Private schools, times a changing?
Discussion
turbobloke said:
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.
I'm a product of that system and many on here think I'm an idiot.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.
I jest.
From my limited knowledge NI achieves many of the best exam results but also achieves many of the worst. It's a good place to be if you're top tier but not a good place to be if you aren't.
It's artificial to think it's not about money. There are many attempts by some to preserve academic selection by having those that can afford to pay for it pay for it (AQE). They even managed to make it sectarian by removing the 11 plus result and have separate tests for different schools. They're no model of what's best.
I don't support the 11 plus but I sure as s
t stinks don't support those pretending academic selection is a fair system. It can be gamed.borcy said:
1 in 3 kids privately educated in London? That's a lot higher than i would have thought.
It wasn't claimed that 33% of kids in London are privately educated, the survey asked a sample of adults in London if they had experience of being educated in an independent school. That will include London's imports of adults educated privately elsewhere, at any time, so not surprising in that such adults may look to London for a well paid job and a good career in the capital. It's suggesting that London is a bit of a magnet in that regard.I'm still a bit surprised at the level of magnetism revealed.Have another read.
Earlier I said:
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%.
cheesejunkie said:
turbobloke said:
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.
I'm a product of that system and many on here think I'm an idiot.<snip>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.
turbobloke said:
I've missed those comments. Some people disagree with your viewpoint, that sort of thing happens.
I'll give you that one 
. (I know you don't drink)Some disagree in a friendly manner. I can appreciate you're doing so.
Some are wrong of course but let's not let that cause disruption. My NI education means I know plenty about catholic dogma and can recite plenty of things I think are bulls
t. It also means I have a better education than some in maths and sciences. But is that price worth it? I think not, my parents thought differently and I understood their desire to work the system. Just like I do for many on this thread who complain about it potentially getting more expensive but not yet. The potentiality is enough to annoy some.NomduJour said:
Is private exam tuition “working the system”? Should that attract VAT too, or should tutors be banned from working outside the state system?
It's working the system, can't and shouldn't be banned, but should be recognised for what it is rather than pretending it's playing fair.Some would get more sympathy from me if they admitted they're supporting their own rather than supporting fairness.
cheesejunkie said:
Some would get more sympathy from me if they admitted they're supporting their own rather than supporting fairness
Yeah - what about engaged and interested parents assisting their children? That will obviously be at the expense of the offspring of the feckless, those too busy or disinterested etc. Clearly not fair.cheesejunkie said:
NomduJour said:
Is private exam tuition “working the system”? Should that attract VAT too, or should tutors be banned from working outside the state system?
It's working the system, can't and shouldn't be banned, but should be recognised for what it is rather than pretending it's playing fair.Some would get more sympathy from me if they admitted they're supporting their own rather than supporting fairness.
As the cliche goes: Life's not fair.
Some people are more physically able than others, some people are more academically able, some people are just plain smarter, some people are prepared to work harder.
Levelling down is never an answer
NomduJour said:
Yeah - what about engaged and interested parents assisting their children? That will obviously be at the expense of the offspring of the feckless, those too busy or disinterested etc. Clearly not fair.
And I get accused of pot stirring.Feckless? That belief explains a lot.
Wombat3 said:
I don't recall anyone talking about fairness.
As the cliche goes: Life's not fair.
Some people are more physically able than others, some people are more academically able, some people are just plain smarter, some people are prepared to work harder.
Levelling down is never an answer
You do realise I agree with that. I just don’t agree with being able to pay being the price of entry.As the cliche goes: Life's not fair.
Some people are more physically able than others, some people are more academically able, some people are just plain smarter, some people are prepared to work harder.
Levelling down is never an answer
cheesejunkie said:
Wombat3 said:
I don't recall anyone talking about fairness.
As the cliche goes: Life's not fair.
Some people are more physically able than others, some people are more academically able, some people are just plain smarter, some people are prepared to work harder.
Levelling down is never an answer
You do realise I agree with that. I just don’t agree w=ith being able to pay being the price of entry.As the cliche goes: Life's not fair.
Some people are more physically able than others, some people are more academically able, some people are just plain smarter, some people are prepared to work harder.
Levelling down is never an answer
Wealth provides for more options, and education is one of them. Others are less politically loaded so less controversial.
turbobloke said:
Yet "life's not fair" doesn't stay out of wealth considerations / implications, so do you really agree?
Wealth provides for more options, and education is one of them. Others are less politically loaded so less controversial.
I have thoroughly failed in my claim to walk away from this thread, I will soon, my wife's on the way home. Wealth provides for more options, and education is one of them. Others are less politically loaded so less controversial.
Yes wealth provides more options and life's not fair. Supporting that is a choice. Defending that is a choice.
I'm doing ok out of it. It would be incorrect to think my perspective is envy or jealousy.
It's knowing some of the arrogant mother f
kers I've had to listen to complain have never really worked a hard day in their life but will complain about others not doing so for them.
Ken_Code said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
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)
There are grammar schools in England too.Would be interested in Cheesejunket's views on all those affluent families who buy expensive houses in Buckinghamshire/Bromley/Sutton/Kent and then pay for tutoring so that they can get their kids into grammar schools there
ClaphamGT3 said:
There are indeed but only in a small number of areas, whereas the grammar system operates across all of Northern Ireland
Would be interested in Cheesejunket's views on all those affluent families who buy expensive houses in Buckinghamshire/Bromley/Sutton/Kent and then pay for tutoring so that they can get their kids into grammar schools there
Junkie, not junket. I’ve had many a junket in my career and I suspect you have too.Would be interested in Cheesejunket's views on all those affluent families who buy expensive houses in Buckinghamshire/Bromley/Sutton/Kent and then pay for tutoring so that they can get their kids into grammar schools there
I agree, they’re gaming the system. Perfectly understandable but not very defensible if they criticise others for being feckless.
ETA, I’ll not hold you responsible for others stupid comments. I will pretend not to remember your own.
Edited by cheesejunkie on Tuesday 23 April 21:18
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff