To marvel at privately educated Keir Starmer's hypocrisy?

[Bursarysadness]

Both Kier Starmer and his wife are privately educated. Kier's senior school converted into a private school in the second year of his attendance and he has received a generous full bursary up until his A levels. He has built his life and his success on this education, supported to the end by the bursary funded by the same schools and parents he is now trying to destroy. It pains me as my children receive 50% bursaries from a brilliant local school. We've worked incredibly hard to cover the remaining 50% but it has been worth it, seeing how my children blossomed. We had a very different experience in their primary state schools, including bullying and racism. We don't live in a great area. We have just been told that the school will probably reduce all their bursaries to be able to lower the fees for the non bursary parents who are now struggling because of the VAT introduction. I don't know what the future for my children is now and they have so many close friends where they are. They are both academically brilliant and work very hard - hence the bursaries were granted. I feel so depressed that, from what is becoming obvious, they won't be able to benefit from the generosity of bursaries the same way Kier Starmer did when he was a child ..

This policy is not about stopping inequality in the education system. It’s a cheap tax raid or an easy target.
Question - if Labour are as serious about ending inequality as you suggest, why are they not reforming the 11+ system?

@Kitte321 "Question - if Labour are as serious about ending inequality as you suggest, why are they not reforming the 11+ system?"

In what way "reforming?"

They’ve got five years. It may yet happen.

Ending it?

Maybe it depends but where I live the 11+ really doesn’t seem to achieve the whole ‘equal opportunities for poorer bright kids’ thing it was intended for. The vast majority of children who attend are from more middle-class comfortable families, there is about 1% of the school population on free school meals whereas the non-grammar has about 35%. Private tutoring is a massive thing around here and parents spend a small fortune on coaching children through the tests. I’m not sure what the answer is but I think it needs an overhaul to address this.

Could they.... Go to a state school? Like most other local kids? Or are yours super special?

You don't have to spend money on tutoring. I tutored my children myself and this is how they passed exams - using Bonds books and other available materials. No tutoring at all. So you can do it. They are only 10 / 11 when they do it - it's basic stuff, basic maths etc. The problem is that it's a lot of hard work, we did practice papers every day amidst emotional outbursts etc. but please don't say the equality is not achieved because middle class parents spend a fortune on tutoring. You can just prep them yourself like I did and many others I know did

And please don't quote these random figures - only 1% of kids in the grammar system are on free meals but 35% of kids in other schools are. These are non representative and misleading figures. Out of that 35% many of them won't care, won't want to do the work or won't have intellectual ability to do it. So these are totally useless figures. The only thing that matters is that children who have this ability and willingness to study can have equal opportunities, no matter where they come from. And if parents can't help children with 11+ maths... As I've heard people mention before, then we have a much bigger problem, going further back then the last Tory government

How can pure statistics not be representative? FSM kids are underrepresented in grammar schools, it's not really debatable. It sounds like you're trying to suggest that poor children are inherently less intelligent? What about the kids who are willing and able, but don't have parents to pay for tutors or buy them books? How would your extra special kids have fared without your interventions?

@Bursarysadness "@Bursarysadness "And please don't quote these random figures - only 1% of kids in the grammar system are on free meals but 35% of kids in other schools are. These are non representative and misleading figures. Out of that 35% many of them won't care, won't want to do the work or won't have intellectual ability to do it. So these are totally useless figures"

No they aren't. Unless you genuinely think that being poor and disadvantaged means you are feckless and of low intelligence. Which I am sure you don't-because that would be such a disrespectful thing to think.

Cassandre, I see what you're saying about empty school places making a loss for state schools. Where I live, however, the state schools are all oversubscribed, so not sure where they'll put pupils who have to leave private school because their parents can no longer afford the fees.

Totally agree about SEN. It's utterly dire

and even my fiends who do send their kids to private school agree that it is privileged - FIENDS! - surely they are not that bad!

@Bursarysadness like I said it may differ between areas but those are certainly the figures in the town where I live. I find such a disparity pretty concerning and think it would be ideal to look into WHY the figures are this way? If the 11+ is supposed to be about equal opportunities for children of all backgrounds then it shouldn’t be looking so weighted towards more privileged middle-class children.
Of course tutoring isn’t (necessarily) the only way but it wouldn’t be such a lucrative business if it didn’t give children a clear advantage over those not tutored. Paid tutoring is a significant but probably not the only aspect of this though.

@Fluufer and @CurlewKate I've never suggested anything similar and am a bit taken aback to be honest, especially as I pointed out that the equality means that kids who are willing, intellectually able and care should have opportunities, no matter where they come from. Please reread my post... I come from a poor family myself and don't think I'm stupid and I got good education. I don't come from money. What I meant is - all the kids applying to grammar school do the prep and want to work, this is why it's not representative. Not all kids want to and they don't have to either. Not everyone has to be academically excellent. What matters is that those academically excellent are never limited, no matter where they come from. And the children of educated parents will always be privileged because they will get more support at home - this is true for both state and private sectors. Children in private sectors tend to be children of educated parents because it takes bloody good jobs and pays to pay these fees .. simple logic...

When did I say Labour is serious about ending inequality? I think I said they’re cautious and mild actually. This policy is a very watered down version of their previous commitment to end the two tier education system and I think that’s a shame and a missed opportunity.

Who the hell has the time to let the system change organically when their child is self harming and school refusal??? You seem so far up yourself you have lost touch of all reality. There are DIRE schools out there putting kids in DIRE situations. You are preventing parent helping these kids.

Challahplaiter

mild and cautious 😀

😂

You’ve clearly misunderstood what I said, and been fairly rude to boot. Please reread.

‘many of them won't care, won't want to do the work or won't have intellectual ability to do it.’

when I read comments like this I feel incredibly frustrated at the seeming ignorance behind it and the clear prejudice shown.

So

Tax breaks are going. That’s it, Charity status should have been the target but that would have been much more complicated, that’s next.

@Bursarysadness "@Fluufer and @CurlewKate I've never suggested anything similar and am a bit taken aback to be honest,"

You said that it's meaningless and irrelevant to point out that grammar schools have a vanishingly small cohort of pupils from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds because "many of them won't care, won't want to do the work or won't have intellectual ability to do it."

Those are your words.

All of this is hugely complex.There are inherent issues all over the system. That is why labour has no real interest in a full overhaul.

• the 11+ system is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. It is selective, available to everyone (or those in the catchment….) but children from excellent primaries with excellent parental support (and, dare I say it, cash) are more likely to pass. So they are almost entirely populated by the middle class.
• The current state system being catchment focused is just another form of selection.

i have no real answers but I guess I think that Labours stance is removing the exemption to remove ‘inequality’ is disingenuous without any thought of addressing the above.

How would you even start to fix things? I personally think you have to do that through general taxation. Could you also have a system similar to the NHS where private school teachers are required to provide some teaching in state schools?
VAT on schools fees will
make no difference. Apart from to the families left uprooting settled children and to, those with SEND that choose independent schools for very specific reasons.

Also, (and a final thought!) when you are faced with a choice for your child to send them to an underperforming and, in some cases, dangerous comprehensive, those with the means will do anything to avoid that. Whether some on this thread want to admit it or not there ARE children who are aggressive, disrespectful and disruptive. Some of these behaviours are learnt at home and from families that just don’t value education. Those numbers are increasing and until you can come up with a plan to work on that all the money in the world will only go so far.