Private schools, times a changing?
Discussion
fridaypassion said:
Louis Balfour said:
It is not the case that independent schools are without their challenges. Children will be children. But in the state sector you are lumped in with those children whose parents don't give a toss and you have the problems that you describe.
Broadly, parents of children at independent school DO give a toss because they are paying for it. If the school phones a parent because a child is being disruptive it is generally taken seriously and behaviour improves.
Yeah there's bound to be a better general attitude as you say. I have no doubt that they are all still little sBroadly, parents of children at independent school DO give a toss because they are paying for it. If the school phones a parent because a child is being disruptive it is generally taken seriously and behaviour improves.
ts at times as all three of mine can be! They all have exemplary behaviour at school but grow horns when they get home! ker. To be fair though, the school also knows what he can be like, though he has had the good sense to moderate his behaviour whilst there.I went to RGS Guildford - bit of a sweatshop but I loved it and still have 3 mates I see regularly 40 years later.
Sent my three boys to a reasonably well-known public school and busted a gut to get them through. One probably did no better examwise than he would at a state school, one did much better than he would have managed at a state school and the third absolutely made the most of it. All went to Russell Group Universities, as did I. None of us are remotely Oxbridge material.
Was it worth it? Probably not by any financial measure but we gave them an education that broadly gave them the opportunity to be whatever they wanted. That and the fact they were all very happy and have loads of mates from school makes it worth it I suppose. It is interesting to me that when people pay for education they expect and receive a structure that includes things that are apparently not valued in state education: doing your work, being on time, competition, good manners etc
You can ban private schools but motivated parents with financial and social resources will always find a way to give their children a leg up.
But the rate at which fees are increasing it seems unlikely that my three will be able to afford to pay for their kids so I suspect these schools will look a bit different in a generation.
Sent my three boys to a reasonably well-known public school and busted a gut to get them through. One probably did no better examwise than he would at a state school, one did much better than he would have managed at a state school and the third absolutely made the most of it. All went to Russell Group Universities, as did I. None of us are remotely Oxbridge material.
Was it worth it? Probably not by any financial measure but we gave them an education that broadly gave them the opportunity to be whatever they wanted. That and the fact they were all very happy and have loads of mates from school makes it worth it I suppose. It is interesting to me that when people pay for education they expect and receive a structure that includes things that are apparently not valued in state education: doing your work, being on time, competition, good manners etc
You can ban private schools but motivated parents with financial and social resources will always find a way to give their children a leg up.
But the rate at which fees are increasing it seems unlikely that my three will be able to afford to pay for their kids so I suspect these schools will look a bit different in a generation.
Edited by lockhart flawse on Wednesday 15th March 11:52
Louis Balfour said:
It is not the case that independent schools are without their challenges. Children will be children. But in the state sector you are lumped in with those children whose parents don't give a toss and you have the problems that you describe.
Broadly, parents of children at independent school DO give a toss because they are paying for it. If the school phones a parent because a child is being disruptive it is generally taken seriously and behaviour improves.
What he said.Broadly, parents of children at independent school DO give a toss because they are paying for it. If the school phones a parent because a child is being disruptive it is generally taken seriously and behaviour improves.
Turtle Shed said:
Louis Balfour said:
It is not the case that independent schools are without their challenges. Children will be children. But in the state sector you are lumped in with those children whose parents don't give a toss and you have the problems that you describe.
Broadly, parents of children at independent school DO give a toss because they are paying for it. If the school phones a parent because a child is being disruptive it is generally taken seriously and behaviour improves.
What he said.Broadly, parents of children at independent school DO give a toss because they are paying for it. If the school phones a parent because a child is being disruptive it is generally taken seriously and behaviour improves.
Obviously not all schools are this way - but it's a valid point.
Depends doesn’t it.
In big state schools you will get both ends. I remember if I got in trouble my parents sided with the opinion of the school. If the lad that lived on the farm up the road got in trouble his mother would be in the car threatening the staff.
Suspect an extreme example of that will be that the best kids from a London state may well end up un Oxbridge, the worst will end up dead by 18.
In big state schools you will get both ends. I remember if I got in trouble my parents sided with the opinion of the school. If the lad that lived on the farm up the road got in trouble his mother would be in the car threatening the staff.
