to find it incredibly irritating when in certain circles school fees are talked about as if they are a necessity, not a choice?

[emkana]

Like Emma Thomson currently on the Women programme on BBC 4, or very often in the "Style" section of the Sunday Times.

lil, the argument is that a critical number of middle class parents is essential to the success of a school (I think some studies have shown this) and the assumption is that all parents of children in private schools would be very vocal & pushy if their children were in a state school and so raise the standards. As ability (or at least attainment) is quite strongly correlated with income the ability range of privately educated children is actually strongly skewed to the higher end (of course this is conveniently forgotten when considering university place allocations).

I always find the idea that my children would turn around the fortunes of the local school rather laughable. I'm not the sort to be on the school doorstep complaining all the time myself, but I do admit there do seem to be a fair few like that in private schools, so there could be some truth in it.

Of course, many state schools (in the leafy suburbs, for example) already have this critical number of middle class parents and probably won't benefit much from any more. I somehow suspect that it's these schools that the privately educated kids would be heading for (if they were all suddenly forced to leave their independent schools) rather than the failing schools, so I'm not entirely convinced state education would magically improve hugely with an influx of private kids.

I think the idea is that we independent parents are movers and shakers and would bring our collective 'power' to bear down of the state to improve our local schools.

Well...whilst I'm flattered...sadly I neither move nor shake with any efficacy. Indeed I volunteer at my local school and appear to have made no positive impact whatsoever.

And yes, I suppose my DC might improve the average SAT score if they attended, but really, what will that achieve for the school as a whole?

I could bore everyone to death with suggestions as to what might improve my local school...but sending my own DCs there, is low on the lsit of what I consider might actually make a real difference.

crossed with you Snorkie.
And you make a good point that if I were to send my DCs to state school I still would no doubt not send them to my local school which is awful on so many levels.
I might use my wealth to buy a house in the catchment of the best state school I could find and send my kids there. More likely I would home educate.

I assume home ed would be outlawed at the same time as private schools litchick. I too would move catchment.

I'm sorry, but this sniping is unpleasant. You have made your choice, fine. I made mine also. But don't denigrate the very real evidence that suggests involved parents do improve state schools.

And have some fucking compassion for the children who suffer in failing state schools.

There but the grace of god go all our children.

And not all state schools are shit holes. Get over yourselves.

I don't recognise the picture painted of (state) schools on this thread at all.
I also think once you've made the decision to educate privately, it supports your decision to demonise the state sector.

Indeed Igg, its most unpleasant. My choice to move ds to private school was motivated by that particular school and its failures regarding SN provision.

I have nothing but admiration for the vast majority of state schools and teachers.

I went to state school and did perfectly well. As did most of my contemporaries.

This fantasy that only private school will educate your child to a decent standard is just rubbish.

I apologise if you feel I am sniping at you MD. That was certainly not the intention. I have very much sympathy with people who have no choice but to send their children to failing schools and support efforts to turn those schools around. I am however pointing out that a simple ban on private schools will not imo have that effect. It's not to say that middle class parents wouldn't help at all (especially if there were enough of them), but those children won't end up at the schools that need them. I would move, litchick would move and most people who care about education in my town would move. People who think closing private schools would help failing schools are wrong. It would only work if you also stop people moving, but you can't really do that, the whole thing just becomes an infringement of liberties and won't really redress the inequalities.

The big problem in education isn't the gap between private and state, it's the gap between good state and bad state.

I have made all sorts of suggestions to improve my DSs private school. Made no difference whatsoever - and I pay and send two children there.

Parents have zero influence over what and how lessons get taught in any school.

In a state school it is even less likely to make a difference. Teachers answer to the headteacher and the headteacher answers to the LEA who pays everyone. He who pays the piper calls the tune. END OF.

Sick of Labour politicians blaming middle class parents who send DCs to private school for the failure of some state schools. Sheer hypocricy when so many Labour politicians went to private school or sent their DCs to one.

Its not just about the parents, its about the children, who bring different aspirations and cultural mindsets to schools. That makes a big difference.

And its hardly blaming the parents to point out their choices do have an impact. Its just the way it is.

You made your choices, don't expect everyone to pat you on the back and say your choic was great for your kids AND for everyone else, at least have the good manners to admit it was a purely selfish act and be done with this snitting at schools you have no personal knowledge of.

"The big problem in education isn't the gap between private and state, it's the gap between good state and bad state." Snorkie, does it seem co-incidental that the "good" state schools are in the areas with more expensive property, and the "bad" in the poorer areas?
Schools are a reflection of society. I fail to see how a school with a catchment of impoverished, downtrodden students with no family experience of success will ever escape this label of "failing".

why, thank you, Emkana!

but in fact iggi, they can and they do.

We have a new secondary here which has just got 85% A-C passes at GCSE. In one of the most deprived areas of society. It really gives me heart. And, believe it or not, its thanks to Labour educational policies.

So it can be done.

