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.

Not sure I follow the private nursery = private preprep thing.

Do you mean normal private (i.e paid for) nursery or a nursery attached to a private school?

Maybe it's not buildings that are the thing but the grounds? That's what people always seem to notice as the biggest difference. And the fact you have to do sport the whole time which is proven in children to make you more alert and sharpen your brain etc.

The Grammar schools usually have fab grounds and a lot of emphasis on sports as well.

Just thinking out loud really.

Oh, and horsefucker monkeycock.

For you Fio!

Hey, haven't you noticed, EVERYTHING is better if you have money.. not just education!

Equality doesn't exist!

But, is money really everything?

After a certain amount of money, so you have a roof over your head, food, clothes etc. things don't seem to improve happiness-wise.

Britain always scores low in terms of happiness, and especially childrens' happiness, although how they measure it is anyone's guess.

It seems to be that happiness comes from meeting basic needs, then from good relationships with family and friends. If you move away from family to pursue a high powered career in london, then never have time to see your family, but earn squillions, you are considered a success. But I'm not sure that these people are always happy.

Chukkypig you are not wrong. And I sing for a similar hymn sheet often myself. However there a times when it's hard to swallow, (and keep singing!) like for me, today, when I started this thread when I get really narked about the whole inequality thing

I agree that private schools aren't always the best thing for all students. I did well academically but it did me no good socially - I was out of place in my 'posh' school and out of place at home with all the state school students.

I am putting all my hopes into an 'outstanding' school (according to Ofsted) with less than 30% grade A-Cs at GCSE (on that list) in a deprived area. But it feels right. And for the first time ever it is over-subscribed with middle-class parents out of the catchment area who have realised, as DH and I did, that it has the makings of a damn good school. And a different intake, with different expectations and backgrounds might be just what it needs to improve dramatically

Who knows. It's all a lottery to a very large extent. And that is what is unfair.

I disagree with your basic premise.

The private school you just experienced may well be a very good one. But there are plenty of state schools that are much better than many private ones. Yes, the adult-pupil ratio is invariably better in a private school. That doesn't mean the school is better run or that children are receiving a better education than in a well-run state school.

Paul MacCartney sent his children to state schools and Stella seems to have done ok.

I went to a private school and it was, how can I put it? - seriously flawed.

Haven't read the whole thread but just wanted to add the following. My sister is a Primary School teacher. She has worked in schools in Britain and abroad. She is currently abroad as the pay is better but she has told me that she teaches the same curriculum and to the same standard to both British state schools and British schools abroad. So those paying through the nose for education don't get any extra from her.

Eponine have checked your thread out. I think the whole "money doesn't matter/happy happy" thing all goes down the swanny when it means your kids can't go along with the rest of the class. For us grown ups it's easier for so many reasons.

Don't be embarrassed to talk to the school about it and apply to any charities/govt funds which may be able to help. That's what they're there for and really, does it matter.

I still think that a lot of my privately schooled friends would have swapped all the material stuff for a dad who was at home sometimes.

Just to add, my 'sweeping generalisation' re the poor management of the state eductation system if referring to THE SYSTEM not individual schools whose 'management teams' are doing the best job they can and I'm sure there are excellent examples all over the country.

If our system was so great why is it failing so many kids? Why are we regarding as having one of the poorest eductional systems in Europe? Why are employers pushing for the International Bacalaureate rather than our increasingly feeble watered down qualifications? Why are universities having to educate students on basic english grammar and spelling before they can even begin on their 'advanced' studies?

The system itself IS badly managed and underfunded as is the NHS...

I read in a newspaper recently that around 50% of school children receive below average results in English and Maths!

