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?

Not everyone with money has it gifted to them and most people working fucking hard for there wealth don't see why people should be bitter and jealous of it.

Hard work can lead to wealth and it can absolutely also not lead to wealth. “Hard work” being the key to opportunity is a myth in this society.
I’m not bitter or jealous, come off it. Can’t you see that I’m looking at it from a much wider lens than “susie went to private school and I’m JEALOUS”

There still wouldnt be equality because people with more money would move to areas within the catchment of the best schools.

@year5teacher

Not everyone with money has it gifted to them and most people working fucking hard for there wealth don't see why people should be bitter and jealous of it.

Hard work can lead to wealth and it can absolutely also not lead to wealth. “Hard work” being the key to opportunity is a myth in this society.
I’m not bitter or jealous, come off it. Can’t you see that I’m looking at it from a much wider lens than “susie went to private school and I’m JEALOUS”

I agree op that it should be possible to discuss the issue without resorting to the personal or the idea of jealousy.

Even though I’m not convinced on abolishing private.

OP you are saying you want good stuff for everybody not taking away good stuff but your question was about abolishing private schools - taking stuff away- not raising standards. And I haven't heard one clear argument from you (or anyone) for why state schools would get better if private schools didn't exist..... several coherent arguments for the opposite though - that it would damage standards in state schools - state schools would be more overcrowded more underfunded and the best of them monopolized even more by richer people.... so why do you think closing private schools would be a method for 'giving everyone good stuff?'

@toastmeahotcrossbun

I've seen this too TableFlowers and in cases where the parents could in fact have afforded private schools, but by tutoring to get into grammar have got: - better schooling for free

• a feeling of the moral high ground

Absolutely this!!!

That’s exactly what they do. They probably think, why pay £12k per annum for a private school, when I can pay £1k for a couple of years worth of weekly private tutoring - with the sole purpose of passing the entrance test.

Terrible. I also feel sorry for the children. If they need that much extra support, then a grammar school wasn’t aimed for their ability imo.

Then again, manny and daddy will just continue to higher tutors when young Rupert falls behind..... just not what grammar schools where intended for

Apologies for my typos etc...

I get why people want ''private schools''...They don't want their children mixing with the hoi polloi, and generally the exam results are better.

'Brainy' kids can get scholarships..A financially hard up family had every child they had getting a 'free' place at a 'good' school...But it meant for a boy wearing a silver pike that marked him out as a ''Scholarship boy'' -Or ''Poor boy'' as he was told, regularly.

My nephews had to go to a ''rough'' school in West London, but their grandad swooped in to save them.... and they are far happier as a result.

My own DS had to go to a so- called 'rough' school...and he says it helped hugely in adult life, as he can deal with all types of people and not be intimidated.
But the Children with rich grandparents who went from his lovely Primary to the 'rough' secondary were whisked away to nice, safe private schools ...Like rats deserting a sinking ship.

We have this system in the state sector too though. Higher earners buy their way into 'better' (hit targets but not necessarily a better educational experience in my opinion) schools. Its far, far wider problem that the private sector. If you abolished private schools, those kid would just have parents who buy their way into the best state schools.

Apparently there are other countries which don't have this - people just send their kids to the local school.

It wouldn't really matter if you did.

What drives "good" schools is largely a process of even a weakly applied selection gradient, plus assortative matching (e.g. by the educationally motivated to move to good areas).

If you ban private schools, all that will happen is that money will be dumped into house prices, as the private school population forged into known good state schools instead, both raising their attainment standards and house prices in those known good areas.

So what have you solved exactly?

You would have to forcefully redistribute kids to schools of mixed economic catchments. No one is willing to do that.

@Planetaryexplorer

I think yabu because ultimately it will just create inequality somewhere else. The answer is to raise the standard of state schools so that no-one feels the need to go private.

This.

But also couldn’t send ours to our local state schools because they were over subscribed and we didn’t get a place. We live in a village and they keep on building houses right next to the school. We are less than a mile from school but the new housing development meant we wouldn’t qualify for a place.

Later on one child got in but the other didn’t and we were not doing two school runs in the opposite direction!

I don’t particularly agree with grammar schools. Even if tutoring wasn’t rife but then I went to school in another country and find state selection based on ability at odds with equal access to all. Not keen on faith either,

If we got rid of private schools then the state would be funding more children in education. Currently, parents who send their children to indies pay twice for their child’s education. Once through their taxes and once through their fees.

I agree it is an unfair system but to get rid of indies would not lead to better education for all children. As PP have already said, the catchment areas for ‘good schools’ would go up in price and parents would be paying to move to these areas to ensure their child has the ‘good’ education.

I think the education system needs an overhaul and state schools need to be taking the best from indies to help improve pupils’ experiences. This will cost money though and I don’t know where this would come from.

YANBU

Private schools would be abolished in a fair world.

And if they didn't exist, and politicians had to send their kids to state schools, you know they would be properly funded.

People are told that they want choice in schools but really, everyone just wants the one nearest to their house to be really good.

