes through areas and schools, it really is a case by case, it isn't ruled only by money as they all cost about the same, but there must be a lot more to it that means most of the kids in certain schools are white british vs others being much more diverse.
The next tricky thing that we're having to think/decide on is boys school vs co-ed. The different age groupings that brings, and also what we think long term of that given in the real world there are also females, unless you work in car sales. My leaning is that if it wasn't vaguely sensible as a concept then we'd have stopped doing it in this day and age, my wife who went to girls schools thought that it wasn't particularly healthy and lots of the girls went a bit mad when they got into 6th form/uni because of it. Obviously all the heads have their pitch as to why it works/why it doesn't - anyone had their mind turned on this?
We have a boy and 2 girls and found that because they had brothers and sisters the idea of the opposite sex was all a bit 'meh'. We have friends who have all one or the other who found that socialising with the opposite sex was a bit more 'distracting'.I've visited a number of schools in more built up areas, and now also a range of those in more leafy parts of the area (Dulwich namely) and honestly some of the latter schools have such an embarrassment of riches in terms of facilities that they make some of the other paid options in say Clapham look quite lacking. One thing I've found is how diversity changes through areas and schools, it really is a case by case, it isn't ruled only by money as they all cost about the same, but there must be a lot more to it that means most of the kids in certain schools are white british vs others being much more diverse.
The next tricky thing that we're having to think/decide on is boys school vs co-ed. The different age groupings that brings, and also what we think long term of that given in the real world there are also females, unless you work in car sales. My leaning is that if it wasn't vaguely sensible as a concept then we'd have stopped doing it in this day and age, my wife who went to girls schools thought that it wasn't particularly healthy and lots of the girls went a bit mad when they got into 6th form/uni because of it. Obviously all the heads have their pitch as to why it works/why it doesn't - anyone had their mind turned on this?
In Sydney, they went to single sex private schools simply because there was no choice. No problems but they were young.
When we came here they were 12, 10 and 7 and they went to a school which used the 'diamond model' which is mixed in Prep, single sex classes but a mixed campus for years 7 to 11 and then mixed classes for 6th Form. This was an issue for one of my daughters who took Maths and Physics at A Level and found she was the only girl in the class which she found intimidating but ultimately she did well and now she looks back and can see that she was motivated by wanting to compete with the boys.
None of this really helps you as you don't know how the family is going pan out. But my personal opinion is that one way or the other, kids need to opportunity to socialise with the opposite sex whether it is co-ed, sisters/brothers, hobbies (ballroom dancing anyone?), a boys school linked to a girls school (for proms, school plays etc) or just going co-ed for 6th Form.
okgo said:
We have almost certainly written off the state options now, have been to see the local two and they were nothing that special. Massive classes, huge range of ages together (blending of two year groups), distinct lack of facilities and space. All what you'd expect in Z2 London.
The lack of space for facilities is perhaps inevitable in a dense city environment like Z2 London, but the mixing of year groups is curious. Larger primaries tend to have multiple classes per year, not the other way around. Very small rural primaries do mix ages, as otherwise they'd only have half a dozen kids per class, and/or don't have 6 or 7 classrooms (or teachers) anyway.
mikey_b said:
The lack of space for facilities is perhaps inevitable in a dense city environment like Z2 London, but the mixing of year groups is curious. Larger primaries tend to have multiple classes per year, not the other way around. Very small rural primaries do mix ages, as otherwise they'd only have half a dozen kids per class, and/or don't have 6 or 7 classrooms (or teachers) anyway.
I think it is to do with there being fewer kids born in London. The situation with the school in question is that they were expanding to a second site so they had the opportunity to take more children per year. Covid hit and now they don't have enough kids to fill both sites, so the original victorian building will be sold and they're all piling into the new site.https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/04/17/london... - more here. I think in essence what I see here is that people either have money to buy a house and stay in London with kids, those people either go to church and get into the local highly regarded church school (which I can't be arsed with). Or they send private. The rest typically look to move out of the area when they have their second young kid as they can't afford a house at £1.xm from their flat. All that remains really seem to be the huge estates we have in Lambeth, their kids end up in the states, which typically means they're pretty dire at secondary level as behavioural issues in south london are rife.
I went to a rural school and indeed we did have about 10 of us per class, I think 11 in my year 6 cohort, no mixing ages. I then went to a secondary with 8 forms per year group, quite the wake up call that was!
Edited by okgo on Friday 12th May 15:15
okgo said:
We have almost certainly written off the state options now, have been to see the local two and they were nothing that special. Massive classes, huge range of ages together (blending of two year groups), distinct lack of facilities and space. All what you'd expect in Z2 London.
