Sam Freedman wouldn't send his kids private

The cost of private schooling has risen hugely while the wages of the traditional professions have not. it used to be, at least up till the 80s, that doctors, lawyers etc could send their kids to top private schools, as the single earner in the family. Now they are very unlikely to earn enough to do that and the top public schools are full of the kids of aristocratic landowners (of eg the Samantha Cameron variety) and wealthy businessmen, very often from overseas.

www.conservativehome.com/platform/2016/09/sam-freeman-selective-schools-destroy-choice-and-competition-why-conservatives-should-oppose-mays-plans.html

I have three young children. At the moment I can choose between three comprehensives for them. If one of those became selective, my choice would disappear. I’d have to enter them for the eleven-plus to try and get access to the school that has all the advantages of selection. And if, even after I’ve shelled out thousands of pounds for private tutors and gone through months of domestic stress, they didn’t make the cut I’d be left with no choice at all. The remaining comprehensives, which would become secondary moderns in all but name, are it, unless I could scrape enough money together to move or go private – which, of course, wouldn’t be an option for the vast majority of people.

So, he would consider scraping the money together for private education (or move) if his dcs were allocated places at secondary modern schools? He cannot really afford private education for 3 dc and Bertrand is very much in the minority I think.

Surely if the reason was that he couldn't afford it, he didn't need to say anything about it in the first place?

He is a coffee-shop liberal and as catslife suggested, his children are very young and he genuinely doesn't see the need to pay for a private primary school? He would like to change the views of people who can afford private education, happy in the knowledge that he has bought a house in the catchment of an excellent comprehensive? He may also have the option of a North London faith school.

Yes I too like my children to be able to mix rather than not!

It is different though to saying everyone should go to the same school which was my point.

Anyway as previous posters have said mixing doesn't always occur. The large comp in our town seems full of powerfully defined cliques from what I can see via the pupils.

I agree with you SeekEveryKnownHidingPlace....
the general idea is that mixing is better than not.
Add message | Report | Message poster

One things for sure. If you don't want people to discuss your family's educational arrangements, don't go making public pronouncements about it.

I know several people who have made statements about state education when their children are at primary school who suddenly change their minds a few years later. Usually when they realise they don't live close enough to the most high achieving comprehensives (which have the most middle class intakes and the highest house prices in our city). That certainly true outside London but could be different there, of course.

Yes, I know it's not an ideal everyone buys into, as many people explicitly buy out of it! I'm just saying that rather than thinking it is a moral good for every middle class child to know a working class child, the general idea is that mixing is better than not.

" it's generally good if everyone goes to school together"

That's an ideal I don't share.

If I dont like the way schools in my area are that well run why would I think it good to send all children there? My children do attend the local school as it happens but I wish the other kids that don't all the best. I know someone who is home edded and some who go to private schools out of town.

It shows my children that there is more than one style of education. I see that as desirable tbh.

Surely if the reason was that he couldn't afford it, he didn't need to say anything about it in the first place?

Mixing with working class children certainly doesn't automatically make middle class children 'better'. But that individual, isolated, model isn't what it's about for me; it's a bit like saying 'I don't see how sending my bright child to the comprehensive will suddenly make the comprehensive better'.

It's more about the ideal that it's generally good if everyone goes to school together, I think.

noble
Out of interest, what sort of combined salary do you have in mind for a (North) London property and 3 sets of school fees?

His father is not just a lecturer And if he has 5 or 6 grandchildren is he obliged to pay school fees for all of them?

Maybe his wife earns money too
Of course, but there is another dilemma - does she work full time just to pay school fees or would she rather spend more time at home with her young family? Or perhaps she would prefer an extension?

it's just sour grapes
Not necessarily - he obviously has a social conscience but it's easier to give up something you cannot easily afford in the first place.

On the other hand, Haringey has some excellent schools, if for example, he has bought a house in the catchment of Fortismere, then how exactly is buying a 1 million pound property in the catchment of an already 'outstanding' school helping social equality?

Bertrand
I am slightly stunned that you didn't send your youngest dc to a private school (or move house) if you have been able to afford private school fees for the past five years.

Look, I've no idea if this family can or cannot afford it.
But it is absurd not to recognise that the cost of housing and private education has risen disproportionately from the last generation to this. Especially in London.

The traditional middle classes have been priced out of much private education.

I do think that a big advantage of comprehensive schools is that you get to have friends from across a wide range of social backgrounds and abilities

This is lovely idea but it's generally not what happens. Kids become close friends with others who are like them. They might know people in their class / year group who are totally different from them but they rarely become close friends.

Just like you I expect - how many of your closest friends are from a very different social background and ability from you?

Well, I'm assuming his wife earns a similar amount to him. Still not enough for private school and a mortgage in london.

Maybe his wife earns money too?

I've never understood the logic in the idea that if you attend school with people poorer than you it will somehow make you more understanding, more moral, more able to appreciate their concerns.

The vast majority of adults in the UK attended state school yet the working classes have never been more demonised. The division between the working class and the middle class is incredibly acrimonious and has certainly not improved since the vast majority of the MC can no longer afford private school.

It wouldn't be surprising if he couldn't afford it. He works for Teach First, a charity, in London. His father is a lecturer. Solidly middle class but both occupations not known for being hugely well remunerated.