Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to be amused that the more exclusive a school is..

525 replies

seeker · 29/04/2012 10:02

.. by faith, fees, ability, aptitude..whatever- the more diverse a community the school's parents say it is.

OP posts:
pianomama · 02/05/2012 23:40

Independent schools offer a choice - why shouldn't they? If you remove the choice, overall standards will go down. An then it will be morally correct , equal and fair. And less diverse. And crap.
You would not deny your DC nutritious healthy food you can afford because it is not fair on people who can't ? Why is education different?

Nospringflower · 02/05/2012 23:47

Havent read the whole thread cos its too long but have read a fair few posts.
I always think when I read about people sending their children to private school because its better, it depends how you define better. For me good is about diversity and experiencing and interacting with people from all sorts of social class and you are not going to get that in the private sector. So , for me private schools are not better they are worse. Academically/choice wise they might have things going for them but for me that is less important than how they get on with people. It is an individual thing.

ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 02/05/2012 23:53

Nospringflower - I suggest you read the thread

There has been a lot of discussion of the relative importance of economic diversity versus ethnic / religious / cultural diversity and how the weight you place on each of these may vary depending on whether or not you are from an ethnic minority.

Nospringflower · 03/05/2012 00:00

Chaz - I've read enough to get that you and I disagree.

ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 03/05/2012 00:08

Its not about agreeing or disagreeing its about accepting that different types of diversity matter to different people.

Economic diversity may matter most you whereas ethnic and religious diversity matter more to me. I think the issue is whether one type of diversity really more valuable than the other or do we accept that some people choose one type of diversity over another based on their personal experience.

Noqontrol · 03/05/2012 00:23

It doesn't mean that a child is not going to have any understanding of economic diversity because they go to private school. My dd goes to private school. Ive worked hard to pull myself up out of the sink school environment and I want her to have something better. Dd's local school is a sink school, and that was what she was offered, which is why I made the financial push for private school.

When dd comes home from her private school, she still gets to experience her working class roots with us and all our working class friends and family firsthand. Diversity does not have to be achieved solely in a school environment. Children have plenty of opportunity to experience other areas of life outside school.

When i went to my lovely sink school, strangely enough i also mixed with children from the local grammar schools and the private schools. i didnt notice anything different at the time, nor did they. It was only much later on after i had left school that i realised i had got a shite (sink school ) education and they hadn't.

This thread is not about the different types of diversity, it's just another bashing from seeker about private schools. Again. Ffs.

TheBossofMe · 03/05/2012 01:00

I disagree, noqontrol I don't think this thread is about seeker bashing at all, I think it's a really interesting debate with lots of different perspectives about what diversity means to different people, each of whom have different influences. I for one completely respect seekers pov that to her economic diversity is more important than ethnic. I just would like the same respect afforded to my views that for my child and for many others from ethnic minorities, we may value ethnic diversity more.

seeker · 03/05/2012 07:24

I did not intend this thread to be about private schools. I intended it to be about exclusive schools.

I have not said that economic diversity is more important than ethnic diversity. I actually though I avoided using the term economic diversity at all. I meant to say "socio- economic diversity" a meaningful difference - money and social class do not always match. I did say that a black middle class child from a leafy suburb is likely to have more in common with a white middle class child from a leafy suburb than either them have in common with a disadvantaged working class child from the rough end of the Medway towns. And the fact that black people on here are saying that their children are having a better experience in private schools surely goes to support this point?

This is not to deny the overt and covert racism, or the experience of black people in our inherently racist society.

What I am saying is that the class divide, which is particularly reinforced by those exclusive schools which do not select by income (the middle classes are very good at playing the system to their advantage) is the great unspoken elephant the room. While all the privilege and opportunity for gaining privilege is in the hands of a small minority then our society will
remain unequal. And, crucially, the status quo will remain.

I also think that it is very easy to tick the box marked diversity. Many organisations do it. Our very socially diverse but monocultural primary school was delighted when my niece joined- her mother is Spanish, and we could finally put a number in the box marked EAL. And when 2 half Norweigan sisters joined shortly after, the Head's joy was unconfined.

