.. to think we should scrap private schools?

[katnyps]

How can we ever have an equal opportunities society when people with more money can pay for their children to have a better education?

I know that there are exceptions to the rule, and great teachers in publicly funded schools, but I get the impression that influential roles in society are disproportionately represented by people paid for education... or am I wrong about this too?

I believe that Finland has one of the best (internationally recognised) education system in the world and (apologies if I'm not quite right here, but broadly speaking) that it is actually illegal there to charge for education?

So basically a mass capital buyout by the state (the charities and businesses that own the schools won't just give them away)

I think owlwearingglasses would probably advocate the state simply requisitioning them with no compensation as in the Soviet Union.
Then what? As listsandbudgets says how would they be funded? Many of these schools have listed buildings, sports facilities such as swimming pools, tennis courts, acres of playing fields which have to be maintained.
Who or what is going to pay for all this?

As for parents who are at present paying fees giving the money to state schools instead? That will never happen in a million years.

X post with almostslimjim

I totally agree with Pumpkinlatte's comments above. I too have had experience of overseas schools and their education systems and other culture's attitudes towards education and IMO it is not just the state's fault that our children are poorly educated, it is also our own slack attitude and lack of effort too. The culture in the UK is that our children are other people's problem. Their education is outsourced to the government as is their health and wellbeing. It's not. It is YOUR responsibility as a parent to manage your child's health (diet and fitness) and their education. Obviously some DC have SEN and this is different.

My child's education is MY business. If my DC isn't doing well at e.g. maths it is up to me to find out why from the school and then do something about it. It is not just the school's fault. You only have to look at how many immigrants have come here, seen what is on offer to their DC WRT education and have fully taken advantage of it, with their DC ending up being doctors, surgeons, lawyers etc. It is their attitude towards education for their DC that has made the difference.

What a private school does is provide a conducive learning environment. Small classes, better facilities, nicer food and in general the DC have a better attitude towards learning because they get a blocking off their parents who are paying for it and also because no one is telling you that you are a geek because you like physics and maths. However, I'd say that a large portion of my DC's friends won't get good GCSE's because despite all this they are not that interested in school. They don't all walk into Oxford and Cambridge. When I was at Uni I met loads of ex private school DC on crappy courses and who ended up in jobs that you didn't need a degree for.

In summary, whether you are in state or private the key deciding factor of whether your DC does well or not is the attitude of the parents and the DC to learning, a healthy dose of discipline and lots of support.

Who or what is going to pay for all this?

Who actually owns public schools? I am talking here about Eton, Harrow, etc - the ones owned by public trusts and charities. To whom would compensation be due? In some cases moving into the state system would be a route back to the founder's intentions of educating the poor. Where schools are privately owned, yes the sites and resources would be bought by the state, the staff retained. As has been said previously, there would be a long transition, it wouldn't happen overnight.

Not enough children are in private schools for it to make any real difference if they were scrapped

Massively missing the point! If the 7% privately educated produced 7% of Oxbridge entrants and those in top jobs, that would be absolutely fine. But, as you are no doubt aware, private school students are vastly over-represented in the most powerful, influential and desirable jobs as well as the highest ranking unversities. This is not just about fairness, it's about having people in positions of power and influence who can actually understand the life experiences of the wider population they are meant to be serving and representing.

Who actually owns public schools? I am talking here about Eton, Harrow, etc - the ones owned by public trusts and charities.

No one "owns" them - that's the whole point of trusts and charities. They're "managed" by professional trustees, solicitors, etc., within usually a pretty strict legal document such as a constitution or Articles of Association or similar. Usually to change the constitution, you need a court order, sometimes that means going right up to Parliament. Our town's football club used grounds owned by a "trust" set up many decades ago - the club wanted the (prime estate) land to be sold and proceeds used to build a bigger/better stadium elsewhere - it took years and ultimately needed Parliamentary approval to get permission for the trust to sell the land, and there was then an identical (in fact even more restrictive) trust set up to "own" the land bought to build the new stadium on. Another local case I was involved in was our local agricultural society, a charity who owned a field on which they held their annual agricultural show. The society was wound up because of loss of interest and, again, it was a matter for the Courts to approve the formal wind up and sale of the land, the proceeds of which were gifted to another registered charity which had to have similar charitable goals.

the staff retained but not all private school teachers are eligible to be state school teachers. Not all have QTS. I doubt they'd be happy to become TAs with the salary drop that would have.

