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.

Being tax free isn't quite the same as a subsidy and all those who take teacher training have that training subsidised by the state - so every tax payer in the country is helping to fund that.

All state school teachers have to be formally trained - but at private schools that isn't necessarily the case. So you could say more fool the private school parents who may be paying to have their kids educted by teachers who may not be formally trained as teachers.

Saski thanks, it's interesting that people do often assume Home ed is the preserve of the middle class and yes it can be used to imply a set of things that don't actually exist, so in that sense yes it can be included if my understanding of cultural capital's correct.

BubuMarra, it seems that grammar schools in some areas are in such demand that only very bright children who also get private tuition get a place.

Thanks, chocoluvva.
As I see it, in addition to paid tutoring, parents can provide tuition as well or a child can be that bright that s/he studies on their own. It is still meritocracy. And I actually think that it's quite fair to have state of the art education that is free (at least at the point of entry) and that is what grammar schools are. But sometimes people just seem to view them as just a bit less evil than private schools which puzzles me. (Not referring to you here, just a general observation).

JustGettingOnWithIt that is interesting because in the US it's considered more the domain of religious extremists i.e. negative "cultural capital" points! I think you just have less of that in the UK.

No YANBU. I think it is totally unfair that private schools are, in effect, subsidised by having charitable status. Yes I know that there are a handful of bursaries and scholarships available, or the state school kids are occasionally bestowed a visit to their luxurious sports facilities in a half hearted attempt to justify this status but, IMO, it is a joke. They should be taxed as per any other business.

For what it's worth, I know three people who teach at private secondaries, none of whom can spell or string a grammatically correct sentence together so am dubious about the teaching being superior.

Yermina life isn't fair on many levels. It isn't possible to make a level playing field out it and I have sympathy but can't see much point by being eaten up with jealousy over what others have.

If lone parents can work nights and home educate, there must be ways for two parents sharing the load to manage if they wanted that. That?s assuming the LP?s don?t feel it?s unfair that someone with the advantge of a husband is competing with them and starting to demand they shouldn?t be allowed to, and that?s why I don?t like banning choice, because whose choices will we ban?

It's unfair that my children live in a country which provides free education and healthcare, and has relatively efficient public transport, and a reasonably fair justice system, and a safety net for them if I should die, or be otherwise unable to provide for them, and the vast majority of children in the world have no such advantages.

I think that people from European countries should not be given the best jobs in multinational companies, as that would CREATE A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD!

Our local state primary is pretty bad. It wasn't great in the past, but ok. My friend sends his daughter. He's a relatively recent immigrant and was pleased initially. He now says that it as just a temporary dumping ground for refugee kid - quite a few have serious behavioural issues (kids with weapons - and these are small kids). We have a lot of hostels here now (over the last 15 years or so, and we have 4 very large ones within half a dozen streets now) and people are moved in and out regularly. Teachers come and go with regularity, and some of the parents there work hard to pay rent somewhere else to get out of it.

I've lived here over 25 years, DH all his life. The council won't change its messed up policy of placing families in b+bs until they find them a home (which there are too few of because of the sale of council stock and lack or replenishment of the stock).

We chose private. My own state primary school was, like most of yours probably are now, ok. Dad was a real Labour man and also a lecturer. He held education up as the main target for us kids. Mum always said that he would be happy at our choice - he was fiercly protective of his family too. We didn't have weapons or police at the door at our schools. Its not about rich and poor. We don't want to have to move to god knows where to find a half decent state school.

at being able to home-school for 3 hours after a full time job. even if I could do it (and it would kill me) DH couldn't as he doesn't have 3 hours to spare every evening. And who would look after the children during the day

Our local state primary is pretty bad. It wasn't great in the past, but ok. My friend sends his daughter. He's a relatively recent immigrant and was pleased initially. He now says that it as just a temporary dumping ground for refugee kid - quite a few have serious behavioural issues (kids with weapons - and these are small kids). We have a lot of hostels here now (over the last 15 years or so, and we have 4 very large ones within half a dozen streets now) and people are moved in and out regularly. Teachers come and go with regularity, and some of the parents there work hard to pay rent somewhere else to get out of it.

I've lived here over 25 years, DH all his life. The council won't change its messed up policy of placing families in b+bs until they find them a home (which there are too few of because of the sale of council stock and lack or replenishment of the stock).

