'State till 8' - how? Post Reply

[SabineMum]

This is a recommendation I've read over and over again on NV. As I'm still trying to grapple with some of the workings of the English education system, I would be very grateful to know, from those who have done it, how you achieved a move from state to private and what made a difference (the academic level of the state school you were in? or the tutoring that you supplemented school work with? or perhaps the choice of private school - perhaps one shouldn't be too ambitious and not aim for the very top independent schools?). I'm also wondering if it's as widely done as is suggested here - how can there be that many additional places in Y4/Y5 (in fact, do people move in Y4 or Y5?) in private schools to take in kids from all sorts of other schools? I just cant get my head around that. Finally, we are particularly interested in Newton Prep, so it'd be good to hear from anyone who made the jump there from a local state school.
Many thanks!

[AbbevilleMummy]

We have not done it, yet, however my husband did it when he was a boy and it is a very normal and common thing to do in the uk.

Back in the day there wasn't really pre-prep schools, just state, then prep, then boarding.

State till 8 means that you'll send your child to a state school until they complete year 2 and then from year 3 they will go to a preparatory school until they are in year 6 if they go on to a day school or year 8 if they go on to a boarding school.

There are many prep schools that don't have a Pre-prep and so all children start in year 3, such as Northcote Lodge, however the boys from Broomwood pre-prep do feed into that school.

I can't comment on how easy it is to pass the entrance exams when coming from a state school, I just wanted to let you know that it's year 3 that they move and that it is common for independent schools to have a large intake in year 3.

[mgb]

Does this apply for girls as well?

Thanks x

[BalhamMumWorkingFT]

Many schools offer a bigger class from Year 3. Basically this means there are anywhere from 10-20 places open for kids to join the year. Class size ratios go up slightly or a new class is brought in to make the year bigger but then usually it is more important to have smaller classes in Reception to year 2.

It applies for all children, not just girls or boys. Most private schools will access children to be offered a spot. This means they will have to be at a similar standard education wise. But to be honest, most state schools from Reception to Year 2 are pretty close to private. The difference is usually in the extra circular offerings and broader variety of things like Sport. However, if your child seems to be falling behind in state at year 1 or 2, you may want to talk to their teacher about what you can do at home. Not encouraging massive tuition, but there maybe some extra support you, a nanny, or if you feel it is needed, a tutor, could provide.

I see many people that are in outstanding schools move later for the last two years of prep Year 7,8 and then private for college. I believe that is much harder due to the entrance exams and such but not impossible at all.

In London, there are many great state schools to 11+ as well as good grammers, and sixth forms. There are also great private options too, like Newton Prep. They are all usually great about answering questions, showing you around the schools, etc... that way you can really keep in touch with what you want out of the education system and of course, what you'll have to put in.

Good Luck.

[ready2pop]

If you want to move them at 8 you need to focus on preparing them for the 7+ entrance exam.

This is where it is harder from state than private as most of the prep schools do lots of work and practise to get the kids ready for it whereas states generally don't - which is why lots of people then hire tutors instead.

Going private from the start can allow you to avoid the 7+ altogether if you pick a school that goes on beyond 8 as it the entrance process for reception is less formal (and in some cases just a matter of getting your name on the list early enough). Then you only have to focus on common entrance exams or 11+

[thing1andthing2]

7+ is much more common that 8+ (ie entry to year 3 rather than year 4).

However, it depends which school you are targeting.

In terms of 7+ Bonds assessments in the appropriate age group will be fine for most schools, however at 8+ if you are targeting particularly selective schools (KCS, WU, DC Junior, DPL etc) you should be looking at high scoring marks on the next age group. The other issue is that for 8+ a lot of the entrance exams in January feature areas that just haven't been taught yet in the year at most schools (ie maths areas that will be taught in May are on the exam already in January) - you need tutors to be able to give you this info, as most schools will not publish past papers (KCS being an exception).

And remember, once you manage to get through the exam, there's then the assessment morning for group work and the interview.

Good luck!

[MGMidget]

I had heard that KCS is very competitive so don't be too disheartened if your child doesn't get in!

[schoolgatesmum]

Just to point out that only about 7% of the population are privately educated - most of that 7% must be from nappy valley!!

[schoolgatesmum]

Oh and I'm state educated and don't feel as if my future was pulled out from under my feet. I feel that I have had a very successful life so far - but then I guess it all depends on your definition of success (I didn't get a "top uni" degree or go into a top profession).

[iamjules]

I would say it's not that common in all state schools and when it does happen, it's quite disruptive for the schools that are left with dwindling numbers upper years. Schools miss out on a lot of funding when children leave so it's not great really when they take children in in reception only to do a couple of years then leave. Oversubscribed state schools have a real problem and quite rightly feel a bit annoyed about the whole idea, especially when siblings of kids who have left in year 3 start in reception, and will obviously leave when they get to that stage too. Don't always assume that all state primaries aren't good enough.