@HasaDigaEebowai

Not this again

Add many thousands of children into an already very stretched state education system. Great plan OP.

Fund state education correctly and invest in it (financially and morally). Even better plan.

So - a few takeaways from this thread! One which interests me is the idea that the outcomes of children are based more on what their parents' motivation is, rather than where they get educated. Therefore, sending to private school is predominantly a form of segregation so that such children are separated from the children of parents who care less (often dubbed the kids that cause a disturbance at the school)

@katnyps

So - a few takeaways from this thread! One which interests me is the idea that the outcomes of children are based more on what their parents' motivation is, rather than where they get educated. Therefore, sending to private school is predominantly a form of segregation so that such children are separated from the children of parents who care less (often dubbed the kids that cause a disturbance at the school)

Let me guess

You didn’t get this from any poster who actually sends their child to a private school?

@WatchWatch

the staff retained but not all private school teachers are eligible to be state school teachers. Not all have QTS. I doubt they'd be happy to become TAs with the salary drop that would have.

That’s a good point watchwatch.

Bluegovan you say all the staff will be retained and presumably the facilities.
So Eton becomes a state school with fabulous sporting amenities with every sport catered for - rowing, fives, swimming, tennis, you name it, a state of the art theatre, recording facilities, fantastic music provision etc etc.
Children who get to go to Eton and other ex public schools now state schools are going to have a huge advantage over other state schools.
Even if the facilities are shared among local schools those in parts of the country without an ex public school are going to miss out.

Several schools such as Eton bought land abroad for such an eventuality (which was a real possibility in the 1970s) so many of the teachers would go with the school to its new abode.

Who is going to pay for the upkeep of these ex public schools? Maintaining listed buildings and sports facilities is one of the reasons for the huge fees.

Children’s chances in life would also be fairer if family incomes were all the same, and parent competency/engagement were all the same, and houses were all the same. Why stop at school? Let’s give up children at birth, put them in a lottery to be parcelled out to random parents, to live in identical housing at a state approved level of income. That would be “fair.”

I have to add that there would be teachers who would quit if forced into the state sector.

I know lots of teachers, so many of them teach at private schools in order to secure a heavy discount on their own kids’ education. Time and time again, as their child finishes school, the teacher quits - no need for a staff discount any longer. If their kids’ education became state and therefore free, those teachers no longer need to kill themselves working like dogs. I know many who would get a dog and spend more time with their families if the kids were educated for free.
Plus I know teachers who’d quit teaching because they have already quit the state sector and gone to the private sector. One person I know taught at a “good” state school. He was followed home by kids and they took his bins and threw gravel at his window. He had a drink thrown over him in a classroom etc. Since moving to the private sector, any kid that does this would be expelled immediately. He would not return to the state sector. If his private school became state, he’d work as a private tutor instead. And then I ironically he’s be teaching only those whose parents could afford his services.

This isn’t a simple issue.

@Andante57

But if every government minister and wealthy businessman had to use the state system, I think we'd see improvements very quickly

There were plenty of politicians in the last Labour government and today’s shadow cabinet plus some principled rich left wing people whose children go to state school.
Why aren't they making sure the schools improve?

Maybe it’s not as easy as it sounds.

London schools improved hugely.

www.centreforlondon.org/publication/lessons-from-london-schools/#:~:text=London%20schools%20have%20improved%20dramatically%20since%202000.%20The,resourcing%3A%20finance%2C%20teacher%20recruitment%20and%20school%20building%20quality

I agree with you OP, but you're only going to get people disagreeing with you on this point on Mumsnet.

