To wonder if you are against private schools…

[Unsrr]

Why is this? As in against their existence?

I was brought up in a reasonably poor area and my education was not good. I sometimes went to the nearest private school for swimming lessons and remember being in awe of it. We have one dc now age 7 and can’t afford private but there is maybe a chance we could for secondary. I wouldn’t give it a second thought if we could make it work.

I have never felt private schools should disappear because surely that’s what we should be aspiring to? An education that is excellent (yes I know not all private schools are good and lots of state schools are better), isn’t that what we should aim for?

I feel sad that this country has now made it harder to access this education. What is the reason people are against private schools existing at all? I don’t think it can be jealousy, I think many people are genuinely opposed to it from an ideological perspective and I can’t understand it at all. Just interested really as there’s been so much talk about schools recently.

@Xenia "? There are lots of ways some of us try to help our children (I call it love and other think it is unfairness) from breastfeeding them to reading them stories etc"

Those things are not solely dependent on money.

Because houses for sale won’t show you the rented social housing?

If we’re talking about Eleanor Palmer school …. The admissions are not strictly distance from school, likely because if was distance from school would have no economic diversity.

I don't know what rich parents do extra, but I do know that privately schooled people are aggressively dominating most UK professions with some prestige and social power, from politics to judges to journalists and artists. It is an immense social equality problem. There is effectively a "ruler class" in the UK that is almost entirely bred in their own special schooling system. It's naive to pretend otherwise.

Well, to give an example I've heard of in my own life, a friend was a teacher in a secondary school in England where they only taught Science as a single subject, mostly due to lack of teachers. This school was rated "good" by Ofsted, yet zero kids there were able to study Chemistry or Biology at a level that would enable them to pursue Chemistry or Biology A levels and become doctors. So their fate in life was effectively decided at age 11. Not to mention that their science teachers were not even trained in science at all- one of them was a PE teacher. This was shocking to me, and I did ask questions, and all the answers I received only shocked me more.

Does that sound OK to you? It sounded insane to me. I don't know, maybe we can just chalk it down to cultural differences.

Children could go elsewhere for A levels. There are plenty of posters on here who vociferously argue that they or their children have gone into top professions from state schools. It's not a choke hold. Two generations ago you might have had a point but not now.

It is insane, but honestly the answer to most of the questions would be - teacher shortages.

I have worked in education recruitment for a decade, and have never seen a labour market so depleted as it is now. Subject specialists in certain subjects, are almost impossible for schools to find - and then they outsource that and the agencies don’t have them either. I have known schools advertise for a maternity cover role for 6 months and get nowhere.

Those schools then either bring in unqualified staff (who are cheaper, and kinder on the budget) or staff who are qualified in a different subject. Humanities teachers covering English, for example. It’s either that or have nothing.

‘am absolutely opposed to private schools, it puts certain children at a significant advantage than other children just because mummy or daddy or rich grandparents etc can fork out an eye watering amount of money each year
Where do you want to stop though?
’

perhaps it’s less about stopping and more about starting?

On the £2m houses for the catchment for the Starmer children primary school (they are in secondary now) - that is what I read - the £2m. David Cameron also found a politically correct state primary in Kensington where the great and the good would send their 5 year olds when they had to make out they were into state schooling for political reasons too.

"Critics have pointed out that when they were younger, Sir Keir's children benefited from attending Eleanor Palmer Primary School, in Camden, North London, where the catchment area was recently down to just 182 yards.
Admission to the school, where his wife Victoria was a governor, has been described as 'selection by house price', because properties nearby sell for in excess of £2 million. "

On the issue of different advantages for children - yes some things are not bought with money like love and bed time stories but some partly are eg if a parent is able to read it is more likely it will read to its children before bed. If the parent is not working 2 jobs it is more likely to have time to do things that benefit the children. I don't know why people pick education as this massively important category and want to damage parents who pay school fees rather than even richer parents who can choose posh state schools by house price and then appear holier than thou virtue signalling their state school choice.

Seriously. How do you know this? … where do you find detailed information about the secondary schools attended by the leadership of large Organisations/Legal system/artists etc?
Please share your data.

Bred … in a schooling system … i’d like to see that!!!

Well, for example, there's a pretty comprehensive report on this linked from the UK Government's own website. The figures are out there. I don't know why you're so surprised by this. It is common knowledge that privately schooled people are overrepresented and dominant in prestigious jobs by a very, very wide margin.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/elitism-in-britain-2019

The "bred" part is not meant literally, of course.

You are absolutely right, it is a huge crisis. My friend from whom I'd heard that story about the science teachers is no longer a teacher either.

It sounds entirely possible.

I’m aware of schools that have cancelled some GCSE & a-level because not enough students are interested in the subject and the decision is taken to cancel the class. This is with students part way through …. They are told can be self directed education with some teacher support. I’ve heard of this in state & private school.

My ordinary friend’s children went to same Church of England school as some of Cameron’s children. It was the school for the church goers. He wasn’t PM when they started there …. I don’t recall her listing any Great and Good parents, other than Cameron. It was in Kensington …

Yes, Xenia, we know what you read in the Daily Mail but that doesn’t stop the school having 19% of kids on free school meals. Far more than grammars do.

Children can’t go elsewhere to study chemistry, physics and biology if they haven’t been able to sit them at GCSE fgs. That is really shocking. You’d possibly expect that in a 1960s secondary modern school but not in a modern society.

We did GCSE Science at school in the early 90s instead of the separate sciences. And this was in what was generally considered to the best school in the area, a former grammar school with strict streaming.

It was a double GCSE if that makes any difference.

@Singinginthespring I'm pretty sure single science GCSE isn't a thing anymore-although of course I could be wrong. Combined science is-and you can do A Levels with that.

The full list of GCSE & A levels in on Gov.uk
They are not all academic, not every school offers everything - obvious not every school can cater to every student.

Localities will have their “local offer” schools listed and you can see what each school offers.
Science might be exactly correct course for some.

The thing is will closing independent schools increase the number of science and maths teachers at state schools or will many of them leave the profession instead?

What if they like teaching their subject to relatively well behaved students in small groups and having longer holidays?

What if it's the work load, large number of students, poor behaviour and scary parents putting off teachers in many comprehensives and fewer independent schools would just lead to less children getting a good education?

My DC are in a (v good) state secondary. I could afford private but don’t want to/feel it necessary.

I’m also a co-opted governor at a local state primary my DC never went to and I have no affiliation with. It’s a school in a deprived area with v different challenges my DC encounter. I know my skills and experience are valuable there.

Whats hard to understand? That state school parents are wholly invested and not just in outcomes for their own children?

Yes they can. 6th form colleges are used to taking people from a wide range of schools who may or may not have done separate sciences. The vast majority now do some combination option and so long as their overall grade profile is good it's absolutely fine.

Apologies but I find your post a little confusing.
I don't believe I said that anything was "hard to understand" and I made no reference to State school parents being invested or not invested.

Oh Google it, love. It fact, though slowly ing changing thank goodness. Not one of our MC kids who were privately schooled got into Oxbridge this year, the 4 state schooled ones who applied did.

Darling, lovey, babes…. please show me your google results indicating numbers of “leadership” across industry, including creatives which detail the secondary schools attended. Also define “leaders”. Are you talking boards of directors? Or actual heads of functional areas?

Telling someone to “google it” indicates that you have no data, just assumptions based on bias.

BTW- my private school educated child did get into Oxbridge, talent is what got the offer. The Oxbridge college chose the best candidate. Not DEI, social engineering etc.