to wonder why David Cameron is sending his daughter to a state secondary school?

[sexonthebeach]

He went to Eton and his wife went to an exclusive private school. Both have done brilliantly well, so why are they sending their daughter to a state school, particularly as most London state schools are apparently a bit rough.

On the one hand, I applaud them, as they are showing support for the state sector, and of course the standards should be sufficiently high that no parent should feel they have to spend £££s on opting out. On the other hand, are they just using their child for their political agenda.

Miriam Clegg has also made similar comments ie that their DC will not be educated privately, as why would you pay so much for the privilege of your DC to take their maths exam in a tailcoat? For some reason, Miriam comes over as more sincere, but I still can't help wondering if this is part of the Cleggs' political agenda, given that Nick went to a top 'public school'. Miriam, not being British, probably can't understand why the Brits want to send their kids away to boarding school, in any event, instead of bringing them up yourself - it seems to be something peculiarly British, going back centuries to the days when the noble families would send their children to the households of other noble families to be brought up.

Anyway, I've digressed. Do you think the Camerons are being responsible parents or being unreasonable to use their child to further their political agenda?

Nobody said he was. It's a straw target.

"I always feel slightly uneasy about the implication that middle-class white children benefit from being able to mix with kids from disadvantaged or minority ethnic backgrounds - as if the job of those children is to provide white middle-class children with the necessary social skills to equip them for adult life. What about those kids - the black kids and the poor kids? What are they getting out of it?"

And a pretty dodgy assumption that those talking about the benefits of mixed back grounds in school are talking on behalf of white middle class children. Mine are the black kids you speak of. And though a bit middle class (educated parents) they are certainly not at all well off economically!

Schools should reflect the area in which the children live and grow up

in deepest Wiltshire that will be almost completely white English
in parts of central London it will be dozens of nationalities

the scary thing about selective schools is that they segregate by one of many means
and keep kids segregated from the rest of the community - by parental wealth, parental religion or ability to pass a test

comprehensive schools do not segregate
so the children are free to make their own choices
(exactly why lots of pushy and religious types do not like them)

Did Cameron mention anything about comprehensives or did he just say state? I am thinking there is quite a lot of wiggle room there...

The state school - yes, a comprehensive (hmm, with the caveat of church-going criteria or ability to pass language aptitude test) - that's closest to Downing Street is Grey Coat. One of the most sought-after state schools in London. That's handy, isn't it.

It probably has better social networking than Eton.

Ha, merrymouse, it probably does. I find it enraging that - as when Gove sent his kid there this year - it'll be presented as 'bravely risking the state school system for the first time in Conservative history'. When in fact it gets fantastic results and parents all over London would murder their granny to get their child a place there.

For me, social/ethnic mix no concern other than that we prefer some kind of mix to none. We opted to send dd to a much more ethnically mixed comp further away as results much better than local option and vast majority of parents seem thoroughly involved/encouraging/motivated. Half her friends are at least bilingual and all are ambitious.

Maybe they didn't enjoy their own private education or derive particular value from it?

not that I believe that, I think like most people it is simply a PR question

""she is actually very unconventional. She went to a day school."

Hakluyt and Nippiesweetie.
This was written by Johann Hari who has since been exposed as a fantasist, a liar and a plagiarist. He spent many many hours writing derogatory comments on people's Wikipedia pages and also had a 'sock puppet' under whose name he wrote further derogatory remarks about anyone he disagreed with.
He probably made up that 'unconventional .....went to day school' comment - as he made up many other comments, or copied them from someone else.

That's a shame, dapplegrey. It was very funny. Thanks for the heads up.