If you consider doing the best for my children to be purely selfish then yes that's what it was & I've never claimed anything else.

I've never claimed my choice was great for everyone else either MD, you seem to be attacking me & making me out to be a great ogre.

And what makes you think I have no knowledge of my local school which is the only one I've been critical of? By the way I never called it (and far less all state schools) a shithole. You are the one using emotive words like demonise, not me. I have huge admiration for teachers too btw.

I believe failing schools would not improve if independent schools were banned because very few of those children would end up there. I'm not convinced the better state schools would improve much, because they are already quite good. (The school I would move about 10 miles to be in catchment for myself is one of the top comprehensives in the country and gets better A level results than the independent my dc attend).

I think this thread is going the way of all such threads, but please stop the personal attacks.

I used the word demonise, not MD.

Absolutely right, MD. People who deny that the existence of independent schools affects state education are both wilfully choosing to ignore a robust body of evidence, and trying to have their cake and eat it. Go ahead, eat your cake, I don't blame you for doing the best for your child, but let's at least be honest about what's going on so we can work to improve education for ALL children (not just our own) in the future.

Oh, and what DID Emma Thomson say?!

apologies MD and iggie again then.

And to answer your point about catchments and standards iggie, there is a correlation yes, but not a perfect one. There are poorly performing schools in not too bad areas as well and as MD states, sometimes good schools in deprived areas (that one is easier to understand, since schools in these areas often qualify for extra funding).

Snorkie, none of that was aimed at you. I read your previous post with interest. We believe different things, which is fine. But there was a moment when the posts were getting sniggery about the ghastliness of state schools. It rather ruined an interesting thread for me.

I am a parent who educates privately also. I just don't feel it necessary to back up my choices by dismissing all state education. As you say, its the difference between good and bad state education, and as you will see from my post about my local secondary, with political will and commitment extremely positive change can be effected. When you work in state schools, even failing ones, you are always aware of those beautiful children whose lives are being ruined by a cultural apartheid.

Thanks for clarifying MD. I too will hope for positive change in my local school. There are changes afoot there, but unfortunately the funding for them keeps getting scaled back, and I fear the kids may not get all they deserve (many of them are also lovely). There are big upheavals in the management at the moment & there is far too high staff turnover. It's not a high deprivation area (below national average free school meals for example) and should perform way better than it does.

I tend to think the first and foremost duty of each parent is to their own children. So we all make our individual choices depending on what we can best do for them.

But whether we choose state or private, faith or non-denominational, or are stuck with Hobson's choice, we still have the same responsibility as every other citizen of the country - whether they have kids or not - to support the education of all children. So, at the most basic level we all pay our taxes; beyond that we hopefully choose our politicians with their education policies in mind, campaign for fairer admissions, whatever.

A large factor in our decision to use a private primary school was that all the local state schools are 'faith'. DH is actively campaigning on the issue. We didn't have to send our DD to those schools to become involved in trying to make the system fairer, which is the main problem we observe in them.

Fortunately the same issue doesn't apply to the secondary choices so she can be donated back to the state machine as a nicely oiled little cog

snorkie

hoping to make a similar donation myself, grimma!

Had a blinding flash of realisation about this question of 'middle class parents improving state schools' by sending their DCs there rather than to private schools.

The often quoted statistic is that 7% of childen are in privte schools. Lets suppose all of that 7% suddenly turned up at state schools. Assumeing that state schools will continue to limit class sizes to 30 pupils that means every state school class would gain 2 privately educated children and their middle class parents. I do not believe that adding just 2 private school chldren to a each class in a failing state school is really going to turn it round. It is just a a fallacy.

Moreover, why does no one ever criticise teachers for abandoning failing state schools? Oh yes, I know why. Teachers are unionised, no one on the left could ever critcise union members. Plain fact is that failing schools struggle to attract good teachers and it is that factor that destabilises them and drives down standards more than the fact that a couple of middle class kids to to another school.

Don't get me wrong, anyone that teaches in a failing state school and is dedicated deserves high pay and high praise but the fact is most teachers would prefer to teach in a good schol than a bad school. It is not their fault or the fault of middle class parents. The arguement that middle class parents should go in and turn round state schools rather than send DCs private is utterly specious.

Not all state schools are bad or failing of course.

You said Abetadad, 'In a state school it is even less likely to make a difference. Teachers answer to the headteacher and the headteacher answers to the LEA who pays everyone. He who pays the piper calls the tune. END OF'

Honestly, in makes a huge difference, parents involvement in school. Not only middle class parents, all parents. You may not have experience of parents helping in state school but they do an enormous amount. Helping listen to children read. Helping out with swimming lessons, trips etc. Parent volunteers contribute hugely to state school life and as a body, if the PTA/CSA is well attended, it can have an important influence on the school.

I work FT but I am eternally grateful to the legions of parent volunteers who have helped my children on school trips and listened to them read over the years, influenced how many staff need to be in the playground, helped champion healthy eating in the school canteen, helped support the early literacy support clubs etc. etc.