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?

@year5teacher

i know none of this is ever going to happen in real life, people are too focused on furthering themselves and not thinking about what benefits society as a whole

So, other than starting threads (which many will see as goady? Especially today) what are YOU doing to change things

@GoshHashana

I would love for the whole private sector to fall, and for the public sector to be properly funded.

Not sure where to start in pointing out the economic illetaracy in this comment. But on balance, I think it’s not worth trying to point it out as it would be lost on you.

Private schools are not preventing state schools being properly funded
They are when those with money sit in parliament and vote on education funding knowing that their decisions will never affect their children.

I feel conflicted OP. Years ago I would have agreed with you. Now I'm not so sure. I'd happily send my children to a good state school, but as a teacher I see so many issues in some areas of state education such as limited curriculum, narrow options for students, less outdoor time, erosion of arts and creative subjects, too high focus on testing from a young age and so on. If I had the money then I would probably have to swallow the fact that I would send them private in order for them to access a broad education that cannot be guaranteed in all state schools.

Ideally, I'd want every child in every school to have a broad education that is tailored to meet their needs, and I'd want all children to be taught by appropriately qualified teachers who have the time to focus on educating rather than all the crap that takes up so much time. Students should have smaller class sizes and teachers should get more PPA time to plan and mark. I can't see that happening any time soon.

If private schools were banned then well off parents would just move to where the best state schools are. So they would still end up with the better education.

Yes I agree, all that will happen is that others will be priced out of certain catchment areas, but the funding will come from the public purse rather than from the families who 'benefit' from it. I do agree though that the aim should be to raise the standard of public schools, our budgets are so tight that we cannot offer the range of lessons, sports and trips that private schools can, depsite having equally capable and talented teachers; heck, we cannot even maintain the school to a good level, it's just about acceptable. Abolishing private schools won't change that. I can't get too worked up about private healthcare to be honest, although out of range for many people, those who use it still contribute to the NHS (and rightly so), and there should be an alternative choice. Of course standards in healthcare should also strive to increase, but again, I don't see how removing private healthcare provision would achieve that.

@Nomorepies

So while you're at it then to level the playing field- ban private schools, faith schools and remove all sets so that children all learn the same work to the same level regardless of ability. In fact just remove all exams and coursework and grades as well. Uni could just be a free for all that you just turn up to if you feel like it. And abolish qualifications for jobs. If you fancy being a doctor for the day- just have a go!

What about excellent state schools in reasonably well off areas? Would you make them abolish their catchment areas?

YABU. Not everyone who attends private schools is wealthy so I think you have some misconceptions there.

I don’t believe in ability grouping (I can only speak for primary school) and I also don’t like exams.

I find this “well why don’t you just go and (insert ludicrous thing here) then!” argument strange. I don’t think anywhere in my post you will find me advocating for random people becoming doctors with no training.

But when you say making it accessible to all, it really means that you will have a one size fits all approach catering to the largest common denominator.

So for instance recorder lessons in school are free. If you want to do an instrument needing one to one lessons like piano, thats £15 per 20 minute lesson and not funded by the school. Abolishing private schools is akin to saying all kids can only play recorder because it isn't fair that some parents can pay for piano.

The standard of state schools needs to be raised including SEN provision and the quality of art, drama, sports and music teaching.

@Choochoose

If private schools were banned then well off parents would just move to where the best state schools are. So they would still end up with the better education.

Yes I agree, all that will happen is that others will be priced out of certain catchment areas, but the funding will come from the public purse rather than from the families who 'benefit' from it. I do agree though that the aim should be to raise the standard of public schools, our budgets are so tight that we cannot offer the range of lessons, sports and trips that private schools can, depsite having equally capable and talented teachers; heck, we cannot even maintain the school to a good level, it's just about acceptable. Abolishing private schools won't change that. I can't get too worked up about private healthcare to be honest, although out of range for many people, those who use it still contribute to the NHS (and rightly so), and there should be an alternative choice. Of course standards in healthcare should also strive to increase, but again, I don't see how removing private healthcare provision would achieve that.

This is a very good point which I hadn’t thought of - about people moving to different catchment areas. It’s hard, isn’t it - really what I feel should stop is the fact that such a huge contributor to children’s futures (their education) can be so wildly different based on their parents income. You’re right, abolishing private schools wouldn’t eliminate that completely. I completely feel you on the experience of state schools and the budget we have.

I also feel more strongly about schools than healthcare, maybe because I’m a teacher, and also because I know literally no one with private healthcare so it seems like such a mad far-off dream to me - and it probably really isn’t!

I used to think this. I still feel the arguament that people care more about a system they have to use is very valid. But now i think
other countries have small private sectors by focusing on improving state education.

i am not keen on state monopolies with zero alternatives as my child with SEN attends an independent charity school for children with SEN and the fees are paid by the state. It does what it does as it can operate differently than a state school.

I also feel that privildge is so entrenched that something other than school would take over (fancy holiday clubs or afterschool clubs)

@anon444877

The standard of state schools needs to be raised including SEN provision and the quality of art, drama, sports and music teaching.

Completely agree. 👏

I would stop public schools being charities with all the tax breaks that involves.

Only if you ban tutoring. A child from a mediocre school who is tutored can receive a contextualised offer that doesn’t account for all his or her one-to-one classes. Several people in our local town have benefited from this at Bristol University in particular.

Just to add a personal dimension to this discussion - I have seen firsthand the huge disparities in public and private schooling, and the impact it has on people's lives. I went to a state school where very few people went to university, but was very lucky to have supportive parents who valued education and supported me to do my best. Most of my fellow students were not so lucky, and I watched as much of their raw talent and drive was squandered by poor teaching, poor resources and parents who either didn't value education or didn't have the time or energy to support them. Most of the students from my school are now minimum wage earners in jobs with very few prospects for advancement, when I saw how intelligent and talented they were, if only they'd had support and a good education. My sister-in-law, on the other hand, admits freely that her elite private schooling allowed her as a fairly average student to get very good results and she is now a high-earning professional, as are the overwhelming majority of her peers.

This is a systemic issue, but I just use the above to illustrate how people's lives can be completely altered because of the schooling they are able to afford. You might say, why would getting rid of private schools help with this? Of course, we would still have income disparity by area but there would then be so much more incentive to invest in state schooling across the board. We don't live in a perfect world, but we can do a lot more to mitigate inequality. As I've said above though, it is very much in the interests of the privileged few to block social mobility, and education is one of the key routes to achieving it.

It would cost a fortune, and that cost would not be bore by those currently paying for their education.

If you think of all the kids currently in private school, how would they fit in to the state system? It's already bursting.

I really don't know op so I haven't voted. I benefited from one and like you said, I would do the same for ds if I could. So I don't think it's fair of me to say they are bad.

I've come to the conclusion that a range of schooling (including grammars, single sex, montessori, boarding school etc) are all fine and can be wonderful or terrible depending on the school and child in question.

I think state schools themselves and teachers need a LOT more funding and support. Class sizes halved, more extra curricular, specialist support for the many many children with different needs. However I am also aware that that's a bit of a dreamland.

but because to me it seems inherently wrong that little Johnny who’s mum and dad make six figures can go to a great school and go on lovely trips, whereas little James who’s parents are low earners has completely different opportunities available to him

But by that logic, no one should be allowed to send their children to music or karate or Brownies or singing or dance or football or language lessons because it somehow disadvantages others. You can’t dictate to anyone how they should spend their money. It is desperately sad some children have so much less of a start in life but where are you going to draw the line?

@LolaSmiles

Private schools are not preventing state schools being properly funded They are when those with money sit in parliament and vote on education funding knowing that their decisions will never affect their children.

I feel conflicted OP. Years ago I would have agreed with you. Now I'm not so sure. I'd happily send my children to a good state school, but as a teacher I see so many issues in some areas of state education such as limited curriculum, narrow options for students, less outdoor time, erosion of arts and creative subjects, too high focus on testing from a young age and so on. If I had the money then I would probably have to swallow the fact that I would send them private in order for them to access a broad education that cannot be guaranteed in all state schools.

Ideally, I'd want every child in every school to have a broad education that is tailored to meet their needs, and I'd want all children to be taught by appropriately qualified teachers who have the time to focus on educating rather than all the crap that takes up so much time. Students should have smaller class sizes and teachers should get more PPA time to plan and mark. I can't see that happening any time soon.

Everything you say makes such an excellent point.

To be fair I also know of private school pupils who’ve been tutored. But tutoring is as ‘unfair’ as private schooling and a lot more covert. Universities need never know.

@Howaboutanewname

but because to me it seems inherently wrong that little Johnny who’s mum and dad make six figures can go to a great school and go on lovely trips, whereas little James who’s parents are low earners has completely different opportunities available to him

But by that logic, no one should be allowed to send their children to music or karate or Brownies or singing or dance or football or language lessons because it somehow disadvantages others. You can’t dictate to anyone how they should spend their money. It is desperately sad some children have so much less of a start in life but where are you going to draw the line?

That’s very much not what I’m saying, I’m saying that brownies and karate and all those things should be available to all children. It’s not about stopping people having things, it’s about making MORE people have them. This is the key thing, people seem to think I’m saying “no you can’t have anything nice because other people struggle” - the opposite, I’m saying “we should ALL be able to have those nice things”

Also, I would argue that abolishing state schools probably would not affect children going to brownies.

YeahNahmum

“Righto. Like if you had all the money in the world you'd send your kid to a public school then? No.

Nothing' morally wrong 'about wanting the best for your kid ,education wise. We all want whats best for our kids.”

Actually yes... it’s not uncommon at all for very wealthy parents to still send their kids to public schools. I was privately educated from reception-year 11 and switched to state for 6th form. Plenty of my state school friends were very wealthy yet had parents who fundamentally didn’t agree in the state system.
My uncle and his wife are very high earning lawyers with just one child. A private education would be a drop in the ocean yet he’s at the local public. It’s not uncommon at all.

@Lelophants

I really don't know op so I haven't voted. I benefited from one and like you said, I would do the same for ds if I could. So I don't think it's fair of me to say they are bad.

I've come to the conclusion that a range of schooling (including grammars, single sex, montessori, boarding school etc) are all fine and can be wonderful or terrible depending on the school and child in question.

I think state schools themselves and teachers need a LOT more funding and support. Class sizes halved, more extra curricular, specialist support for the many many children with different needs. However I am also aware that that's a bit of a dreamland.

I don’t want to only reply to people who agree (and you don’t even necessarily agree!) I just think I’m this is a really good comment.

Ideally no YANBU. Realistically unfortunately yes YABU. Because even if private schools were abolished, inequality would be created elsewhere within education.

@year5teacher - how would the state system cope with all of those extra pupils, all of a sudden?

I don’t believe in ability grouping

This is very strange. Why wouldn’t you want children to work to their ability levels?