To think private schools should be banned?

[BethanyBoobs]

Why should someone have a better education just because their parents have money? Why should someone have a better chance of getting into university because their parents paid for their education? It makes me feel uncomfortable that people can buy their kids an upper hand when it comes to education.

I feel the same way about private health care too.

IMO private schools should be banned. Everyone should have the same chances when it comes to their education.

Because NancyJones that is the most obvious answer and to argue it isn't is impossible.

I'm starting to think that a lot of people on this thread have no idea what a large independent day school is like. If it's not academically selective then it is essentially like a large high achieving comp except for the bells and whistles in terms of facilities (ie what the fees can pay for that the state couldn't) If it is academically selective then much the same accept the kids will all be fairly bright.

Most parents who are paying are sending their kids to these sorts of school. All this talk of elitism and cabinet members and 'who you know' is a world away a nothing like the reality for most kids privately educated.

People don't want to address the inequality between state schools because then they'd have to admit that some parents are not very good at parenting, that some parents don't bother to help with homework, or make books available, or teach their children manners, or expect good behaviour. And people with socialist attitudes tend to not want to do that.

Unreasonable to think that they're probably a malign influence? Not really.

Unreasonable to think that their charitable status [& consequent taxpayer subsidy] is outrageous & should have been scrapped years ago? Certainly not.

Unreasonable to suggest an outright prohibition? Yup.

Totally agree Nancy

Woowooowl is right about the parental involvement / disengaged aspect. The first state school that one of my children went to had many parents who were simply not interested. At one group meeting for parents of reception aged children I remember two of the parents complaining and swearing at the teachers because we were all asked to spend 10 minutes a WEEK helping their children learn numbers one to 10 with some equipment provided by the school (numicon). It wasn't that the parents were innumerate and unable to help, they said they didn't have a spare 10 minutes catch week and they were already giving 10 minutes up each week to do reading with their child. None of the complaining parents worked so I'm not sure why they felt that they didn't have 10 spare minutes during the week.
Closing private schools will not change the attitudes of those parents, nor raise those children's learning potential or opportunity because the chances are that none of the private school kids would end up in those state schools with high numbers of disengaged parents.

At private schools parental disengagement does not seem to have a massive impact on children though. There are zillions of private school parents who leave it all to the school. One of the reasons some state schools do fail some children, imo, is that there are such low expectations of those with supposedly crap parents. I do agree with Wilshaw on that, though not on everything by any means.

Parental disengagement at some state schools can be very different from parental disengagement at private schools though. A parent who is paying £10k for their child's education is clearly interested in their child's education and whether they take an active role in providing hands on support or not the child will know that their parent is interested in them doing well at school and that their parent is interested in their education. The child who hears his parent swearing at teachers because they have been asked to spend 10 minutes with them doing math isn't getting a positive message about the value of education.
I do not think that not having the time / ability to practically help your child with homework is quite the same as letting the child know that education is worthless and a waste of time and not worth giving up 10 minutes of Jeremy Kyle for. The message that the child receives from his parents about the importance of education is very significant.

I completely agree with that Impatient. My mum is the perfect example of a parent who highly valued education and placed a lot of importance on it, but despite the fact that I went to private school, she had no idea how to support my education having left school at 14 with no qualifications herself.

I agree with you too impatient in thinking that there is a difference in kind between those two situations. But I think you will find that the vast vast majority of parents at even so called deprived state primaries are very keen for their children to do well at school, especially in the early years. A few not so much but some get disaffected along with their children as time passes, ime. In any case, I feel that the best schools, state or private, take the patents out of the equation and have high expectations of every child no matter what their background or personal circumstances.

It can be very difficult to take parents out of the equation though, and I'm not really sure that doing that would be a positive thing for the majority of schools.

Parents will always be children's first educators, and we shouldn't need schools to have a bigger influence over children than parents do. Schools should be able to provide the academic support that parents can't OP won't provide, but the children who need that will still be disadvantaged compared to those whose parents can help them academically.