No, no dapplegrey, you don't get away with that. What a weasley word that 'probably' is. Here is the article where Hari (who admittedly was a deplorable journalist) uses the quote.

www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-cameron-is-wily-but-hes-beatable-907801.html

As you can see he was referring to a hagiographic book, Cameron on Cameron written by Dylan Jones - a fan and then editor of GQ - who followed Cameron around for a year. Risible though the quote is, it was written by a supporter of Cameron, not a detractor.

poster MrsMcColl

It is brave most state schools are shit compared to private sector and I don't even feel that outstanding schools get any were near even avrage private schools it's only really grammar and chruch schools that get any were near and I suppose labour will close them all but nit before sending their own children their

Thefishewife-that is such a stupid post.

I can see why you'd need to believe that, if you're forking out the fees. But it's really not true. Sorry...

Also, if you're not able to be much help to your kids academically yourself, you might feel the need to pay fees. Confidence is a big factor - in your children and yourself.

Thefishewife - did you actually have any secondary education at all, given the amount of spelling errors in your last post? You don't sound like a very sophisticated buyer of educational services TBH!

Nippie - in that case my apologies for not checking the source. I read it in a Hari piece in which he, Hari, made no mention of Dylan Jones but merely quoted it, saying it came from 'an interview'.
I don't know how to do links, but if you google 'Hari Samantha Cameron day school' the piece comes up.

Some time later he was exposed for attacking people via Wikipedia entries and plagiarism. It was in an article about this (I can't remember where, possibly the Telegraph) that the author suggested that Hari had made up the comment about Sam Cameron and day school on the grounds that he'd made up so much other stuff and he hated the Tory party.
Anyway, thank you for the source.
Hakluyt - ignore my earlier comment!

thefishwife
glad your parents got their money's worth

Dapplegrey Apology accepted and, like I conceded, Hari did turn out to be a dishonest journalist, just not in this case.

Oh, fishy, fishy fishwife.

There is an interesting article in the Times today (sorry, my IT skills not up to links, clearly a gap in my education!), called 'Who will tell the truth about local comprehensives?'

The article addresses the pros and cons of private v comprehensive and the 'visceral anxieties' people have about local comprehensives, as well as the positives of learning 'independent thinking', rather than being 'spoon-fed'. Independent research shows that the most tangible benefit of private schools is that they are better at getting children into university. On the other hand, one parent claimed to have developed 'reverse snobbery', as the private school parents 'are a less interesting bunch of people. I feel that I am surrounded by bankers and estate agents, not scientists and creatives'.

Ultimately, the message was quite uplifting. In a world that is becoming ever more competitive, parents feel more anxious in justifying their choices, for secondary education in particular. However, the pupils are ultimately the best advert for any school and ultimately, 'It's not about league tables or glossy brochures, it's 'Here are the kids, this is what they think, these are their values, make your mind up'.'

Rich smart kids will do well wherever they go to school.

As do lots of poor smart kids.

Well if that were true then we wouldn't need to worry about the standards in state schools at all, would we? Let's just scrap pupil premium, burseries and grants for uni students from poor backgrounds, and remove household income from the equation when calculating fees. And make it a truly level playing field by insisting that all prospective students get exactly the same number of UCAS scores at the point of entry for uni.

Rich smart kids will do well wherever they go to school.

And rich thick ones…

and this is not true either - they just have an easier time compared to poor, thick kids because they are more likely to receive early intervention and support with SENs, less likely to turn to crime and more likely to have family who are able to prop them up financially when necessary, in adulthood. They don't all end up in top jobs, not by a long shot.

I imagine Dave is fairly uncomfortable about sending his children to state school, but it would be political suicide to send them to a top public school these days, even for a Tory. He is obviously trying to shake off/play down the whole Eton Toff thing.

But let's face it, she's not going to be going to some failing sink estate hellhole with metal detectors on the door and a resident police officer, is she?

Just like Tony Blair's children she'll be in a state school that most ordinary mortals could only dream of getting their children into, and once there the standards will be up there with a good private education.

And of course it's a primary school at this stage, so there is precious little at stake, and it's easy to do extension work at home should it be deemed necessary. The acid test will be at secondary level. But he probably won't be PM by then, so he can do what he likes without fear of scrutiny.