Suspect an extreme example of that will be that the best kids from a London state may well end up un Oxbridge, the worst will end up dead by 18.
Luke. said:
Move to Kent and take your pick of the grammar schools.
My two were at a fee paying pre-prep and now my son's just started at the local grammar school. He loves it and we've no complaints at all.
If I do not relocate (again), that would be our plan, I guess. Fee-paying pre-prep and aim for grammar if he can, otherwise will send him to the most decent state in the area.My two were at a fee paying pre-prep and now my son's just started at the local grammar school. He loves it and we've no complaints at all.
I've spent a good amount of time working in "higher education" in my previous life. I think the main point is with private (and grammar) schools, kids can academically and socially excel with smaller groups. Another point is obviously the activities (both academic and social). Private schools can engage kids in loads of activities, and while they are young, they can really learn faster with targeted activities. This is something state schools will always suffer as they can not afford it, unless parents have time in their hands, and generate further self-directed activities, which is a difficulty.
The important issue, when they come to higher education (university) they should have good "self-learning" skills so that they can further excel in their subjects. It is always noticeable in the university, most students really struggle how to approach their given tasks or assignments, if they suffered in their earlier education system (no matter what talent or self-drive they have). They would not go to library, they would not use any other self-directed research facilities to work with their assignments, or simply they would not know how to analyse, learn and execute effectively on a given specific topic/problem or field.
The issue of also crime and further social problems in most state schools another matter unfortunately...
Louis Balfour said:
AstonZagato said:
I only went as I got a scholarship.
Scholarships aren't what they were, at our school. There is no financial incentive at all, the money goes to pay for places for bright children who cannot afford the fees.Reading this thread with interest but I hesitated to comment as I seem to always end up disagreeing with someone.
I’m grammar school educated. I’m successful by some people’s metrics in life due to having had teachers that encouraged me. I know for a fact that friends at secondarys didn’t get pushed to the same degree. I also know my school had no time for the less academically able. Some schools are better than others, that’s just a fact of life, but not all schools suit all people. Whether access should be based on your parent’s wallet is a whole different question. But doing the best for your kids is universal. The system sucks but I’d not send my kids to a second class school out of some perverted point of principal.
I’m grammar school educated. I’m successful by some people’s metrics in life due to having had teachers that encouraged me. I know for a fact that friends at secondarys didn’t get pushed to the same degree. I also know my school had no time for the less academically able. Some schools are better than others, that’s just a fact of life, but not all schools suit all people. Whether access should be based on your parent’s wallet is a whole different question. But doing the best for your kids is universal. The system sucks but I’d not send my kids to a second class school out of some perverted point of principal.
cheesejunkie said:
Reading this thread with interest but I hesitated to comment as I seem to always end up disagreeing with someone.
But doing the best for your kids is universal. The system sucks but I’d not send my kids to a second class school out of some perverted point of principal.
I have friends who are directors at the local, uber left-wing, city council. They send their children to private schools. But doing the best for your kids is universal. The system sucks but I’d not send my kids to a second class school out of some perverted point of principal.
Obviously their political sensibilities don't impact THAT much on their choices, where their children and concerned.
The idea of a ban on private schools is not about equality, it’s about levelling down, about chip on shoulders.
Everyone, given the chance and without the financial outlay would choose a private school environment… smaller classes, more activities, wraparound childcare. These are good things that private schools can offer.
Sadly it needs paying and I don’t see anything wrong with it. Parents with more money to spend will always advantage their kids in many ways and not only school like life experiences, holidays, etc etc.
Trying to curb that is impossible.
I say bring the level up on state schools, train more teachers, build more schools, make the average education if a higher level. Make parents play their role to in educating their offspring.
That should be the focus really and would benefit the state school children more, much more.
Everyone, given the chance and without the financial outlay would choose a private school environment… smaller classes, more activities, wraparound childcare. These are good things that private schools can offer.
Sadly it needs paying and I don’t see anything wrong with it. Parents with more money to spend will always advantage their kids in many ways and not only school like life experiences, holidays, etc etc.
Trying to curb that is impossible.
I say bring the level up on state schools, train more teachers, build more schools, make the average education if a higher level. Make parents play their role to in educating their offspring.