Schools need parents to support them over homework, and especially over behaviour and expectations. It's easy to say that schools should have high expectations of behaviour, but if the parents don't share those expectations, then they will not teach their children to respect what teachers say and the discipline they try to instil. You can't expect schools to ensure that outcomes are the same for children whose parents have high expectations and for children whose parents don't. There aren't enough school hours in the day, and nor should there be.

As for parental involvement. I think we are discussing very different things. Reading to a child or making sure they go to bed on time, after all -- toilet training their toddlers, is one thing? Schools cant really do much about it. However, its hardly up to parents how the school is managed, what sort of staff they hire, how they deal with things like bullying, etc.

Also, for those children in boarding school parental involvement is down to minimum.

If it's not academically selective then it is essentially like a large high achieving comp except for the bells and whistles in terms of facilities

One of those 'comps' that won't let you in if you can't pay? Ah yes, I know those.

At private schools parental disengagement does not seem to have a massive impact on children though. There are zillions of private school parents who leave it all to the school.

This seems inconsistent with the parents I know, and the forums on this website. It seems like the teachers at private schools feel overwhelmed by parental over-involvement.

Sorry, I don't understand your post. My point is that in terms of day to day that is very much what it's like for the students. Yes, their parents are paying which is why they have the amazing enhanced facilities but other than that it there is little difference. It is vastly removed from a traditional British public school.

Truffle, it's much the same for teachers at high achieving state schools. I know my friends who have taught with me in deprived areas then moved to teach in much more affluent areas have been stunned by how often the parents are in asking for hw policies and copies of half termly planning etc.

Certainly interested and involved parents who are internet savvy and have a clear expectation of what their kids should be doing are not the preserve of the private sector.

Sure, but I didn't suggest that was the case.

No, I know. Sorry, that post was more a nod in agreement with you.

Long thread, so I haven't read it all.

There would be no need for 'private' schools, if all schools offered the same level of excellent education. My DS is in year 4 currently no I know a lot can change in 2 years, but our 4 local schools are very poor. 2 in special measures and the other 2 require improvement. Behaviour at all 4 schools is a major concern.

I don't feel that I have any choice to send my DS private and I am certainally not wealthy. I am a single Mum, but have worked hard over the years to get myself to a position where I can send my DS private. It will be a huge struggle, but I have no other options. My DS is very bright and loves school and I don't want that to change with the possibility of him attending a poor local school where behaviour is a major concern.

I scrimped and worked ten hour days to send ds to a private prep school. I am not a rich parent by any means. Micheal Gove would secretly love to banish all private schools, and quietly bring state schools into privatisation. It's parental personal choice which school to send their children to state or private.

Also, for those children in boarding school parental involvement is down to minimum.

But the schools staff take on the role of parenting during the boarding days and nights as they are 'loco parentis' during those times. Even when the children are at boarding school they still understand the expectations that their parents have and the consequences of not behaving in the manner expected whilst at school. A child at boarding school (the vast majority of privately educated children don't board anyway) still understands that his parents are paying for his education and are bothered about his education enough to pay the huge sums. A child whose parents are at home everyday watching Jeremy Kyle and ignoring their every waking moment and sending the message that education is a waste of time (which is not the majority of state educated kids by any means) is not getting the same message as the child at boarding school.
We are talking about very small minorities of children on both sides of the fence here because not many children board full time and not many children have parents who are totally uninterested and disengaged.

No it isn't up to a parent how a school decides on it's bullying policy, amount of homework to be done per week etc etc etc.

Surely parents have a right to send their children to a school that has values they agree with?

closing private schools will not rid the country of elite schools, it will instead create more elite state schools.

If there's going to be selection I'd rather it was on ability, not money.

It won't be based on ability it will be based on catchment areas. Really expensive catchment areas.