In thinking it is simply unfair that the standard of education that your children received is based on your financial status.

[lucyellensmum]

Yeah yeah, this old chestnut, but i feel i have to vent.

Yesterday i had the opportunity to get some "teaching practise" in a private primary shcool. It was like a different world. Small school, small class sizes. Wonderfully behaved, active, bright and happy children. It was really lovely, certainly made me think i might want to persue a career in teaching.

BUT the one thing i couldnt get past is the fact that these children were receiving this education because their parents are in a financial position to provide this. I have never posted on these threads before because it stinks of sour grapes that i can't afford this for my child. Even my friend who teaches there cannot afford to send her children . Its not that at all, their parents clearly work very hard for what they have and i don't begrudge that for one second. I think its great.

However, why should it be that if your parents are poor, or just average, or even just above average financially that you have to take your chances in an overstretched, underfunded state system. Its fundamentally wrong imo. Even in the state system it is biased towards wealthier families because if there is a good school in that area, the property prices rocket. Leaving average families with the "rest" of the schools.

Yes, people work hard for their living and should be able to reap the rewards of their hard work. But CHILDREN don't have any choice as to what family they are born into. Surely a child of a Junkie parent who has no interest in her/his child and sponges off the state etc (to take an extreme) has the same right to a decent education as that of a child who's parents are lawyers and MDs of major businesses.

I'm actually quite lucky, our local primaries are all pretty good schools. The secondaries are OK too. And YES i would totally abandon my principles and send my child to private school if i could afford it. The school i am describing has a 100% GCSE grade C or above pass rate, compared to the 70% of my DDs old school, compared to the 50% at the local state secondary unselective school.

The schooling system in this country is blatantly unfair, however i wouldnt want to be the person charged with putting it right as i dont have the answers.

LEM recognises that her grammar is diabolical on here too, so please dont comment

100% in agreement

Is that about my grammar fairy?

Well the educational accomplishments of children are best predicated by the educational accomplishments of their mothers. On the whole the more educated you are the financially better off you are (not in every case, but on average).

There was an interesting study a while back that showed that children who were deliberately (due to parental principles) sent to poorly performing state schools did as well or better than those sent to private schools by similar (but differently principled) parent, so it's not as simple as good school=good results. Many (but not all, I agree) of the children who get good results at private school would get good results at state schools because of the parental backing and encouragement.

Of course it's unfair lem. But at least all children here can get some kind of education. Even if it's not the best.

"that children who were deliberately (due to parental principles) sent to poorly performing state schools did as well or better than those sent to private schools by similar (but differently principled) parent"

I hope that's true nooka!

I've heard that as well, nooka.

.

I agree with you LEM. It is inherently unfair. I'm sorry about that. Life is very unfair in many respects and this is one.

Life's unfair is it not?

We have a high profile, private school in our area. I see some of the parents together. Usually involves long dresses after some ball or other. I know some of them fairly well. Mostly builders, restaurant owners etc and former shop assistants that married fairly well or so it seems on the surface.

Not in the least bit jealous My DD and her friends are getting a very good education in the state sector. Private, doesn't mean better. Also the druggies children do have the opportunity to get on in education if they have the will and the way. Have you had much opportunity to help in the state schools. At primary level most are quite pleasant

I guess the private school kids may benefit in the form of a slightly posher accent, superiority complex and a bit of networking but from what I've seen. No thank you for me.

ORM that is a very good point and one that crossed my mind too. I know that there are other children much worse off - that is even MORE unfair amd makes me

Speaking of unfairness - there haven't been too many famines in England recently - so perhaps much to be thankful for

(not much help but true nonetheless)

about eve, yes that was the impression i got from alot of the mums walking round. Over made up and well dressed And some very normal mums too i hasten to add.

That was my first venture into teaching and i have to say i loved it, more than i thought i would. Interestingly it was the feisty "naughty" group that i enjoyed the most! that was the post dinner brigade, they got better behaved as the day drew on - knackered

I do think that a good point is made that lots of state schools are as good if not better than private schools. However i do think that these schools tend to be in more affluent areas and you cannot expect a child who is attending a "failing" school is going to get a fair crack of the whip, no matter how motivated they are. IF indeed they are as the school must surely provide some, if not all of the motivation for study. The parents can only support this.

FWIW, i was not happy with my DD1s schools at all. However the fact that she has left school with a couple of GCSEs and a college course barely equivalent to the five is due to her and us as parents. I think i handled her schooling all wrong but that is a different issue. Would she have been any better off at private school - honestly, i can't say, possibly not. She is an extremely bright girl and im quite an intelligent person (despite my diabolical grammar). But she is lazy and unmotivated, which is pretty much history repeating itself. So heres hoping she becomes a mature student.

LEM She may well study later on. I was demotivated at school also and have been keeping a watchful eye on DD to make sure she keeps up so ISWYM.

I know we are lucky in my area to have one good school per town, but it still fails a few. I do know a girls who comes from a family of addicts though and she is doing brilliantly.

I don't find it unfair.

But I find nothing in life 'fair' and why should it be?

Instead I see it as short-sighted and a waste of future productivity and talent, not to invest the max in making ALL schools the best they can be.

Because it translates to a more productive work force.

unfortunately for the prosperous few they can buy advantage BUT peaches and pixi have rich father and they are a pair of idle rich fuckwits

I would be more upset about this if I thought that dd and ds were getting a bad education in the state system, but they are not.