PMSL!!!

isn't there a saying - lies, damn lies and statistics

I have lived virtually next door to a private school for nearly 10 years, I have had an intersting time observing the pupils and parents and listening to all the arguments and counter arguments between my friends as we all decide whether to send our kids there or not, it has been very instructive and almost an obbsession at times. I have had friends who start off being deeply ambivalent about the prospect of their children attending said school, change gradually until they are like pod people who have joined a cult, lured in by lovely uniforms and pipe bands and sports day dances in marquees. I have also had parents who have children there tell me in a resigned tone that it is not all it's cracked up to be. Some send children for reasons of family tradition, some because they have the money lying about and it seems silly not too, most have an exagerrated need to keep their children in a bubble of 'niceness' they have seen local teens slouching off the bus wearing black slacks and too much make-up and prefer shiny hair and kilts (not to mention a lovely accent). I have struggled to get my car out of my drive, hemmed in by the porsche cayenne driving designer handbag mothers who send their kids as a status thing (they have to send from P1 in case the kids are not clever enough to pass the entrance exam later). I have seen parents send their kids to compensate them for some perceived deficiencies in their own education or upbringing that has always made them feel that they are vaguely inferior. I have also met parents who have bright kids who they want stretched and parents who want their kids to not have to add being streetwise to the list of things they need to learn. What am I going to do? Well two of my kids have mild learning difficulties, other parents would not want them taking up the teachers time so the school would be very unlikely to admit them ( there is the small matter of the exam too). Sadly we are going to have to move to a town with a nice small state school instead, it has really saddened me to experience a growing division between friends who were close when our kids were small. I have quoted all those articles and papers proving that bright kids with good homes do well anywhere but nobody really wants to know, the reality is that exam passes are actually one of the least important reasons that people send children to private schools, they will just never admit it.

"...papers proving that bright kids with good homes do well anywhere "

Although that may be the case, generally, but don't you think that some parents feel that they don't want the risk of their children falling in with the 'wrong crowd'. If a school has an intake from an area which has a drug/knife culture, I don't think it's unreasonable for parents to try to discourage their children away from possible friendships involving those things.
Unfortunately, a child's peer group can have a greater influence on them than 'a good home'.

I get fairly annoyed when these threads go on and on about individual schools and how some state schools are fab and some private ones are crap. yadda yadda yadda.

This isn't about those individual schools. There is a fundamental problem in the UK in that during the 1970's education was a platform through which you could achieve social mobility (I know, I did it and I come across many people at senior levels who also did it). Today, the ladder has been removed and there is less social mobility. The political interfering has resulted in a two tier system: great schools (including many state schools) and crap schools (including many independant). And they become self-enforcing as parents who are able to (ie with the financial wherewithal and drive) get their children into the one set and those who can't settle for the other. And our children are now destined to follow our paths, because education is still the only real tool for social mobility.

And this is nothing to do with the individual schools and everything to do with government policy. And the solution is to engage with politics. What are the views of your local MP with regard to education? What soutions does your MP support? Did you take that into account when you voted? Did you vote? Have you thought about getting involved in politics?

These our our kids we are talking about here, and if we - as the most interested party of all - do not take action then who will?

I was in a seminar the other week talking about unions and the miners strike. They were speechless when I told them about the community support and the student and teahcer for the miners, and levels of political activity and demos, all undertaken by normal people, not militants. And the discussion was taking place at the London School of Economics - one of the original hotbeads of socialism (and now just a sausage machine for investment bankers). It makes me mad to see how normal people (yes, you) who could get involved, don't get involved. Parent Governers and PTA's are of course essential, but you need to change things at the top as well, and you can start with simple steps like making your local MP work for his money and earn his votes.

Of course we all have our views on what could/should be done - I have my own and they might be totally diametrically opposed to yours. so why not take those views and do something with them?

Great post squiffy.

I don't disagree squiffy. I am routinely horrified by home political (and communal) aparthy seeming to be the norm. Even amongst the young. Marching, shouting and caring passionately was a formative activity when I was at college. But yet again it depends on someone having the guts to stand up and fight. If you have apathetic, disinterested parents and/or come from a community that is totally politically disengaged, what hope is there for you? It shouldn't be down to how many noisy angry organised people live in your community. Should it?

And it doesn't always work. As a community our ward is routinely shat upon with regards to spending and planning decisions. We have a fantastic residents committee, who have the local councillors on board, and have reasonable good relations with our local MP, we make a fuss about everything but in the end we still can't improve our lot hugely. This isn't an argument for not getting involved but it isn't the whole solution.

We should be able to rely on our elected leaders to do their best for our schools, not spend their energies making knee jerk reactions to satisfy the voters.

We live close to three excellent state schools (5 min walk). Ds got into none of these but was offered a school 2 miles away in special measures despite every neighbour in our street and surrounding streets being offered one. After being on the waiting list for all three all summer and appealing he still had no place.

