Vilification of going independent route

[quasimodo]

I'm sorry but you do need to realise that some people think private school should be closed - then they feel that politicians would HAVE to put more money into schools.

There are many good primaries that can differentiate and ensure all children do well - mixed ability can, as research has proved, actually improve outcomes for all children.

It's exactly the same as people criticising choice of holiday, car, etc - try to ignore as it won't go away.

I am sorry I have to disagree with you on this one.What about freedom of choice?

If an individual chooses a private school he is paying twice over for the schooling.Firstly for the school his or her child attends and secondly through his taxes for everyone else's state education.

When I wasn't able to work from December 2012 and not able to rely on the State for financial help fundamental choices had to be made. So we sold our motor vehicles(two mercs which others might criticise) and now manage on one very old car.Our child's education was far more important(and that of our eldest going to University) and something we can never take away from her.She was happy and performing well in her school and we had no wish to change it.We considered our local options and wanted the best for our child and remained where we were.

I sometimes think some people have a degree of envy in their criticism(not you).

My own personal experience and that of my wife being in mixed ability classes in State schools led us to make our choices and its a choice that's been made in the last 25 years for all the children in the extended family numbering some 18 to date thus far.The careers and life paths are all the justification we need of the decisions taken.

[Guest55]

Quasimodo - my post was to say 'ignore it' as criticism won't go away.

'Paying more' does not equal 'better' necessarily ... what ever we buy.

[kenyancowgirl]

I have a daughter in an independent primary as whilst the local schools are good, she is so bright she needs that extra stretch.l

You have made the decision based on what you believe is right for your child and others make a different decision - with the education system we currently have, you have the right to make that choice and, as others have said, you have to ignore criticism, implied or otherwise. But, I do have to say, in the sentence above, you are guilty of the same thing as you are basically saying that whilst the local schools are OK they are not OK enough, for your bright daughter, who needs "better"....!! In all honesty, if you said that to me, I would probably take umbrage...maybe people are reacting to what you say?

I am personally not of the opinion that just because a school is being paid for that it is "better" as schools can vary widely, but I respect your ability to make that choice.

[quasimodo]

Quasimodo - my post was to say 'ignore it' as criticism won't go away.

'Paying more' does not equal 'better' necessarily ... what ever we buy.

That's why at Secondary school level we have chosen to go down the route of a Grammar.

We live in a free society everyone can criticise.

[Yamin151]

Guest and Kenyancowgirl are both right in saying that paying does not necessarily mean better, that if (and you've probably not) you have said or implied that your child is too bright for an ordinary state primary then you will get that kind of response. Also that you are best just to ignore these comments as people will always make them.

I don't agree that the basis for criticism is a belief that if people didn't spend on private the government would put more money into state system. More likely is there would be an even wider divide between the schools that attract the 'otherwise private' group, with attendant expensive housing stock and huge competition for entry (that's even if they are non grammar) and those schools that are easy to get a place in because no one wants to go there! The good across the board state system is a utopia. A utopia it is worth striving for I agree, but I don't feel eliminating private is the way to get it. You could argue that private places that are paid for at least means that that amount of children are not fighting to get into the best state schools, with all the advantage of whatever postcode, coaching etc that they are able to buy, leaving more places for others.
And at the basis of all this is that no two children are the same (thank goodness), so why do we assume that children don't flourish in different schools, and that those who have the resources, easily won or more commonly, hard won, to choose are perfectly within their rights to do so. I would actually say that it's also damn rude to make someone feel guilty for that choice.i wouldn't dream of saying "you chose SinkEstate High?? What were you thinking! That's right, release another child who hasn't reached his potential onto the dung heap of life!!". Exaggeration perhaps, but it can sometimes feel like those who are felt to be "privileged" (stay at home parents, private school etc) are fair game, but woe betide those who criticise those who seem to take no account of what's best for their child schooling wise.

[Amber]

I wonder if it isn't so much the fact that you send a child to private school as the 'she is so bright she needs the extra stretch' bit of the story? Two of my children spent some time in independent schools, but it was for entirely different reasons (pastoral; and also a rather foolish oversight on my part when moving from abroad and failing to register children for local school ) and I have to say no one ever said anything negative at all. I gently suggest that if one frames a story from the point of view of a hugely bright child who can't be catered for elsewhere it may tend to alienate other parents in a way it might not if you just said you felt the school suited her better. Using that line doesn't then imply criticism of the choices other parents have made, especially as not everyone can afford the private route.

For us, the decision to leave the private sector was the best one ever and we felt it served our children much better to be at the local state primary when we got them there. So it does work the other way round, but one feels almost unable to say that in case it looks like envy or, again, criticism of the reverse choice. The best way is for everyone to be careful what they say to each other, as we are all guilty of degrees of rewriting narratives to bring ourselves and our children out in the best light.

I differ from G55 in that I would like to see the back of grammar schools before private ones, so not everyone who is critical is likely to have an antipathy to your choice per se, but maybe the reasons behind it? Just a thought.

[copella]

In ds2's primary school a parent removed her child to a private school because she was supposedly too bright. This really got the backs up of all the other parents because it implied we were willing to accept second best for our children. The parent may have felt we were envious as our response when told was rather muted.

When ds2 was sitting the 11 plus we saw said girl at nearly all the exams with her mother telling us it was a certainty that she would get in and looking rather sadly at my son. Come the start of y7, my ds and several others in his class held places at grammar or semi selective schools whilst the girl deemed too bright was at her local comp.

In ds1's year his friend gave up a place at a great comp to go to a private school because the parents thought paying = better. His GCSE results were no better than ds1 who went to a not so good comp down the road.

Now this isn't to say going private is bad, but state education can be as good if not better and sometimes it is best to save your money. Also not everyone cares about the decision parents make re private education. I personally couldn't care less but it comes across as boasting at times and putting down others choices.

[Yamin151]

Completely agree with the potential boasting needs of other parents who choose private. It's not, of course, a guaranteed success route, and certainly absolutely no reason to show off about it, any more than if your child gets into GS!
The difficulty with anecdotal stories (no better gcse at the private school) is that of course they are impossible to prove either way, and often swayed by the teller depending on the point they want to make. It might be that the boy you mentioned may have actually done worse in his GCSEs if he'd not been moved. Sometimes choices are made to help prevent that child not reaching their potential due to totally different reasons, not because the parent thinks the school is better academically, but maybe better for their child pastorally.

And yes, why do some people think everyone needs to know about their choices? Some of us just don't care, and also some people definitely need lessons in tact and diplomacy. I would never criticise a school to someone with a pupil in it, no matter how I felt about it.

[copella]

Your right Yasmin who us to say if both children would have done worse or even the same if left in the state system. The common thread with both my examples were parents vocally dissing the state system and putting down parents who stayed. Paying seemed to make them feel better. That's ok If that's what they chose to believe but sometimes it's better to not voice this.

[Yamin151]

Yes I completely agree.