To wonder what chamgain shami Chakrabarti drinks

[Thefishewife]

It emerged last week that Baroness Chakrabarti’s son won a place at the £18,000-a-year Dulwich College in south London after sitting a tough entrance exam.
Critics say it shows she believed selective education is fine for those who can pay for it – but not for parents who cannot afford it.

Maybe it's Moët 🍾🍾🍾

I know a few rich lefties who woulnd never send their children to private school

They are lucky enough to be able to afford to live in catchment areas with great schools

It's easy to have these choices when your wealth allows you to

it is wild hypocrisy!

Problem is they tel us proles we don't need private or grammar because state schools are so good now a days

And that f you have grammers all the bright kids will leave and you leave the bright children behind

Well at the moment only the poor bright children have been left because all the fucking wealthy bright ones are in frigging dulwich collage

You don't get to tell foolthe working class that the local school are awsome unless you are willing to put your money were your mouth is

Chakrabarti's remarks on selective education weren't that no one needs it because all non-selective education is fantastic. Nothing of the sort. She's reported as saying that selectivity is damaging to the kids who "fail" at 11.

She got herself into a bit of a hole this morning. Apparently living in a big house and eating nice food while you have homeless neighbours using food banks is analogous to sending your son to an academically selective school instead of a comprehensive. Er...

her wealth & self described privilege enable her to have completely free choice - she could move, stay put, chose state, chose private, selective, non selective. Her wealth & privilege ensure that regardless of her child's place of education he will do far better than average (both income & maternal education being important factors in a child's achievement). Despite this she has chosen doubly selective education - that says something about her.

I'm a rich leftie. I won't send my kids to private school, or tutor them through a grammar school exam; they'll go to our local comprehensive, which is where I went.

I don't believe a parent's wealth should be the primary determiner of a child's academic success, I don't believe in two-tier systems, and I don't believe in patronising scholarships for one or two bright kids from poor backgrounds.

What if your local comp was absolute shite? Would you still be happy to send your children there for their formative years?

And what monied middle class do tells me one thing

its the best education or they wouldn't be doing it and there is no way they will get my vote to stop my son having the same and there children

So screw them

I had a look at results for the schools in Southwark which seems to be the authority covering Dulwich. There are loads of schools where High Achievers are getting the same average scores as in grammars. Even the one with the lowest score (360) is not that far behind your average grammar.

What's so utterly depressing is not whether she's a hypocrite (frankly I don't much care) - but that she seems to have an image of state comprehensives which is totally out-of-date.

My education was also sacrificed on the altar of my parents' socialist principles. I resent them for it. I'd have been more successful and, more importantly, happier elsewhere.

I hope it made my parents proud/happy because at least it was worth something. It made me sad/unhappy for 7 years.

My secondary school was not shite - but I was bullied for 5 years solidly. My parents could have put me in for the 11+ - it had been discontinued for some parts of the grammar school's catchment, to turn my school from a secondary modern to a comprehensive, but I could have done the 11+, if my parents had requested it.

They didn't, and I still wonder how much better my school life would have been, if my welfare had mattered more than their principles.

But if there were no grammar schools or private schools then those in power would make sure that state schools were good as their children would need to use them.

agree op,cant believe how it all blows over in couple of days and is all forgotten about

i feel were treated as idiots and they can do as they please,oh wait they do[confused

Hey SDTG sounds like we had similar experiences. We had no 11+ in our catchment but I was forbidden from taking the private school exam, even though teachers advised I was capable of achieving a scholarship. "I prefer my daughter how she is" was my father's response (oft quoted by my mum, with pride).

I was also bullied. Being bright and articulate was not cool.

When I went to Uni it was like I'd found my people. It was an absolute revelation that there were other people on the planet like me, who respected me for being me. I probably wouldn't have been quite so damaged had I met some like minded friends as a kid/teen.

Do as I say, not as I do.

She is a complete hypocrite as are most of Labour - it's why I can't stand them. I'd rather rich politicians just admit they're better off than the rest of us rather than lie about being "normal" while paying for the best healthcare, education on the sly because they know it's better than what the state can provide etc.

As well as Chakrabati and Abbott don't forget Emily Thornberry aka Lady Nugee who turned down her local state schools in Islington for her son and sent him to a selective state 14 miles away.

jellyfrizz don't agree. There will always be good and bad schools on a account of the kids that attend them.

If you took your average sink comp, expelled all the pupils and 'forced' all the private school kids to become state, the school would be fantastic overnight. Allow the expelled pupils back in and its a shithole again. I attended one for 5 years so I speak from experience.

poster jellyfrizz Sun 09-Oct-16 21:05:26
But if there were no grammar schools or private schools then those in power would make sure that state schools were good as their children would need to use them.

😁😁😁😁😁😁

No what would happen would be ortery school all the monied would move round one or two schools and eveyone who have the same as we do now

There would simply be the super state school

Even though the ortery is a state school any mortal can get near it the houses are 2.5 million

That's all us the proles would still have shit schools

What is the ortery? Is it part of the plot against proles?
I'm lost, TBH.

I think it is quite rare not to be a hypocrite about education. I strongly believe that religion has no place in education. I disagree with the Catholic religion on pretty much everything. My son goes to a Catholic school.

Surely it's only hypocrisy of the person sending their kids to private school had proposed a bill abolishing private schools? Otherwise they are just part of a government (or opposition) offering education for everyone in society and the more money you have, the more choice you have, which is true of most things in a capitalist country.

I thought she & her son's father had divorced & he had insisted on private school.

myownprivateidaho Nothing of the sort. She's reported as saying that selectivity is damaging to the kids who "fail" at 11.

Yet, doing badly in the 4+, 7+, 11+ or CE for private schools has no affect on DCs what so ever .

Put your money where your mouth is, show us how good you think state education is/how good it has become as a result of your input by using it for your DCs.

People often forget that they're supposed to be socialists when it comes to schooling. It's a weird phenomenon.

Still, as long as Everyone Else is dutifully sending their kids to mediocre comps.....

Seems to be the order of the day for the left

They made me do it

Very convinent to blame the absent partner

It's like corbyn I am sure grammer schools WAs part of many rows but the fact he diddled Diane Abbott is the mostly likey cause of the brake up