Which would you choose - the 'best' school (at a cost) or a better lifestyle?

[wysiwyg]

From my perspective: there is a very real chance that, with your guidance and parenting approach that your children, even without the steiner school, will have access to ethical, nuturing and inspiring education. Having you around a bit more will help compensate for a little less immersion in the school environment. having the extra finances is, a necessary component in helping to create a more harmonious home (money stress can be really hurtful on a wholistic level IYKWIM).

Totally agreed - Personally I would go for option B, because I would want the time and the finances to be involved personally as much as I could in their development. Also schools change over time even Steiner schools so personally I wouldn't want to invest that 'heavily' in a school. My brothers girlfriend went to a few Steiner schools as a child and didn't always have the best time, seems there was a certain rigidity in their methods which didn't always suit her. I suppose what I am trying to say is you can't predict exactly what your children will be like and what will suit them as individuals (My cousin sent her DD to a private grammar school for her kindy year with the intention of her staying there, but the way enrollments went and people leaving she was the only girl in the class and would have continued to be, and started to really dislike it, so has now started at her local catholic school instead) so I wouldn't want to choose a specific school if it was to the detriment of other things because you just don't know what the school will be like in 8 years say or what your kids will be like - but you know that you as a parent will be able to be flexible to meet their needs and assist in their development - so I would want to keep the time and the finances for that.

[MrsFabuloso]

A better life style. You could provide alot of other learning opportunities for that amount of money per year (and much MUCH less!), plus they get the added bonus of having you around and you being happier. Whilst life is about trying to provide your children the best things in life, it also needs to be balanced. You need to think of you too. If you're going to be frazzled and tired alot of the time, and the kids won't be getting the best of you because of you trying to give them their education, as a child, I know what I would much rather have- my mum happy and nurturing me rather than in a hurry and frazzled because there isn't enough time int he day for her. I'm sure you and your DH could teach them many similar lessons and if you live the kids of lifestyle you aim for, then they will learn that way.

[Astrid]

Better lifestyle - well not really that, more secure financial future. We are behind the 8 ball here and trying to catch up the best we can. We have lived on the edge and it is not fun. We would like to be able to take the children just on simple holidays to visit family. We want to have financially stable (mortgage paid off, money in the bank) by the time they hit uni age, as that is where we feel they will probably need the greatest level of financial support from us.

Sometimes it is not just a matter of the now, or the next few year, but 15+ years down the track. We always need to keep that future in mind.

[Santosha]

Thankyou all so much for your thoughtful replies. It's given me a great deal to think about. TBH, I was surprised that the majority lean toward option B, mainly because I think I have generally been tending toward option A.

My argument to myself is that school is the place that they will spend the majority of their days throughout their childhood, and so the culture in which they are immersed is bound to have a huge impact on their imagination, intellect, relationships etc. DH and I will be who we will be. Yes, having to stretch ourselves financially and time-wise will leave us 'frazzled', as I put it, but I hope that we will still maintain our ethics and parenting style. A house is just a house, and whilst we may never afford a bigger one, this one will meet our children's basic needs. And there's nothing wrong with camping rather than trips to far-off places.

Reading your other ideas has given me pause to consider 'B' more though. Obviously, I was thinking about it, as I wrote this post, but I don't think I really considered the many valid points you have made. Fortunately, I have a while to make the ultimate decision and will then know more about what our budget looks like when I return to work.

I think if it was just a matter of private versus public school, I would have a clear preference for the local public school, especially for primary. I went to a mainstream private school and don't think it afforded me any great advantages, except perhaps for the final couple of years. In fact, the culture of the school really didn't suit who I was and I found it stifling and in many ways, quite damaging. The confusion really comes from my love of the Steiner ethic and culture. It's just an aside... a really big, expensive one, that the fees are what they are. I'm more than happy to accept that Steiner education may not suit my children's personalities and learning needs and will try and be as responsive to what suits them as possible. But in the mean time I have to make a decision based on what I hope might be best for them, and i really feel like this school might have 'it'.

Ginger... and someone else who asked (??!!), the school has long waiting lists and esentially I'd have to start from primary to ensure that they'd have a place. I understand that it's next-to impossible to get a place in the senior school without having been in the primary. I think that the Steiner style of education really suits young children and how I want their childhoods to be 'shaped'. I would have to re-assess when they're heading for secondary school as of course it would then depend on what they want in terms of academics, structure, subjects and teaching style.

Ummm... sorry, so utterly brain-dead, I'm not sure if I've covered everyone's comments and queries. Thanks again ladies. Lots to think about. xoxo

[Loveinamist]

I personally think B. In my personal opinion (as an ex teacher and mother) I think it is the parent's job to 'shape' their children's childhood. Schools are only a new institution in our culture. In fact schools were only really made compulsory and state funded for all in Victorian times when Big Business Heads realised they could get a more compliant, punctual and efficient workforce if they could create institutions where children were taken away from the 'influence' of their parents and shaped to fit the schedules and restrictions of their factories and workplaces and not question authority etc. So in reality the softer, more natural approaches to education like Steiner and Montesorri were attempts by progressive people to try and return to the sort of gentle loving education that parents (in an ideal pre-industrial world!) would have given their children. By education I mean of course, life skills, personal skills and skills needed to work in their profession so not necessarily reading and writing. With today's emphasis and the necessity on academic skills things have changed but I think there is no reason an involved parent cannot provide these skills with the help of the internet and libraries.
In my experience as a teacher I believe that once a child has the tools to read and they are happy and confident because of a loving background and they have a sense of wonder and have been inspired then it doesn't matter whether they learn at home or school, they will do well. But nothing can replace the loving influence of a parent that has time for them and can help them on their learning journey.
That is just my pretty radical opinion. I seriously felt sad for all those children who I taught in many different schools, in two countries, who spent more time with me in a week than with their parents. Not that I was cruel or awful but I just couldn't love them or have as much time for them as their parents would have if given the chance. So if you want Steiner and can't afford it, then give them Steiner in the home. Your version of Steiner would be a hundred times better than from someone who can never know and love your kids like you do. Even if it is only in the afternoons after 'normal' state school. Your influence is so much more important I think.

Sorry full of punctuation mistakes as I am dealing with a climbing toddler and I can't go back to find them all...even so I hope my rambling makes sense!

[Gigi]

i've just started my child at a public primary school, that has a Steiner stream. I've heard there are many dual stream primary schools in Melbourne, so could you consider one of those, instead of a pure Steiner school? It's a compromise, but i'm assuming, like it is for me, the fees are HEAPS less than $6k. Even the pure steiner schools here are WAY under $6k, more like $1k, last time i heard. Paying a few hundred, instead of a few thousand, is much more manageable. Fingers crossed for you that you can find a dual stream school near you, that has similar fees to ours.

[AnyDream]

Well I'm flying in the face of everyone else, because eldest DD has just started high school at a school that I believe strongly is absolutely the best place for her to go, despite our budget shortfall. In our case it's a little different because it's a catholic school so there is some room for negotiation of fees (which may also be an option at the Steiner school, it's worth asking about), but even so the next couple of years (esp while we're paying the same again in childcare for our youngest) will be tight tight tight. Partly it's an act of faith on my part that by committing to this for DD's highest good, that the universe will support this path, and the abundance needed to get through this time will arise as it is needed (which, LOL, is a very un-catholic way of thinking about it). We've never really had a lot of money to do activities, holidays, house renos etc, so - what difference will a few years more of living with less make?