The answer to our private/grammar/state school angst

[Shagmundfreud]

Remove the charitable status of private schools, as this only benefits those children who would be educationally successful where ever they were schooled.

Abolish grammar schools.

Abolish external selection.

All schools to be truly comprehensive. Places allocated by lottery to get rid of post-code selection. School buses to get round transport problems. Highly structured streaming so that the brightest children could work at a fast pace, unhindered by thick or badly behaved pupils holding them back.

But all children to mingle outside class time.

And lots of one to one support for students who are working hard to move up through the streams, to support educational and social mobility.

Maximum of 20 in each class.

Teachers allocated to teach the bottom sets would receive extra money, training and support, and more non-contact time for lesson preparation.

You likey?

I'm not asking anyone to justify their existence, just their charitable status. Other businesses are liable to pay tax; why not private schools?

DSs school is run by a charitable foundation.

"More than 400 years later the Foundation supports over 43% of over 2800 current students at three independent day schools through generous means-tested bursaries amounting to over £4million a year.

Such support to families allows talented boys and girls from Croydon and further afield to be educated at three outstanding independent schools in the UK. Children are encouraged to take a full and active part in all aspects of school life - both in and out of the classroom.

The Whitgift Foundation also owns and manages three care homes, The Almshouses, Whitgift House and Wilhelmina House. These offer a range of care needs from sheltered accommodation to full nursing care.

The Carers' Information Service provides information, support, advice and training to adults caring for those with disability, illness or frailty. Its role in Croydon is constantly expanding and the Foundation is pleased that this valuable service to the wider community is now firmly established as part of our programme of care to the community in Croydon.

Community links

The three schools work effectively with the wider community through a range of projects as part of a significant community service programme as well as hosting numerous events and activities open to the public. Further details of the school calandars are available on the schools' websites, and newsletters."

Businesses pay tax on their profits, not their turnover. Charities don't make profits. Non-profit private schools are charities. They don't make any money.

"All Lower Sixth students have a term of timetabled Tuesday afternoons and Upper Sixth may choose to work on a Friday afternoon. Activities involve:

gardening and housework for senior citizens
teaching English, Maths and Communications to children at Ashburton School
teaching sport to junior school pupils using the Trinity facilities
conservation work at the Heathfield Ecology Centre
painting murals at junior schools
writing a newsletter for Fairtrade Croydon
helping in the Trinity gardens
reading to and playing scrabble with the residents of homes for the elderly
teaching music therapy to Autistic Spectrum Disorder students
part of a Task Force which tackles large gardening and painting projects at Community Centers and schools"

"In the last year over 9000 hours of community work has been completed by Trinity students"

because so few out of the popualtion go to the handful of grammers around, and because few go to private schools, i think you are getting already a true pic of comps.

It is really truelly comprehensive and its utterly crap and shite.

i really dont get this block on the 11+.

the level of education at 11 is basic, basic stuff.

i just dont get people saying its full of highly tutored middle class kids.

what is stopping any parents simply tutoring themsevles? some kids pick up stuff very quickly!

elizaregina-
What is the point of a test where achieving 95% doesn't get a place? Or where there is 11 candidates per place so making one silly mistake costs you a place? I don't think the 11+ test is "basic, basic stuff" at all.

My son is leaving Y6 with level 6 results and probably wouldn't get into the superselective grammar in our old town. We decided to opt out of that race and moved to an area where he can attend an outstanding comp (85% GCSE A*-C inc English and Maths) but it's not a viable choice for many.

Did you tutor for a super selective?

My ds will leave primary school probably with a 5a for Maths, a 5 for science and a level 6 for literacy. His reading age is at the top of the normally tested scale. He failed the 11+ catastrophically. My dd, who got. 2 5s and a 4 in her SATS passed. This is a good selection process exactly how?

There is no quick fix solution.

