The best Independent schools generally take the highest qualified teachers?

[Hamishbear]

It might be obvious to many that the most academic schools insist that their teachers have an outstanding degree from one of the best universities but it wasn't to me.

For example if you want a job in Maths at Guildford High school allegedly you need a first in Maths from a well regarded university. You obviously need to be an outstanding teacher in the fullest sense too.

So do the elite schools usually have the best teachers? I suppose it stands to reason that there is more competition for jobs at schools that have a fantastic reputation?

PS I meant no peripathetic teachers available anymore in those areas.

Well, of any of the lawyers we engage ever start putting their fingers in their ears singing 'la la la I'm not listening' or start changing the subject when they realise everybody knows they don't know what they are talking about, I'll remember this thread.

@orange I'm sorry to hear about the music service in your LEA - where roughly is it? What a nightmare for you. It's not representative of the whole country though (I do worry about the future, as the cuts start to bite - but that's a different thread).

I would say funding might affect who might be able to take part in the NYO - presumably (since it's national) it requires travel to auditions and rehearsals, residential time, concerts etc. Are these totally free to everyone taking part? If not then by definition the private school children will be at an advantage as they are more likely to be able to afford to take part than children from state schools, particularly far-flung state schools in less affluent areas of the country?

Hi Mirabilis,
we are in the North of England, also my brother lives in Scotland and works in education and says that also in large parts of Scotland this is becoming a sad reality. Although this doesn't affect us too much as we have the means and cultural background (musicians) to source our own and pay for it, I feel sorry that so many children are being deprived of these opportunities. I think it should be every child's right to have access to an instrument or some music provision.....

I accept this is by no means a national picture though, just patchy across the UK, I know for example a secondary school outside of our LEA but quite close to where we live has excellent music provision and in fact has done so well with it that it has expanded it to include many children from outside its boundaries (ie anyone can use the facilities who lives close enough to travel). However this is only for older children, say 10-11+ so if your child wants to learn the violin aged 7 it's not going to be able to unless you source a private tutor. Ah sorry for longwinded thread!!

Yes. :(

Sorry that last post was to @teacher

sorry Metabilis not mirabilis

PS It annoys me that private schools are not being forced to do that as part of their charitable status? If a bog standard secondary school can make its music provision available, why can't private schools? The dance school my DD attends (very high standard dancing) had a mess up with a theatre booking and asked the private schools if they could use their theatres (and pay a booking fee) and they all said no. So much for inclusiveness in the community!

I don't know why people find my username so hard. It's also a sad reflection on the cultural capital of most mumsnetters :(

@orange I suppose it depends on which bit of 'the North' - presumably there is Saturday conservatoire and stuff like that at the Royla Northern, but that won't be accessible to everyone. I don't know much about Scottish music facilities except Feis roiss (I might have spelled that wrong) who are utterly wonderful but obviously only working in one sub genre.

Metabilis are you calling me ignorant?
I think mirabilis is a great latin word, if it helps demistify your perception I am pretty well versed in classic languages!!!!

Xenia - you can hardly suggest that the number of Olympians from private schools proves that private school sport is better. That's ridiculous. What it clearlyy reflects is that to be an Olympian you have to devote yourself to your sport - not only that, but your parents probably have to devote a huge amount of their time and money too, ferrying you around (even abroad) to train and compete, buy you eqipment etc. Not surprisingly, most poorer children ie those who couldn't afford to go to private school, and their parents, couldn't afford this either. They have to spend their time working for a living - the investment in time and equipment and travel costs, on top of lost income whilst doing this, is just far too great.

Sadly this country does not tend to fund poor but sporty kids to achieve in their sports. As happens in many other countries. Once they are well-known enough, then sponsorship (or prize money) etc may fill that gap. But it's getting to that stage that is the hurdle.

Orange it's a Pune or play on words as Terry Pratchett would say. But if you don't get the original reference you won't see the twist. Nobody on mumsnet has ever 'got it' which means (a) I really don't belong here and (b) I'm weirder than even I thought (and I know I'm unusual). :(

Bread - also of course posh schools poach top sportspeople from state schools (eg Tom Daley).

I thought that the issue with Tom and the reason why they had to move him was that he was being severely bullied for being so successful. This is an issue with successful children, a close friend of mine has a DD1 who is a champion at a different sport and she was bullied mercilessly at her state school too. In fact now that I think about this I know someone else in the same predicament...But that's a different thread...

