To be outraged about fee-paying schools and social inequality?

[coffeerevelsrule]

I have a ds in Y11 who has been researching potential careers and degrees and it has brought home to me what a horribly unequal society we still have in this country. Apparently 70% of barristers went to public school and there are similar stats for other desirable non-stem roles like journalism and the civil service, as well as medicine. It's a bloody disgrace - what a joke for a supposedly modern society.

And it seems that certain schemes like blind recruitment might also feed into this as although going to Oxbridge might have become slightly more attainable recently thanks to contextual offers and an awareness that those institutions shouldn't be filled with people from certain schools, now blind recruitment means the advantage a state school student may have got from going there is pretty much cancelled out.

To me it seems that ds is most disadvantaged in a way as he wouldn't qualify for schemes aimed at people who are the first in their families to go to uni and we aren't in a deprived area, but he has none of the advantages that would have come from going to an independent school. Everything about us is just average!

He is very bright (predicted all 9s and got that in his mocks) and wants to achieve but it seems that the odds are against people like him having prestigious roles. Obviously when he is quoting these stats at me I'm telling him not to be defeatist and that he has every chance of doing something amazing as long as he keeps working hard, but inside I'm wondering if how true that is.

I've always been against fee-paying schools but him reeling off all these stats at me has just been sickening and yet when Labour make noises about doing something about it there's outrage when in my opinion there should be daily outrage about the current situation.

Can anyone who cares about fairness honestly say I'm BU?

I do agree that some sort of lottery for school places is probably the fairest way to go with state school admissions. However, that is not without problems. What would a family do if they got placed on the other side of town and had no transport etc? What about parents who rely on childminders to get their kids to school - would they have to source new childcare when they found out which school their child would be attending? Would siblings be opted out of the lottery system so that people didn't have kids travelling in multiple different directions?

I believe that they tried to do this in Brighton but not sure how successful it was. There are no easy solutions, unfortunately.

I would love to get rid of private schools in the long term, but that would not be the top priority for me. Wealthy parents will always seek to buy advantages for their children. If this is not through sending them to private schools, then they will find other means, e.g. tuition etc.

I think addressing the inequality in the state sector has to come first. I don't agree that grammars effectively support social mobility. Where I grew up, the grammar intake was mainly made up of kids who had gone to a particular private primary which seemed to exist primarily for the purpose of getting kids into the grammar, and middle class state school kids who had been heavily tutored. We now live in a non-grammar area and it is infinitely better in my view.

And yes, I want excellent comprehensive schools for all. That will take a lot of investment but I think that's what we should be aiming for.

YABU

Private schools are not all elite, many of them are reasonably priced offering an option other than the shitshow state provision for SEN kids.

I'm a single mom and work very hard to give my DD13 access to a small all girls school where she can stand half a chance of achieving due to her ADHD and ASD.

Sometimes treating everyone the same is the unfairest thing you can do.

It's not about advantage, sometimes it's about lifting up people with less and if your son is going into law perhaps he needs to be taught that.

I’m not sure it’s so much funding as cohort in state.

I mean great if more money goes in but the difference between the excellent state comp near us and one people move to avoid is just that, the fact that some parents pay through house prices to access it.

The funding for both is roughly the same

Even those who use state mention how sets divide the top from the disruptive dc. Parents don’t want that and whether it’s through sets, house prices, faith or paying will push to get it.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves
Why should we all be aiming for comprehensives when the stats show girls perform better in single sex education?

I look forward to finding who everyone blames once Sir Keir Starmer has destroyed private schools (just as a previous Labour government did for Grammars).

I don't think it's jut schooling though. Wealthier or even middle class parents have access to so much else to help their children - tutoring, sports camps, university summer schools, coding residentials and so much more all of which cost £££ which many people just can't afford to access.

Parents who choose to pay for independent schools are still paying taxes to pay for their local state school places, effectively subsidising places at state schools.

If you abolished private schools (would that even work in a free market?) then all those children would have to be squeezed into state schools but the schools wouldn't receive any extra funding

Wealthier or even middle class parents

What does class have to do with wealth?

@LoveQuinnOhDearyMe
Yes you'll end up with more Elite State schools surrounded by many £m houses.

But it also means every child gets the same spent on their education.
Extra provision for SEN kids so they benefit and aren't taking up a disproportionate amount of the teachers time.

I bet schools would suddenly become a cash priority if all MPs and the Elite could no long buy their way out of state schools.

It's a pipe dream and I know it but still.

You need to get over it OP. I was brought up in a very poor household. However, my mum scraped together £10 an hour for 11 plus tutoring for me (I passed) Then tutoring for my sister to take the entrance exam to the local private school on a full scholarship. There were only two fully funded places in each year group and she got one. Where there’s a will there’s a way, it depends how you prioritise your money really. We’ve now got well paying, professional jobs 🤷‍♀️

Choice of school is an illusion - just speak to the thousands of parents who have had to accept 2nd, 3rd or even a school that wasn't on their list of "Choices".

If we did abolish private schools you would need a plan - it would take at least a decade maybe more.. just like when they abolish the Tripartite system of education in the 1970s.

Just because it might be difficult does not mean we shouldn't try to come up with a better system.

Well it’s all in the execution, isn’t it? State schools with wealthy parents can supplement. ‘Disruptive’ DC due to SEN etc will be dealt with by parents engaged enough to push for proper support and worse case pay for private intervention.

