[hycaria]

Don't you worry about the objectively lower education for your children there ? As much as I dislike cities, I can't imagine raising children somewhere else. Education, culture and network potential (through friends) is just not the same.

[phillc73]

No, it's not something I worry about at all. I'd be interested to know why you think the education would be objectively lower.

I'm still living in a city, just a small one. Having checked Wikipedia, it tells me the population is officially 320k. There are six Universities and the city is UNESCO listed as a Cultural Heritage site. I just don't see this location disadvantaging my child. In fact, I think it's a location with a pretty good mix of culture and nature.

Nothing is perfect of course, but I think we're in a better position than if we'd stayed in London.

If we were to move back to the UK, I'd be looking at somewhere like Cambridge or Edinburgh perhaps.

[lostboys67]

both of those are also very expensive areas to live in in the UK

[flak48]

Cordoba?

[mcjiggerlog]

As someone from the UK, this is surprising. In the UK the worst schools are generally in cities, and much better in smaller towns.

[jbb67]

I was going to add this. Education for possibly future children is one reason why I would move _out_ of London

[jarvist]

I think your perception is incorrect. It is now well recognised that London has the highest quality teaching in the country: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2012/jan/20/top-local-...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/07/london...

https://www.teachers.org.uk/expert-view/why-attainment-highe...

[lostboys67]

err no the top selective schools in the UK are in big cities the Oratory (London) and King Edward VII (Birmingham)

[mastazi]

Not sure where are you from but in Europe many cities smaller than the one parent settled in have their own universities and significant cultural scene... Basel, Perugia, Lille, Salzburg are some examples of cities with less than 250k residents where you would have all of the above.

[toomanybeersies]

250k doesn't seem to be small enough to have a serious negative quality of education.

I grew up in a city of 100k, and I had all the opportunities that someone growing up in a bigger city would have. The quality of teaching was fine too. I did go to a larger school, with 2300 pupils though.

[yakshaving_jgt]

What makes you think London is at the forefront of educational standards?

(I'm originally from London, and I also live in a smaller European city).

[mantas]

In my country, a public school from 5th largest city, with population of less than 100k, routinely makes it into top-3 high schools. It gets worse only when population is < 10k or so and can't fill a full-blown school. On the other hand, quite a few schools in big cities are notoriously shitty...

[jakobegger]

He said he moved to a mid sized city with 250000 people — I expect that most European cities of that size have decent public schools. Even a lot of small cities often have a good school. And even if that‘s not the case, in most places your kids can just take the bus to a school in the next city.

[richardknop]

Lot of top universities around Europe are in smallish cities (200-300k people). I don't know why you think top universities are only in London/Berlin/Paris. That's not true at all, especially in Europe. Not sure about US.

[bboozzoo]

Or even smaller than 200k people, try KU Leuven for instance.

[cyphar]

There are many "mid-sized European cities" that have better education than London. Most of Estonia is an obvious example. And a city of 250k people is still large enough in my book to allow for a large enough pool for networking.