What is the best way to have a dig at a private school parent?

[UrbanDad]

"No am I being unreasonable?" here. I am totally reasonable to have a go at an otherwise liberal mate who eschews a perfectly good state secondary school to send his DD to a private school miles away. He makes all kinds of rubbish excuses about how his DD needs nurturing, the local secondary is composed entirely of the Bash Street Kids and it doesn't have enough sporting or cultural activities. It's all a load of Horlicks and he knows it - it's just about allowing his DD (and him TBH) to mix with the "right kind of people". I cannot afford private school and even if I could or my DKs could get a scholarship I wouldn't send them there - I just think social apartheid for children is wrong and it's poison for social mobility.

He says "everyone wants the best for their kids". I agree, but my point is this - even for purely selfish reasons - I also want the best for everyone's kids (after a couple of generations I suspect I will be blood-related to quite a few of them as well) rather than to purchase a privileged status for my own. That will be poison chalice for my DKs as well - what? After all I spent on you, you can't even get a decent job? - and it inculcates them with a terrible ethos of "every man for himself" and "beggar my neighbour".

Does anyone have any other suggestions how I can humiliate, lampoon and pour scorn upon him for being a sell-out, please?

I care how Cruella de Ville spent her money.

rootypig - you don't need to explain it. David Mitchell explained the "private school subsidy" very succintly in the Observer over the weekend:
Private schools charitable status is great... if you're a foreign plutocrat.

tootsietoo - in this case, it is - in which case, more fool him for wasting his money. Interesting though, the Sutton Trust published evidence that, even to the extent (if any) A-level grades are inflated by private schools, that magic wears off for their degree results:
school pupils 'do better at university' [[http://www.theguardian.com/education/2010/dec/03/state-school-pupils-university]]

The Sutton Trust has also published an imaginative paper on "Open Access" to break down the eduactional apartheid - a cheaper way to mitigate the worst effects of the private school system than turning them into state schools:
Open Access

If the ConDems are serious about educational opportunity for all, they should embrace this approach.

Um, let me try that link again:
State school pupils do better at University

urban you need to read the research carefully, rathet than siezing upon the Guardian friendly headlines about state schools 'doing better'.

UrbanDad, that is not an explanation re charitable status.

It's a lot of hot air, it says:

(a) middle class being priced out of private education - this is a moan, it is not a fact, the facts show since 1997 pupil numbers have risen 10%, to 505,000. And only 25,000 of them foreign.
(b) School fees have been rising at approaching three times the rate of inflation for nearly a quarter of a century. - yes this is probably true
(c) I went to private school -- hahahahaha. (and he doesn't have any of his own yet, so the jury is still out on whether he'll send them to the local sink comp.)
(d) As charities, they don’t pay the same taxes as businesses. - Amazon don't pay taxes either. That's because they don't make profits, they invest their money in their business. Private schools are run not-for-profit for the benefits of their pupils. Given that there are no profits, there would be no corporation tax.
(e) "The considerable resources that public schools put into justifying their charitable status – for example, £365m a year in support for poorer pupils, according to Harman – is an index of what they must know they gain by being charities. It reveals the scale of the effective state subsidy."

That doesn't make any sense at all. Some schools are very generous to poorer pupils, others don't give a shit. It's bizarre to aggregate the sum of this and claim it provides the sum of state support.

The actual estimate by a group opposed to this is £88m www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-13468322

Also private schools might not WANT to be charities any more, it is often cheaper to turn into a business and stop providing charitable benefit to others, but they have no choice - you can't just convert a charity into a business.

Plus on that basis, you would surely sum the cost of educating these children in the state sector. With 480,000 British children at private schools which would cost £7k/head in the state sector, that comes to ~£3 billion being saved by the state.

So it's just a load of bollocks. 5% of private school children are foreign. 95% British, numbers are not in decline.

Also re the Sutton Trust:

(a) the head of the Sutton Trust calls for the state to give money to private schools because private school pupils will earn on average £200k more than their state counterparts over their careers

www.theguardian.com/education/2014/jul/03/subsidy-independent-school-fees

(b) the report you refer to starts off by pointing out that while, effectively an ABB at a state school is as good as an AAB at private, in terms of eventual degree outcome, so a one grade difference, the average private school student scores SIX grades higher than the average state school student.

So on the one hand you have six grades higher, and on the other hand one grade.

Also note that the independent sector as a whole, including all the nice-but-dim schools, does better than the state grammar sector, which is wholly selective.

Did no one else read this as a joke?

AgaPanthers: "(b) the report you refer to starts off by pointing out that while, effectively an ABB at a state school is as good as an AAB at private, in terms of eventual degree outcome, so a one grade difference, the average private school student scores SIX grades higher than the average state school student."

Of course they do - but private schools are selective, so you're comparing apples with oranges. Most of the state school pupils would not be selected or have sufficiently wealthy parents to be comparable.

If you compare the children who are in state schools but have the level of ability to get to private schools and who have parents who can afford it (which is a better comparison) that's where you have to look at whether private schools "add value" (in a purely academic results-oriented sense) and they don't, but what they do do is provide a fast-track to the richer professions by grade inflation and personal contacts.

And what would be really interesting is to see private schools submit value added data. I suspect that much of their high quality output is due to high-quality input with very motivated upper-middle class parents and very little to do with the quality of their teaching.

"that's where you have to look at whether private schools "add value" (in a purely academic results-oriented sense) and they don't"

That's almost impossible to prove one way or the other. Certainly saying 'they don't' doesn't cut the mustard.

As a single example, this school:

www.ashfordschool.co.uk/News/Latest-News/a-level-results-100721
www.ashfordschool.co.uk/News/Latest-News/gcse-results-100725

is in Kent, which largely exists for kids who failed the Kent Grammar school test.

Performs better than all but 'super-selective' grammar schools.

Schools that are charitable are good though as they enable children from poorer families who are bright or talented to gain a better education to suit their needs.
Anybody can apply and the bursaries can provide full funding for some children.

"I suspect that much of their high quality output is due to high-quality input with very motivated upper-middle class parents and very little to do with the quality of their teaching."

I believe you alluded to this in your OP:

"...it's just about allowing his DD (and him TBH) to mix with the "right kind of people"."

From a practical point of view, it makes life a lot easier as a teacher if all of the children in your class have parents who will nag them about homework and not tolerate bad behaviour.

In some ways this is a case of a Prisoner's Dilemma, as if all the private school kids with motivated parents were spread evenly around state schools it would do a lot to make those schools more effective, by diluting the more disruptive children. As soon as some people remove their children from this the worse it gets for those left behind.

I used to feel quite raw about this, after my daughter's best friend left their state primary school to go private. At the state school this child was not getting that much attention from the teacher, because she was neither near the top of the class, nor the bottom, nor being particularly disruptive. So she was sort of overlooked. At the private school the teachers aren't running around after kids who are playing up, so they can make sure that there aren't children who are just coasting through school.

I can see the advantages that it will bring to this child. To be honest I am envious of the opportunity that my daughter does not have as a result of my lower earnings. Every child should have the opportunities that children at private schools have.

However, for poking fun at your "liberal mate" one idea might be a few choice comments about whether the other Dad's in the playground have had any tips on tax avoidance, etc.

It doesn't read as genuine to me either. I can't believe some of the horrible answers.

Our previous 'friends' who are vocal about their disdain for private schools paid thousands over the asking price for their house in the right area for the local Stste school

We've effectively saved money by buying in not as good an area, and using a local private school.

Each to his own.

I have reported both these posts.

So it is fine for someone to ask for advice on how to bully his friend, in real life, for his education choices for his child, but not OK to express how disgusting you find that on an anonymous forum?

I send my children to private school.

It's our money and our choice and what we think is best for our children.

The overall cost of a 5 to 18 private education when you factor in fees inflation is about the cost of a very nice flat in one of the outer zones of London.

We know some families in a similar position to ours who have taken the decision to spend the money on investment properties to help their children on the property ladder.

What would you prefer we spent our money on?

SDTG you are welcome to report the OP and HQ can decide if it breaches the talk guidelines or not.

A post does not have to breach the Talk Guidelines to be nasty and small-minded, does it, Iggi?

Fwiw, I do not condone the name calling, but I do think that OP asking for ways to abuse his friend, because he does not agree with his friend's school choice is deeply unpleasant and verges on bullying.

If you love the school your dc are at so much, why do you give a crap where your friend's dc go to school?

If you really think he's a snob who looks down on your dc, then you need to cut contact, not engage in some sort of juvenile argument with him.

No indeed, but you were comparing my reporting of a post to me not complaining about the OP.

My apologies, Iggi - it is a while since I read the whole thread, so I had forgotten you had criticised the OP for wanting to humiliate his friend.

It's one of those threads that keeps on going isn't it?!