My parents pay for him now to go to a private school. Ds is doing very well academically and is very happy, his class has 15 pupils. I am pleased about this BUT want him to go to a local school where he would know the children in the area. We live in a very community based area and it was/is very important to me but not to the extent of sending him to a failing school.

I have reapplied for next year but still looks unlikely as there have been alot of new builds in the area in the last year.

Know this is off topic but just now have a difficult choice if he ever gets a place. Do I move him from where he is happy and doing well (he is the youngest in the school as well) or keep him where long term I feel he would be happier knowing and mixing with local children?

I am a single working parent and he is an only child. To me, friendships and playing with children locally are part of childhood, very much a part of mine and one I very much want him to enjoy.

What would you do????

I marched through London in the snow against Cuts in Education in 1980 when there was a Tory govt. Twenty three years later all the non-permanent staff lost their jobs in the school where I taught due to the action of the Tony Blair ("Education education education") government.

Doesn't matter who you vote for: the government always gets in.

Can i just say as someone who went to a private school that yes it's unfair that if you have the money you can get a better education but surely its just a lifestyle choice... Many people choose to send their child to a private school and sacrifice having a nice house, car etc... If i had been in a mainstreem school i would have come out with no qualifications at all. I have dsylexia and struggle with spelling, reading and writing. My older sister is the complete opposite, she is very bright and in the state school we were in could not be satisfied by the level of education they had to offer.... for example by yr 3 she had read all of the yr 6 level books and so had nothing to be going on with. My parents chose to send us to a private school instead of buying a bigger house and having a lavish life style. I can not thank them enough for their decision. Im now in my second year of university and doubt if i would be doing that had i been in a state school.

I think its the parents who make their children's education a sucess rather than a school. (within reason)

My son's school is low down in the league tables, but my son is doing well. The reason for this is that I am prepared to get my finger out and make do his homework, listen to him read for ten minutes a day.

Some parents cannot listen to their children read because they can't read themselves. I think that schools in deprived areas need to be provided with LSAs and smaller classes to ensure that children at schools in deprived areas learn to read.

My parents valued education. I passed the 11+ and went to Grammar school but only got 2 years before it was turned into a comprehensive. We were "taught" in mixed ability classes with kids who tormented anyone seen to be working. I was predicted (at 11) 10 decent O levels but came out with just 5, excluding maths.

My brother went straight to the comp and found that he could just coast along doing nothing and nobody bothered him. My parents tried in vain but he wouldn't work. He left school with no qualifications at all. We all thought he was a bit thick. Turns out he has an IQ of over 150 and many many years after leaving school he is now making good money in IT and doing an OU degree.

My own kids went to a variety of schools (one private, one High school and 2 grammar). My youngest is repeating his uncle's school years in doing the bare minimum but at least because it is a grammar he isn't allowed to sink too low. As parents we also value education but when you have a child who won't work at secondary level no amount of parental interest can change that.

I do get fed up with the tired old line that a bright child will do well wherever they go. Me and my brother are testament that this isn't the case. My DD1 was also really easily led and liked to gravitate towards the lowest in the class despite being clever. At the private school she ended up in she switched her energies to competing with the best in the class and was determined to beat him.

My DS1 went to the high school (non grammar) and did very well at GCSE because he is the sort of kid who is not peer led. He couldn't care less what people thought of him. He didn't do so well at A level because it turned out he had huge gaps in what he had been taught (partic maths) and wasn't at the same standard as the grammar school boys he ended up with (high schools here have no 6th form)

It very much depends on the personality of the child. Is it really fair to end up with no career prospects because at 14 you couldn't see that mucking about with your mates wasn't a good career move?

"It very much depends on the personality of the child. Is it really fair to end up with no career prospects because at 14 you couldn't see that mucking about with your mates wasn't a good career move? "

I think that children have to take a certain level of responsbilty for their own academic achievement. There is only so much that parents or a school can do. Ultimately its up to the child.

A hard working bright state school child will out strip a lazy private school child of similar intelligence and level of family support. You can take a horse to water but you cannot make it drink and the same is true for education.

It also has to be remember that getting no qualifications at the age 16 is not the end of the world. Although it is hard its not impossible to gain qualifications as adult.