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.

I was just a bit surprised that you picked apart applesandmosesmummy's post. It was bad form.

Yes it was. Sorry applesandmosesmummy

Swedesinsunglasses, if they don't have a PGCE then they are not qualified teachers. Oxbridge degree or not, first or not, they simply are not qualified enough to teach in the state system. Plenty of state school teachers have Oxbridge degrees, a fair few I've worked with have PHds as well, but they all have a PGCE becuase the State recognises that a knowledge of one's subject is simply not enough for effective teaching.

It's true - I know a good few Oxbridge graduates (and I am one - good state education, you see). Many have firsts, and some of them think they'd be good teachers. I know one who entertains a fantasy of giving up his job and teaching classics in a "little private school" somewhere, which he obviously thinks would be some kind of cushy option. I snigger every time I think about this.

A load of recent Oxford graduates with Firsts and no teacher training? It sounds like a madhouse

Whats so much better about the 'core educational experience' in private vs public then? What practical steps can be taken to help the state sector emulate this?

You know the saying 'if it ain't broken, don't fix it'? I really don't see what good demolishing the unbroken part does if you haven't first fixed the part that needs fixing.

Because the broken bit can't be fixed without the parts.

PMSL at the idea that an Oxford degree qualifies you to reach. I've got one. I'd be a stunningly terrible teacher.

Oh my goodness it is precisely that smug "core educational values" that drives me around the bend. Whose core educational values are we talking about? Music and drama are extras? Are you kidding? No wonder we have a society with little cultural appreciation and a compulsion to chase after status and money.

most of my contemporaries who got Firsts would make dreadful teachers. It's actually quite a frightening thought.

I would MUCH rather have my children taught by somebody with a decent degree, some life experience and proper teacher training - and an aptitude for TEACHING - than somebody who is a world authority on the sex life of the cabbage white butterfly but can't tie his own shoelaces or take a train without help

Honetly, an Oxford First is not evidence of suitability for teaching

zazizoma - you misunderstand me. I never said music and drama were extras. I said extra music and drama lessons were available. I don't think for a minute that they shouldn't be subjects taught in schools. How on earth could you think, in the context of everything else I have said here, that I could have meant that?

You mean that the absence of a small proportion of kids from the state sector is whats wrong with it? They'd make such a difference?

Even if that was true, the first prerequisite on the state system is to abolish discriminatory admissions criteria. My DD can't go to the local school unless I lie.

I bet it isn't a madhouse though - I bet it's an absolutely top school with a very very high quality of education.
If you selected a random bunch of Oxbridge students with firsts, including some like the ones UQD knows, I'm sure it would be rubbish. If, on the other hand, if you selected them for natural flair at teaching and offered them the chance to develop on the job the useful bits out of the skills you learn on the PGCE, and managed them properly to make sure they deliver, you would end up with a fabulous bunch of inspired, inspiring teachers, which people who are in a position to choose absolutely any education they want for their kids would pay top whack for.
The notion that you can't be a good teacher without a PGCE and if you have a PGCE you will automatically be an adequate one, is exactly the kind of narrow-minded, bureaucratic, rules-based thinking which makes me think there should be something else on offer other than what the state provides.

I'd probably agree with you on the latter point, Grimma. But no entry requirement is more discriminatory and socially divisive than the requirement for parents to pay.

Having also been at Oxford i think I'd almost pay not to send my kids to schools full of newly graduated Oxford students. Shudder at the thought. I still can't believe that A PGCE isn't a prerequisite for all teachers - whether in the private or public sector.

Yes, UQD, I did misread "core educational experiences in school are being compared with the optional, additional experiences (music, sport, drama)."

What I understand from your posts is that you want equality in education, but don't seem to be able to articulate precisely what you mean by that, other than it involves a sense a fairness and stakeholding and not independent schools or vouchers.

I'm not sure if zaz's inference was from UQDs mail or mine but agree with his post of 12:09:55

UNQ, I am not trying to trivialise what you are saying, I'm simply sharing my overall impressions.

Slug, well that's OK with me about state schools and their PGCEs. I'm just telling you that some schools manage perfectly well without it and it's silly to say teachers aren't appropriately qualified without it. Maybe that's true in your children's school, it certainly isn't true always.

Kathyis6incheshigh, I didn't say that teachers without PGCEs could not be inspirational teachers, merely that they are not qualified. All things being equal, and having taught in both systems, I'd take the guarantee of an appropriate qualification every time.

'no entry requirement is more discriminatory and socially divisive than the requirement for parents to pay.'

Can't agree with that. Discriminating on the basis of the parents' religion is truly divisive. Look at the problems it exacerbated in northern ireland. Kids who never met, never played, never associated outside schools. Private school kids do play with their neighbours.

I am not sure, but I think in our area if there weren't any private schools then the affluent muslims who currently use them might feel their only option was to get their own faith school as an alternative to all the CofE and RCs.

It is actually one of the top schools in the country, academic achievement-wise and I know A level results aren't everything. Their school is an extremely happy and well-balanced place and a lot of the staff are really proper friends to my sixth former and have been brilliant at offering him guidance that is absolutely relevant.

For me, a penchant for teaching would trump the existence of a formalised "qualification."

swedes, it's simply a fact that teachers who are not teacher trained are not qualified. They have no teaching qualification.

zazizoma - it may have been my fault for expressing myself ambiguously. I have contributed here at length about the difficulties of an "equal" system. I should not be expected to come up with all the answers.

kathy - I like your idealism, but you get inspired and inspiring teachers everywhere. Obviously a PGCE is no guarantee. But we're talking as if most jobs don't have a requirement for a professional qualification. You can't be a fully-qualified accountant or a management consultant or a lawyer or a doctor straight out of college with no on-the-job training or qualifications. Why should teaching be different?

I agree there should be more flexible options than a one-size-fits-all state provision. (I've never been in favour of that.) I simply don't feel - and don't see how anyone can feel - that we live in a society aspiring to fairness if the discriminatory barrier of paying for education is in place.