That should be the focus really and would benefit the state school children more, much more.
CrgT16 said:
The idea of a ban on private schools is not about equality, it’s about levelling down, about chip on shoulders.
Everyone, given the chance and without the financial outlay would choose a private school environment… smaller classes, more activities, wraparound childcare. These are good things that private schools can offer.
Sadly it needs paying and I don’t see anything wrong with it. Parents with more money to spend will always advantage their kids in many ways and not only school like life experiences, holidays, etc etc.
Trying to curb that is impossible.
I say bring the level up on state schools, train more teachers, build more schools, make the average education if a higher level. Make parents play their role to in educating their offspring.
That should be the focus really and would benefit the state school children more, much more.
Quite. If state schools were generally good, there is no way the middle classes would send their children to independent schools.Everyone, given the chance and without the financial outlay would choose a private school environment… smaller classes, more activities, wraparound childcare. These are good things that private schools can offer.
Sadly it needs paying and I don’t see anything wrong with it. Parents with more money to spend will always advantage their kids in many ways and not only school like life experiences, holidays, etc etc.
Trying to curb that is impossible.
I say bring the level up on state schools, train more teachers, build more schools, make the average education if a higher level. Make parents play their role to in educating their offspring.
That should be the focus really and would benefit the state school children more, much more.
Louis Balfour said:
cheesejunkie said:
Reading this thread with interest but I hesitated to comment as I seem to always end up disagreeing with someone.
But doing the best for your kids is universal. The system sucks but I’d not send my kids to a second class school out of some perverted point of principal.
I have friends who are directors at the local, uber left-wing, city council. They send their children to private schools. But doing the best for your kids is universal. The system sucks but I’d not send my kids to a second class school out of some perverted point of principal.
Obviously their political sensibilities don't impact THAT much on their choices, where their children and concerned.
Louis Balfour said:
Quite. If state schools were generally good, there is no way the middle classes would send their children to independent schools.
I agree, however when I hear stories from a teacher friend about the parenting of some kids (admittedly in a deprived area) it’s heartbreaking, unfortunately the problems go much deeper than the state schooling system, which seems to be left to pick up the pieces.CrgT16 said:
The idea of a ban on private schools is not about equality, it’s about levelling down, about chip on shoulders.
Everyone, given the chance and without the financial outlay would choose a private school environment… smaller classes, more activities, wraparound childcare. These are good things that private schools can offer.
Sadly it needs paying and I don’t see anything wrong with it. Parents with more money to spend will always advantage their kids in many ways and not only school like life experiences, holidays, etc etc.
Trying to curb that is impossible.
I say bring the level up on state schools, train more teachers, build more schools, make the average education if a higher level. Make parents play their role to in educating their offspring.
That should be the focus really and would benefit the state school children more, much more.
You’d have to go root and branch.Everyone, given the chance and without the financial outlay would choose a private school environment… smaller classes, more activities, wraparound childcare. These are good things that private schools can offer.
Sadly it needs paying and I don’t see anything wrong with it. Parents with more money to spend will always advantage their kids in many ways and not only school like life experiences, holidays, etc etc.
Trying to curb that is impossible.
I say bring the level up on state schools, train more teachers, build more schools, make the average education if a higher level. Make parents play their role to in educating their offspring.
That should be the focus really and would benefit the state school children more, much more.
Banning is tinkering at the edges. Proper reform would require making it impossible for all but the richest (who let’s face it don’t count) to pay their way to a better outcome.
Countries like Finland get held up as exemplars. But you can’t cherry pick features. Go all in or realise you’ll fail.
The easiest way to bring the level up on state schools is to ensure the wealthy have to use them. See also health care and any other two tier system you care to mention. Blaming parents is a dead end road.
GiantCardboardPlato said:
Education and infrastructure are the only two areas of government spending that generate a return in investment. Case for spending more on education is clear. Somehow though the nhs is beatified and education system is just battered.
The only thing I disagree with is the use of the word “only”.There’s a good argument for having a healthy population. Returns on investment are about more than finances,
Education is treated like a second class citizen. Teachers are not a respected job which is so many shades of f
ked up wrong. I’ll not lie, I enjoy slagging teachers about how many days a year they work, I’m related to some, but they deserve more respect than they get.Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff