to think it was a mistake to give a damn about education?

[AbbyLubber]

Ok, I know some will really disagree about this, but I am fed up. Really furious. I earn a solid, not great wage; so too dh. We have two children. We've scrimped and struggled and sweated to pay for them to go to independent schools, because they are both bright and because here in Oxfordshire the local state schools in our area are dreadful, really dreadful. We're almost at the end of our rope financially. My son has a scholarship, but the schools say we earn too much to qualify for a bursary, though they also admit that we don't actually earn enough to pay the fees over the long term.

WTF? AIBU to think that if we don't earn enough to pay the fees then that should BE a benchmark for help? I get that it's political, that they want to keep their charitable status, but surely this is madness? Perhaps I should add that we don't have a fine art collection we can sell, or rich parents... as per the ludicrous inquiry form the school sent around.

Isn't ANYONE else cross that soon unemployed single mums and the rich will be the only ones able to send their dcs to a good school of their choice - unless of course you pay in the other way, by buying a 675k house in the tiny Cherwell catchment area? Not that I'm against unemployed single mums and their kids - the more the merrier - but I wonder now why I worked full-time when my dcs were small to earn a decent wage.

belle - that all schools should be equally good does not mean that they need to be exactly the same.

Nothing's helpful when it comes to education policy. It has never made any sense as the government keep changing it.

equality has never happened, it's delusional to think that it will. I hope it does, I really do but I can't see it.

The think about taxation and education is that you aren't paying for your child to be educated, you are paying for everyone's children to be educated, as we think that an educated society will be better for everyone. So everytime a child doesn't get a good enough education it's your money being wasted.

But we don't pay taxes for things. We pay taxes to have a state.

No of course you can't have complete equality. There are people involved, that means that you can't reliably replicate results. But you can reduce inequality. Ideally to the point that all the hysteria that leads to tiny catchment areas, soaring house prices and people spending their parents life savings on fees can be eliminated.

It's this hysteria which drives more then a few families into the private sector in the first place. I don't think this is to blame though. What constitutes a good school?

belle - that was my point. What constitutes a good school? That's a complex question, so probably deserves a simple answer. How about one with good teachers in it?

I'd use an anology now but I am resisting.

I appologise for not reading some of the posts, the hayfever is doing nothing for my eyesight and ability to keep up.

What's wrong with a state school:
Discipline, there doesn't seem to be alot. Since when is it acceptable to not notice children being bullied or abused in the playground (media articles, experience as a parent and threads on here)

overregulation
lack of competition
class sizes
inability to cater for all children
poor teachers
lack of resources (yes, due to funds/poor management)

The point I really wanted to make was about the hysteria. I suspect that a lot of the decisions we make about childrens schooling don't make nearly as big a difference as we think they will (obviously there are cases where it does though). But because it is something we CAN (to a degree) control, it takes on a disproportionate importance in peoples lives.

True, it's only controlled by those with money though. Parents either pay for a private school or they pay to move house. I get this, what about the people that home ed though? Where do they fit into your scheme of things?

the only public school I've ever known to relieve fees was part of the GDST and that was only applicable to girls in the senior section- whose parents faced dramatic personal changes.

Your comments regarding lone parents are ill thought- after all, it is the quality of parenting and stimulating of children's interest in learning that really matters. I went to a state school- and have a master's in law. My children are at state schools and doing well, as a lone parent i'd rather be able to afford to enable them to experience life than scrimp for schooling and no life.

I know this isn't hugely on point but I'm slightly mystified by people saying that private medical insurance is less of an issue than private education and wondering why that is. It used to be much more of an issue, e.g. in 1992 when officially 2000 patients were waiting more than 2 years for an orthopaedic operation. There was a furore when Denis Healey's wife Edna went private for an operation, much as politicians who promote state education for all get huge stick for choosing private education for their own children. There's still plenty of people waiting a long time for NHS treatment (usually now AFAIK as a result of repeated treatment cancellation rather than official upfront waiting lists) but waiting lists really HAVE shrunk, there really ARE more staff in there and hence this is much less of an issue than it used to be. Also of course the continuing privatisation of the NHS has blurred the boundaries.

Sorry, that's all.

"And the problem is that a large swathe of movers and shakers have a vested interest in keeping things exactly how they are, thank you very much, because they it keeps the riff-raff exactly where they want them. "

Absolutely - right to the heart of the problem.

"What's wrong with a state school:
Discipline, there doesn't seem to be alot. Since when is it acceptable to not notice children being bullied or abused in the playground (media articles, experience as a parent and threads on here)

overregulation
lack of competition
class sizes
inability to cater for all children
poor teachers
lack of resources (yes, due to funds/poor management) "

This is a definition of a bad school, not a definition of a state school! Bad schools exist in both sectors.

