Private schools, times a changing?

[Hedgedhog]

dimots said:

The ultra-right-wing on Pistonheads would love to see state schools run as hollowed out workhouses so that tax avoidant Tories get a few quid off to spend on hugely inefficient private services. Money spent per child in private schools is triple that in State schools. That money benefits a tiny minority. That tiny minority are unduly represented in careers such as law and politics which serve to pretect and preserve the status quo. It's a complete sham of a system.

Although defending this state of apartheid is quite natural to those unwilling to confront their own internal bias and prejuice, there are a growing number of academics and politicians calling it out.

Professor Francis Green is a good starting poiint.

https://francisgreenspersonalwebpage.com/

That tiny minority sit on both sides of the house.

[turbobloke]

Ultra right apart from being risible it's no more than an ad hom 'shoot the messenger' logical fallacy. Then there's that casual use of bias, deeply ironic.

dimots said:

That tiny minority are unduly represented in careers such as law and politics which serve to pretect and preserve the status quo. It's a complete sham of a system.

That anachronistic comment, dragged up from 50 years ago, wrongly assumes that there must be equal numbers of equally educated, equally capable and equally ambitious candidates from boggo comps who could be in those jobs if only they wore the right tie. Research from Ofsted in boggo comps shows where the problem is, and the problem isn't independent school education as shown below with my emphasis and brackets added to the Ofsted text.

Ofsted research published in their report titled The most able students - Are they doing as well as they should in our non-selective secondary schools said:

Too many non-selective schools are failing to nurture scholastic excellence. While the best of these schools provide excellent opportunities, many of our most able students receive mediocre provision. Put simply, they are not doing well enough because their secondary schools fail to challenge and support them sufficiently from the beginning.

In too many lessons observed by inspectors, teaching is not supporting our highest-attaining students to do well. We know from our inspections that this is particularly the case in mixed ability groups. This survey suggests that few checks are made on whether mixed ability teaching helps the most able to achieve their potential.

Although the term ‘special needs’ should be as relevant to the most able as it is to those who require support for their learning difficulties, a few of the schools visited for this survey did not even know who their most able students were. This is completely unacceptable.

It is a serious concern that many non-selective (state) schools fail to imbue their most able students with the confidence and high ambition that characterise many students in the selective or independent sector. Why should the most able students in the non-selective sector not have the same belief that they, too, can reach the top?

There's the problem. Comprehensive schools work when they're comprehensive in name only with grammar sets hidden in plain sight. Mixed ability teaching has been a disaster as per Ofsted evidence above. This is no surprise given that the most gifted teachers, those who can cope with Einstein and the village idiot in the same classroom and ensure they both - along with the other 28 - reach their full potential, are rarer than rocking horse poop. It's no surprise nor is it ultra right or bias, it's research evidence which also makes sense at the face-value level.

If more state comps fostered a work ethic and instilled ambition, with teachers leaving their politics at the school gates, that would be a start.

Edited by turbobloke on Tuesday 23 April 09:34

[EmBe]

cheesejunkie said:

Well when some of them have a go at me what do you expect?

I've read many slurs aimed at me on this thread. I've allowed myself the odd insult but won't engage in a tit for tat.

So please fk off with the false pretence of being scandalised.

I'm not here to have a go at strangers. I have a difference of opinion. Some on here think that makes me a bad person. They're people who I refrain from saying what I really think about them as tempting as the alternative may be.

I know. Lots of sideways insults. fk them.

If you're prefer this thread to be full of people agreeing with each other then tough. It has long passed the point of advice on school fees and entered the territory of their suitability. Disagreeing is not a crime although I suspect a few on here would make it one.

Bullst.

You came into this thread hurling sideways insults and you've never stopped; repeating the same tired, weak arguments over and over. Almost everyone who's taken the bait has initially at least tried to engage you in good faith but you you don't repay the favour because that's not what you're here for is it?

Scandalised

Just bored. The cheesejunkie show long since jumped the shark.

