My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Education

Would you be prepared to pay more tax to get better state education for all?

706 replies

happygardening · 26/02/2013 16:53

Any other suggestions welcome to ensure that all where ever they live and whatever their background have access to education of the highest quality.

OP posts:
Report
usualsuspect · 26/02/2013 16:55

I would if it meant all private and grammar schools were abolished.

Report
amothersplaceisinthewrong · 26/02/2013 16:57

Yes, as long as there were no grammar and no private schools, no single sex schools, no faith schools.

Report
NewFerry · 26/02/2013 16:58

Yes! If I was guaranteed that it would go on education, and secondly, if I was guaranteed it would go on front line education, eg more teachers/specialist teaching staff.

Report
usualsuspect · 26/02/2013 16:59

I would want a truly comprehensive system, with all children going to their local schools.

Report
RVPisnomore · 26/02/2013 17:00

No.

Report
whistleahappytune · 26/02/2013 17:03

Yes. Without conditions.

Report
potatoprinter · 26/02/2013 17:04

Simply "yes" but not as simple as that. I think a lot of money is wasted and resources are used in the wrong way. I think all schools should publish their accounts including expenses paid to staff and consultants. I don't mind paying teachers a good wage (they deserve it), but I do object to waste and expensive cars for SLT etc.

Report
freetoanyhome · 26/02/2013 17:04

yes. we used to pay 30% tax did we not. And O and A level standards were better than they are now.

Report
NewFerry · 26/02/2013 17:05

But, I think we need to recognise that some pupils do not want to be in school and in a poor school setting can cause almost constant low level disruption. I would like to see those pupils take out of the main classes and educated separately - maybe in the empty ex-grammar schools Wink Grin
Seriously, I think these secondary age pupils should be educated in a separate space as they can have a negative impact on the whole learning culture in a school that is far bigger than they merit. The whole ethos can be determined by a few, and I would rather it was a positive can-do culture.

Report
bulletpoint · 26/02/2013 17:06

I am not sure more tax would necessarily result in better state education, depending on what your definition of that is. Reason being the state of state education is not necessarily due to lack of funds, behaviour in schools is one, various political agendas, individual parents own perception of what constitutes a good education, home backgrounds etc

i'm not even sure the population as a whole agrees that state education isn't up to scratch, many believe it is quite good.

Report
sydlexic · 26/02/2013 17:06

Yes. My DS goes to a super selective Grammar but I would still say yes.

DS and before him DDS went to an outstanding state primary. DD1 very bright went to outstanding local comp as did DD2 who has mild learning difficulties. DD2 did a Vocational course in hairdressing in year 10 and then went onto college to do level 3 and barbering.

I have three DC with very different needs and IQs and they were all catered for. From my perspective there is nothing wrong with the education system.

Report
CajaDeLaMemoria · 26/02/2013 17:10

Why no single-sex grammars?

I went to one, with one year in a standard state school, and it was by far the best thing. Just amazing, academically.

Report
ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 26/02/2013 17:14

I am not convinced that resources are the key problem.

I would like to see the abolition of all state funded faith schools.

I think there should be more outreach into those communities that feel disenfranchised from the education system. I would also like to see a higher value placed on practical and vocational skills.

Report
usualsuspect · 26/02/2013 17:16

Yes to higher value placed on vocational qualifications.

Instead of them being viewed as 2nd rate qualifications.

Report
Abra1d · 26/02/2013 17:20

'I am not convinced that resources are the key problem.

I would like to see the abolition of all state funded faith schools. '

How would you afford to pay the churches which bought their land in the nineteenth or early twentieth centuries, built their schools, etc.

Report
expatinscotland · 26/02/2013 17:22

What amother said and with far more investment in quality vocational schools.

Report
HorribleMother · 26/02/2013 17:23

I don't think that higher taxes could possibly achieve what OP wants, no matter what reasonable conditions were imposed. Sorry.

Report
Olgathebrickshed · 26/02/2013 17:26

No.

However much tax we pay, there will always be familes who simply don't give a toss about education. You could throw money at schools all you like, and it would never solve that problem.

I actually think that all schools should be privatised, run by people who can manage and lead people (rather than being driven by doctrine). But that's not likely to happen...

Report
Iggly · 26/02/2013 17:28

Why would being a privatised school be better?

Private schools have more money hence better. But making all schools private just means that money is creamed off in profit which should be going back into the system.

Report
scaevola · 26/02/2013 17:40

I'm not sure throwing money at the issue will help - if it did, standard would have shot up under New Labour.

Schools get pretty similar funding now - aim of for areas with grammars, but why are some schools so much "better" than others? For the issues of demographics of the catchment aren't go to go away.

Report
ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 26/02/2013 17:52

Abrai1d
I don't think the churches could sell you the schools because they would have been set up to provide a Christian education.

Churches only have to provide 10% of the Capital costs of running the school (which can be waived by the LEA) the other 90% of the Capital costs and 100% of the running costs are paid for by the State anyway.

Report
bryte · 26/02/2013 20:07

I thought we already spent more on Education as a country than other countries who manage to do better than us....?

I would pay more taxes specifically towards education but I would like to see smaller class sizes and smaller (secondary) schools in return.

Report

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

LaVolcan · 26/02/2013 20:32

Yes, but I too would like to see smaller class sizes, and decent equipment, plus sufficient school places to stop this mad scramble which happens in some towns and cities.

Report
discrete · 26/02/2013 20:34

No.

But I would be willing to pay more tax if state education was abolished and instead all the funds were used to pay the private school fees of children on a means-tested basis.

Report
surreygoldfish · 26/02/2013 20:47

No - because I don't believe it's all about how much money is invested.....the current variation in quality within the state sector cannot be explained just by funding. Agree with scaevola - it doesn't change the different demographics of each school's catchment.
If private schools are abolished, more government funding would be required to pay for all those children not currently educated in the state system.

Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.