Private schools, times a changing?

[okgo]

borcy said:

I'm sure it is. What I'm saying is that aren't that many state grammar schools to start with.

163 apparently.

[borcy]

okgo said:

borcy said:

I'm sure it is. What I'm saying is that aren't that many state grammar schools to start with.

163 apparently.

Exactly a small number in the uk. I wonder if they are, broadly speaking quite small pupilwise.

[otolith]

TownIdiot said:

I'd also have thought many state schools would benefit from having more kids with engaged and motivated parents.

I suspect that the biggest challenge the failing schools face is the demographic they serve - and that an influx of pointy elbowed middle class parents demanding that more focus is put on getting their kids into Oxbridge will not help them deal with their current problem kids.

[ooid]

TownIdiot said:

I'd also have thought many state schools would benefit from having more kids with engaged and motivated parents.

You really picked a great username

You do not improve education by setting top down taxes for those who chose private education. Improving education is complex, not easy task but only bunch of town idiots would try to solve with such simpleton measures. Sadly, no sides of the political field have anyone with right skills and knowledge to set a decent proposal so double lose for the Good old Blighty as usual.

They have no idea how much they can actually raise revenue for education (I've read the projections, they are worse than a footballer wife's monthly projection), the only thing is certain, the ones who uses private education will be punished.

[TownIdiot]

okgo said:

It’s a quick move to Tunbridge Wells. It isn’t difficult. What it’s not is sending kids to the local ‘needs improvement” - that will never happen.

There is a world outside the south east.

[TownIdiot]

ooid said:

You really picked a great username

You do not improve education by setting top down taxes for those who chose private education. Improving education is complex, not easy task but only bunch of town idiots would try to solve with such simpleton measures. Sadly, no sides of the political field have anyone with right skills and knowledge to set a decent proposal so double lose for the Good old Blighty as usual.

They have no idea how much they can actually raise revenue for education (I've read the projections, they are worse than a footballer wife's monthly projection), the only thing is certain, the ones who uses private education will be punished.

By punished I presume you mean pay a bit more tax?

Have a word with donkey apple, it's just a game and can be avoided apparently.

I am really not sure what the issue is, other than a few people paying more tax
Which is the way it is these days, until you work how how to avoid it.

[DonkeyApple]

TownIdiot said:

By punished I presume you mean pay a bit more tax?

Have a word with donkey apple, it's just a game and can be avoided apparently.

I am really not sure what the issue is, other than a few people paying more tax
Which is the way it is these days, until you work how how to avoid it.

That's a distortion of what was said and twisted to fit. The avoidance doesn't relate one iota to the middle ground but to the explanation as to why you wouldn't have any joy opting for a means tested system. Please don't deliberately misrepresent what was said/explained in good faith.

[TownIdiot]

DonkeyApple said:

That's a distortion of what was said and twisted to fit. The avoidance doesn't relate one iota to the middle ground but to the explanation as to why you wouldn't have any joy opting for a means tested system. Please don't deliberately misrepresent what was said/explained in good faith.

You seem very accepting that the very wealthy can game the system thus disadvantaging the middle ground

The only reason it wouldn't work is people would find a way round it.

Such is life.

[DonkeyApple]

TownIdiot said:

You seem very accepting that the very wealthy can game the system thus disadvantaging the middle ground

The only reason it wouldn't work is people would find a way round it.

Such is life.

That wasn't what was said. Someone suggested means testing. I merely pointed out that above a certain level people didn't generally have income paid as income so it wouldn't work. No gaming simply how the world works.

You appear to have taken that as people deciding to change their finances to save a few K on fees, which obviously doesn't make sense as the cost dwarfs any gain.

[TownIdiot]

DonkeyApple said:

That wasn't what was said. Someone suggested means testing. I merely pointed out that above a certain level people didn't generally have income paid as income so it wouldn't work. No gaming simply how the world works.

You appear to have taken that as people deciding to change their finances to save a few K on fees, which obviously doesn't make sense as the cost dwarfs any gain.