If this thread passed any 'point', it was you that dragged it there with your continual need to make your single point ad nauseum (73 times and counting, for someone who's proudly childless, that's.... well, we'll make our own minds up on that point); there can't be anyone who doesn't know exactly what your position is and that you'll brook no disagreement.

You have nothing more to contribute to any discussion or private schools and that's been the case for a long, long time, but you're so high on your own self-importance you can't help dragging yet another thread into being all about you.

[M1AGM]

EmBe said:

Bullst.

You came into this thread hurling sideways insults and you've never stopped; repeating the same tired, weak arguments over and over. Almost everyone who's taken the bait has initially at least tried to engage you in good faith but you you don't repay the favour because that's not what you're here for is it?

Scandalised

Just bored. The cheesejunkie show long since jumped the shark.

If this thread passed any 'point', it was you that dragged it there with your continual need to make your single point ad nauseum (73 times and counting, for someone who's proudly childless, that's.... well, we'll make our own minds up on that point); there can't be anyone who doesn't know exactly what your position is and that you'll brook no disagreement.

You have nothing more to contribute to any discussion or private schools and that's been the case for a long, long time, but you're so high on your own self-importance you can't help dragging yet another thread into being all about you.

Well said.

[beagrizzly]

A question, outside of the debate on whether it's an acceptable idea or not:

Do you think they (Labour) will actually do it? Surely there's a fair chance at least that it's rhetoric to help get them elected but will take a back seat to higher priorities once the election dust has settled.

[cheesejunkie]

EmBe said:

Bullst.

You came into this thread hurling sideways insults and you've never stopped; repeating the same tired, weak arguments over and over. Almost everyone who's taken the bait has initially at least tried to engage you in good faith but you you don't repay the favour because that's not what you're here for is it?

Scandalised

Just bored. The cheesejunkie show long since jumped the shark.

If this thread passed any 'point', it was you that dragged it there with your continual need to make your single point ad nauseum (73 times and counting, for someone who's proudly childless, that's.... well, we'll make our own minds up on that point); there can't be anyone who doesn't know exactly what your position is and that you'll brook no disagreement.

You have nothing more to contribute to any discussion or private schools and that's been the case for a long, long time, but you're so high on your own self-importance you can't help dragging yet another thread into being all about you.

Yes, I'll admit some of my points have been repetitive. There's a reason. They're honest. There are a limited number of ways to say the same thing. But I keep reading people talking ste. As per usual I'll back off this thread for a bit, I've done so repeatedly, but if it's still on the go in a few days I'll probably be back with the cheesejunkie show as you call it.

It's not tired and weak to think that many of the defenders of others paying VAT have a plank in their own eye.

Turbo accusing all teachers of being commies is comedy gold but doesn't get anyone worked up. Questioning VAT exemptions gets a pile on. On a public internet forum. For what it's worth I'm against academic selection too but I'm a realist and know it isn't going away. There is a difference between supporting systemic unfairness and dealing with the reality that it exists. Some have had their reality questioned, there's no VAT on private education yet, there's a possibility there might never be, but boy does it have some annoyed at the thought of it.

[dimots]

turbobloke said:

There's the problem. Comprehensive schools work when they're comprehensive in name only with grammar sets hidden in plain sight. Mixed ability teaching has been a disaster as per Ofsted evidence above. This is no surprise given that the most gifted teachers, those who can cope with Einstein and the village idiot in the same classroom and ensure they both - along with the other 28 - reach their full potential, are rarer than rocking horse poop. It's no surprise nor is it ultra right or bias, it's research evidence which also makes sense at the face-value level.

If more state comps fostered a work ethic and instilled ambition, with teachers leaving their politics at the school gates, that would be a start.

Edited by turbobloke on Tuesday 23 April 09:34

Indeed. That report from 2013 absolutely highlights how the English Education system has been neglected by the Tory government wheras the devolved Governments in Wales and Scotland have made efforts to improve! Thank you for sharing.

