Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The UK has been continuously falling in the international league tables for education, child poverty and child happiness. I am beginning to think that the best of what the UK can offer a child is only available to the wealthy few that can afford to pay for it. If you could raise your child in another country outside of the UK would you? Would you choose Europe, USA, Canada or Australia instead of the UK and if so why?
My daughter has been educated in both the UK and the US.
In the US she was at a British school as when we moved over there she a year ahead of her age group- we start kids a year earlier in the UK.
We moved back from the US so that she could continue her education in an English grammar school, having taken the entrance exam in the US.
Providing you get into a reputable school within the State sector here in the UK, and providing you are willing to learn then I would recommend the UK.
I would also suggest that the removal of large numbers of grammar schools in the UK was wrong on a number of levels.
I have experienced both systems too, and I found the American school provided a more comprehensive, more well rounded foundation. British schools specialise far earlier, which some may say provides an indepth comprehension of certain subjects. I have also been to both private and state schools in England and I would never send my child to a state school unless it had an exceptional reputation. The majority of state schools have very limited sports facilities available, and the extra curricular programmes are very uninspiring. The difference in quality of education between private and state is like night and day. I think the majority of British private schools are outstanding, but the majority of state schools are terrible. If you want your child to get a good quality state funded education then you have to live in the geographical catchment area for the right school, and then once your child passes the entrance exam, then you have to hope that there are places available. It also places an extreme amount of pressure on the child to pass the exam and get selected for a place. It can be very difficult.
I have experienced both systems too, and I found the American school provided a more comprehensive, more well rounded foundation. British schools specialise far earlier, which some may say provides an indepth comprehension of certain subjects. I have also been to both private and state schools in England and I would never send my child to a state school unless it had an exceptional reputation. The majority of state schools have very limited sports facilities available, and the extra curricular programmes are very uninspiring. The difference in quality of education between private and state is like night and day. I think the majority of British private schools are outstanding, but the majority of state schools are terrible. If you want your child to get a good quality state funded education then you have to live in the geographical catchment area for the right school, and then once your child passes the entrance exam, then you have to hope that there are places available. It also places an extreme amount of pressure on the child to pass the exam and get selected for a place. It can be very difficult.
I don't dispute more or less all you say.
It's fair to say that as far as myself, my wife and my daughter we have no real experience of a state school other than a grammar school or private school (obtained via a scholarship) at secondary level.
I fully agree that we specialise too early in this country.
Perhaps the International Baccalaureate is the way forward?
I am happier to raise my child here than in the UK, but there are terrible schools in both places, and my state ranks as one of the lowest in the US for education. There is also a worry about the gun culture here, and while unlikely, it is still something parents in the UK don't even have to think about. Saying that, my child has more access here to great recreational clubs, groups, parks and just being outside more. If you can afford good schooling then it is a matter of preference. Most of it is down to parenting anyway.
I am happier to raise my child here than in the UK, but there are terrible schools in both places, and my state ranks as one of the lowest in the US for education. There is also a worry about the gun culture here, and while unlikely, it is still something parents in the UK don't even have to think about. Saying that, my child has more access here to great recreational clubs, groups, parks and just being outside more. If you can afford good schooling then it is a matter of preference. Most of it is down to parenting anyway.
I agree with you about the general lack of recreational opportunities, groups and sports clubs available to most British children. I think American kids are very lucky in that way.
England is a tough place to raise kids because the cost of living is really high. House prices are impossible and so is the price of rent. For a lot of people there isn't enough money left in the pay cheque for any kind of treats or luxuries. We live next to mainland Europe, but most of us can't afford to travel there very often, if at all. Better off living somewhere you can afford to be comfortable and give your children more choices and opportunities.
My son and daughter attend the local state primary school and both are receiving an excellent education.
My daughter is in a brass band , swim club and netball team , my son a football team swim club and jiu jitsu academy .
There is no shortage of things for them to do and you don't need lots of money either .
A lot of it comes down to the parents willingness to get involved also according to the OECD Pisa results the UK's kids are faring better than there US peers.
So to answer the op's question yes but there is always room for improvement.
I wonder how much of an effect on the schools have immigrants made, both in the USA & UK? Bringing in students who either don't speak English or barely speak English can hold back the class as a whole. School quality can vary even within the same district. Parental support at home goes a long way.
I would imagine large numbers of immigrants from certain countries improve educational standards as their parents are often the most supportive. This seems to be reflected in universities where darker skins are over-represented in subjects like law and medicine. There is a well documented native underclass who continue to underachieve at school, safe in the knowledge the welfare state will always provide. Many London primary schools with very few native English children consistently achieve "outstanding" status in Ofsted inspections.
As for bringing up children, I think it's a great place. When I was at school less than ten percent of children attended university, and your job prospects were usually factory or retail. My child, who is well above most classmates academically (boast boast), will have amazing opportunities I could only ever dream of. Local play parks are excellent, especially compared to tales of concrete wastelands my Eastern European friends tell me about. My only worry is house prices for the next generation, but that is a political question and nothing worth not having kids for.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
