ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.
Selective independants(580 Posts)
Do they look better on League tables because the standard of teaching is better or just because they select the children most likely to do well?
It all comes down to chicken at the end of the day.
Have you posted on the wrong thread BSGroupie?
... by the way, its kind of silly posting about your GS DD' s grade As and then going on about how private kids don't perform as well as state school kids when they get to uni because their selectives focus on teaching them to pass exams. Unlike state selectives eh? <rolls eyes>
Will certain people make up their minds.
I mean they post cliches like a bright child will do well regardless of which school they go to. And they go on about kids who go to private school often do worst than state school kids at university because they have been spoon fed all their school lives.
The above points are made to show that parents who choose private have more money than sense. But when the focus changes the arguments flip and now it's poor people do less well because they can't fairly compete against kids whose parents have money.
Why is private school a waste of money when it suits your argument but a bastion of advantage when it suits a different argument?
I don't think we have a Costco. We have Aldi and Lidl but I don't use them as they are on the outskirts of town, whereas we have Morrisons a 2 min walk away. Also ds1 has discount as Asda so do a lot there.
If Costco was near I daresay i would use it, yes, being so poor an all.
Yes, but do you shop in Costco?
Well I consider myself as a "have" and am very poor. I am also successful and have been very resourceful throughout my life.
In fact i'm a shining example to everybody and a good role model to our children as is my dh.
Even with everything being offered to you on a plate, you still have to choose to take up what is offered and work with it. Nobody can really be a passive success in life. Having musical instrument lessons, for example, does not automatically make great musicians - not if your children can't be bothered to practice. The haves have more opportunities for finding potentially enjoyable ways of developing a work ethic and useful skills in their children than the have nots, but their children do still have to develop a strong work ethic and saleable skills if they want to remain "haves." You could say, the "haves" put an awful lot of pressure on their children. The more opportunities you give to the have nots to try and catch up, the more pressure the haves will put on their children to maintain their advantage and the more ludicrous the extremes of competition you might get to see. How do you resolve that one?
Bright children do not always do well everywhere, that's true, which is why most parents try to get them into the best schools they can.
Some women are encouraged by hearing about other women who worked well and did well and it's important that message gets into schools of all kinds, telling teenage girls you don't have to end up in the call centre, you could own a string of call centres and this is what you need to do to achieve that.
As a have not who luckily 'made it' I can see why its seductive to think if I can then anyone can. The alternative is an acceptance that I'm somehow special. And that feels both absurd (I really aint all that) and arrogant. However, better that than fall for the idiotic adage 'a bright child will do well anywhere.'
The "haves" are just people like all of us here. They are no different. In fact the children of those who have an awful lot often do not do as well as their parents which is why Bill Gates and others try to ensure their children are not given too much money as "having" too much means the child can do worse and not make efforts and the like.
m5 made a lot of effort. It is the teenagers prepared to make the effort we need to encourage, not those who cannot be bothered to stir themselves to look things up. In my own way I made similar efforts, wrote to lots of universities to find out which did separate scholarship exams (for some reason I had it in my head at 15 that I wanted to win an academic scholarship to university), wrote to them myself, made my school set up an exam room for me to sit the exams on my own and then I won one. Worked hard at university, won prizes etc etc.....
There is no reason we should put ourselves out as a state for groups in society who can hardly be bothered to turn up for lessons never mind push themselves as long of course as we have enough educated people to do the work we need to have done. There are too many lazy teenagers around who think they are entitled to everything. They aren't. They have to work for it. If they don't they will lose out and it is their own look out if they do.
People flock to the UK from all over the world because we offer totally free state education of a standard they can hardly dream about at home and free healthcare.
And round and round we go. Of course we can't all make it. But while some people are still starting the race three quarters of the way down the track and wearing a jet pack and others are shackled to the starting blocks and have to gnaw the ankle chains off before they start........