[EmBe]

cheesejunkie said:

Questioning VAT exemptions gets a pile on.

No, repeatedly being a tin-eared annoyance gets you the 'pile on' (hyperbole BTW - you haven't been piled on, stop with the pearl-clutching).

[Tom8]

dimots said:

turbobloke said:

There's the problem. Comprehensive schools work when they're comprehensive in name only with grammar sets hidden in plain sight. Mixed ability teaching has been a disaster as per Ofsted evidence above. This is no surprise given that the most gifted teachers, those who can cope with Einstein and the village idiot in the same classroom and ensure they both - along with the other 28 - reach their full potential, are rarer than rocking horse poop. It's no surprise nor is it ultra right or bias, it's research evidence which also makes sense at the face-value level.

If more state comps fostered a work ethic and instilled ambition, with teachers leaving their politics at the school gates, that would be a start.

Edited by turbobloke on Tuesday 23 April 09:34

Indeed. That report from 2013 absolutely highlights how the English Education system has been neglected by the Tory government wheras the devolved Governments in Wales and Scotland have made efforts to improve! Thank you for sharing.

Really? Scotland used to be a world leader in education however after years of left wing dogma they are now rock bottom.

[Hants PHer]

dimots said:

Indeed. That report from 2013 absolutely highlights how the English Education system has been neglected by the Tory government whereas the devolved Governments in Wales have made efforts to improve! Thank you for sharing.

What? Seriously? A cursory Google shows that educational standards in Wales and Scotland are plummeting. The Times article dated 9th March has the headline "Why Scottish and Welsh schools are lagging behind the English" (it's paywalled).

One could make a similar point about healthcare and probably other public services. Meanwhile, Starmer's Labour party is proposing a change that will decrease standards in state schools. Well, that's left leaning ideology for you, as they say in Edinburgh and Cardiff.

[dimots]

Lots of reasons for that of course and entirely unrelated to the opportunities for outstanding pupils.

[PugwasHDJ80]

In the 40s and 50s bright children of any class, monetary background etc could be selected on their brains and go to a grammar school and get a great education

nowadays the selection criteria for an amazing education is purely money- either privately or by buying a house nest to a great school.

Our preference would have been to send our daughter to an amazing grammar school

[dimots]

PugwasHDJ80 said:

In the 40s and 50s bright children of any class, monetary background etc could be selected on their brains and go to a grammar school and get a great education

nowadays the selection criteria for an amazing education is purely money- either privately or by buying a house nest to a great school.

Our preference would have been to send our daughter to an amazing grammar school

I'm not sure about the relative pros and cons of grammar schools, but I think the task given to comprehensive schools is the hardest of all in the education sector and should be the best resourced.

[turbobloke]

dimots said:

PugwasHDJ80 said:

In the 40s and 50s bright children of any class, monetary background etc could be selected on their brains and go to a grammar school and get a great education

nowadays the selection criteria for an amazing education is purely money- either privately or by buying a house nest to a great school.

Our preference would have been to send our daughter to an amazing grammar school

I'm not sure about the relative pros and cons of grammar schools, but I think the task given to comprehensive schools is the hardest of all in the education sector and should be the best resourced.

Alternatively change the approach to something that works better,as there aren't enough unicorns to staff the current system and make a success of it for all children of all abilities.

As to grammar schools, there's plenty of research out there claiming to show no net benefit from selection, however, they're mostly if not all based on modelling of some kind where the modellers make changes and / or correct for variables they can't control. There's one pivotal study from iirc Northern Ireland where local politicians simply expanded the number of selective places available, and it actually happened i.e. not modelled. That was the sum of the changes. The results over time showed overall net benefit in the education system, i.e. outside the selective system as well as within it, also benefit to university entrance. Naturally it didn't go down well. I'll see if I can dig it out.

[ClaphamGT3]

turbobloke said:

Alternatively change the approach to something that works better,as there aren't enough unicorns to staff the current system and make a success of it for all children of all abilities.

