To wonder if you are against private schools…

I don't bother to check grammar properly online or in texts but do when I'm teaching.

I'm not against them. I wish every child could have access to the best education. I don't think getting rid of private schools would make that happen.

Expel them where Oona?

Same here but my kids are in private due to developing EBSA, bullying and various other things. It's not about academics in our case.

@OonaStubbs i agree the disruptive students need speedy intervention. Psychiatric assessments and treatment plans, a huge problem is long delays in seeing specialist Dr.’s. and Educational Psychologists.

Gosh. You sound very Trumpian.

More to the point, why do we let a small number of violent, bad kids disrupt the education of the pupils who want to work? Expel the bad kids and demand for private schools will drop dramatically.

Still convinced that Labour focus on Private Schools being “the problem” has been a successful strategy to focus hate on the “working people” …
with a silly plan they say “reduces inequality”.

At least British Public have not lost the freedom to educate their children privately. It just costs more, most likely widening the so-called inequality and in no way reducing it.

Most people in this chat know what makes some state schools fail to produce active contributors to the (legal) economy. But it’s just not Labour politics to shine a light there or focus policy on trying to motivate the bottom half upwards.

For all those still looking towards Finland as the educational model … look at the trends of the last 20 years. There have been large drops in attainment which tax rates won’t fix. Big gaps in performance based on socio-economic status, immigration. Sure, they do better than many in their study, but not so different. Has the attainment gap in Finland widened because the bottom has become lower???
Their politicians can’t blame “private school” for their staggering gaps in attainment.

www.oecd.org/en/publications/pisa-2022-results-volume-i-and-ii-country-notes_ed6fbcc5-en/finland_6991e849-en.html

We moved DS to a private school this year (P6) after years of being in a disruptive class where a small group of boys ran riot. My DS was used as a 'good influence' and has never not sat next to a disruptive child. So he spent his days not being able to concentrate, having things thrown at him and generally hating school.

After a year of using a tutor which helped make up for the things he wasn't learning at school we decided we couldn't carry on with him hating school.

Now at his private school he's learning all the same things in the school day that the tutor could have taught him. But he loves school. He loves learning. He's enthusiastic. He's happier.

Don't regret it for a second. I didn't do it to give him a 'network' or because I think I'm better than everyone else. I just wanted a happy child who wants to learn. And I'm sad that his local school couldn't do that for him.

I hope you are not teaching children English!

As an adult, would you chose to be around people who hit you, shout at you, steal and break your stuff, stops you doing your work and then feel OK when your boss tells you you have to put up with it as there isn't anything they can do about it, and tells you off for not doing your work? If you got assaulted in the street and then told that your attacker was going to sit at the desk next to you in your office, would you be fine with that?

I know I wouldn't, but we expect our children to somehow be ok with this?? Why? No wonder so many women struggle to escape DV, they become ingrained at a young age to believe that males can hit them and authority figures won't do anything to stop this. And makes learn they can get away with this.

My daughter and her female friends are being hit almost daily by a couple of disruptive boys in her class. And their stuff is stolen and broken and then they get told off for not having the right stationary. So yes, she has told me she wants to be 'segregated' as you put it. 'Segregated' from disruptive violent boys who hurt her and stop her learning. We can't really afford private (but will have to stretch to it) so are tutoring for the 11+ as all girl only schools are either grammer or private near us.

I don't really believe in single sex schools, or grammer, or private. But strongly believe in my daughter not get used to being hit by males, I strongly believe in her feeling safe in school and in her being allowed to learn.

We've both worked in a failing school and plenty of children did well. I think my child would be ok wherever they went to school because parents ultimately have more impact on the children then the school. I'm not saying I would want them, or any child, to go to a failing school though.

Don't agree with paying to segregate children, this is mostly what private school is imo, paying to keep your child away from certain people in society. But that's just my view.