I don’t tutor for grammar schools myself, but my nephew was tutored. He is currently doing a PhD. The tutoring was about learning how to do the specific test for his school. This isn’t fair on those who do not get the tutoring, but that’s not to say that all children who get it will struggle there.

Why should you dictate to me how we spend our money?

All our household income is earnt, DH and I both went to (pretty rubbish) state schools, DH had free school meals at school, but worked hard and made good decisions.

We decided that we didn't want state education for our children - I think the national curriculum is too focussed on attainment early on and it's not beneficial to young children to be pushed. I also think it's too narrow. We also have a child at Grammar school who was tutored - but only by me!

@BraveGoldie

OP you are saying you want good stuff for everybody not taking away good stuff but your question was about abolishing private schools - taking stuff away- not raising standards. And I haven't heard one clear argument from you (or anyone) for why state schools would get better if private schools didn't exist..... several coherent arguments for the opposite though - that it would damage standards in state schools - state schools would be more overcrowded more underfunded and the best of them monopolized even more by richer people.... so why do you think closing private schools would be a method for 'giving everyone good stuff?'

Well, you could redistribute the wealth of private schools into the state school sector. Which is what labour were planning on doing.

Why should you dictate to me how we spend our money?

RTFT and you’ll see I’ve responded to this exact question from parents about 4 times

I think they should be abolished as they perpetuate inequality and privilege. However, I don't think they will be. At the very least, they should be stripped of their charitable status. They are the opposite of charitable.

This is a brilliant and thorough investigation into this subject...

"The existence in Britain of a flourishing private-school sector not only limits the life chances of those who attend state schools but also damages society at large..."

www.theguardian.com/education/2019/jan/13/public-schools-david-kynaston-francis-green-engines-of-privilege

Of note, in Scotland (where we don't have state grammar schools any more), there is often more of a catchment buzz around Catholic schools. The reason is that the small hurdle of proving seemingly irrelevant filtering criteria (religious background) excludes a proportion of low-attainment pupils in a way that seems to measurably impact league table performance, which gains the schools a slight reputation, which increases the set of ambitious parents looking to get in...and so on.

Where I live, we have parents of Hindu and Muslim kids preferring to get them into the local Catholic school, rather than the non-denominational (and this is possible, Catholic backgrounds get priority but free places are granted to any background if available).

Selection criteria of any kind seem to produce a virtuous circle.

We are not private school people, and this definitely not the plan for any of the DCs, but DD1 applied herself to a private school, got a massive bursary and scholarship. It's the right place for her, and wouldn't say that she is insanely bright, but she works very hard.

DS goes to the local comp and is really happy. For him, having local friends is important, and the teaching at the local comp is excellent to outstanding, and although there are stark differences between their schools, DS is thriving and is being pushed academically.

Am really interested in Brampton Manor in East London that gets a high percentage of Oxbridge offers, although think it may be selective?

If you put every child in a high achieving school with great teachers and facilities it will still not create a level playing field. One child goes home to a chaotic home environment where education isn’t valued and another goes home to a warm house, with healthy food and a space to do their homework, which is monitored. One is barely fed in the holidays and is bored rigid, making their own entertainment and one is having their horizons broadened.

Schools are not capable of being a panacea for structural inequity.

@year5teacher I did and you still haven't told me why I can't spend our money on the type of education I choose.

Redistribution of wealth, I assume was one of Corbyn's classics and that's been tried many times in several countries in Eastern Europe..

@ilovemydogandMrObama

We are not private school people, and this definitely not the plan for any of the DCs, but DD1 applied herself to a private school, got a massive bursary and scholarship. It's the right place for her, and wouldn't say that she is insanely bright, but she works very hard.

DS goes to the local comp and is really happy. For him, having local friends is important, and the teaching at the local comp is excellent to outstanding, and although there are stark differences between their schools, DS is thriving and is being pushed academically.

Am really interested in Brampton Manor in East London that gets a high percentage of Oxbridge offers, although think it may be selective?

Well done to your DD! She must have worked bloody hard for that. It’s not easy to get scholarships. It makes me happy to read both your kids are thriving in their schools. You must be so pleased and proud. 😊

It would be quite interesting to know the ages of those replying, because you can’t really take this out of context of wider society imo.

Specifically, are the millennials going to be all that keen on private schools I wonder, after having to pay tuition fees for uni to get good vocational jobs that pay much less than 6-figure salaries, be faced with ludicrous house prices, no pensions, etc etc. I can’t think that private schools have much of a future really.

I've worked in both and the teachers are the same. There isn't a special private school pgce. The biggest difference is the attitude of the kids and parents.
I asked a kid in a state school once why he didn't want to listen and show respect in my class. He said he didn't need to get good grades as he planned to go on benefits. He was only 11 !
Plenty of naughty kids in private but fewer and not as disruptive to the education of the whole class IME.
It seemed people wanted to send their kids to our school to put them amongst other kids who wanted to learn, and away from those who didn't.