Means testing doesn't just look at income. It looks at means.
For example if you need elderly care they look at your assets.

It would be complicated as many people pay for these fees from family or trust money, but in the end you'd have to rely on disclosure. And if people really care about the private school system they will be open and honest.

[Notreallymeeither]

How will the parents of previous private school children improve the state school system?

Genuine question. Would you do it by evicting a current governor and then getting elected as a replacement for that governor, and then converting all the other governors to get rid of the head and all the failing teachers?

How long will that all take? I would have thought it would be circa 3 year project before you start to see results?

And why are private school parents considered so fantastic at turning around state schools? Is there a special “How To” book that gets issued to private school parents for use in emergencies?

What I suspect in reality is that the ex private parents aren’t suddenly going to be able to do something miraculous that the parents who are currently there have been trying to do for some time but have not been able to do due to general inertia / lack of funds etc.

Some will say “they will have more funds because all that money from the VAT will be injected in and will save the state schools”. I think it is highly unlikely all the VAT money will make it to the relevant schools. And remember, there will be more demand in those schools and higher class sizes etc.

I just don’t see how it is all going to work.

[kiethton]

TownIdiot said:

okgo said:

It’s a quick move to Tunbridge Wells. It isn’t difficult. What it’s not is sending kids to the local ‘needs improvement” - that will never happen.

There is a world outside the south east.

Some people do something called 'work' or have family or indeed friends. These things often require you to be physically located in a certain place.

[TownIdiot]

kiethton said:

Some people do something called 'work' or have family or indeed friends. These things often require you to be physically located in a certain place.

Yes I know.
I was responding to the poster who suggested moving to Tunbridge Wells in order to access grammar schools.

[okgo]

TownIdiot said:

Yes I know.
I was responding to the poster who suggested moving to Tunbridge Wells in order to access grammar schools.

Kent has around 40 grammar schools. The most in any county in England and getting on for a third of the total number. Over half of said schools nationally are in the South East.

My point was simply that I wouldn’t just ‘accept’ the local school, and I’m sure many other parents wouldn’t either. Depending on age of children.

[ClaphamGT3]

Notreallymeeither said:

How will the parents of previous private school children improve the state school system?

Genuine question. Would you do it by evicting a current governor and then getting elected as a replacement for that governor, and then converting all the other governors to get rid of the head and all the failing teachers?

How long will that all take? I would have thought it would be circa 3 year project before you start to see results?

And why are private school parents considered so fantastic at turning around state schools? Is there a special “How To” book that gets issued to private school parents for use in emergencies?

What I suspect in reality is that the ex private parents aren’t suddenly going to be able to do something miraculous that the parents who are currently there have been trying to do for some time but have not been able to do due to general inertia / lack of funds etc.

Some will say “they will have more funds because all that money from the VAT will be injected in and will save the state schools”. I think it is highly unlikely all the VAT money will make it to the relevant schools. And remember, there will be more demand in those schools and higher class sizes etc.

I just don’t see how it is all going to work.

Google the "swamp the comp" movement. Its a very big thing in certain areas/with certain schools and it is certainly not about raising standards for all; it's about influencing state schools to focus their time and resources on the children of a particular group of activist parents.

Another unintended consequence of this policy is that it will increasingly disbar bright children from poor households the opportunity to get into selective state schools as parents who would otherwise have gone private move into catchment areas and spend money that poorer families may not be able to afford on tutoring.

But, hey, as long as sticking it to the "rich".....

[Baroque attacks]

okgo said:

p1stonhead said:

Surely anyone who can afford it now, can afford it with an increase, and if they can’t, they’ll be just like the rest of the country?

I fail to see the issue. Anyone who can’t afford it, can’t go. It’s how everything works.

Who wouldn’t love to buy a 911 without VAT on it?

You’ve ruled yourself out of being listened to with that post tbh.

Yup.

