To wonder if you are against private schools…

@iamtheblcksheep why such an extreme view? No state school good enough?!

I sort-of agree but (a) it can be difficult to get people to volunteer to be governors. Our church is supposed to supply 2 governors to the board of the local church secondary school and I was asked to do it. I said I wouldn't feel comfortable doing it because I was sending my own child to a private school and it would seem patronising. But the post went unfilled for months as they couldn't find anyone to do it. However (b) as governors aren't in control of the budget of their school I don't think it's an "indictment" for a governor not to choose it for their child. A school can be doing the very best that can reasonably be expected with the money available and still not be the best option for a particular child.

I am against then because I believe all children deserve an equal decent education. In the last 14 years funding for state schools has dropped dramatically compared with private schools. Normal kids should not lose out because of this

Also, they teach how to play the game and make connections rather than teaching to be smart well rounded people. That was generally the case in my old job with mostly privately educated co workers. They knew how to get ahead but they weren't actually very smart. I was forever fixing their mistakes while they mocked me for going to a comp

🤮

I can't get my head around being a governor of a school that I would not send my kids to. I mean that's quite a damning indictment of the effectiveness of the institution you are supposed to be a critical friend to isn't it?

I was also a governor for many years but of the state schools my kids actually attended. I can't imagine the head wanting my input if I simultaneously sent my kids private. How can you do that role whilst clearly not believing in state education I just don't get it.

I would hope most of us can agree that all children have a right to warm homes, full stomachs AND decent education.

Visting libraries and museums isn’t a basic right, some of your other examples are. I would argue we don’t need to make sure all kids can go on a UK holiday do Cornwall - but we should ensure they’re all warm, fed and educated.

And do you donate the £20k/year/child you are saving plus the £7k/year/child you are costing the state to your children’s school and maybe other state schools*? Or are you just sponging off the state system and adding to an already stretched teacher’s workload?

*otherwise an inequality would then develop between your children’s school and the nearby state schools.

It’s hyperbole but just because you can afford it but chose not to use doesn’t make you better.

I presume you do not enrich your children’s lives in any other way - no instrument lessons, sports, trips to museums or theatre, no books at home or visits to the library, no cooking together, exploring cusines, visiting different parts of the UK or going abroad. Where do you stop?
Do they have a warm home, full stomachs, a quiet place to study, broadband, devices?

You already are part of the system that perpetuates inequality. We all are.

I am absolutely opposed to private schools, it puts certain children at a significant advantage than other children just because mummy or daddy or rich grandparents etc can fork out an eye watering amount of money each year

Where do you want to stop though? My late OH spend ages helping our granddaughter to develop her reading, I spent some time this weekend talking to my grandson about a problem he was having with his Maths, my son-in-law almost ran private revision classes in his subject at half term. for his daughter and her boyfriend. Is the suggestion that able and caring family should not try to give their children an advantage? Shall we ban selling children's books because not all can afford them or bother to direct their resources in that direction?

Not commenting on private vs state but the reality is more complex than going private saves the state money.

Pupils = state funded income for schools. True.

However, there are many fixed costs to running a school. Whether the class has 24 or 30 students it’s still requires 1 x teacher. It requires the same building, utilities and lots of other overheads associated with it. So the variance between fixed and variable costs is less than you might think.

Schools are in deficit budget in some areas due to falling pupil rolls. This is either propped
up by the state or schools are having to scrimp in other areas because they still have high fixed overheads. An influx of some ‘private’ students will be the opposite of a burden. It will be funding/income that as a ratio makes fixed overheads more bearable.

But when they don't have to deal with disruptive behaviour, have small classes, excellent resources and parents who are generally engaged with their childs education its much easier to teach.
DDs GCSE History class had 10 kids in, DS's classes have between 15 and 20 tops.

Agreed. What I meant was the teachers are no better at private. It’s the same standard of actual teachers. But nice to have one that has knowledge of the subject.

Id say the private school teacher turnover must be much lower as so many of the teachers are committed to staying until their kids leave the school (and they no longer need the staff discount).

London Oratory perhaps?

It’s the endless fighting your child’s corner. It’s so draining!!! You become such an expert in your child’s rights!

Is your child at a failing State school?

So you’d put up with your child being kicked black and blue every day for your smug ‘perpetuating inequality’ values? I’d doubt it.

I support private schools. Hopefully the litigation will be won and Labour will not be able to go ahead. We save teh state a small fortune and have our children educated well which benefits the nation which relieving the state sector of the cost of 500,000 children a year.

But you might if your child had unmet needs in state. Do you really not understand that? Loads of us had no intention of beggaring ourselves to do this until our kids were utterly broken. Anyone who hand on heart would leave their child in a setting in which they were terrorised and then developed EBSA and didn't move them if they could is a bloody terrible parent in my view.

Some, such as those with SEN, would struggle in mainstream but get more support in private schools. I’m not going to flame those who want to do that when they have zero support in traditional schools.

I do blame them. I can afford it, but wouldn’t consider sending DS private. To do so wpuld be participating in a system that perpetuates inequality.

This

Sad they are needed really. All education should be great. But don’t blame people who can afford them for picking the best for their child.

I think it’s variable (state school governor).

Philosophically I’m conflicted about MATs. On the one hand curriculum and policy autonomy is good and poor support from the LA gives them buying power and other economies of scale etc. However, the size of some MATs are akin to publicly listed companies yet trustees remain largely volunteers who are unable to adequately challenge. There’s an issue with span of control.

They tend to be better than state maintained ones (primary level). I don’t know about secondary quality for academy yet.

That is a huge issue, those deciding on placements often have very limited professional knowledge. As a health professional I write reports for ehcps, and you can see they just pull random phrases from each professionals report which looses context and ends up with the report making no sense.