to think private schools having charitable status is taking the piss

[zanz1bar]

Most private schools have their charitable status as an accident of history. Does a school like Eton really deserve the same financial status as the NSPCC.

Can it really be justified by a few subsidized places.

We were always told to "teach to the middle." The quicker ones would not be bored because they would be turning to help out the slower ones. I can't believe someone's walking around with a PhD in Education based on this utter nonsense.

Must have been the water in Berkeley . . .

I guess the point is at the bottom of the pile the state does provide children with rubbish parents an insight into what their lives could be like if they do apply themselves, that certainly happened in my state education.
The teachers basically said don't be like your mum and dad, you can be more and then it's down to the individual to take that on board and do something with it, but if you put the brightest child into private school or Oxbridge without support from somewhere they will flounder and I'd apply that to young people starting in their careers too.
I did go to University but being the first from our family to do so, nobody could guide me and ensure I reached my potential and I probably have let myself down.
However I don't believe that state education now offers the inspiration that it did even 15 years ago and that's why DH and I go without most things that my family consider the norm in order to pay 4 sets of school fees.

Everyone is mad in California zazizoma. I know this from my learnings and also because I have been to Disneyland.

Amen, Morloth.

What about Widening Participation programmes, SWC?

30 seconds and a google search brought up that Oxford (didn't google Cambridge) have mature student arrangements and will accept open university A-level equivalent type things etc. Obviously I don't know exactly what is required because I haven't looked into it that deeply.

I didn't say it wouldn't be a struggle, hence the drive and ambition.

These stories attest to the infinite value of a good teacher, who can make an impact despite the system. I think that these good teachers, trained and qualified professionals, should be allowed to run their schools.

Message withdrawn

diving with a couple of tangential points: thinking about it majority of my friends and colleagues who went to well "regarded universities" after state school; who are in relatively well paid jobs, have elected to send their DC to private schools.

One of my conclusions is that if they were to abolish private schools our DC most of us would find a way of ensuring that our DC still had a good educational chance. I am happy to take mine out of private if everyone else does. You see there is a fear/insecurity whether justified or not that kids in private school have a better chance. And some people prefer to dip into their pension pots than risk their DC not having a very good shot at it. Not that diff to the idea of having private medical insurance except that it is more emotive a topic.

I think it has already been pointed out that the govt would have to increase taxes if we all stopped paying for private andentered state schools. That alone should tell you who is subsidising whom.

Those of us who champion the state system are often accused - and have been again, I notice, since I was last on - of somehow wanting the "lowest common denominator", of wanting to "take everyone down to the same level" and of wanting to "destroy/close good schools."

I can understand why people want to argue that we think this. It's easy, after all, to shoot that supposed viewpoint down with a bit of well-placed outrage. It's easy for our detractors to believe that we are some kind of anti-intellectual philistines striding across the educational landscape, clutching our GCSEs in Leisure & Tourism and scytheing down all top educational establishments in our path with a few well-aimed blows from The Great Leveller Of The SAT.

It's all nonsense, of course. This is not remotely anything to do with any arguments I have put - as people who have followed what I have said have realised.

I'm very happy for there to be "good schools." I just don't think the entry requirements should include "level of parental income", any more than they should include "name of the supernatural manifestation worshipped by parents" or, for that matter, "football team supported by parents".

People defend their private schools by singing the praises of their outstanding teaching. They mention the wonderful facilities which they so generously let out to "the community" (aren't we all "the community"??) in the holidays, so that they can keep their tax breaks show their philanthropic nature. But surely the fact that they are only normally available to those who have a spare £20K+ down the back of the sofa tells you something? I sometimes wonder if I am speaking Swahili...

It's not "jealousy" or "class war". Actually, what I feel about this most at the moment is sadness. Yes, sadness. That people are so petty, and so keen to hang on to what they see is best for them, that they lose sight of the bigger picture. That private school users are always keen to put the boot in to the state system at every opportunity, just to reassure themselves that it isn't very good really and they are not wasting their money.

How did this happen? Where did it all go wrong? When did the education of OUR children become the education of MY children and sod the rest of you? It doesn't bode well for the future...

"normally available to those who have a spare £20K+ down the back of the sofa tells you something? I sometimes wonder if I am speaking Swahili..."

That says it all as far as I'm concerned.
DH hasn't bought a new pair of shoes in 9 years to fund our children's education. We say a prayer of thanks everytime our car starts and we have never been on a holiday.
It's a case of priorities not having a spare £20k full stop.

UQD -"intellectual philistines striding across the educational landscape, clutching our GCSEs in Leisure & Tourism and scytheing down all top educational establishments in our path with a few well-aimed blows from The Great Leveller Of The SAT"

State educated or private school?

UQD- are you thinking of political career?

Morloth - lol @ your learnings & disneyland

Morloth - lol @ your learnings & disneyland

Doesn't a state school education cost around 4k per child? Aren't private school parents paying twice and thereby saving the exchequer money?

Frankly, I'd rather do without the tax breaks (such as they are) and pay the increase in fees.

Would stop all the bleating.

No Q it's about £2,200 well it was 4 years ago I guess it may have increased or been cut by now.

UD, you can have access to the same education as my children get it you get an appropriate job.

We have no family money. It is all based on merit and aspiration.

My DH is just an employee who doesn't even get an annual bonus.

Apple&Moses Mummy - they will never get it, you have battled valiantly, but I wouldn't bother trying to convince them.

They - uqd et al - manage to unashamedly hold two conflicitng views, namely that

a) State schools just good as indies, and so rich & snobbish (natch) parents are wasting their money, buying the Emperors New Clothes; and

b) Indie parents are unfairly buying a better education.

Illogical or what?

conflicting

Oh don't make that argument ST. I've done that one before. UD doesn't believe in planning careers to enable school fees to be paid. He'd prefer to believe that it is all inherited wealth and we've been keeping the proletariat down for generations.

You're right and then when my children are where they want to be, either emptying bins or at Oxford, either is fine with me as long as it's been their choice to make, no doubt that'll be unfair too.

Ha, inherited wealth indeed. We went around with 'holes in our breichs' so that I could have an independent education.

DH won a scholarship to a major public school and the compelling reason for his going was so that his family didn't have to feed him.

Inherited wealth indeed.

It is clear that parents who use the independent sector would be financially better off if PS were abolished. And I think their children would probably still end up with a good education- after all relative performance wouldn't change that much as people will find other ways to give their children a chance; just as motivated state school parents currently do.

But I repeat: taxes would have to go up to pay for it.

I did actually live in country were the private schools were nationalised and I witnessed that nothing much changed apart from well off parents got to keep/spend their money in diff ways