I've visited a number of schools in more built up areas, and now also a range of those in more leafy parts of the area (Dulwich namely) and honestly some of the latter schools have such an embarrassment of riches in terms of facilities that they make some of the other paid options in say Clapham look quite lacking. One thing I've found is how diversity changes through areas and schools, it really is a case by case, it isn't ruled only by money as they all cost about the same, but there must be a lot more to it that means most of the kids in certain schools are white british vs others being much more diverse.
The next tricky thing that we're having to think/decide on is boys school vs co-ed. The different age groupings that brings, and also what we think long term of that given in the real world there are also females, unless you work in car sales. My leaning is that if it wasn't vaguely sensible as a concept then we'd have stopped doing it in this day and age, my wife who went to girls schools thought that it wasn't particularly healthy and lots of the girls went a bit mad when they got into 6th form/uni because of it. Obviously all the heads have their pitch as to why it works/why it doesn't - anyone had their mind turned on this?
I presume you’ve been to see Dulwich Prep, Alleyns Juniors, and Dulwich College.I've visited a number of schools in more built up areas, and now also a range of those in more leafy parts of the area (Dulwich namely) and honestly some of the latter schools have such an embarrassment of riches in terms of facilities that they make some of the other paid options in say Clapham look quite lacking. One thing I've found is how diversity changes through areas and schools, it really is a case by case, it isn't ruled only by money as they all cost about the same, but there must be a lot more to it that means most of the kids in certain schools are white british vs others being much more diverse.
The next tricky thing that we're having to think/decide on is boys school vs co-ed. The different age groupings that brings, and also what we think long term of that given in the real world there are also females, unless you work in car sales. My leaning is that if it wasn't vaguely sensible as a concept then we'd have stopped doing it in this day and age, my wife who went to girls schools thought that it wasn't particularly healthy and lots of the girls went a bit mad when they got into 6th form/uni because of it. Obviously all the heads have their pitch as to why it works/why it doesn't - anyone had their mind turned on this?
The college has better facilities by virtue of sharing with the senior school, but honestly is less high-achieving (especially 3-13) than the Prep. And it’s not as if the Prep’s facilities are falling short!
brickwall said:
I presume you’ve been to see Dulwich Prep, Alleyns Juniors, and Dulwich College.
The college has better facilities by virtue of sharing with the senior school, but honestly is less high-achieving (especially 3-13) than the Prep. And it’s not as if the Prep’s facilities are falling short!
Only DPL so far, the others I will do in due course. Though DC entry at 4 is a bit of a weird one vs the others. DPL very impressive as you say. Though can see the appeal of getting a spot at the other two which obviously means you're kind of done with entry tests. Though kind of hoping that doesn't happen as I don't want to have to buy another London house, which I think I'd feel obliged to if Alleyn's happened.The college has better facilities by virtue of sharing with the senior school, but honestly is less high-achieving (especially 3-13) than the Prep. And it’s not as if the Prep’s facilities are falling short!
okgo said:
brickwall said:
I presume you’ve been to see Dulwich Prep, Alleyns Juniors, and Dulwich College.
The college has better facilities by virtue of sharing with the senior school, but honestly is less high-achieving (especially 3-13) than the Prep. And it’s not as if the Prep’s facilities are falling short!
Only DPL so far, the others I will do in due course. Though DC entry at 4 is a bit of a weird one vs the others. DPL very impressive as you say. Though can see the appeal of getting a spot at the other two which obviously means you're kind of done with entry tests. Though kind of hoping that doesn't happen as I don't want to have to buy another London house, which I think I'd feel obliged to if Alleyn's happened.The college has better facilities by virtue of sharing with the senior school, but honestly is less high-achieving (especially 3-13) than the Prep. And it’s not as if the Prep’s facilities are falling short!
And honestly coming from DPL the kids are largely guaranteed to get in to the college or Alleyns; it’s only places like Westminster where there’s a bit of selection.
brickwall said:
I think in that rarified world I think it’s mainly a combo of
- Only one parent works
- If both parents work, there’s a nanny
Or one of the parents is a teacher etc.- Only one parent works
- If both parents work, there’s a nanny
Or grandparents.
A lof of people get 6 weeks off these days and many don't do much for another 2-3 weeks over Christmas and New Year
okgo said:
I've visited a number of schools in more built up areas, and now also a range of those in more leafy parts of the area (Dulwich namely) and honestly some of the latter schools have such an embarrassment of riches in terms of facilities that they make some of the other paid options in say Clapham look quite lacking. One thing I've found is how diversity changes through areas and schools, it really is a case by case, it isn't ruled only by money as they all cost about the same, but there must be a lot more to it that means most of the kids in certain schools are white british vs others being much more diverse.
