to resent getting grief because I work in a private school?

[fuschiagroan]

OK, realise that people may say I am being totally unreasonable.

Just about to start my first teaching job. It's in a private school. At a dinner party the other night, my friend (well, I've known her a long time but we're not that close) was making lots of digging little comments about the fact it was a private school. Other people were asking genuine questions about the job/school, not being snarky at all, like 'So what are class sizes like?'. When I answered, e.g. 'It's fifteen to a class at most' this friend went 'God!', wrinkling her nose, as though I'd just said they had a school society for strangling baby bunnies or something. She also made comments about 'privilege' and 'unfair' etc.

OK, I know of course that it is a very privileged environment, and the kids are incredibly lucky. But why does that make me a bad person for working there? If a job had come up in a good state school I would have been just as happy teaching there, but this was the school that offered me a job.

I just think, ffs, I'm not an arms dealer. There's really no need for her to criticise my choice of workplace just because it doesn't fit in with her faux-socialism.

By the way, she got her kid into a great state school by moving into the (expensive property) catchment area - not exactly something possible for all!

I see your point redcardigan, when I worked in a school that was 'outstanding' there was the odd kid there who seemed more like the kids in the more troubled schools I had worked in- but they were all doing so so much better than they would have done if they'd been in the more troubled schools. There was a critical mass of other kids for them to interact with and learn with that just wasn't there in the schools in worse areas/worse schools. It is disgraceful that there is so much variation, and disgraceful to hear teachers in schools in deprived areas moaning on, having low expectations, blaming the kids etc. However, you'll never convince me that it's right or proper to have fee payers in small classes and kids with very poor life chances sitting in classes of 32

I see your point redcardigan, when I worked in a school that was 'outstanding' there was the odd kid there who seemed more like the kids in the more troubled schools I had worked in- but they were all doing so so much better than they would have done if they'd been in the more troubled schools. There was a critical mass of other kids for them to interact with and learn with that just wasn't there in the schools in worse areas/worse schools. It is disgraceful that there is so much variation, and disgraceful to hear teachers in schools in deprived areas moaning on, having low expectations, blaming the kids etc. However, you'll never convince me that it's right or proper to have fee payers in small classes and kids with very poor life chances sitting in classes of 32

beertrickspotter sorry but why put 'principles' in inverted commas- are they not really real or something? Are we all just playing at 'believing' in social justice? Are principled people being 'ironic' or something????? Enlighten me please 'oh wise one'

Well we moan lots in our staffroom but we certainly don't have low expectations and our value added scores are excellent.

However, getting rid of private education doesn't bring all that money and all those facilities into the state sector. I had 33 a couple of years ago and that is one of the reasons I pay (18 in DCs class). However, this is only possible because I pay. The state system could never afford what it would cost to educate children in classes of 15 (double the space, double the teachers)

Is it fair that my kids have a reasonably big house with a large garden when the kids I teach are in flats or have a little piece of concrete out the back?

Is it fair that my kids eat well, get regular exercise, visit interesting places and have great holidays whilst the kids I teach often have poor diets and rarely visit stimulating places?
(this is specific to my catchment, I'm not suggesting that only affluent parents care about their child's diet or stimulate them)

None of this is fair or makes for a level playing field.

Anybody remember 1997 and "education, education, education"? .

Wow! I went out.

Seems like the thread has moved on quite a bit, but I can answer the last few posts.

I'm not that offended, I just think it's a bit rude. I didn't cry about it or anything, I just went . If she'd wanted a proper debate about it I would have entered into one. She didn't, she just kept making random snide comments, and if I'd taken her up on them (or mentioned her new house!) it probably would have turned narky, and I didn't particularly want to ruin the atmosphere for everyone else.

Maybe I should have asked 'AIBU to say OH DO FUCK OFF' but I thought that wasn't very teacherly.

I agree with whoever said that they are concerned about the state money that went into training me. They should think of a better system, there's not really a lot I can do about it. I wasn't determined to only go into the private sector and I had to qualify somehow.

However, you'll never convince me that it's right or proper to have fee payers in small classes and kids with very poor life chances sitting in classes of 32

No it's not right at all, it's a bloody disgrace those in the worse situations receive the least assistance.
But scrapping private schools isn't the answer if they weren't an option I'd HE and then pay no tax and NI at all into the pot.

I used to think MN was vaguely left-wing. Now where did I get such a stupid idea from?

They are terribly left wing, just as long as it doesnt interfere with little Artemis/Montgomerys chances of getting into Oxbridge!!

Then the gloves are off!!!

There's a theory that if all the parents whose children attend private schools were instead campaigning for better conditions in state schools, a lot of positive changes would be made.

"How on earth can the existence of private schools have an impact on class size in the state sector, especially a negative impact?"

See I used to buy that theory until I started volunteering in my local primary.

I can now appreciate that it will take more than a few middle class kids polling up to change things.

The problem begins with the children's parents who hardly give a shit.
It then escalates with demotivated teachers with not enough resources and huge classes.
I could go on...

"There's a theory that if all the parents whose children attend private schools were instead campaigning for better conditions in state schools, a lot of positive changes would be made."

Well I can't see a logical reason why 7% of the population can achieve what 93% can't. At the end of the day, a vote is a vote.

Sorry but even if 7% did go into state schools then you would not have more money per head you'd have less as there would be no more money in the school system but more people to spread it around to.
This would then lead to the catchment areas around the better schools becoming more expensive, leading to the only richer children going to these schools. This would lead to another debate about class divide, etc etc. How would you deal with this?

At primary school, both our children were often sat next to little shits when we (eventually) complained we were told our children were having a good influence. Used by the teacher to manage the class. It was not a good experience for our children though.

"There's a theory that if all the parents whose children attend private schools were instead campaigning for better conditions in state schools, a lot of positive changes would be made."

I wouldn't campaign, I'd opt out and then nobody benefits either from my taxes or my imput.

Soe of the arguments here must be some of the most ridiculous I've seen. Eg parents from private schools having an influence if they moved to teh state sector - why on earth should they? Why don't we all move to Africa and campaign for human rights there? It is not right or proper that we all sit around gossiping on laptops whilst a quarter of baby born in some African states die before they are 5. Life is not fair or right or proper.

you should see the shit you get when you choose to send your child to one instead of the one failing school in the area that you were allocated rather than one of the 3 state "choices" that everyone else in the area gets to send their kids to - all from people whose children are in the schools that everyone wants. I sympathise.

"you can't really understand what it's like to have to make a choice for the sake of your DC's future"

Tomorrow dd1 starts her first day at new school, which is a big inner city comprehensive with a a very disadvantaged intake.

Is her future bleak? I always assumed that as an intelligent child with supportive parents she had a good chance of doing well in any school where pupils behave reasonably in class, and where the school is well-resourced and has a stable, well qualified staff.

Am I wrong?

"Sorry but even if 7% did go into state schools then you would not have more money per head you'd have less as there would be no more money in the school system but more people to spread it around to."

The biggest problem with our schools is that they are segragated along class and religious lines. So bad for our children - rich and poor.

completely agree about the religious segregation. Not sure about private/state equates to class - just ability to pay which, in most cases, means both parents having to work (or generous relatives). In an ideal world that option wouldn't be necessary I suppose.