To wonder if you are against private schools…

It is insane, but honestly the answer to most of the questions would be - teacher shortages.

I have worked in education recruitment for a decade, and have never seen a labour market so depleted as it is now. Subject specialists in certain subjects, are almost impossible for schools to find - and then they outsource that and the agencies don’t have them either. I have known schools advertise for a maternity cover role for 6 months and get nowhere.

Those schools then either bring in unqualified staff (who are cheaper, and kinder on the budget) or staff who are qualified in a different subject. Humanities teachers covering English, for example. It’s either that or have nothing.

Children could go elsewhere for A levels. There are plenty of posters on here who vociferously argue that they or their children have gone into top professions from state schools. It's not a choke hold. Two generations ago you might have had a point but not now.

Well, to give an example I've heard of in my own life, a friend was a teacher in a secondary school in England where they only taught Science as a single subject, mostly due to lack of teachers. This school was rated "good" by Ofsted, yet zero kids there were able to study Chemistry or Biology at a level that would enable them to pursue Chemistry or Biology A levels and become doctors. So their fate in life was effectively decided at age 11. Not to mention that their science teachers were not even trained in science at all- one of them was a PE teacher. This was shocking to me, and I did ask questions, and all the answers I received only shocked me more.

Does that sound OK to you? It sounded insane to me. I don't know, maybe we can just chalk it down to cultural differences.

I don't know what rich parents do extra, but I do know that privately schooled people are aggressively dominating most UK professions with some prestige and social power, from politics to judges to journalists and artists. It is an immense social equality problem. There is effectively a "ruler class" in the UK that is almost entirely bred in their own special schooling system. It's naive to pretend otherwise.

If we’re talking about Eleanor Palmer school …. The admissions are not strictly distance from school, likely because if was distance from school would have no economic diversity.

Because houses for sale won’t show you the rented social housing?

@Xenia "? There are lots of ways some of us try to help our children (I call it love and other think it is unfairness) from breastfeeding them to reading them stories etc"

Those things are not solely dependent on money.

@Blaggoshpereish
"Not one “affordable” property makes you wonder where the 20% free meals kids come from …."

House prices have gone up. People may have lived in their houses for a long time. There's two possibilities.

But you did
You said you wouldn't do what I did so I think asking what you would have done/thought I should have done is a fair question
However, you are well within your rights to refuse to answer.

Not one “affordable” property makes you wonder where the 20% free meals kids come from ….

@Hoppinggreen

I will never be in that position because I would not send my DC to private school so the dilemma did not arise for me and it could not do. Therefore I am unable to say what I would do in a hypothetical situation that I will never be in.

It's a 'well I wouldn't start from here scenario' for me.

Look up the houses in the catchment area. Hardly a middle class neighbourhood https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?includeSSTC=false&keywords=&sortType=2&viewType=LIST&channel=BUY&index=0&radius=0.25&locationIdentifier=POSTCODE%5E621489

@JustAVeryWeirdWoman that's such a backwards view. What is it that you think the "rich" parents will do that the 93% who also include some very rich people, can't? Do you really think you'd get the PS kids scattered across the wide demographic of state? Of course not..you'd get enclaves around the leafy million pound plus houses.

Is it right Starmer's children when at primary school lived in London in an area where house prices were £2m

I just looked up the school Starmer sent his kids to, and despite the claimed house prices, 1 in 5 kids there were on free school meals which isn’t that far off the national average.

Lots of EAL kids too, and higher than average SEN. So not quite the gotcha you think it is.

Winelondon, why pick just on education however? There are lots of ways some of us try to help our children (I call it love and other think it is unfairness) from breastfeeding them to reading them stories etc. Why just pick on school chosen particularly when vast numbers of excellent state grammars and leading comps in leafy boroughs also confer advantage? Why pick on this tiny bit of education where most of the children are in day private schools - not boarding - and target that for opprobrium?

If the issue is some homes have better parents should we be removing children at birth and putting them in some kind of collective system so they are all identically treated? Is it right Starmer's children when at primary school lived in London in an area where house prices were £2m or that Blair could choose the Oratory?

So what would you have done if it WERE you then?
Refuse to be a Governor when asked or remove your DC from their school?

Your view is very warped, you need to do more research. “Shocked to hear?” Go and see, ask questions & learn what going on across UK.

Private schools tend to be better than state schools because rich people send their kids to the private system and don't care at all about the condition of the state system. Because of that, the state system will never get any better. The only way to improve it would be to force rich people to send their kids to state schools.

I think Britain has such an unbalanced schooling system that it's basically like Brave New World: "inferior" people are indoctrinated into their inferiority from a very early age and most of them never aspire to anything better due to their poor education. As someone who was born and schooled outside the UK, it's a very glaring issue. I was shocked to hear, for example, that some children lose the chance to study certain subjects at an early age because their school simply doesn't teach it. Where I grew up, everyone studied the same thing across the country until at least age 15.

I chose not to be a governor of my children's schools until after they left.

It's a good thing that you do
I am glad that you do volunteer
Please do carry on. I am fully aware that people are not crying out to be school governors. It is a ridiculously responsible and time consuming role for a volunteer
I just found it surprising because if it was me I would not be able to do that but genuinely I am glad that you do.

They are giving their time and expertise for free. That is a commitment to state education.

If all the governors on a board are current parents, you get lots of issues around forming panels for complaints and exclusions and pay, and a risk of group think or conflicts of interest on decision making. They can be less willing hold the head to account too as long as their chikd is OK for fear of being seen as difficult.

Surely it’s more of a commitment to state education to work with a challenging school, trying to improve it for the children who do go there, when you have no skin in the game?

Lots of people happily sign up to the PTA or whatever when it is their own kids who will benefit from their commitment.

I believe that instead of just saying something isnt good enough and/or complaining about it you should actually try and change things.
I probably won't be able to make much of a difference but at least I have a go, I am very priviliged that I am in a position to be able to give my time and knowledge - the school has high levels of deprivation so there probably aren't loads of parents who are able to, as evidenced by the difficulty in filling the position.
Maybe I should just say "oh what a shame" and spend my time doing something else. I should probably also stop helping with The Street Kitchen and my involvement with Foodcycle since I have never experienced Homelessness or MH/Substance Abuse issues

I know personally what a commitment it is I did it for many years including chairing. Hence I find it hard to get my head around how you could be fully committed and work in partnership with staff toiling away at the coalface for a school that you felt would never be good enough for your own kids.

But I guess other people do and it is indeed better than doing nothing at all for state education.

If by putting my money where my mouth is means I send my DC to a failing school when I am lucky enough to be able to afford to do otherwise then I am quite happy not to be doing that.
Shall I resign and see if they can find some one else with my skills, experience, contacts and time easily?
OR as my DC went to State Primary perhaps I could say that despite being a Governor for the whole through school I can only comment on Primary matters?