As to grammar schools, there's plenty of research out there claiming to show no net benefit from selection, however, they're mostly if not all based on modelling of some kind where the modellers make changes and / or correct for variables they can't control. There's one pivotal study from iirc Northern Ireland where local politicians simply expanded the number of selective places available, and it actually happened i.e. not modelled. That was the sum of the changes. The results over time showed overall net benefit in the education system, i.e. outside the selective system as well as within it, also benefit to university entrance. Naturally it didn't go down well. I'll see if I can dig it out.

It is little co-incidence that Northern Ireland, the only home nation that has retained the grammar school system, has by far the lowest number of pupils in private education (c. 1% of the school population)

[Wombat3]

beagrizzly said:

A question, outside of the debate on whether it's an acceptable idea or not:

Do you think they (Labour) will actually do it? Surely there's a fair chance at least that it's rhetoric to help get them elected but will take a back seat to higher priorities once the election dust has settled.

Maybe not but the fact that the fkwits have even raised the idea will already be causing both schools and parents to take decisions.

Once taken (especially in the case of parents) they are unlikely to be reversed.

TLDR: Damage is already being done.

[cheesejunkie]

EmBe said:

No, repeatedly being a tin-eared annoyance gets you the 'pile on' (hyperbole BTW - you haven't been piled on, stop with the pearl-clutching).

Make your mind up. A tin eared annoyance gets me the pile on or I haven't been piled on. Sorry, I'm an educated mother fker who can read.

There's plenty of pearl clutching on here. I'm not the one most guilty of it.

Tin eared annoyance. Do explain. Expect a response.

I have a tin ear and know the meaning of the phrase. You're not using it correctly.

[okgo]

This has all become exceptionally dull.

[ClaphamGT3]

In other news, elder Claphamette has just decided to take a 6th form place at Westminster as a day girl, so a £6k saving on where she currently is, which creates a bit of headroom for VAT

[turbobloke]

ClaphamGT3 said:

turbobloke said:

Alternatively change the approach to something that works better,as there aren't enough unicorns to staff the current system and make a success of it for all children of all abilities.

As to grammar schools, there's plenty of research out there claiming to show no net benefit from selection, however, they're mostly if not all based on modelling of some kind where the modellers make changes and / or correct for variables they can't control. There's one pivotal study from iirc Northern Ireland where local politicians simply expanded the number of selective places available, and it actually happened i.e. not modelled. That was the sum of the changes. The results over time showed overall net benefit in the education system, i.e. outside the selective system as well as within it, also benefit to university entrance. Naturally it didn't go down well. I'll see if I can dig it out.

It is little co-incidence that Northern Ireland, the only home nation that has retained the grammar school system, has by far the lowest number of pupils in private education (c. 1% of the school population)

That's not surprising, over time Northern Ireland has amassed an adult population with the lowest proportion of citizens who attended a private school at any time as a child, one-third of the UK average and one-quarter of the proportion in London which is a surprising (to me) 33%.

As a follow-up to the comment I made above on research, it's clear there's a majority of papers claiming to show no net benefit (or worse) from selection, yet one paper I know of which exists that investigated a unique situation where selective education was expanded and direct comparisons could be made without modelling, showed a net benefit. It was a unique situation which afforded the opportunity for a 'natural experiment'. My description above from memory appears to be correct, and I think I've found it, but not the full paper which I have on file (somewhere). A pdf summary of the paper from McMaurin and McNally is here

Naturally it can't be held as a certainty that the above peper's results would be replicated elsewhere if a similar change was made, the situation was unique. Equally there's no obvious basis for expecting a different result. I'll keep looking for a paper from NIERC around the same date which looked at the same event (expanded entry to grammars) and found the same results, with university admission also. Based on the evidence provided it would be a good move to expand places available in selective education and admit a wider group to grammar schools, though it may well lead to a lowering of numbers in independent schools.