Dd is now in Year 6 and ds in Year 3, and I see the evidence every week that their minds are being stretched and they are excited by the new things they are learning. Plus I have the joy of being able to add extra value to this by supplying a well-stocked family library (more books!!! Yeah!!!), interesting conversation over the dinner table and whatever stimulating outings we can afford.

We did have some rough moments (mainly to do with disabled access)- but I have no reason to believe that a private school would have handled that better. The beauty of the state system is that there are more people you can complain to- and our problems have been resolved.

We live in a city where the pass rate at GCSE is well below the national average (presumably for demographic reasons) but so far I have had no reason to be dissatisfied with the education my children are actually getting. After all, they don't have to prove those statistics in their own persons.

But I do agree that in general it is a great waste to have a society with such enormous class differences when it comes to education. It can only mean potential going to waste.

Our children go to a private school because and only because the two secondary schools on offer are truly diabolical.

We are not well off. I work 55 hours a week and my DH 45 hours to send them there.

My mum and PIL help us too but live very basically, two crappy cars, 4 bed semi so you can imagine the other children's parent's reaction to us.

I've had to teach my DC's to accept that we don't (or ever will) have the lifestyle they have but that appearences and good manners count for more than wealth. We often see their school friends out and about and we are mortified at their lack of manners and social graces.

It isn't fair that we should have to pay to get a half decent education for our DC'c but I'm so glad we made the choice to, even with what we've had to give up.

Maybethe govt put the very best of pupils to local selective schools give them more of a chance of this wonderful education - perhaps we could call these grammar schools??

LEM - life is unfair. Children born into well-to-do families will in all probability get more opportunities in life (it will certainly be easier for their parents to finance them).

Your best bet is to get a well-paid job so that you can afford to give your children the best possible education you can find and that matches their talents.

It never has, nor do I think it ever would, cross my mind to send my dd to a private school. I would consider it, in our situation at least, an unforgivable and unjustifiable waste of money (I am talking only about my family, no-one else's). I expect that my dd will do reasonably well at school because she has 2 (reasonably) intelligent and well-educated (in the state sector) parents.

I simply don't believe that private education is guaranteed to confer advantages on those who use it that are worth the massive sacrifices that I hear mentioned. I choose to give my dd and my family a decent lifestyle now with financial provision for her and our future rather than sink it all on the uncertain premise that private schooling will allow her to achieve more than she could in the state sector.

I also think that the introduction of parental "choice" in schooling was probably, on the whole, a bad thing.

LEM

Life is unfair.....

Some people are better looking than others

Some people are brainier than others

Some people have more money than others

Some people............

Gather up your social conscience and consider that there are lots of children far worse off than your own in terms of family background and education opportunities and this is what we need to be addressing, not bemoaning the lack of private standard education for all.

If we want standardisation it comes with the risk that we all get asked to accept the minimum level of quality just so that things are fair and this benefits no-one really.

Mindingmum: why do you see a four-bedroomed house as somehow inferior? Sounds great to me. Also, what is crappy aboput your two cars? YOu are fortunate to be able to have two cars and pay school fees. Many people cannot afford a mortgage, a 4 bed house, two cars.....Are you angry because you are spending your spare money on education, when you think you should be able to spend it on flashy cars and an even bigger house?

Many, many, parents who send children to independent schools have the kind of house, ordinary cars etc that you mention. Also, many families are working just as hard as you just to maintain a basic standard of living- not even able to pay for school fees as well. I think you need to stop feeling hard done by. You are doing what lots of people do, but the fact is, you are doing it to pay for the school- some do it just to live.

Flashman, don't even get me started on THAT!!!

Anna, aside from the fact taht we are piss poor at the moment, on the whole we are quite comfortable. but i think that Minding mum has highlighted the issue really well. Her and her DH have clearly worked really hard to keep their children in private school and it is unfair, if that is the right word, that they have to do this. I certainly don't have a problem with parents who send their children to private school, i probably would, if i could afford it.

The trouble is, its not always a case of "well get a better job and finance your childrens opportunities", for most people i think that is a fair comment, myself included. But what about the children of parents who either cannot or wont do this?? Surely they are being penalised?

I rather wish i didn't use the term unfair as im not completely niave, i do realise that life is on the whole, very unfair. I think i should have used the term "simply wrong".

I certainly think that parents have a right to pay for what they perceive to be the best education for their child, im not arguing with that. Rather i am saying that i think it is wrong that there are children who are clearly getting a second rate education because their parents, for whatever reason, cannot afford private or to move to the catchment area of better schools. Or maybe they are just lazy arses who coudlnt care less about their childrens education. Surely it is THESE children that almost deserve even more help, to help them break the chains of poverty??

but then perhaps im being niave.

Obviously there are lies, damn lies and statistics but....

didn't the author of Freakonomics prove that how well children did at school was influenced by their parents interest in their education and desire for them to do well rather than the quality of the school?

I went to the school I went to because it was the only one in our town and I don't think it would have occurred to my parents to send us elsewhere even if it had been possible (which it wouldn't as my mum didn't drive..). I sometimes think having a choice (or perceived choice) does not necessarily make it easier for parents...

Most of my friends similarily went to bog standard, non- selective schools - and most came from backgrounds which would probably be considered impoverished by present- day standards. They did well in life because their parents valued education and were supportive (not in a material sense) of their desires to get a better education and hence better jobs.