to think the state should pay part of our private school fees?

[wolvesarejustoldendaydogs]

Don't jump down my throat! It's just a thought.

State schools are overcrowded and there aren't enough good ones. Private schools are expensive.

What if every child had a right to have their state school 'payment' (whatever it costs per child per year') paid to a private school? Obviously parents would have to top-up (probably a considerable amount).

That would create a bit of a market, with more choice, making private schools more affordable and state ones less overcrowded.

Or is it a stupid idea for a reason I will think of soon after pressing 'POST'?

seeker
But now I know that you think I don't mean what I say about my motivation,
Have I actually said that? (again a genuine question?)

That is the really sad part, happygardener, the idea that an apprenticeship is for 'losers' when in actual fact a lot of people would be far better off with one, rather than university. Sensible DCs are opting for them after very good A'levels. My DS has one and it was very tough to get, many a university student wouldn't cope with the technical level. A pity the practical and technical isn't valued in schools.

The other problem with modern day apprenticeships is that the training is so much shorter. At one stage you would train for five years beside a master craftsman then spend at least two years as a journey man consolidating what you have learnt. Now they go to on day release to college for two years complete with about 16 weeks holiday a year and then at the end are told they are "fully qualified." One of my husbands staff has just retired they have replaced him three times all have excellent paper qualifications not one of then can do the jobs all have been dismissed at the end of their three months trial period. My husbands works is highly skilled and very satisfying and requires a high degree of intelligence and artist ability he would love to find a keen intelligent trainee who wants to learn a difficult and demanding trade but he just cant find one.

noble
As regards "mandated average curricula? What did you have in mind that a state school can't offer?"

This was in response to Portofinos statement that "Every school should follow the same curriculum of course."

If that curriculum was rich and varied, containing many languages, sport, music, triple science (maybe even 4 sciences) for all who wanted it and a good smattering of minority interest subjects for the quirky, then fair enough. (That's my wish list, there would be other requirements from other parents too). But forgive me - the plethora of mumsnet threads from people lamenting their dc can't do triple science or two languages or the lack of a choir at their schools suggests to me that some of these things may well not be on offer - not that they couldn't be, but that the cost of implementing all would be too high and some would get lost on the way, especially if we were mandating the same curriculum in every state school.

I strongly think that to change the system in such a radical way would be fraught with problems and would almost certainly not yield the expected results. I confess I would not want my dc who only have one chance for their education to be part of such a major social experiment.

I am in favour of making small incremental changes to make the existing system fairer - and I'm not opposed to making some changes to private ed either - I was interested in the proposal they shouldn't be allowed to select (presumably on ability?), it would certainly need thinking through quite carefully, but I'm very in favour of increasing the bursary system and definitely improving the lowest performing schools.

seeker I think 30-40% good GCSEs sounds about right for your high school's circumstances, but I would define good GCSEs as 5A-B not A-C (I don't really know what I'm talking about here, but my gut feeling is that children around average really should be able to achieve thsi). I suspect to achieve it though requires more changes at primary level and possibly even younger, not just at senior age.

our school has just gone into post-16 apprenticeships in a big way - we think it is the way ahead for so many youngsters. It should definitely be the way ahead.

re the finding the intelligent trainee happygardening why doesnt your husband go direct to one of the schools or colleges and see if they can recommend one of their youngsters/recent leavers? DH did this and has a really excellent young guy as a result who he is training up.

"I was interested in the proposal they shouldn't be allowed to select (presumably on ability?),"
Independent schools are just that independent they are not public sector institutions so how can anyone apart from their governors which they appoint dictate to them who they admit? Government dont dictate the terms for other private sector industries. Surely governments of what ever persuasion need to address the problems that appear to exist in the state sector rather than interfering in something they have no right to interfere in.
Also many are acadmic centres of excellence don't we need these as much as we need sporting and musical centres if excellence?

boschy he's tried that and in fairness has one boys who looks good but most talk about going to university and don't see his trade a "good job." Manufacturing is definitely regarded by school leaver and in may cases by their parents as poor option. Going to a 2nd class uni to study American studies is seen as something to aspire too. But my husbands company has worked all through the recession unlike many their orders and turn over are up from four years ago and can afford to pick and choose what work they do want as they are in demand and they work in many parts of the world. No one has been laid off in fact quite the opposite they've taken staff on. My husband no longer does the manufacturing but runs the manufacturing side of the company and earns a good salary so for the right person there are career opportunities as well. He meets interesting people (not all) travels and most importantly of all creates usually beautiful things that will last for many years to come. But still school leavers want to go to university and study for a meaningless degree.

that's sad hg (not about his success, obv!). I do think this whole 'uni is essential' is going to come back and bite us on the bum, because it just so ISNT for so many businesses and individual young people.

