AIBU to think that Bridget Phillipson is exaggerating the level of middle-class support for VAT on school fees?

[TepidWatersOfManagedDecline]

Bridget Phillipson has been quoted as saying that the policy is supported by "middle-class parents in good professional jobs with housing costs who just can't afford that level of fee" and want "brilliant state schools". www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c86wd1y7v2xo

Is this true, in your experience? Most middle-class parents with professional jobs who I’ve discussed this with think that it’s a spiteful policy (including those who don’t use the independent sector).

AIBU to think that Bridget Phillipson is exaggerating the level of support for the policy?

Well I guess it earns then a living in their specific field. But yeah in 2024 I would think there are other languages that have value is my point:

And for reference I learned both Shakespeare and Chaucer which have nothing to do with career. Sure English does and Latin may have benefit if studying law but pretty limited elsewise.

My parents gamed the state system completely and we've all been significantly disadvantaged by our peers in private system

And the faux concern re children already living in the most expensive parts of the country( entirely out of reach for the majority)which itself gives an advantage alongside pretending to care about SEN is hysterical.

Nailed it in one. Couldn’t have said it better myself (may even be part of my MN name)…..

One of the more predominant things I hear from private school parents is the confidence and resilience it offers their children.

Maybe that’s only true when they are there?

Agree. My friends are 50/50 private/state parents and I’ve heard not a murmur for or against this IRL. I did ask a couple of friends whose dcs are privately educated how they felt and they seemed pretty indifferent 🤷‍♀️

I don’t know anyone in real life who thinks it’s “spiteful” and most are pro though some sadly pro.

You just want to argue the toss don’t you. We are having this discussion as you had to concede the over-representation of the best state schools within the state sector feeding the higher echelons of education and work.

As I said, wealthy middle classes will dominate the top of the state sector which is why this policy won’t do much for equality.

What you’re missing is that the majority are selective and the SE dominates partly because those areas retained selection along with certain areas in the Midlands and North.

Catchment is a bit of a red herring as students still need to live near enough to get to school thus prices are still higher in the areas around good state schools. Although some schools don’t offer many places outside the catchment.

I think you’ve missed the point there.

What’s the value of teaching history or English Literature to children?

If there is a value, why is it greater than teaching Latin?

Reducing the numbers of privately educated will do a lot for equality ans the sector is the biggest cause of inequality. Re state selective schools when children are commuting an hour or even half a hour there are many many differing types of housing available.

And what of all the SEN and physically disabled kids? Have you even considered them in your goady glee?

Most distasteful.

Sorry, but that makes no sense. Getting into Oxbridge - or the other most sought-after universities - is matter of academic achievement and perceived potential.

This is not 1924.

You’d think so wouldn’t you but the best jobs and unis are over represented by the privately educated even though so few are educated in the system . There are many many kids with stellar qualifications state educated .

Inequality is the biggest driver of inequality, a small reduction in private school numbers will make no difference. While fee increases will achieve nothing other than other making elite institutions more elite.

Because suddenly all the privately educated kids leaving the sector are suddenly SEN and disabled. 🤔

I’d say leaping on that bandwagon is distasteful.

The fewer that are privately educated the better for all.

Please can you explain further how it will improve equality and show evidence that private vs state is the single biggest cause of inequality? Isn't it just shifting the line sideways slightly? The line will still be there, with just a few more on one side of it.

And more importantly, how specifically, quantifiably (with figures and outcomes) will it improve state education? Surely this is the priority in all this rather than an ideological debate, improving education for all children?

I’ll take my stats from an anti-11+ website:

https://comprehensivefuture.org.uk/interactive-map-of-grammar-schools/
for example, ‘There are 163 grammar schools in England.

• Many grammar schools admit pupils who do not come from the local community and who travel long distances to be able to attend school. Our map shows that 29 grammar schools admit 50% or more pupils from outside the local authority area.’

also

• The majority of children who win a place at grammar school come from more advantaged families. Our map reveals that on average only 6.7 percent of grammar school pupils are claiming free school meals compared to 28.4 percent attending nearby non-selective schools.‘

The majority of grammars DO have catchments. That entrenches their inaccessibility for parents who can’t afford to buy or rent in catchment for the good selective or non-selective state schools because living there attracts an inflated cost.

Plus a lot of the parents who already do live inside the right catchments can’t afford to pay for expensive tutoring needed to get in to the selective state schools or grammars that they live near.

That’s because the average child in the private sector gets a better education than the average state-educated child.

The children of well-off, sharp-elbowed left-wing MC parents do just as well. Even while the parents congratulate each other on their commitment to state schooling.

Many many state educated kids get top grades enough to fill all the top unis and then some.

Oh and guess what they’re not all from the sharp elbowed middles classes

Are you on some kind of race to the bottom?

I did not say anything of the sort.

No I didn’t miss the point I was being facetious.

Tutoring is a lot more affordable than private education.

All? Including the SEN/physical disability sector? Really?

Hey does anyone know where I can attend an elbow sharpening course possibly taught in Latin? I feel like I’m missing out.

Without exception, every single comment I've read online 'supporting' VAT, fundamentally misunderstands the entire concept, and has no comprehension of the massive impact on state schools, in fact, I'd go so far as to say that the impact hasn't even been considered. It would be funny if it wasn't so bloody damaging to ALL children.