Even things like ‘setting’ - the negative impacts are due to the lower set pupils’ self confidence etc but having them all In one gigantic class doesn’t benefit anybody IME. ‘Disruptive’ pupils take up all the teachers’ time. Bright pupils get bored (and the negative impact on this is especially hard on bright kids with less engaged/able to engage parents , preventing them from fulfilling their potential). The ‘middle’ get ignored and again, May not achieve their full potential.
If ‘lower sets’ were re marketed as additional help, with more resources. Or we had mixed sets but with smaller classes in the first place this wouldn’t be an issue.

As funding across the board is cut to the bone those who can supplement will invariably rise to the top. ‘Private’ and ‘state’ are irrelevant at this point.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves so your path to educational equality is based on banning a tiny grammar school sector based on your own experience 20 plus years ago and ignoring a much more significant two-tier system. Really? I have known grammar schools from the inside for many years and I have witnessed so many real success stories for DC from disadvantaged backgrounds. Their alternative schools would have been quite dire in many cases given the areas they were living in. Okay, it is a drop in the ocean but does that mean it is not valid and just because everyone doesn't get a chance, does that mean that those DC shouldn't. You didn't comment on whether you were against scholarships from private schools for very smart DC dumbing down cohorts. Is that okay because they are not defecting to grammars?

Regarding girls in particular, I have seen many examples of particularly ethnic minority girls from deprived and religiously conservative backgrounds in grammar schools. The simple fact that their school was single sex opened up their opportunities to participate to the fullest in what was on offer. There are shining examples of girls such as those who have most certainly used their education as a social mobility bridge that in turn provided much wider freedoms in their lives. Their selection (without tutoring) and their rigorous academic education helped them believe in themselves and also demonstrated the breadth of opportunity that they had before them. The majority grab the opportunities ahead with both hands. Personally I would never do anything to eradicate those opportunities.

You wouldn't squeeze all those private school children into state schools - you would 'nationalise' (can't think of a better word to say what I'm thinking) the private schools and all their buildings etc. Things might appear the same for a while but the admissions criteria and control of the schools would change. A bit like renationalisation the trains again.

Also I don't think education system should be subject to the 'free market'. It is a bit like health services (although I know bits have been privatised) you shouldn't be able to buy a better health service because you have money - same goes with Education. Free at the point of access.

Almost all parents will do whatever they can to give their child any advantage in life. If you remove one avenue for parents to do this, the market will find another opportunity somewhere else. It is in our nature.
The best thing you can do is focus on your child and what you can do to help, rather than obsessing about what others are doing.
The things that give the most advantage usually involve a time sacrifice, particularly in the early years. Reading with your child every night, helping them learn their times tables etc. Consistent parental involvement and interest in schooling is usually the better predictor of academic attainment.

The U.K. education system is well thought if o/s

It feeds into the university system which relies on o/s fees

Some of these ideas would lead to a poorer quality overall

There’s no point wrecking what we’re good at. But improve state if the aim is to help dd

I remember hearing that Scotland had made the curriculum easier across the board which has had a negative impact overall on standards

I hope we don’t do the same at some point

I think intentions come from a good place but we need to grow what we’re good at rather than the opposite

By last post I mean private sector

Labour’s desire to damage that is concerning. I know it plays well for obvious reasons but they should do what Blair did and just go with education line not let’s attack private line

MrsBennetsPoorNervesso your path to educational equality is based on banning a tiny grammar school sector based on your own experience 20 plus years ago and ignoring a much more significant two-tier system.

No, it's based on the extensive research which shows that grammar schools don't promote social mobility.

I think this is a fair point. Instinctively, I have a personal preference for co-ed schools, and my dd had a strong preference for co-ed as well, but I'm aware of the research that supports single sex education. In an ideal world, I suppose I would like to address the underlying reasons why girls seem to do better in single sex schools, rather than segregating by sex, but I appreciate that this might be pie in the sky. Perhaps comprehensive single sex schools would be the best way to go, though I would like to see more research on this topic before reaching any conclusions!

I went to both a grammar, and a comp, and the grammar school would have given me a much bigger educational boost had I stayed there, the standards in the comp (non grammar area) were very low - I coasted through top set English and Maths, and was one of the only ones handing in my homework for example.

As it was, I've done well through careful career choice (STEM, so not prestigious, but well paying), so I can give my kids a boost (one has SEN) by sending them private for secondary.

Realistically, not everyone can have everything, so you do what you can for yourself and your kids, whether you're rich or poor.

Interesting I bet these where some of the arguments people used when trying to stop the Tripartite System from being abolished in 1976.

I also strongly disagree with university fees for home students - but that's a whole new thread.

What good is our standing in the world if we struggle to education our own children. Still significant numbers leave school every year with very few qualifications not ready the workplace.

Also many have criticised universities for being over-reliant on overseas fees so they need to address that.

@Ladybowes so you want free university education for everyone and a crack down on overseas students paying high fees. Where will the money comes from to fund your Utopia?

they abolish the Tripartite system of education in the 1970s.

What was the tripartite system?

We do as many other countries do and charge international students more. Reduce that and our fees will go up and the sector will struggle even more.

We don’t struggle to educate our children although Scotland seems to have made a misstep in decreasing difficulty in curriculum. The left seem to think levelling down helps. It’s concerning that the answer is take away the top so it feels more equal.

You need to raise up standards not lower them.