I thought that the issue with Tom and the reason why they had to move him was that he was being severely bullied for being so successful

It was indeed. In his state school his peers threatened to break his legs
(and seemed to mean it). Of course public schools do what they always do best and he was offered a sports scholarship (100% free place) soon as it was known he needed a school. If I recall he had three offers, all good ones. He took the one nearest his home. He seems to be turning into a fine young man.

Not only are her comparisons meaningless her original assertion that the teaching of music in private schools is better is factually incorrect

Factually incorrect or not, it does seem to be the experience many who take that route. You may argue their experience is not valid. Thats up to you. So, what do you measure it by?

I thought that the issue with Tom and the reason why they had to move him was that he was being severely bullied for being so successful. This is an issue with successful children, a close friend of mine has a DD1 who is a champion at a different sport and she was bullied mercilessly at her state school too. In fact now that I think about this I know someone else in the same predicament...But that's a different thread...

I agree orangeberries. There are several sports persons in my school all of whom came to us needing a safe haven from state schools and bullies. Tom Daley was not amongst them I might say. However, he is in an excellent school for his sport and with others who can compete at a similar level. That is good for him.

The important thing to remember here is that a public school does not go out and "poach" pupils. We only step in when we are approached or when we hear there is a problem and we can step in. We can also do the same for academically gifted children. But you need to understand that they or their parents have to approach us. I think many people fail to realise that.

Essentially, the argument about both sport and music is about money, not schooling. There is no way a successful sportsperson or musician would get anywhere if they relied purely on what was provided by their school. If parents cannot afford to provide private lessons, take their DCs to training sessions, rehearsals and lessons, then they are unlikely to get very far, no matter what the choose to pursue. If the NYO follows the same pattern as the National Youth Theatre and National
Youth Music Theatre, then the courses run in school holidays are expensive- prohibitively so in some cases. Unless DCs have the means to pay or raise sponsorship, they can't really take part.

I used to teach an England under 18 national footballer, another boy who went on to play for a premiership football club, a girl who became an opera singer, a member of the British tumbling team and 4 who have gone on to have some degree of success in acting. All state schools, none were bullied. Generalisations don't help.

Generalisations don't help

Indeed they do not. It would seem you are more prone to this than the rest of us. What are you trying to suggest? That the experience of young people like TD and those I have met , and those orangeberries have met are all invalid because you know a couple of footballers and the odd actor minor who didnt get bullied?

I will not speak for other schools. In my own school we put a lot of financial resources into both sport and music facilities. This is done in the hope we might attact both top class competitive persons from both fields of endevour
(ie we offer scholarships) and because we know many parents come to us because they want those facilities for their own DC's.

We are at the end of the day a business, even when the business is education. We would not survive if we were not offering a top class product or service. State schools do not have to do that.

Don't you believe it jabed!! State schools are competing for custom.

If you are really serious about music or sport you need to go outside what is offered by the school. My friend's DDs, who have careers in music, travelled 60 miles to London for a music lesson every week. (one was state educated and one was private).

Jabed- where did I say that you are wrong? I am simply adding my own experiences.

And who on earth are you to be so rude about people you've never met?

The "odd actor minor", that is.

I am not denying that Tom Daly was bullied- that was well documented. My point is that not all talented kids in state schools are bullied. They're not.

You ignore my main point- that no talented and successful sportsperson gets where they get purely because of what the do at school.

and 4 who have gone on to have some degree of success in acting

I took "some degree of success" to indicate they were not major stars?

And who on earth are you to be so rude about people you've never met?

And who are you to invalidate the experiences of those you have not met?

It seems to me eviltwins that you seem to want to make everyone elses view a generalisation ( after all you are the one who made the comment).

It is not my experience or the experience of many that state schools are good plces. To keep suggesting otherwise is to invalidate the experiences of others.
How do you know that those DC's you taught were not bullied? Just because they never told you or because they stayed at the school where you taught? Maybe they thought they did not have a choice?

PS - I dont think TD believed he had a choice until his plight was mentioned and we came through for him. He had been bullied then for sometime. It wasnt new. This I do know because I knew someone who taught in his state school. I also have a relative who was once a footballer of some small note
(he played for England a considerable number of times and you would know the name if I gave it) . He was bullied but never said anything at school. He thought he had no choice)