When it comes to making it and not making it, we can't all "make it." Maybe it's the concept of "making it" versus "not making it" that's the problem.
It's so easy for the "haves", and, sadly, for some of the "have nots" who through their own fantastic efforts made it, to say "Well, I did it, so so can anyone". And that's just not true.
Because you wouldn't be a "have" if it didn't make any difference to the ease with which you could travel through life, you'd just be someone with lots of useless stuff.
M5stelle- that's absolutely fantastic, and I am drifted for you and in awe of you.
But the fact remains that the "haves" in society don't have to do that- and the "have nots" do. Why should you have to be twice as clever and resourceful and determined if you are poor/working class than if you aren't?
I don't think the standard of teaching is better. It's more that classes are smaller and disruptive pupils aren't tolerated so teachers can get on with teaching not keeping the kids in line.
When I was 16 I took a train and several buses to go to the british council as I wanted to attend a british university. Every week the lsdy at the desk said they ran out of ucas forms and in the end when I finally got hold of one she told me not to bother as they were not for the likes of me and would never get in. It was a long road but I did get admitted, I even had to fly to england for an interview and save for my own flights as my parents were against. So if I could do all that I can't get why any child can't log onto the internet. But I was and am a driven individual so I guess maybe even my own children will have to be spoonfed continuously, who knows?
Some facts (in very general terms) about education in Hull:
The results are abysmal.
Education was and is still not valued by the white working class.
There has for a longtime been a professional immigrant 'class' - they have predominantly sent their DC to the independent schools.
Recent immigration from EU eg Poland is changing the demographic.
The leafy suburbs of Hull are actually in the next county which also affects the ability to recruit decent governors.
There are plenty of teaching vacancies if anyone has a friend who is looking for a job ( Newland High former pupil Maureen Lipman) with a decent house/reasonable price within 3 miles.
Unfortunately the nanny state, like it or not, ends up footing the bill when things don't go well.
First generation immigrrants are by definition incredibly resourceful people and are often very highly educated. I deplore this "Well, if immigrants can do it........." you hear so often.
However, many parents aren't able to do that. And I think it's up to the schools to pick up that slack.
Oh for goodness sake - we do not need even more intrusion from the nanny state. If first generation immigrants who have never been to uni can provide their offspring with a good start in life by giving them that opportunity or the kids themselves are resourceful enough, then you can hardly blame the state for not picking up the slack from those who can't be arsed to google "university admission"...
Seriously. And if you can't even do the above, can't google anything or read... just don't even think about uni.
For most top jobs, what you HAVE to be is being resourceful. If you aren't, then you just won't fit!
"Usually on proximity alone, though- you don't actively have to do anything. Except move, I suppose."
Quite a big ask though, isn't it. The largest social housing areas will be in the catchments of bad schools, so it's essentially inevitable that people in social housing will go to the worst schools. Even if individuals can move, you cannot physically move entire council estates, so the net result is the same.
London is a special case, because social housing costs hundreds of thousands of pounds, and there are lots of aspirational parents and relatively high social mobility, but in areas like these:
nobody wants the houses (well for free they do), so there is nowhere for people to move to really, that's not equally shit and depressing - middle class families will buy housing in naice areas (quite affordable compared with London), so areas are far more ghettoised compared to London, which is mixed and genuinely diverse.
The nature of teacher recruitment seems to have changed though. I don't remember my peers having problems moving from area to area whereas teachers I know who have qualified recently , young and mature, have had real problems getting jobs in any schools where they did not do a teaching practise, the schools appear to be using them as a sort of trial interview. So I know an Oxbridge language grad with several years working as a facilitator in business, with an amazing skill set for teaching and genuine charisma and rapport around children and a glowing report from PGCE Supervisor who I just assumed would be fighting off job offers but was rejected out of hand, not even an interview, everywhere that she hadn't done teaching practise. The same experience for a young graduate who had trained in London but wanted to work in a northern city.
Join the discussion
Please login first.