A great way to show they don’t understand the detail - and likely love policies of envy. Grrrrr rich people

[TownIdiot]

okgo said:

Kent has around 40 grammar schools. The most in any county in England and getting on for a third of the total number. Over half of said schools nationally are in the South East.

My point was simply that I wouldn’t just ‘accept’ the local school, and I’m sure many other parents wouldn’t either. Depending on age of children.

And my point is that moving house to avoid 20% on school fees probably doesn't add up financially.

[DonkeyApple]

TownIdiot said:

Means testing doesn't just look at income. It looks at means.
For example if you need elderly care they look at your assets.

It would be complicated as many people pay for these fees from family or trust money, but in the end you'd have to rely on disclosure. And if people really care about the private school system they will be open and honest.

Another reason why means testing above a simplistic level doesn't work. It merely ensures those in the middle pay the full amount while those above don't.

There has to be some common sense here.

Ultimately, as we all know and fully understand the only real solution is to invest more in the state system, get rid of the bad teachers who destroy human lives forever and do so every single year they're paid to do so. Proper discipline of parents who can't be bothered to be parents and proper dealing with disruptive children who are destroying the opportunities of entire classes of future tax payers and then the delivery of better resources. But that is too difficult so it's back to giving a kick to middle England who pay for everything already. And it's not just the part of middle England that chooses to pay a separate educational cost for their children but those who hold up the state system and wish to keep moving upwards and end up paying even more taxes.

The basic reality is that deliberately increasing the cost of education is national and social vandalism. We've seen with the university system how it has hammered economic mobility and fostered elitism. The once great social leveller that allowed millions to break free of the shackles of their accidental birth has been destroyed by deliberately increasing its cost. And these detrimental cost rises are just done to fob off and appease the people who have chosen to not move forward with their lot. The precise people no civilised society should be pandering to one iota.

What is even more crushingly moronic about forcibly increasing the cost of education so keeping more people less well educated than they could otherwise be is that the U.K. is a modern, fast moving global economy that is built upon the essential need for as many inhabitants to be as educated as possible. It's not some third world dump where half the population, regardless of their intelligence or desires are sentenced to a working life down a hole swinging a stick. It's an economy built upon services and manufacturing and global trade which is only possible if the population is as educated as possible.

Any responsible govt and people should very obviously be demanding, wanting and pushing for education to be as cheap as possible and as open to everyone as possible. Not actively seeking to make it more expensive and to lock even more people out of their true opportunity in life and for what? To appease a handful of cretins who invariable want equality through poverty, others punished for achieving progress and for people to return underground and swinging sticks all day.

Any policy, by any nation that seeks to make any education more expensive so that fewer children have the greatest possible opportunity in life isn't just insane but criminal.

And just as we have seen fewer domestic children attending university as those from the 8 billion people outside of the U.K. outbid them for the best places and then take that education to another country to then spend a lifetime competing against the U.K. so the increasing of costs the next rung down will do exactly the same, keep more U.K. children away from their best chance while creating more overseas competition for U.K. PLC.

We should be making education for U.K. children cheaper and easier to access and when someone sticks their silly head up to demand others are punished because they don't have a bigger house or car, that head should be knocked off and replaced with one that works properly.

[Wombat3]

DonkeyApple said:

Another reason why means testing above a simplistic level doesn't work. It merely ensures those in the middle pay the full amount while those above don't.

There has to be some common sense here.

All sensible and logical stuff.

The problem with common sense is that it's evidently not common enough and when dogma appears in the equation it generally goes out the window altogether.

We are a nation if "haves and have nots" and that doesn't just apply to wealth, it also seems to apply (in spades) to critical thinking. When you cross that with dogma it's simply a recipe for absolute clusterfk.

You are pushing water uphill with this.

[TownIdiot]

Your position seems to be - it won't work as the very richest will work round it.
Which is an issue with many taxes.

Not easy to solve.

However in general I agree with your point - I'd like to see massively increased investment in education a long with a radical overhaul of the state system.

Can't see it happening though so we will continue to see tinkering at the edges.