I think there would be a lot more incentive to make state schools better if all the 'little darlings' from private school had to go there too. I don;t get this argument of 'why bring everybody down to a lower level, why not lift up state schools to private school level' because that is not what would happen. State schools would get better.

Also people going 'parents will still pay for extra curriculars and tutors'..yeah sure, noone is arguing against that. If you can afford more, you give your child more. But the thing is that in a mroe general sense their children wouldn't be ringfenced off from the rest of society the majority of the time, amassing all the benefits and wealth in a completely different system. Ugh...I could go on...but so many people privately educate on Mumsnet there's literally no point in having this debate here

@Empressofthemundane

Children’s chances in life would also be fairer if family incomes were all the same, and parent competency/engagement were all the same, and houses were all the same. Why stop at school? Let’s give up children at birth, put them in a lottery to be parcelled out to random parents, to live in identical housing at a state approved level of income. That would be “fair.”

ridiculous extrapolation.

With that logic, we shouldn't strive for any improvements in equality ever. "Let's not pay women equal pay to men....there are others areas of life that aren't fair. Let's not ever donate to charity, the homeless, or help third world countries..." Do you see how ridiculous your statement is?

yes there will always be inequality and noone is suggesting all kids will ever get the same chances in life....but you can dismantle a system and institutions that are massively contributing towards it by ensuring a load more resources are only channelled to a minority of children

London schools improved hugely --- thanks to them receiving up to £7,800 per child. In rural areas, schools are more likely to get under £5000 per capita. No wonder London schools are getting better. It's just a shame that the rest of the country is still being short changed.

@ekidmxcl

I have to add that there would be teachers who would quit if forced into the state sector.

I know lots of teachers, so many of them teach at private schools in order to secure a heavy discount on their own kids’ education. Time and time again, as their child finishes school, the teacher quits - no need for a staff discount any longer. If their kids’ education became state and therefore free, those teachers no longer need to kill themselves working like dogs. I know many who would get a dog and spend more time with their families if the kids were educated for free.
Plus I know teachers who’d quit teaching because they have already quit the state sector and gone to the private sector. One person I know taught at a “good” state school. He was followed home by kids and they took his bins and threw gravel at his window. He had a drink thrown over him in a classroom etc. Since moving to the private sector, any kid that does this would be expelled immediately. He would not return to the state sector. If his private school became state, he’d work as a private tutor instead. And then I ironically he’s be teaching only those whose parents could afford his services.

This isn’t a simple issue.

Fine. That particular guy can work as a tutor. Tutors should still exist, that's fine, noone is suggesting you can't then use your own cash and time to invest in your child, the objection is to purposely allowing a minority of children to receive a disproportionate amount of resources in their everyday schooling.

And fine if he doesn't want to be a teacher- that's his choice. (I think if we all rely on anecdotal evidence of friends we'll have very different results. I know mainly state school teachers.)

It would be quite interesting to see the rising property prices as ‘egalitarian’, middle class parents struggle to gain entry and advantage.

It works be interesting to turn this around. How could those who are the greatest beneficiaries of state education give up their advantages.

• entrance by lottery
• transport in and out of areas of children to overcome wider issues of economically advantaged/ disadvantaged areas ( again, decided by random lottery)
• a genuine will to overturn bias towards black children ( a heads up, this will have implications on scores of white children and university entrance which is based on predicted grades)
• abolishing progress trackers that advantage those familiar with learning goals.
• free tutors provided for the economically disadvantaged as a levelling up exercise ( maybe funded by a tax on private tuition fees)

Those who shout loudest about the privilege of others are often those unwilling to acknowledge or give up their own privilege I suspect.
Those who do well by the secular state system are often those who don’t see the need for the alternatives.

@Fucket

OP it’s one thing to be against private education when you can’t afford it, but if you were to win the lottery and your child is at a state primary and is sat at the back being overlooked because she’s one of the few out of 31 kids who can be expected to sit and work, but never gets pushed or any help because the teacher is trying to get the child with a chaotic background and challenging behaviour to sit down and not climb out the window, you might change your mind.