We chose private. My own state primary school was, like most of yours probably are now, ok. Dad was a real Labour man and also a lecturer. He held education up as the main target for us kids. Mum always said that he would be happy at our choice - he was fiercly protective of his family too. We didn't have weapons or police at the door at our schools. Its not about rich and poor. We don't want to have to move to god knows where to find a half decent state school.

Yes, in the interests of a level playing field we also need to ban private health insurance, private tuition, the purchase of workbooks and other homework aids, nutritional food, horizon-expanding holidays, and maybe educational toys too - unless all children can have all of these, they're history I reckon.

Saski Unfortunately all minority activities attract stereotypes, our view of US home ed is of specifically more extreme Christian groups, structured and very religious curriculum based, as the majority, here it is Middle Class, financially secure, and autonomous as a majority.

Private schools seem very stereotyped too.

Sorry I've not read all of this, but want to make my point. Will come back and reread when have time

By sending my sons to a private school I feel I am helping the state system by putting less children into it. Our local state school is bursting at the seams (another reason we use the private school, we didn't get into our local one 0.98 miles away).

Now where is that hard hat...

You'll need that hard hat, I've already been told off for using that argument willaby

Apparently it's not good enough not to be a burden, you should also be helping out these state schools as well. Not been told how so far, but just so you know

Willabywallaby I disagree. Part of the reason that schools become shite is because anyone wants better for their kid AND can afford it goes private. If the middle classes were forced to send their children to public schools, they would improve. This is not to say that I agree with outlawing private, because of the draconian laws that would be required in order to do so - but I don't think you're really helping by opting out.

No, it's not fair.

But you can't ban it, not unless you want some sort of totalitarian socialism, where you criminalise people doing the best for their children, and use the force of law to bring everyone down to the level the state can afford. If you ban private schools, then logically you should probably ban people buying children books with their own money.

I went to a comprehensive. It was fine, but I'm sure I'd have learnt much more at a top fee-paying school. Doesn't bother me.

One thing I would do, though, is stick a bit of VAT on school fees.

YABU.
However, I do understand your frustration. It would be wonderful if all children could receive first class education, with specialist teachers, small class sizes and no interruptions from unruly classmates.
Unfortunately, it's not possible, for so many reasons.
You can't blame parents who work very hard to pay for the private education, though.
Bringing everybody down to the lowest common denominator would not be the solution.

My niece has just started at a private school with all the facilities, all the after school clubs, 12 children per class, everything. The change in her has been absolutely terrifying- she seems like a little soldier.

The grass isn't always greener.

'' Part of the reason that schools become shite is because anyone wants better for their kid AND can afford it goes private. If the middle classes were forced to send their children to public schools, they would improve.''

Disagree. If we were forced to send our children to state schools, we would either home-educate or emigrate.

I don't see why people object to grammar schools in principle. They are supposed to provide a curriculum that is particularly suited to academically able children and therefore not as well suited to less academic children, who will benefit from a mix of academic and vocational subjects or from going at a slower pace.
But where children are the same except for family ability to provide tuition in entrance exams, usually by buying it, the child who has had tuiton is more likely to perform better on the tests and is therefore at an unfair advantage.

So, in oversubscribed areas even some of the bright children are disadvantaged.

Disagree. If we were forced to send our children to state schools, we would either home-educate or emigrate.
I agree, and that's why I chose the word force - most people would home- school in the face of a choice. This talk of banning private schools is silly for this reason; you'd have to pass a set of fascist laws to actually achieve the intended effect.

Labour got rid of selective education.

No they didn't, although people find it convenient to blame them. Mrs Thatcher, when Education secretary, got rid of more grammar schools than Labour did. Nor did Labour abolish the remaining grammar schools between 1997-2010.

They did however abolish assisted places, something specifically designed to allow children from less well off back grounds to attend selective, fee-paying schools

Letting a few selected poor kids go to private school doesn't make it fair, either!

"You can't blame parents who work very hard to pay for the private education, though"

Ummm, I don't!

I don't even blame those who have inherited enough money not to have mortgages, and who therefore have lots of disposable cash to spend on school fees.

Or bankers spending their giant bonuses on private schools.

Or the rich grandparents putting their children through private schools.