.. 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?

I assume if you take away the charitable status schools won’t offer bursaries anymore. What about private SEN/specialist schools would they lose their charitable status too?

I agree with @Pumpkinlatte201 . It is well known that even when good educational opportunities are available the most important factor behind the educational performance of children is parental attitude and involvement.

Scrapping the private the schools and even improving the state schools will not make some parents take their own responsibility of educating their children seriously. In fact I think sometimes the more that is done to help some people the more they expect it and blame someone else when it goes wrong rather than acknowledging their own responsibility.

Where do you plan on putting the kids from private school? You can just take the property of the private schools.

What about teachers who won’t teach in state schools (like some of my teacher friends!)?

What about the people who can afford it who would just send their kids to school in Switzerland or the US? You wouldn’t be able to stop them. The gap between the very wealthy and poor would get worse...

Lovely idea, but not workable. The fact is not everyone who went to a private school was incredibly wealthy and maybe it’s the state education system that should be reformed instead of penalising people who are ‘wealthier’ or make sacrifices for their child’s education?

I’d be interested to hear your take on people who move catchment areas to get their kids into a good state school? Surely that is disadvantaging the very very poor who’s parents can’t afford to love house? Or is that okay?

The govern,ent can barely cope with all the students it currently has, it certainly does not have the money to pay for all the private ones being added to the system.

Plus all that will happen is expensive areas will become the new private schools. Except the government will be paying out for it at its base.

Far better this system and extra money spent on things like medicine, hospitals and police. Than paying to educate kids whose parents can afford to pay for it themselves.

Another recommendation to listen to the Nice White Parents podcast. It really made me think.

They should scrap charitable status for private schools. I think they should be banned. They really do create such an unfair advantage. I did a prestigious degree and it was mainly populated by private school kids (90%) All the first class degrees awarded went to the state school pupils - not a single private school student achieved a first which shows it allows the mediocre to be coached into exam success, which can't then be replicated at uni to the same degree. They are therefore unfairly advanced over state school kids who are just as bright and just as able - just not coached to extremes. It's so unfair and immoral. As for the funding, how about taxing those who can afford the extravagance of private school and ploughing it into education?

I think Finland have one of the highest books per household ratios. Many children start school in England not knowing what a book is

Things have changed quite a lot since a few decades ago. Fees are relatively so much higher and consequently out of reach of many parents who themselves attended independent schools. And that sort of parent is going to put pressure on the state system and be unwilling to tolerate low standards/low expectations.

OTOh now that housing is also relatively that much more expensive, the children of parents who can afford to buy into the catchment area of a good school, are going to be at an advantage.

@Snowrabbit

They should scrap charitable status for private schools. I think they should be banned. They really do create such an unfair advantage. I did a prestigious degree and it was mainly populated by private school kids (90%) All the first class degrees awarded went to the state school pupils - not a single private school student achieved a first which shows it allows the mediocre to be coached into exam success, which can't then be replicated at uni to the same degree. They are therefore unfairly advanced over state school kids who are just as bright and just as able - just not coached to extremes. It's so unfair and immoral. As for the funding, how about taxing those who can afford the extravagance of private school and ploughing it into education?

If charitable status was abolished what would happen to bursaries? Would they be reduced

If you want to scrap private schools, you also have to scrap grammars and faith/church schools too. The only way a "comprehensive" system works is that ALL schools are truly "comprehensive". When you have private, grammar and faith schools, the remaining "comprehensives" aren't comprehensive at all - they're filled with the kids whose parents don't have money, whose parents aren't tutoring them to within an inch of their lives and whose parents don't "find" religion to get their kids into faith schools, so not comprehensive at all. No wonder too many end up as failing schools. So, lets have choice or NO choice, not this half arsed "choice if you have pushy parents" limbo we've been stuck with since the 70's!

Hi OP - 100% agree! Doesn't matter about private tutoring or whatever, rich parents in a state system would push up quality for all. Private education makes me feel sick.

@plumpootle

Hi OP - 100% agree! Doesn't matter about private tutoring or whatever, rich parents in a state system would push up quality for all. Private education makes me feel sick.

They wouldn't

However state schools would definitely drag their children down

Yes no private schools.

While you're at it, no privately owned housing, no private businesses, etc

rich parents in a state system would push up quality for all.

They really wouldn't.

What about the people who can afford it who would just send their kids to school in Switzerland or the US? You wouldn’t be able to stop them

Do you realise op that you wouldn’t be able to stop parents sending their children to school abroad?
Unless this country becomes like North Korea or the former East Germany and shuts its borders.

@plumpootle

Hi OP - 100% agree! Doesn't matter about private tutoring or whatever, rich parents in a state system would push up quality for all. Private education makes me feel sick.

Makes you feel sick?

@unmarkedbythat

I'd scrap them in a heartbeat. Prepare to be told how awful you are, though, OP. Children of well off parents cannot possibly have their needs met by the state system.

Agree completely.

@Pikoty
I hear you - but it's a very Brave New World perspective. That said, I've thought a lot about it and not sure what the answer is. The reality is, unless you automate away all the "crappy" jobs - they need to be done by someone. That said, no way I'm going to quote what a "crappy" job might be as I'm sure that that's is completely subjective - what I wouldn't want to do could be very different from what someone else wouldn't want to do!

@LaceyBetty
That's pretty much my view

@plumpootle

Hi OP - 100% agree! Doesn't matter about private tutoring or whatever, rich parents in a state system would push up quality for all. Private education makes me feel sick.

Why do you think rich parents would touch a state school? I wouldn't and I'm not rich. State schools are great for childcare and teaching to a test, and a general education for the masses.

Home education and/or private tutors would be more in keeping with a private education, rather than state enrollment.

People who can afford it, would just hire private tutors outside school.

People who were highly educated themselves, could teach their kids outside school hours, or help with homework etc.

Even "averagely" educated parents can (and do) help with homework, maybe buy extra revision/practice books, etc.

There really is no way to remove perceived "advantage".

It doesn't even have to be about parental education/finances. I had some school friends who did remarkably well at technical subjects - producing fantastic wooden/metal pieces, etc. Turned out that their uncles/fathers had workshops so they were used to helping with hand tools, machinery etc since a very early age so were well ahead of the rest of the class. Surely that kind of thing is just as "unfair" as a parent throwing money at a child's education? Same could happen with art, drama, fashion/craft, etc., where a parent could give their child a massive advantage in non monetary ways over their classmates.

rich parents in a state system would push up quality for all.

You’re either very deluded or you have an oversized ego (if you’re a rich parent).

Welcome to real life. I'm afraid all through life people who can afford it can pay for improved services. I'd suggest if you go through life feeling resentful of this it will be a very long depressing road...

Only if state schools improve across the board.

I remember turning up to year 1 lesson 1 hockey and finding that a couple of girls knew the teacher from hockey club.

I was resentful for a decade. Then I grew up.