Lotteries disadvantage children allocated to far away schools.
Catchments disadvantage children who can't afford to live in certain areas.
Grammar schools disadvantage children who can't pass the 11+
Selective schools disadvantage children who don't meet the set criteria.
Independent schools disadvantage children who can't afford the fees or not able to get a bursary
Specialise school disadvantage those int he school who don't want to do the specialist subject.
Religious schools disadvantage children not in that religion.

Truely comprehensive schools would not stream. The whole point is that the whole school, including the classes, are not streamed and setted.

The only real solution would be to give every individual child their own individual school set up entirely for their needs and their preferences.

It's not going to happen.

And no - a bright child will NOT always do well anywhere.

I'm not asking anyone to justify their existence, just their charitable status. Other businesses are liable to pay tax; why not private schools?

They will never run as for profits so will never pay tax, and you can't charge VAT on education in the EU. The charitable loss to the government is about £100m I believe so its not a big win.

But, I think the reason why successive governments walk away from this issue is that:

(i) The people who will be hurt are those scrimping and saving, not the rich. The schools will continue

(ii) If the schools lose the status they will stop bursaries to poorer people that they currently bring in as a charitable requirement, this is not a small number.

So the government will have been seen to have removed the ladder for the most ambitious - and floating - middle class voters. But IMO the biggest reason is:

(iii) At that point the people using the schools wil start to agitate with a lot more justification about not paying tax to the state for schooling (or at least getting an offset), and c 600,000 students x (say) £12k pa average pa is c £7 billion up for argument.

But a bright child is more likely to do well anywhere than a less bright child is.

I don't believe that they are.

Was that to me, soup dragon?

Er... yes.

I think that the far ends of the ability scale are both inadequately served by a comprehensive state education.

Sorry, soup dragon, that sounded chippy- it wasn't meant to be- I just wasn't sure whether you were addressing me or someone else!

I agree that "a bright child will do well anywhere" is a bit of a sweeping statement- but is more likely to be true than if the saying was "a not so bright child will do well anywhere" if you are bright, you are more likely to be able to go somewhere towards filling in any gaps in your education yourself ( not that you should have to) But the less bright are the ones that really need the best teachers and so on.

"But a bright child is more likely to do well anywhere than a less bright child is."

I think a bright child who wants to fit in to a poor school, where achievement ridiculed by their peers, is likely to dumb down. This is more likely to happen to a child who goes to a secondary modern, in a grammar school area than at a comprehensive, I suspect.

Yes drag everyone down to the same level, that'll work

SoupDragon, I disagree. But maybe I am just very lucky with the school DS1 attends, and my younger DC will attend. I have a high achiever, and academically average child and a low achieving child (dyslexia). I think the state comprehensive will serve the high achiever and the low achiever best (but the school is dyslexia friendly). If I were going to send any of them to an independent school it would be the average one. I think he would probably benefit the most from smaller classes and being encouraged to work a bit harder.

Who said anything about dragging anyone down?

seeker- because the 11+ is testing for academic potential not academic attainment

No, me no likey.

Here's my suggestion. Stop focusing on private schools/grammar schools. The "creaming off" of a few top performing children has a miniscule impact, compared with the impact of the bottom performing children on the rest of the class.

We need to focus on the children whose academic performance is at the bottom. That might be for all sorts of reasons - because they have SN, or because they are from a non English speaking background and don't speak good English, or because they have a difficult home life, or because they are just not academic at all.

If we take those children out of the "mainstream" classrooms, that will instantly benefit the remaining children because the teacher's time and attention will not be spent on those low performers.

Meanwhile the low performing children could be given small group/one on one attention to figure out what will help them best. Clearly, this will be different on a case by case basis. It may involve taking them out of school altogether. It may involve something simple like extra English lessons. It may involve home help like sorting out care for their ill parent. Who knows. But the focus needs to be on these children, rather than on attacking those who are performing well and ensuring they are thrown into the mix.

"I blame shite tabloid culture, junk food and mass entertainment for the buggering up of the working classes in the UK."

I broadly agree with you here OP. Plus of course the dire lack of jobs these days, and long-term unemployment funded by benefits, have both had a dismal effect on aspirations.