To be annoyed at The Guardian largely because it is such a dump solution - private schools

[Dlwch276]

So as part of their recent excessive coverage of a book which attacked the private school system (written by someone who went to private school) The Guardian has suggested adding VAT to school fees.

Asides raising more money via tax i don't see how this would make the system fairer? From what I've seen the logic is that parents who are motivated to pay £20k+ on fees would force state schools to improve if their children attended them. Mumsnet is full of posters at their wits ends trying to affect change at their local state schools. No-one that I've met at our small private is wringing their hands that the local state schools are terrible and that this gives their children extra advantage.

Surely to improve educational equality either we all need to pay more tax to change class sizes or poorer students need better access to private education. In NZ private schools receive the same student allowance as state schools - wouldn't this be a better solution for students not able to access private education? For everyone to sit the entrance exam and then private schools to have to accept the student allowance as fees for those who can't afford it?

Low, middle and high attainers works for me.

Woof-I am not sure what not wanting compulsory vokunteering has to do with left wing ideology?

I can think of lots of reasons why people wouldn't want to run an activity - time, logistics, lack of experience working with children, anxiety about accountability, the need to plan and dovetail sessions with other volunteers, confidence, mistrust of school etc - none of which have anything to do with being left wing.

Handay, when Ds was at school repeating a year was never offered as an option. The emphasis was all on the cohort.

Thanks for the low/medium/high attainer terminology reminder.

Because it is not the job of the state to pay for all the extra “stuff” that makes private education desirable

What, like a wider breath of education? I disagree. The state could well match the curriculum of private schools if the desire was there. The best state schools already match a full provision of sports, and music and extra-curricular, local to me anyway, and the class sizes are not that dissimilar. I have been to interviews at some and was blown away by the facilities they have. What they don't provide, or are unable to, is the wide range of subjects available at private schools, and they inability to be flexible in the curriculum. We don't have more staff in the private sector, and the classes are of a pretty similar size these days, but the teachers work longer hours, and seem to have a wide range of teaching skills.

The problem I see is that the "comprehensive" does not provide a full education to all children of all abilities, but is stuck in some kind of limbo with no focus on the individual. Is that politics or policy?

By the way, many of my DD's cohort from her private school, and Oxbridge intake are joining Teach First as a Graduate Profession. Maybe they will bring their own brand of education into the profession and strive for change.

Low/medium/high attainer seems a bit deliberately unrefined...as a definition; is there a more nuanced version? I ask out of curiosity rather than for any useful purpose.

All schools vary of course but I have always been very impressed by the teachers at both of my dcs' schools, who definitely knew and saw the pupils as individuals including in the broadest sense and not just academically. Both have always had loads of extra curricular activities going on as well - there are literally clubs every day after school and every lunchtime, covering all sorts from music to Minecraft (!) - and the primary had wraparound care. The secondary offers btecs as well as GCSEs and A-levels and has proper actual links with local businesses as well as tertiary education providers. There are various schemes running linking the pupils up with these.

When I think of my own experience of school, decades ago, it is completely different.

Oh yeah and we live on a council estate, so hardly leafy home counties territory. I never recognise state schools from descriptions given of them on Mumsnet - admittedly, these descriptions do come from parents with children at private schools so I guess they can't be expected to know what they're talking about.

@OlderThanAverage, The bigger the school, the more subjects and cuririculum options can be offered. So an 11-16 community college with 600 pupils on roll is struggling to cover the minimum. At 1800 across the same age range, a school can be more ambitious. With 300 in the 6th form, you get decent teaching; with a specialist 6th form college and 3000 students, schools can fly.

But big schools don't work for all students and in rural areas the logistics of travel and bus timetables make life much,much more difficult. Hence city schools are usually better than rural schools. Which is why London is (despite its social inequality) easier to educate well than Devon or Lincolnshire.

admittedly, these descriptions do come from parents with children at private schools so I guess they can't be expected to know what they're talking about.

In that case Handay, do you think that people with children at state school are equally clueless about private schools?

Basilisk if you object to the word ‘dullard’ then please stay away from Brexit threads.
Dullard is positively complimentary compared to what leave voters are called!

When I say 'educate well' I mean achieve higher level education results. For clarity.

@Bertrand "Low, middle and high attainers works for me. "

There you go & @XingMing this would work for me also as a description in the context of a school career / and also external school exam results etc whatever those may be.

I think Devon would disagree. They have some grammar schools! Also some excellent comprehensive schools. The biggest problem is schools where parents have little choice but to go to them. Schools in some Northern and Midlands areas have clusters of poorly performing schools. They are not necessarily rural but they have high levels of deprivation and low numbers in the population who have a higher level of education. Aim and ambition isn’t high. Rural doesn’t necessarily mean any of this.

I don't think one needs to have had a private school education to know that 70% of top jobs go to people who have had one and to therefore conclude that they are part of the apparatus by which a certain type of person has the country stitched up. Completely different matter to people pontificating about "feral teens" and "dullards" (while paying for their child to retake their A-levels).

“The problem I see is that the "comprehensive" does not provide a full education to all children of all abilities, but is stuck in some kind of limbo with no focus on the individual.”
I am not sure what you mean by this?

To be honest I think the number of university students should be reduced. Loads of useless degrees that mean time and money wasted. All the media studies, gender theory and similar crap

“Low/medium/high attainer seems a bit deliberately unrefined...as a definition; is there a more nuanced version?” What-like “dullard”?

Sometimes I wonder why I get involved in these threads. My DC are out of school now and face new challenges, but I still think it's important to discuss the issues.

“The state could well match the curriculum of private schools if the desire was there.“ Really? So it’s just a lack of desire that stops state schools routinely offering 4 languages and Ancient History GCSE?

If you're talking to me Bertrand I don't believe i said that. Larger schools can offer wider curricular choices because they have more students.

Where's the quote from? The state can well match...

In areas where education is highly regarded, I'm sure you're right. There are parts of the country near me where education and achievement at school are routinely dismissed as irrelevant to success, because the definition of success is getting a job that could equally well be filled by anyone with a heart beat,

Zing- it was a poster downthread- she was suggesting that the only difference between state and private is the will not the money.

Thanks for the clarification @Bertrand. I thought I might be going bonkers (probably already there....)