AIBU to discuss A level success without private school spending?

[Absorbthecost]

Parents/carers who have not spent a penny on Educating their children and they have just received great A level results.

The sacrifices made all the struggle,

I’m interested to discuss families where the child has succeeded without need for private school

https://www.gbnews.com/money/private-school-fees-soar-vat

https://www.ft.com/content/091b214d-231b-414a-8f3e-9ef9fc021926?syn-25a6b1a6=1

Those who did pay,

presumably to secure great results at A level

The same kids off to Uni, placements easier to secure as less international competition. Uni the playing field evens.

And now time to pay for Uni,

https://inews.co.uk/news/education/university-tuition-fees-11000-2030-4705197?srsltid=AfmBOorss52PSHD6xJzisWMdeNxcXDen3IrCGS49nnGH1ZyDnmvTOh_k

A child who did outstanding (without spending a penny) the same result as a family who spent £250k + The above article is a low estimation for a selective U.K. day/ boarding.

The kids holding the same result off to the same Uni, How are families feeling!?…. Did you save to help towards the Uni Fees/accomodation.

I've noticed there are alot more private school pupils wanting to switch to state for 6th form. I hope these people realise that in many academy chains they prioritise pupils from with in academy chains before private pupils. On results day the pupils in the academy chain register their resuits and get the places required. Private or pupils outside the academy chain can only register later that day or the next day and have what's left over. Pupils already in the academy chain get prioritised over private regardless of grades and quite rightly so.

I hope this will change for academy chains and maybe something to campaign for? All children should have access to excellent education, regardless of background.

And if the aim is to get more privately educated children to switch to state, treating them equally (and treating all state school children equally as well) would probably help with that.

I would have thought those in the state sector have more resilience.

What are these supposed soft skills state children are supposed to be so crap at?

I think parental influence is huge despite environment. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree and all that ...

If someone had been in an academy chain since reception of course they should priority over someone who has gone private untill 6th form. You carnt just opt in when it suits you and expect to take the places of others who have used it all the way through

Is this a journalist looking for material, by any chance?

I disagree with this. What about late bloomers within state educated children? If you are in an academy from reception this is only because the parents, likely middle class, has secured a spot (potentially by buying an expensive house in catchment area).

6th form should be competitive and based on ability only, especially for government funded education.

But within state you just have to meet the entry requirements so of course state children already there will be prioritised. Somebody has to be. Why should it be competitive?Even grammars just do admissions on meeting admission criteria with those already there first prioritised. Many students choose to leave to less stuffy schools and want to go to huge sixth form colleges.

Academy chains are all over the country, they are normal schools there's not anything special about them and anyone state educated can attend them. When in an academy chain every child within have the right to move up to the college or 6 th form within in because they are already on the pupil register. That's why they get priority.

What is your definition of ‘excellent’ education. I am eternally curious what this utopia is when I see it written

high grades? Everyone gets an A*?
open space? How do you give fields to an inner city school?
access to sport? See above
access to music? How do you provide that many teachers and instruments and get children to take part who aren’t interested?

no school can do all these things as limited to space for one thing so would never be possible even with billions thrown at schools.

i say Michaela gives an excellent education but thousands would say it is an awful education.

I believe that everyone e has a different definition of what an excellent education is, everyone values different things.

what I disagree with is a subset of sharp elbowed parents securing an early spot at a certain school (before children get old enough to voice preference), maybe by buying property other parents cannot afford and then lock out other children from challenging them at the key entry points, secondary and sixth form.

state education should be open to everyone and if academic success is a stated strength of a school, there should be academic competition at key entry points.

But surely that school is only excellent because of the sharp elbowed people who get a spot in them early? A school’s excellence is mainly due to the quality of the intake and their drive to learn and engage. If you take away those sharp elbowed parents and motivated children than I am sure you will find the school will decrease in quality very quickly.

I am a bit confused by this argument.

Why should all sharp elbowed parent be in the same school until end of sixth form with no chance for other to get in? That is really bad for the other schools and children. Why should some children who are extremely able (sport, music, academic) be excluded because their parents did not secure an early place?

I don’t think this has any place in a fair , state funded education. Nobody should be able to secure tax payers money for their children, locking other children out. There should be some form of assessments at entry points, treating everyone fairly.