Your 4th point is particularly telling - private schools by definition don't, so never have to prove themselves either way.

Totally agree with your last post seeker. Clearly some people find it difficult to differentiate between good and bad!

'a large swathe of movers and shakers have a vested interest in keeping things exactly how they are'

Your assertion makes no sense. The movers and shakers want as many high-earners as possible to tax.

' would be far better if there were NO fee paying schools and everyone had to support the state system, thus making an even playing field for university entrance.'

I want my children to be stretched as far as they can comfortably and enjoyably go. This will never happen in our local comprehensive because the head there doesn't understand what the word academic means.

I don't want them 'earning' two or three tourism, engineering and PE GCSEs at A*. They need to be spending their time on higher mathematics skills and languages (though of course it's good to have an art or music GCSE as well)

If you ban private schools I will take them out of the state school and teach them Latin GCSE, and all the tough subjects myself, in the hope that an enlightened university will see that they can reach high academic subjects.

I will do this because I know that millions of kids in Asia aren't afraid to tackle hard subjects and these are the children mine will be competing against for the rest of their lives.

"By belledechocolatefluffybun... Sat 22-May-10 00:14:25
I'd use an anology now but I am resisting.

I appologise for not reading some of the posts, the hayfever is doing nothing for my eyesight and ability to keep up.

What's wrong with a state school:
Discipline, there doesn't seem to be alot. Since when is it acceptable to not notice children being bullied or abused in the playground (media articles, experience as a parent and threads on here)

overregulation
lack of competition
class sizes
inability to cater for all children
poor teachers
lack of resources (yes, due to funds/poor management)"
Belledechoc, are you seriously saying that is your definition of a state school?
How incredibly rude, arrogant and downright ignorant

I am so angry that I am tempted to comment on your spelling but that would be a little mean and after all I am only a state-educated, state-employed English teacher so by your definition "poor" and therefore not able to comment so I will content myself with

My children go to the local state school, which is rated as "good". We have contemplated private as we could afford it. However,

I think it IS good because:

• My DS who is a bit behind gets extra one-on-one tuition
• The teachers have good discipline, and are dedicated
• Lots of parents go into the school to help, so children get more one-on-one time for spelling and reading (I do reading one morning a week in my DS class, as he was behind on that, and it helped me see how the school works), there seems to be a parent helper almost every day!
• I joined the PTA to help fund raising, and lots of other parents do, and we have created a veg garden for every year group, and have funded a new playground this way, as well as new computers and school trips.

Basically, it is the support of the parents that makes this state school work out really well.

Another thing that parents do is to pay for Kumon or private tuition if child falls behind.

All in all, a MUCH cheaper solution, if you are a dedicated parent, and find a school with like minded people, there is no need to go private IMHO.

I wondered what an 'anology' was too! Something they teach you at private school?!

Also PMSL at the people who don't realise that good state schools do further maths, several languages etc etc

PS; before anyone makes assumptions, the school isn´t oversubscribed

Yes, but it sounds as though you are still at primary level, Chandon.

It's different when you want your children to do stretching, academic, subjects and the local state school refuses to have them on the curriculum.

Our local state school does French. Just about. A large proportion don't actually take the GCSE. That's the only modern language available.

OP thinks life is hard because she doesn't get free money from someone else to pay for her kids' school fees. Try being a governor at a state school!

We are lucky enough to live somewhere with very good state schools. I'm a governor at ds's and the prospect with the new government and spending cuts is frightening - atm our school is looking at a £1.5k 'surplus' on the budget for next year. And we've already discovered there's a wall that's falling down and will need to be fixed.

We are begging the PTA to pay for new chairs (and we really do need new chairs for the kids, the current lot are becoming dangerous). Again, we are lucky to have a PTA that does raise several grand a year BUT most parents think it should only be used for stuff that's nice to have but not essential. They are right, fundamentally, but actually with money the way it is we desperately need the PTA to fund stuff that the government should provide.

I can see that within a year or so we are going to have to start sacking TAs (staffing being the biggest cost) and cancelling things like chess club (costs a grand a year to run).

Thankfully the county council has finally agreed to pay towards replacing all the 1950s curtain walling that is coming to the end of its life and is becoming dangerous. They won't replace all of it but will start work on the Foundation unit next academic year. Although for budget/practical reasons, the work will have to be done during term time so God knows where we'll put the nursery and reception children while it goes on. We are seriously thinking about shutting down the nursery to save money, only apparently there will be a massive battle with County if we do.