To think private schooling should be abolished

[year5teacher]

Just to preface, I’m not criticising individual parents. You have to do what you consider best for your child - for example if the choice was a private school with excellent dyslexia support and a state school that was notoriously bad, for example, you must make the correct judgement for your child.

Just to get that out the way so the thread isn’t flooded with “well I sent DC to private school because...”. I’m not talking about individuals, I’m talking about the system as a whole.

AIBU to believe it’s morally wrong for us as a society to allow children of higher earners to access a generally better level of education, which in turn can affect their trajectories for the rest of their lives?

Totally agree with @Irreversible

Think about it though - the private school I saw the other week (mentioned in in a previous comment, went to a town which had a crazy expensive boarding school) had its own first class cricket pitch, it’s own rugby pitch, it’s own CHAPEL ffs, state school can never compete with that. Ever.

We had a chapel at school, loathed having to go when mandatory it didn’t do much.

Comparing the two you can’t get £11k worth in a state school and if people want that then they can pay for it. But you could get more than currently, and stop squeezing the funding.

Also one of the biggest differences is streaming. As you take away any downward peer pressure against being studious it helps. Helps in state as well as private.

“But OP this applies to virtually everything for children, be it education, health care, security, travel, housing, extra curricular activities

And that's wrong, isn't it?”

I don’t think so.

It is simply not financially or practically viable

I don't know for sure but it seems OP was looking for a more philosophical argument than actually hashing out details of a potential plan. Obviously if it were to happen, it wouldn't be overnight, it would be phased over many years, it would require increasing taxes and/or reallocating a lot more tax income to education spending, etc.

No, you’re right. labour will never get in because people don’t see themselves as part of a society, they see themselves as individuals and how they can get the best deal for themselves. Which is natural, but not great.

Labour will never get in because they're full of woke middle class idiot justice warriors who totally ignored or sneered at the working classes, you know, those people they were supposed to represent, when it came to election time. Why on earth do you think those life long working class labour supporters suddenly turned tory at the ballot box? Because Labour is an absolute joke. And as a life long Labour supporter myself, unless they have a serious shake up / get rid of the trash currently residing in the party, and go back to supporting the people they were supposed to represent, I will never be putting a cross in the box by their name again. Me and no doubt millions of others judging by the last election.

I don’t think so

So it's right that some kids should have greater opportunities because their parents have more money?

Yabu.

The focus should be on ensuring every child has access to the standard of education that the good private schools (I acknowledge there are not so good ones out there)

Life is unfair. The two year old who has a parent that reads to it every night after a healthy tea sat at a table with a stable family background is going to be streets ahead of the kid who doesn't have those basics.

Break down social inequality and there would be no need for private school.

[quote dwiz8]@year5teacher well you're the one throwing out £11k for boarding is expensive over and over again

Most in the south east are in the £20k-£30k per term mark for full boarding

And I get your point, but having nice sports facilities isn't something state schools don't have. The issue with state schools is the level of attainment most of the students 'aspire' to.

[/quote]
Regardless, I’m sure we can agree that £11k per term isn’t exactly accessible to everyone, which is the whole point.

Yes, state schools do have nice facilities, but not to that level. Show me a state school with that level of facility and I’ll be very surprised.

As I’ve said in response to other posters, the issue of aspirations is often something that can be caused by generational inequality and fuelled by parents having received poor state education.

@fsklgf

I don’t think so

So it's right that some kids should have greater opportunities because their parents have more money?

It's not right some kids have bigger bedrooms because their parents have more money and can afford a bigger home

Where does it end?

Are you proposing that all teachers have to work in state schools then? What about the need for boarding schools; there aren't that many state boarding schools.

Anything state funded can only ever be delivered to a quality that the entire nation will pay for, be it healthcare, education, social care, university, ferries (heavily subsidised), roads etc. Banning people who value something more and who have the means to pay for something better from doing so is bonkers.

I understand that in the context of education this entrenches social immobility, however the alternative of mandatory state boarding schools to prevent any extra tuition or guidance is far worse.

Allowing a tax rebate equivalent to the cost of state schooling on withdrawing children from state schooling to subsidise private fees would help more people afford to spend more educating their children.

“ I don’t think so

So it's right that some kids should have greater opportunities because their parents have more money?”

It’s a reality which is not capable of change.

@KarenFitzkaren

No, you’re right. labour will never get in because people don’t see themselves as part of a society, they see themselves as individuals and how they can get the best deal for themselves. Which is natural, but not great.

Labour will never get in because they're full of woke middle class idiot justice warriors who totally ignored or sneered at the working classes, you know, those people they were supposed to represent, when it came to election time. Why on earth do you think those life long working class labour supporters suddenly turned tory at the ballot box? Because Labour is an absolute joke. And as a life long Labour supporter myself, unless they have a serious shake up / get rid of the trash currently residing in the party, and go back to supporting the people they were supposed to represent, I will never be putting a cross in the box by their name again. Me and no doubt millions of others judging by the last election.

Sorry, I’m sure you made a very good point, but I switched off after “woke middle class justice warriors”.

[quote dwiz8]@year5teacher well you're the one throwing out £11k for boarding is expensive over and over again

Most in the south east are in the £20k-£30k per term mark for full boarding

And I get your point, but having nice sports facilities isn't something state schools don't have. The issue with state schools is the level of attainment most of the students 'aspire' to.

