Private schools - want to shout IT'S NOT FAIR!

[Yermina]

Went to PIL last night and heard all about sil's children's school. One of her boys is already attending a fantastic private school. Just found out his two brothers have also got places at very good private schools.

In the mean time my dc's are in classes of 31 at the local state school. My youngest needs additional support (sn) but isn't statemented (diagnosed but no statement) so doesn't get it. SIL's middle child has got into a mainstream private school that has outstanding support for children with dyslexia, which he's been diagnosed with. And will be in classes of 18.

Our middle ds is musically talented but there is really poor provision for music teaching at his state school and very few children there are learning an instrument. We struggle to pay for music lessons for him outside school.

Is it wrong of me to feel eaten up with jealousy and anger at the unfairness of a school system which privileges the children of well-off people so openly and seemingly without anyone else seeing it as something that's wrong or deeply, deeply unfair?

How would you explain to a group of children: you lot over here will have XXXX spent on your education, and lots of opportunity to develop your talents, and you lot over there will have about half as much spent on you, and will have much less attention from the teacher because there'll be twice as many of you in the class. Oh, and you kids with sn or specific gifts - unless your parents have money, you probably won't get the help you need to thrive educationally.

I know it's the way the world is but at the moment I feel bitter about it. Really really bitter. And jealous

Every time I go to my PIL's and have to hear about all the amazing thing SIL's dcs are doing at their school, their academic achievements, I want to go home and hide under the duvet and cry.

We'll never, ever be able to afford private education. We'll never be able to afford to move to an area with really good state schools. We'll never be able to get our children into church schools as we're not church goers, and our local grammar schools (2) are bursting at the seams with children from the local private prep schools, who bus their students in to take the 11+ en mass.

It's just so fucking unfair. It really is. I just want to get that off my chest.

That is all.

So why can't your children go to private school? We have very limited means and my DS was diagnosed as dyslexic. The school would not acknowledge this at all and we looked at alternatives with private schooling. We were upfront about our income and we were very lucky with the level of bursary we received. I would say don't tell your children but apply for the private school that you would like, you may be surprised.

I do think the state should educate the children - I don't know what the full stop really means.

I come from a different perspective from the OP, though I can understand hers: I think she'd mainly just like her PIL to stop banging on about it!

I don't think, and have never said, that private schools should be closed down because they give an 'advantage' - I think the children who go there are probably already 'advantaged' enough! I disagree with them because they're socially divisive and emphasize an already large schism in society as well as fostering a lack of engagement between two parts of society with one another, leading to fear and resentment and misunderstanding on both sides. And yes, I think they are more significant elements in all the above than organic fruit, bedtime stories or gymn clubs. And if one didn't think they were any more important than all those things, presumably one would be quite happy to do the others and not find the £12-16k a year for that apparently insignificant little extra.

So I do find it odd when people at the same time claim 'it's no different from giving a child fruit': so presumably such a parent wouldn't consider their children were getting anything mine aren't, since they all get fed fruit, and the rest is just an equally weighted extra?

Neither do I think they're 'crack dens' (not sure where that came from!). Though for me the fact that you needn't be a trained teacher would certainly be a concern, and I also think that the much-vaunted superiority of private school teachers would look a bit less impressive if their skills were put to the test by being applied to children whose parents aren't motivated enough, or rich enough, to care that much about their child's education to send them somewhere by choice. I dislike assertions about the superiority of an education where the educator's mettle hasn't ever really been tested by teaching anyone but the rich and/or clever.

Chaz I did push and push and couldn't change it because I was up against SLT's and LEA who don't want change, they want an easy life. They warned me and other parents that we didn't want to make ourselfs unpopular with the other parents because of course they couldn't try and deal with problems without dobbing us in could they?

It's poured down to us through the schools that we don't need or want education, and that the world needs plumbers and caterers. That we can't all be high flyers and we'll make more money servicing other peoples lives. Wanting more is being eletist and we get treated like we're born into an unfair system and must be proof of what it does.

Aim low, it's harder to fail is what we get all the time along with the idea that everything is the government or the rich's fault.

What they really mean is half our funding is based on the idea that we are a failing area full of social problems, and they'll all be stuffed if we started suceeding.

Ah, I see I missed a chunk of conversation where, in response to the line about a comprehensive turning out generations of dead heroin addicts, some posters remarked that drug taking wasn't limited to the state sector. I get it.

Ubik.

I do agree about the gifted in sport, music etc.
Ime as parent of gifted musical child and wife to pro musician/ private school educator, the education in these subjects is no better than a private lesson.
If I thought it was dd would be there. I don't even think the most reknowned specialist music school in the country is suitable atm and it would be free to us and practically on our doorstep. .

Hully and word, imo it is quite possible to differentiate between what you want/feel about your own children and how you feel about society in general.

For the record:

a) I have no concerns about the combination of state school education and parental guidance that is available to my own children.

We have not been in a position to let our house purchase be guided by thoughts of education, but had to settle in a cheaper area of town; but even so, I am very happy with the provision offered and the chances it affords. I expect my children to do well (health allowing) if they use the opportunities offered.

b) This does not mean that I think the current system serves all children well or that it is good for society as a whole. Imo it leads to class divides, encourages resentment and/or smugness and makes it difficult for society to make use of all the available talent.