Whilst it might appear that state educated children can come out with 3 good GCSEs and you want the statistics to show that compared to privately educated children that state education gives better results

But like all statistics the numbers don’t show the truth when you look more closely

They don’t show how many state educated pupils A level students have never had a single private tutoring session.

Or where the pupil has parents who are involved and able to help with homework and revision schedules and anything their child needs help with

Or how many went to a private school at anytime from 5 - 18 years old.
Or how many of those pupils went to private school and then swapped to state after GCSEs as a way or rewriting history

With VAT on private education, what the government has failed to see in its pursuit of levelling the playing fields is that those coming from private education who happen to be genuinely bright and have had every opportunity to get great GCSE results
They will be the ones who get the 6th form places to do A levels over those who were state educated and failed to get the same or better results

You will never know how many pupils didn’t have a single private tutor or have involved parents who will push their children or position them to take advantage on every opportunity offered as parents lie.

There is plenty of chances for other kids to come in. Alevel courses are often more under subscribed than over in our area. Loads of kids bail after GCSE’s.

Then where do the less able children go? It's unfair to kick them out of their school because some private school kids might be brighter and need the place. State is for all, so you would need to do what every parent in state does and join the waiting list and join if someone chooses to leave. You carnt just kick them out

What entry points are you suggesting?

there are practically no feeder schools anymore so at the end of primary school you apply to a secondary school and get into it based on that criteria. Your primary school makes zero difference to entry.

year 7-10 - are you suggesting children get kicked out mid way in the GcSe course to make way for another child? How would the school fairly administer that? What criteria would they use? Schools do GCSe courses In Different orders and different paces- it wouldn’t be practical to have a mass movement. There would be so much catching up aside from the social aspect to having to assimilate lots of new children constantly. Where would the children kicked out go?

at sixth form there is a lot of movement generally as pupils change schools for a whole variety of reasons (a-level subject availability, whether they want to do a different qualification the school doesn’t offer etc) and schools open up to a much larger intake. I don’t know of any schools that don’t open up their sixth form for new applicants. Certainly my local comp has about 50 extra places for sixth from.

I think the reason for this is simply down to the fact that there are so many kids centred in and around the south east making certain schools very competitive to get into so they take the cream of the crop.

DD’s school had 1000 kids sit the entrance test. For 150 places. Obviously her school does very well in the league tables because they only take the cleverest kids in the first place. If we lived outside of London we’d likely just have to pay the fees and we’d get a place at a decent Indie (like my friend did for her kids. There was a test but it wasn’t difficult and was more for streaming purposes rather than for selection).

So in the south east, all the very clever kids are packed into a handful of schools (indies or grammars) but around the country, they are spread out across many different schools. And the league tables are all based on percentage of cohort.

@BananaPeels secondary and sixth form. My comment was due to a PP claiming that all sixth form places went to existing students who had locked in a place.

Existing pupils who are part of the academy chain, they get places because they are already on the academy chain role.

That basically doesn’t happen. Maybe in a super tiny school but in average comps with a few hundred per year, certainly in London, there is extensive movement and availability of places at sixth form. The issue is more does a pupil meet the grade criteria for entry onto the course they want.

@BananaPeels that sounds perfect! @Poppinpoppinpopcorn , I don’t think that should be allowed if the taxpayer is funding the education. If the academy is receiving state funding, all state pupils should be allowed to apply under equal conditions.

There's always a lot of nonsense on these type of threads and posters bashing other parents' choices.

Of course, it's not fair that the vast majority academically selective private schools get much better results than local comps. It's not fair that sharp-elbowed parents who can afford tutoring can get their kids into the best grammars. It's not fair that catchments around better state schools push up house prices in the surrounding areas.

Life isn't fair. The UK education system has never been fair. But what's the solution?

Those children are already there, why should they be booted out if they have the qualifications for the Alevel courses they want? Don’t like it, join in year 7 as opposed to swooping in after private to try and have some advantage in uni applications.

I am arguing for all children, whether they are privately educated or go to other state schools. A huge amount of development happens after 11.

It is terribly unfair that children who might have been tutored at 11 plus should be allowed to monopolise sixth form places. Of course they should keen their places if they qualify based on competitive assessment. But others should also be given the chance in a state funded education.