Totally going off subject here but that is something I can agree with you there happygarden (!!!) .

That desire to go to Uni ( particularly to do some random undemanding non-relevant and non-academic subject ) stems more from wanting the Uni experience rather than a) gaining a useful qualification or b) the pursuit of learning for it's own sake.

hairyToe I am not sure that it is because they necessarily want the uni experience - I think it is more that they think they wont get a job (even a McJob) without a degree - any degree.

My DH believes its a cultural thing. The nearest town/city to his company and where they've looked to recruit apprentices is what could be described as primarily aspirational working class (no I'm not being patronising or trying to spoil the nice agreeing atmostphere!) their parents were often apprenticed to a two local very large international company one now gone to China and the other has recently laid off quite a few staff and they see uni as a step up and an apprenticeships as a backward step.
The other thing he's found is that DT probably a prerequisite to an apprenticeship (although a keen person could get away without it) seems to be viewed by many as a "non academic" option in fact at my DS1 school food tech and DT were classified as a "less academic route" when we received the info about their GCSE's. So schools are also sending out the signal that if you not academic you do DT although I understand that Imperial dont take this veiw about the A level!
But the reality is that his job requires an excellent understanding of maths, much is now done using computer aided design so excellent computing skills and also real understanding of the principles of classical architecture. This is not an easy less academic option as well as excellent hand eye coordination and an eye for aesthetics often achieved by exposure to a wide variety of "art."

Crikey, loads of posts since I was last on. It seems to have got a bit muddled...summat about fox hunting? The OECD recommends ending or delaying selective education to improve social equality because it's jealous of rich people...eh?

And full of rampant socialists obsessed with the system at the expense of the individual apparently.

The OECD i quite clear that where state schools draw upon the same socio-economic groups as private school there is no difference in outcome.

If having a social conscience means putting my child's needs below those of other children, in order to try to manufacture some sort of communist utopia, then I'm quite glad I haven't got one.

It's nice to see that the conversation has finally turned round to what the real problem is since I've been away!

I don't think it's become muddled, noblegiraffe. I think that there's been a clear division of views. On the one hand there are people who think that parents should have no rights over the education of their children. On the other there are people who recognise that government doesn't know best and that, just for once, it should mind its own business. What's striking is how few people are undecided on the matter.

It's been interesting to see the arguments used in favour of stripping parents of their right to choose how their child is educated.

The government used to pay direct grants to independent schools in the distant past but that went out with decent exam levels and sports fields. Actually they went long before the others. I may be better if all parents had to contribute something towards education depending on income and that way those who elect to go private would be free to spend as they prefer instead of paying twice.

All parents DO pay towards education, it's called general taxation.

"It's been interesting to see the arguments used in favour of stripping parents of their right to choose how their child is educated."

I know. Evidence-based ones, and backed by international organisations too. Outrageous, isn't it?

And why does Belgium rank much higher than the UK in the OECD rankings when there are no private or selective schools? They don't invest THAT much more per head than the UK. So it must be down to other factors.

Belgium has the almost the highest general taxation levels in the world so they can afford it I can't imagine the poor who use local schools would be willing to pay 40% tax instead of their 10% tax level at the moment.

We expect university entrants to pay fees so why not the parents of children too instead of it all being paid from general taxation?

Those other factors don't neccesarily mean that Belgium et al have better systems than ours. It might mean that, but it might also mean that they have less problems than we do, or less socio economic diversity. Those countries may generally have a stronger work ethic than we do, they may value education more so that there is only a very small and insignificant minority that is disaffected