Ah well nit you and I are fundementally opposed then, as i believe it is the parents' responsibility to educate their child.

They may use whatever resources they choose to do so...and the state must provide one of those resources and it must be fit for purpose and of good quality.

However no parent should be bound to choose it. They are at liberty to do as they see fit, be that pay, or home educate or whatever...

I have no desire whatsoever for the state to run my life. Particularly the current administration!!!!!!

Or to put it another way: I believe that it is quite possible for a child to do well in the state system, but that the current education system encourages a them and us thinking which damages society as a whole. The fact that people like miranda are brought up to regard the majority of the population with horror can hardly be good for the cohesion of society and the same can be said for those state educated people who automatically assume that anyone from a private school is going to be a raging snob.

nit yeah sorry, someone mentioned several of their old class mates were junkies and someone else said dealers camped outside the local private school .

Amen to that wordfactory

cory miranda was taking the piss - I think you're having a mahoosive sense of humour failure .

But I am not sure I am in favour of the forcible closing of all private schools either. The unique situation in post-war Scandinavia was that the vast majority of the population had such faith in the then government that they trusted them to provide an education that would serve the people as a whole. Can't see that happening here and now.

No, saying I think the state should educate children isn't the same as saying that I think children should only be educated by the state! But I certainly think one of the things the state should do is to educate them.

Obviously I think I have a massive responsibility there too, but not everyone does think that, or might think it but be aware that they can't do it alone. So of course I think the state should educate children.

There's a bit of slippage between saying that though and saying 'the state should run my life' or that I want them educated in the ways of any given government!

ok, fair enough, let's leave miranda: I may have read her post carelessly. But I have met people in RL who genuinely are horrified when you let slip that dc are going to state school and mixing with the chavs. They do exist.

Again? Oh, boy.

I think there are private schools and private schools - some are almost unaffordable for anyone not on a stonking 6-figure salary. Others can be reached with a stretch/sacrifices.

Think twice, though, OP. We stretched, and scrimped, and in retrospect it probably WASN'T worth it. We will also be in debt till we are 98.

Unless your dcs are outgoing all-rounders/sporty/musical types, I'd really say you'd do just as well or better with private tutoring supplements/homeschooling.

As for bursaries, you have to be very much harder up than you'd have to be to contemplate the fees. There's a kind of poverty trap - can't pay the fees, not poor enough for a bursary.

Everyone shoudl read The Making of Them by Nick Duffel (I always say that) for the inextricable links between class, education, governing and the vested interests.

Then hasten to the barricades.

The whole idea of private provision of any service, when there is a free one available, is that people value extras and will pay for them.

NHS should provide basic, quality healthcare, with no frills. If you want a private room and menu choices and a consultant on call, go private.

Same for education. Stare schools provide basic learning. If you want bells and whistles such as one-on-music or math tuition, menu of extra-curricular activities, go private.

It really is up to parents to provide the best for their children, not the state. The state should ensure that no child lacks the opportunity to go to school. But it is up to parents to ensure their children achieve their full potential.

The state should not educate children. The state should provide the wherewithal from all our taxes to ensure every child everywhere has the same opportunity of a similar standard, reasonable education.

"If you believe, as many do, that private education is automatically better, how do you square it in your head that the child of the person who empties your bins or mends the potholes in the road, or looks after your poorly child in hospital gets a worse education than the child of the person who presents Dancing on Ice? Or indeed, the child of the person who removes your child's appendix?"

I posted this earlier and nobody replied. Anybody prepared to?

Sorry that should say: The state should not educate children. The state should provide the wherewithal from all our taxes to ensure every child everywhere has the same opportunity of a similar standard, reasonable education. Anything additional or different the parent wants to provide should be up to them.

This is how it is, except for the massive difference in quality of state schools according to where you are and your means to change that.

yy seeker, no one bothers with the correlation that goes with private=better...

*JustGetting8
I can understand why you feel angry. All children should be encouraged to aspire to fulfil their potential, whatever that may be.

As an aside, I also think that this country should put more value on vocational and practical skills than they do.

I don't think they dare think about it, hully.

Flatbread Tue 05-Feb-13 13:09:04
"The whole idea of private provision of any service, when there is a free one available, is that people value extras and will pay for them.

NHS should provide basic, quality healthcare, with no frills. If you want a private room and menu choices and a consultant on call, go private.

Same for education. Stare schools provide basic learning. If you want bells and whistles such as one-on-music or math tuition, menu of extra-curricular activities, go private.

It really is up to parents to provide the best for their children, not the state. The state should ensure that no child lacks the opportunity to go to school. But it is up to parents to ensure their children achieve their full potential. "

So how are you going to find highly educated people willing to do such jobs as teaching and nursing and research if it means their own children can never reach their full potential?

Well that;s kind of what i meant, justgettingon.

Sick to death of this 'basic learning' shit. Even if my daughters were only getting 'basic learning', at least they have one another, and don't kip on the sofa in the kitchenette of a 1 bedroom flat while I work 20 hours a day for them to pay to go to private school. I know which I think would be better out of 'basic learning' and 'basic living'.