Life isn’t fair. Quite a lot of state school children have private tutors these days to get them up to speed with the curriculum. It’s one of the hidden costs of being a parent. I think only the truly poor working-class families don’t bother with some kind of formal extra curricular education.

This.

It’s not my fault classes are massively over subscribed,under funded and sometimes chaotic. I have no control over that. What I can control is that I can put my kids in to a class where they can have a decent opportunity to learn.

You would feel exactly the same if you were in the position to pay privately and I really believe the majority of these threads come from a place of sour grapes and jealousy.

Who actually sits there and thinks ‘I think private schools should close’?

The above post is a case in point.
‘ Tutors should still exist. That’s fine. No one is suggesting you can’t use your own time or cash for the benefit of your child’
Hmmm.
Having it both ways I think.

All good suggestions Blackberrycream. I'd be happy to give up advantages, because, while my dcs might miss out on a top school place, it still seems a saner choice to want to live in a more egalitatian country where huge groups of people aren't sidelined.

Not sure why the existence of tutors would mean 'having it both ways'. The issue under discussion is private schools, not any other ways you want to spend your money, whether educational or not.

but not all private school teachers are eligible to be state school teachers

We could have a transition period of a few years where private school staff are still paid as teachers and will be supported to gain qualified status, maybe a new qualification, or give credits based on experience.

So Eton becomes a state school with fabulous sporting amenities with every sport catered for - rowing, fives, swimming, tennis, you name it, a state of the art theatre, recording facilities, fantastic music provision etc etc

This surely highlights the need for change, not the problem with change? It's obscene that all those facilities exist for 1300 boys, while 3 million state school pupils are lucky if their schools still have a playing field.

The biggest issue would be when these schools are not in highly populated areas. So not too much problem for Eton, Harrow, Westminster, etc as they could have large catchment areas and ballot for places. Those schools could turn into well resourced large comprehensives. Existing schools nearby might merge with the independents and move into the better resourced buildings.

Some of the facilities could be turned over for other public use or shared by several schools. You could also have state boarding facilities as mentioned in a pp. Some costs could be offset by renting out some facilities for extra curricular activities, as conference facilities, or to provide/replace public leisure facilities like libraries, theatres, sports pitches. They could house local authority music hubs, be used by universities, football club academies (which already have partnerships with state schools), etc. And some buildings could be sold or leased out if not needed for educational use.

For schools in rural locations where there would not be the population to support a state school, perhaps there are universities with poor facilities which would welcome a move to a new campus. And maybe the National Trust could create a museum to remind us of the segregated society we once lived in.

These are just a few ideas, off the top of my head. My point is that none of the objections I've seen so far are insurmountable barriers - they just need a bit of creative thinking.

I think times are changing and that some of the negative societal impacts of private education are starting to be tackled. The push for Oxbridge to make admissions fairer, the charities helping disadvantaged children to get into good universities etc. These might change the face of the “old boys club” which I think can be a problem in politics but also in business and life. Whether this will ever be enough, who knows?

You would feel exactly the same if you were in the position to pay privately and I really believe the majority of these threads come from a place of sour grapes and jealousy. Who actually sits there and thinks ‘I think private schools should close’?

I think most people I know think this. We'are not jealous of you. We just want a more equal society. I know people who could afford to go private but feel it's wrong. Some people on the thread have said exactly that. I don't doubt that those of you who have chosen private schools have done it in the belief that you are doing what is best for your children. I believe a more equal education system would be best for mine. You may not have the ability to understand others' feelings about this, but give us credit for being honest in what we are saying on this thread.

@bluegovan Lots of positive ideas there, I agree creative thinking would be needed. The practicalities are problematic, I suspect the biggest one would be that a lot of the schools would revert to some alternative use so additional facilities would need to be built elsewhere.
Again, creative thinking, and money, will solve this.

Tutors are problematic because it is a way of buying advantage over other children which is essentially the discussion point of this thread.
I am not against it but it is important to be honest about it.