OP posts:
TheBossofMe · 03/05/2012 07:37

seeker you are totally missing the point. Its not about having a better experience because of the class similarity. We have a better experience when we are one of many ethnic minorities, so harder to be picked on constantly for being the only one or one of few, and more people that are happy to play with the Bengali kid because they too are "outsiders" in some way (usually also from some kind of minority - my friends from school were respectively Punjabi, Sri Lankan, Kenyan, Jewish, Jewish and very geeky musician, Russian and freakishly tall, Polish, black of Nigerian descent, and two white "English" kids one of whom was a goth and one of whom was just very odd. What bound us what not our middle-classness, it was our "outsider status" We are still friends today. I had very few friends, and certainly no close friends who were the average white middle class kids in the school.

The class divide is the elephant in your room. In mine, it is the racial divide. Also the gender divide. We are products of our experience you see, and you seem unwilling to really really listen to and understand others experience. Listen more carefully. Don't assume that we are backing up your point when we are not.

Still don't think you're a racist, though!

TheBossofMe · 03/05/2012 07:43

That made it sound like I think that socio-economic divide isn't important, apologies, that isn't what I mean. If you think about it, bottom of the pile are ethnic minority, poor women when it comes to social equality in the UK. Rough ride if you happen to fall into that grouping.

LittleWhiteMice · 03/05/2012 08:30

can i ask how some of you can be so blase about sending your children somewhere exclusive? shouldnt education be inclusive rather than exclusive?

TheBossofMe · 03/05/2012 08:34

seeker let me tell you why my parents really value education. Its an Asian perspective that rings bells with many of my British-Asian friends. I think it might interest you since I think you are generally interested in education, yes?

My father is only a few generations removed from scratching in bins and scavenging on Indian streets for food. Real grinding poverty. And only a couple removed from domestic servitude (aka slavery). His great-grandfather however struck lucky - he was a houseboy (urgh, what a hideous word) to a family who were a little different from the Raj norm - they spotted his innate intelligence, and paid for him to receive an education through to college level. This was a golden opportunity that few could dream of, and he worked his backside off late into the night every night, making sure he graduated top of his class. Who would waste such a chance?

With that step up, he was able to secure a job as a clerk, since he could read and write in 3 different languages, including, crucially, English. He received a salary, was able to marry, and to raise children who also went to school. They all also worked their butts off to make the most of the opportunity education afforded and made it to University (or equivalent for Indians in those days), eventually becoming doctors, lawyers, bankers and teachers. And the cycle repeated itself with the next generation, and the next, each climbing a little further away from the dungheap with every exam passed.

Social mobility was what education promised - a door to a world that they otherwise had no hope of accessing. So that's one reason why my family at least value education, because we don't forget what it has done for our family. Without it, Slumdog Millionnaire could have been my real life.

So my family rates schools where children work hard and achieve amazing exam success with no distraction from those who just can't be arsed. We value schools where bullying and the misery of being alone is less likely to be a distraction from studying - because that's what school is for in my parents eyes. Social mixing, life lessons, etc - you do that outside school (albeit my school friends were so diverse we did it in school as well) - school was for studying and not for anything else.

I'm a bit less hardcore myself, but would still be very pissed off if my DD didn't work really reall hard to achieve her very best, and would absolutely look for a school where she isn't an outsider with no mates, because who can study and achieve when you are under extreme emotional pressure.

Will post about my mother's experience later - also offers an interesting but diferent reason why we value education.

TheBossofMe · 03/05/2012 08:40

LittleWhiteMice read the thread. Nobody is (as far as I remember) boasting about how exclusive their child's school is. The very opposite - inclusive means ethnically inclusive as well as socially, you know.