The next tricky thing that we're having to think/decide on is boys school vs co-ed. The different age groupings that brings, and also what we think long term of that given in the real world there are also females, unless you work in car sales. My leaning is that if it wasn't vaguely sensible as a concept then we'd have stopped doing it in this day and age, my wife who went to girls schools thought that it wasn't particularly healthy and lots of the girls went a bit mad when they got into 6th form/uni because of it. Obviously all the heads have their pitch as to why it works/why it doesn't - anyone had their mind turned on this?
The diversity thing in S London fee paying schools is something we clocked too. SE London: diverse and reflective of London as a whole. SW London: Whitey McWhite-ville. And then a bit whiter still. Also agree with the tilt of where the money is. The three Dulwich Foundation schools are absolutely loaded to the very obvious point of literally having more money than they know what to do with, and so have a sort of rolling building programme. SW London schools don’t seem to have anything like that financial heritage, but still like to try to keep up on the rolling development front, so you get hammered with fundraisers and so on. The next tricky thing that we're having to think/decide on is boys school vs co-ed. The different age groupings that brings, and also what we think long term of that given in the real world there are also females, unless you work in car sales. My leaning is that if it wasn't vaguely sensible as a concept then we'd have stopped doing it in this day and age, my wife who went to girls schools thought that it wasn't particularly healthy and lots of the girls went a bit mad when they got into 6th form/uni because of it. Obviously all the heads have their pitch as to why it works/why it doesn't - anyone had their mind turned on this?
We have two girls. One went SW into a mixed school, which was perfect for her, and one went SE into a more academic single sex school, which worked for a bit but by lower/upper sixth was less successful. On balance I think the latter would have been better off at Kings Wimbledon, but we never really had that on our radar for some reason I now can’t fathom. Bottom line: pick the school that you think will be best for his personality type - academic, sporty, musical, theatrical, whatever. Don’t push him to say an academic school if he’s not academic. Single sex or mixed I think is important, but secondary to that fundamental criterion. And don’t rule out a move after GCSEs.
One thing both our kids say is that the thing they are most grateful for is having been sent to the local state primary which was walking distance and had a very diverse social mix. They still have plenty of mates from then, and they say it gave them a keen eye for spotting the entitled s
tbags at secondary school. Didn’t foresee that at all TBH. Our girls are at Dulwich private schools. Notably more diverse, both racially and economically, than SW schools, and partially why we chose them.
I mean, obviously everyone who sends their kids there has money to some degree, but it isn't all single working parent families. Quite the opposite, actually.
I mean, obviously everyone who sends their kids there has money to some degree, but it isn't all single working parent families. Quite the opposite, actually.
My son is 2 so it can be difficult to work out what sort of kid they are in some of those areas. I suspect it’ll become clear as time goes on. I’m not interested in the local states so will go with one or other private option from reception. Visiting them only compounded my thoughts. Obviously I could move house to another area with better states but I’d spend half of his entire educational cost on stamp duty so it seems pointless. And some of the states that fit that bill are also entirely identikit because the only people that can afford houses near to catchment are the usual private suspects.
The diversity/entitlement thing is interesting from your daughters, I live in a much more diverse area (currently) than say ‘nappy valley’ so just existing here you’ll see all sorts of people and things you wouldn’t in some areas. We have lots of mates in London who won’t send their kids private that my son mixes/will continue to mix with so I’m not fussed in that sense.
The diversity/entitlement thing is interesting from your daughters, I live in a much more diverse area (currently) than say ‘nappy valley’ so just existing here you’ll see all sorts of people and things you wouldn’t in some areas. We have lots of mates in London who won’t send their kids private that my son mixes/will continue to mix with so I’m not fussed in that sense.
Countdown said:
Nope. Plenty of State schools rated outstanding are as good as (if not better than) some Private schools in terms of educational attainment. I went to a selective Grammar. It was the first choice for a lot of parents who then had to send their kids to private school when they didn't pass the 11+.
With all due respect, a selective grammar is not representative of a state schoolokgo said:
I suppose the big question that I have which I’ve yet to find a suitable answer to is - what the hell do parents who have jobs (probably less of an issue in this world if one parent is stay at home) do when the kids are on endless vacations?!
live in Nanny init. 4 weeks xmas
4 weeks easter
10 weeks summer
3 x 1 week half terms
used to get pretty bored during summer hols
okgo said:
You wonder if one day the system will change to reflect the modern world!
To be fair, things have changed quite a bit over the years. Used to be that you had to send a letter home to request arrangement of transport at the end of term, and then your governess still only allowed you to see your parents for an hour every Wednesday. Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff