to hate it when people talk about "indie" schools

[gobehindabushfgs]

in an attempt to make it sound cool, edgy and alternative? it isn't. it's private education. it's a right-wing, ultimately selfish decision.

"indie"

I think I'll start instituting bingo cards for these threads, as the feminists do for theirs.

So far we have had:

"indie"
"socially diverse"
"we really don't earn very much money"
"sacrificing income to educate other people's children"
"making a choice"
"some people go without a holiday/car, you know, to afford the fees"
"you buy education too by moving house"

Oh, the old ones are the best. Tick, tick, tick.

I think we just need an "it's what we believe in" and an "I don't feel the need to apologise" and we'll have a full house. Oh, and a "sensitive child". Forgot that. There's always a "sensitive child" somewhere, one who would probably melt like a jelly-baby in the rain if forced to enter the poisoned realm of the comprehensive school.

seeker, why is it? Why should I support other people? I am lucky enough to live outside of the UK and pay absolutely no tax. However, when visiting, I tried to get a private appointment with my old GP and was refused. They would only see me as a temporary NHS resident. Why the hell should the NHS or education/pension/welfare system support me? I am determined not to contribute and in return I should not get. I have medical insurance because I wouldn't want to use the NHS. If you had any idea how hard private medical is to access you would not think I was selfish.

"the vast majority of the population do this because ethey have to, not because they have chosen to spend the bulk of their income on school fees!"

No one is disputing that, but that wasn't the point seeker. Of course people who can afford school fees however much they scrimp and save are in a ridiculously more privileged positions than people who can't afford anything other than grotty flats or having to make mince stretch for a week. But that is a different issue.

The point is that one family may be making such economies to send their kids to an independent school and would get a load of stick here and be accused of snobbery and exclusivity, whereas another similar income family down the road in the outstanding state school catchment area do not have to have make these economies and may enjoy running two cars and a foreign holiday or two each year, while their kids are safely sectioned away from "rough" kids because of the catchment issue, but this second family wouldn't be criticised purely because they use the state system. Yeah, right on.

But they are criticised. They've been criticised on here. You mean they're not criticised by people who argue against private education? We are a broad church really. And I do certainly criticise an admissions system that allows that to happen.

I dislike the word 'indie' but also shudder at 'uni' and 'hubby'

But I don't find the need to tell anyone on here or in RL whether or not the school is fee-paying or not. I mean the words 'prep-school' also cause much animosity on mn.

Just as a matter of interest, what would it cost the state to take on the cost of educating the 7% of children who go to independent schools? I know the Independent Schools' Council reckons it would far outstrip the tax relief given to schools with charitable status.

I'd also be very interested to see what would happen to modern languages courses at university if there were to be no more independent schools, as MFL teaching has been in steep decline in state schools over the last few years. That may change now, thanks to the English Bacc, but in the mean time most independent schools have carried on insisting that all pupils do an MFL to GCSE. At my son's school 70% of boys do one or more MFLs to AS level, which is terrific.

LondonMother, two answers to your question:

a) Many local state schools already insist on a MFL and if there was an influx of children whose parents wanted this, no doubt more schools would.

b) universities teach MFLs from a variety of levels anyway: it is not the case that you cannot study a language at university level simply because you didn't do it at school. Language teaching at higher levels tends to be quite fast paced and efficient so students do catch up.

UD, you forgot "What's wrong with doing the best you can for your children" 'beat up old Volvo", "wrap round care" and "free sport"

Both the grammar and the high school in our town insist on a MFL to GCSE.

seeker, you have your opinions, they are no more right or wrong than anyone else's. I could easily ridicule the lefty farty pants comments and make a set of cards for them.

LondonMother, it's said that on average an LA pays £5K per year to educate a child. However, if that child is not NT or has other needs, of course the price is considerably higher. A term in a Pupil Referral Unit in my county costs the LA £6,000. That's the same amount per term as it's costing my LA to put my DD2 into an independent school especially for children who are so severely bullied that they cannot cope with mainstream (generally state) school - which is what happened to her whilst in one of their sodding state schools.

Times that by the 7% which you speak of and it's a lot of money.

Seeker - added to the card!

"It is extraordinarily selfish to think 'sod the good of society, I'm looking after Number 1."

Well I happen to think my first responsibility is to my kids actually, before society. I think, given that I can just about afford not to, it would be selfish of me to send my kids to a school which doesn't achieve national standards of literacy and is in special measures, purely because somewhere down the line, it's ideologically more acceptable to other people.

And to be honest you know nothing of what other people may be contributing to the good of society in other ways. I for example volunteer on literacy and access projects with socially marginalised groups. I also work in the public sector doing similar work. It's not the kind of work you do if you don't give a shit about society.

Just because I'm sending my kids to independent school does not automatically mean I'm selfish.

You're being very judgey and making a lot of assumptions.

"seeker, you have your opinions, they are no more right or wrong than anyone else's. I could easily ridicule the lefty farty pants comments and make a set of cards for them."

But I can defend my opinions ethically, morally and politically. You can't.

And do please make "lefty farty pants" bingo cards - it would be great fun to play.

Seeker, in the spirit of indie bingo, I'd like to point out that I got in earlier with wrap-around care. :)

I would send my kids to the nearest independent school in a flash if I won the lottery and I bet some of the 'judgey' people on here would do that too. Jealousy is not a sound argument.

There is a ststae school near to me that is very big on rowing, the kids were in the paper recently having won some competition.

"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"

Most of this twaddle on here is pure class bias and not sound intellectual reasoning. Watch out for the chip on your shoulder it may crush you!

Comrade Napoleon has a point I've always thought! Lokk at the amount of Numpties who watch X-Factor. Surely we can't let these people decide the future of anything!

Look

Watch Micheal Morpurgo damming indictment on what is wrong with state eduation in this country to find out why my children go to an independent school. it should be on iplayer.

If he was in charge of schools mine would be going state no question.

As it is we can just about afford fees so we will give them the kind of education that we beleive that all children should get.

I seriously considered home education but don;t hink it would suit them or us.

Oh, you can get slagged off for sending your kid to a state school too. You can get slagged off for anything on MN!

'Jealous' would be another...

Is it judging? Or is it having a different set of principles? I'm not telling anyone that they must or mustn't do anything. I'm saying that I think, big picture, that private education is damaging for the society in which our children will live. And as such, I'm not buying into it, and I would rather others didn't either.

I'm not jealous. I have a choice. I choose neither to teach in nor send my children to private schools.