I wonder if there are many really truly inclusive schools in the UK? That are socio-economically, ethnically, religiously inclusive, inclusive to those with SENs, to those who are academically able (offering them stretch opportunities) and those who are sporty, musical, dramatic etc, doing the same for those pupils. That includes not having their catchment area defines as one that captures mainly the white middle class, or the Bengali etc.

No idea, but I suspect there aren't many.

Bletchley · 03/05/2012 09:10

There aren't. And to assume that "a true comprehensive" is as you describe is misguided. Seeker's idea of "true comprehensives" only exists in cloud cuckoo land which is why her constant criticism of the choices made by others winds people up.

seeker · 03/05/2012 09:20

"I wonder if there are many really truly inclusive schools in the UK? "

Very few. If any. But there are loads of really truly exclusive ones!

OP posts:
happygardening · 03/05/2012 09:23

"What I am saying is that the class divide, which is particularly reinforced by those exclusive schools which do not select by income (the middle classes are very good at playing the system to their advantage)"
I'm a bit baffled here what are these "exclusive schools" selecting by?
Im assuming seeker you are referring to Eton/Harrow (Im not a fan of either) but I'm sorry to spoil your socialist prejudices but in the 21st century neither select by who you or your family are both are pretty academically selective and in the case of Eton very academically selective.

TheBossofMe · 03/05/2012 09:28

seeker very few if any.

So what's the difference between a bit exclusive and very exclusive? I don't see any. They are still "discriminating" against some. I mean, a school that discriminates against people on the grounds of inclusiveness to those with SEN isn't any better than a school which discriminates on the grounds of race and SEN, is it? Its just semantics.

I suspect that for a lot of people, whether or not they can live with how exclusive a school is is directly proportional to the likelihood of the discriminating factor to affect them personally. Which is probably why you don't think racially exclusive is as bad as socio-economically.

TheBossofMe · 03/05/2012 09:29

Sorry - the first sentence should have been a quotation.

rosettes · 03/05/2012 09:37

I wonder how many very rich people your children know seeker? I'm thinking none. What a shame for them that they will never experience all the diverse sectors of our socio economic society!

LeQueen · 03/05/2012 09:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 03/05/2012 09:54

rosettes surely that only proves the point: the answer would surely be 'not as many as if the rich children didn't go to private schools!'

Happygardening I think she means grammar schools, rather than Eton and Harrow.

LeQueen · 03/05/2012 09:55

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

AbsofAwesomeness · 03/05/2012 09:58

excellent post Boss.

Ultimately, it depends on what you value most for your child. If you think that an excellent academic education and an environment where your child's abilities can be developed as much as possible, then you're more likely to send your child to the best school available to you, either by trying to get them into a grammar or good church school or going the private route, if you can afford it.
If, you're not as bothered about that or you value your child mixing with economically, ethnically and religiously diverse children, then you send them to the comp.

I totally agree that it is a travesty that the three most powerful men (and also that it's men) in the country went to the same school, and have a limited experience of life outside of a cossetted world - but it's not just down to schooling. It's very much down to the political system - what are the chances of someone like Obama becoming Prime Minister in the UK? VERY slim. It's not just about the schooling system, it's about problems with the society as a whole.

happygardening · 03/05/2012 10:03

But why would seeker mean a grammar school her Dc is at one? That doesn't make sense! She also made this comment following on from the one about exclusive schools:
"While all the privilege and opportunity for gaining privilege is in the hands of a small minority then our society will remain unequal."
Which maybe I misinterpreted but I take it to be a dig a our current Eton/Westminster educated government.

wordfactory · 03/05/2012 10:07

Therer are hardly any true comprehensives in the UK. Most areas are scewed by independent schools, or grammars, or faith schools, or one town near me has an absurd number of home edders. There's alos the old post code trick.

So the idea that seeker can excuse her own use and pursuit of an exclusive school, but no one else can is the biggest load of BS.

seeker I really think you need to look at your own integrity. You are finger wagging at the decisions of others, while making silly excuses for your own similar choices. I have heard you say that you want to be 'part of the solution' to the unfair system. Could you explain how you are going to do that?