[/quote]
Cheltenham Ladies College: £12780 per term boarding
Elton £14167 per term boarding
Oundle: £12630 per term boarding

@year5teacher of course it's not accessible to all

Otherwise the schools wouldn't be as good as they are

Whether you like it or not it's not down to me to hold my child back in life needlessly

It's not better off families fault some parents can't afford heating. People make choices in life. Some pan out and some don't. Life isn't fair

I went to one of the best public schools in the country. On a scholarship. It was a very rude culture shock. I was the first person in my family to go to Uni. My Dad was in the army. We lived in married quarters and drove a 10 year old car. The girls I was mixing with played tennis, spoke French, rode horses and had a helipad. The sort that get brand new Range Rovers for their 17th birthday.

I worked hard and left school with some good qualifications. I got a Masters degree from St Andrews. I washed dishes and waited tables to afford books. Years later I am lucky to have a very good job which I enjoy, although taking time out for starting a family means I probably haven't advanced to the heady levels of Management. But I haven't forgotten my roots. My school friends married Bishops and titled people and politicians. My husband was a gardener. Unfortunately my husband is very ill and can't work at the moment so we've had to scale back and just live on my income but we get by. My daughter went to the local High School and despite being classed as an education establishment "in a deprived area" went on to study History at Glasgow University.

I will ALWAYS be grateful for the opportunity I was given and whilst I could never afford to educate my daughter privately I feel that the trickle down effect has been enormous. My husband has a degree, I did a second business degree to improve my career prospects and I feel that education has opened doors and enriched my life in ways I could never imagine. It's also enabled me to relate to people from all walks of life which is very important to the job I do.

I don't resent private education although I am shocked by how much it costs relative to average incomes. In the 1950's, 60s and 70s even ordinary people could afford it for their offspring. Now it's just the seriously rich. I think there should be more "Assisted Places" type schemes to allow kids from poor backgrounds to access education. But I definitely don't think private schools can or should be closed because existing schools couldn't cope and rich parents would just send their kids abroad. So overall the UK would lose out. We actually save money because the taxes paid by rich parents are supposed to cover their kids schooling but they don't actually take advantage of it, freeing up resources for people who do.

I think the problem with rich, middle class parents being able to buy houses in the catchment area for the best schools is worse. There also giving their child a better education and although not directly paying for it they are anyway because they are paying for the expensive house. It amounts to the same thing. What would you say to abolish that? No-one is allowed to move to get their child into a better school? Unfortunately there are many injustices in the world. I think the state school system is worse for disadvantaging parents of lower income families.

@KarenFitzkaren
“sneered at the working classes“
Yes they have done and I agree it was appalling, but while Labour sneering at working classes is a fairly new development, Tory sneering is par for the course. I get why working class people may have felt alienated from Labour but I will always be astounded when they vote Tory. Take this issue for one: Labour in government would probably fail at increasing the achievements of white working class boys - but the Tories won’t even try.

It's not right some kids have bigger bedrooms because their parents have more money and can afford a bigger home

This is silly and I think you know nobody is arguing for that.
There’s an argument to be had about housing and I’m not getting into it here, but no one is saying “all kids have to have the same size bedroom!” Maybe if that contributed to what could be their entire life’s trajectory.

More money more choice, that’s just the way it goes. It doesn’t guarantee success anyway.

Perhaps all schooling should be means tested? So kids who have parents that can afford it have to pay but those who don’t, don’t?

Or just accept that in some cases some people will do whatever they can to educate their kids to a better level and with a better system than, quite often, they had for theirselves?

You could strip this back even further and say why have kids? It’s not fair on the working people who don’t. Maternity, paternity sick pay etc. How’s that fair on the working people who have done everything they can to keep a roof other their heads?

@Therewillbetroubleahead Eaton is £14k per half term...

@year5teacher

Just to preface, I’m not criticising individual parents. You have to do what you consider best for your child - for example if the choice was a private school with excellent dyslexia support and a state school that was notoriously bad, for example, you must make the correct judgement for your child.

Just to get that out the way so the thread isn’t flooded with “well I sent DC to private school because...”. I’m not talking about individuals, I’m talking about the system as a whole.

AIBU to believe it’s morally wrong for us as a society to allow children of higher earners to access a generally better level of education, which in turn can affect their trajectories for the rest of their lives?

Can’t get worked up about this. DD met and was friends with a huge selection of students at her (RG if it matters) uni. Some of them went to state grammar and some to church schools, some of them male and female went to private schools and one or two VERY expensive private schools with boarders and a prep school etc.

When they all graduated the results for the private schoolers were no different to comprehensive DD, who whilst bright isn’t exceptionally clever and got into a very competitive course with two B grade ALevels and a BTEC at Distinction.

Now qualified, they all have jobs, but the private schoolers are lagging behind in salary. I dare say they will overtake with a generous helping of nepotism in time, the point I am making is that the private education may just have been a waste of £150k.

@Bumlooksbig I just wanted to say best wishes to your DH

Parents who send their kids to Eaton will continue to send their kids to Eton if private schools were abolished. The only difference would be Eton would relocate abroad.