My dc are very privileged. They live in a comfortable house in a lovely area, have books and computers needed for learning, go to dance and music lessons, have trips out to interesting places and go to a good state school due to us affording to live in the catchment area. IMO private school is just a different kind of privilege. If I had a cheaper mortgage and lived in a not so good area, I’d probably have paid for private. A lot (not all) of people against private are just paying for privilege in a different way.

I'm not against it but I don't believe they should get charitable status. Most do very little for state educated children. I don't see why they should have the financial benefit when in reality very few children attend.

Some of the comments on this thread are ridiculous.
private schools mostly accept the top achieving kids who are put through entrance tests to get in. They are always going to be high achieving no matter who teaches them. The teachers in private schools aren’t necessarily better than teachers in state schools.
What children in private school get is smaller classes, a hard working peer group, access to top facilities and connections re Oxbridge and American universities.
In terms of lesson content, they’re practically the same. The difference is the children in the class. Put them in state schools and they still do well though will have to suffer the non-academic children slowing the class down, the messing around that is generally seen in state schools, the lack of facilities etc. it not much different to me paying for my daughter to attend ballet, violin, karate lessons after school. Lots of people can’t afford to do this, but does that mean I shouldn’t pay for my child to do these things?? She doesn’t attend private school, but if I could afford to send her I would, for the smaller classes, the facilities and opportunities. Not for the lesson content. I don’t think anyone sends their kids to private school thinking the actual teaching is better than state.

I hope you're not an English teacher.

Nevertheless, as you're a teacher, I'm sure you know that school is about far more than just the academic work. There are some state schools that will outperform some private schools, but parents will still chose those private schools for many other reasons - sporting facilities, nurturing environments, SEN provision, outside space, extra curricular offerings etc etc.

@Makingchocolatecake - sorry but are you really a teacher? Your reply is not what I would expect/hope from a teacher for two main reasons.
One being is the reason that you give for not using private school does not answer the question.
It’s like me saying, I don’t use private schools, because I pay tutors to supplement my child’s learning, send them to sports clubs, music lessons and orchestra. I also do not need any after school provision.
Would you use private schools if you and your DH could not help DC with their work?

Remember @Halfemptyhalfling that all private school parents are already net contributors to the state system as they pay for places they don't use.

The answer is to fund state education properly. If it costs a private school £8k a term to provide a quality education for one child how on earth can a state school provide the same for £8k a year.
Further equality is not the answer; we need to strive for equity. This means providing the right resources for every child to thrive and achieve their potential.

But school isn't just about reading and writing, it's a whole learning experience to develop social skills, awareness, practical skills etc. My oldest is thriving academically, but is becoming more and more withdrawn and reluctant to attend school due to the aggressive behaviour of other children.
Attending private school for many isn't about academic achievement, it's about the experience as a whole.

You contradict yourself by implying that private education is excellent and then acknowledging that some private schools are poor and some state schools are better. I have nothing against people throwing their money at a system that provides an education. I do, however, baulk at the reality that the private schools system still disproportionately furnishes the politicians, high level civil servants and other privileged strata in our society.

Not a bad idea actually. People don’t value what is “free” and it is to those that don’t pay
much tax.

I think the poster meant "they" being the government. Offer - like many other countries - incentives to use the private sector, further reducing the burden on the state system. Instead of the reverse, which is what Labour are doing now.

All schools should be private. Give parents some tax relief so they can afford to pay. Set a fairly low maximum fee that schools can charge without being taxed, and tax the hell of out of those that charge more.

If parents had to pay out their own hard-earned money on their childrens education they'd take it a hell of a lot more seriously than many do at present where it is just seen as free daycare.

If private schools don't pay vat then less money for state schools. This means more grow up to be criminals so more likely to be mugged or burgled and country does less well as paying for prisons instead of businesses doing well

I never said it wasnt, just trying to explain partially how Michaela is achieving such results.
None of their students take triple science - only double.
In lots of communities many parents wouldn't be happy with their child only being permitted to take 7-8 GCSE's and wouldn't want them to be restricted to double science either.