[ready2pop]

Chin up mungomuffit!

I went to state schools all the way through (including one that was so unpopular it was shut down two years after I left). I never had any private tutoring either but I still managed to get a place at Oxford and then a career in law.

It all seems to get amplified in London but remember nationwide the vast majority are state educated.

[twice_as_nice]

ahhhh this sort of attitude just makes me crazy!!!!

I'm trying to reply in a measured way, but really?!

MM "You don't have your future pulled out from under your feet if your parents decide on the state system, like you seem to do here." I guess I need to cut you some slack as your'e not from the UK but really, OMG you are frigging kidding me!!!!! What an attitude.

Does everyone in london really think that if a child goes to state school they can't do well in life?!!! Please!!!!

[AbbevilleMummy]

I don't really understand the outrage?

We are in London. And due to the sheer density of the population and the lack of state funding, inner-city state secondary schools in London by and large aren't great. Of course, if that's your only option, and you are bright, hard-working, come from a home that values education etc etc then you can do well where ever you to go school, but it will probably be a harder road to travel.

By paying for prep-school, one would hope that getting into an independent secondary will be that little bit easier. By paying for an independent secondary, one would hope that getting into a white or red brick uni will be that little bit easier. That's all. Its not a desperate situation.

[livegreen]

@abbevillemummy

Why do you think majority of London Secondary Schools aren't great. This is the attitude that scares people to unnecessarily fork out thousands on education that they do not need to. Try researching the topic and.....

London state schools have undergone a "startling turnaround and are now the best in England" according to a study by the Financial Times newspaper.

The FT analysed 3.5 million children's exam results for the six years to 2011.

In 2011 London pupils did better in five GCSEs including maths and English than pupils from any other region.

FT education correspondent Chris Cook said that when the figures were adjusted to account for poverty London's performance was even stronger.

Analysis of the data from the National Pupil Database showed that results improved during the six-year period. In 2004 London's exam results were just fourth best out of nine English regions.

Performance Gap

During the period the performance gap between richer and poorer pupils narrowed in London - a change that was not mirrored elsewhere in England, suggests the analysis.

The FT says that by 2011 pupils in some of the poorest areas of the capital were outperforming children in more affluent areas.

For example the FT says: "A London child can expect to achieve one better grade in three subjects than a similar child from a similar neighbourhood in the south-eastern counties".

At their most extreme the figures suggest a child from the top-performing borough, Westminster, would outperform a similar child from a similar neighbourhood in Hull by two grades in every subject.

Commenting on the findings, Chris Husbands, director of London University's Institute of Education said the improvement in London results made the capital "not only the national but in many ways the international school success story in the last 10 years."

Professor Husbands also praised the targeted interventions that had helped improve teaching and management in many London schools.

The FT also quotes Lord Adonis, a former schools minister under Labour: "For 15 years London has been the pathfinder for school reform."

Lord Adonis particularly praised the Teach First scheme which encourages top graduates into teaching and which began in the capital. He also said the academy programme and the London Challenge which ran for eight years until 2011 were effective in turning around poorly-performing schools.

A DfE spokeswoman said: "London's schools have made great strides in recent years and should be congratulated on their improvement.

"Great leadership, high-quality teaching, the success of academies and strong partnerships, where strong schools support weaker ones, have driven this progress in London. We would like all schools across England to match this success, raising standards for all our children."

Add to this the fact that state school pupils outperform those from private schools at Oxbridge (recent report from Sutton Trust confirms this happens at all Russell Group Universities).

OECD report says children from similar backgrounds perform equally well at private and state schools in the UK.

Do not panic people - relax and let your children enjoy their childhood.

[AbbevilleMummy]

Wow Livegreen! That is a lot of research you have pulled together.

I don't disagree that London schools are improving, but London state comprehensives do not compare with London independent secondary schools both on terms of grades and number of places gained at top universities.

On this link you can see the top 100 state schools vs top 100 independent schools. There are barely any London schools on the state schools list yet many that are local to us on the independent school list. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/educa ... 94994.html

I am not anti-state schools at all, just want to provide the best that I can afford to for my kids, and like most parents I imagine, want to provide them with the same or better than I had.

I don't really see how sending them to a nurturing prep school is not letting them enjoy their childhood, my limited experience of the UK education system is that kids in comprehensive schools often have to grow up faster than those in bubble-like independent schools.

Anyway, my post was not to slag-off state schools, just to say that I don't understand the shock-horror attitude of people wanting to pay for their kids education.