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?

I'm a planet.

A blue one.

Metabilis3 - from Dr Who in the Pertwee days.

Most men in the UK believe in equal rights under the law for women and fairness at home. That is all feminism is. I would imagine on that definition jabed is a feminist. Yes?

No, I just discount them based on the fact that they come from someone proud to be dissociated from the actual world.

Most men in the UK believe in equal rights under the law for women and fairness at home. That is all feminism is. I would imagine on that definition jabed is a feminist. Yes?

I would be quite happy with that - yes.

This thread is hilarious!

I hestitate to bring it down to earth because it's had such a fascinating detour - can't say how relieved I am to hear normal people agreeing that the woman being paid for on a date is yucky - I've read too many polls etc suggesting that lots of people, some presumably aged under 80, think this is normal. Anyway, massive detour.

Would anyone mind if I returned to the original topic?

I feel I should ask as the West Country trip has been very scenic. I can hear Pam Ayres now... (alright, I know she's actually from Oxfordshire not the West Country at all...)

This thread is hilarious!

I agree-I go out all day-come back and after reading all the posts have to look back to OP to remember what it was about!

Well, essentially, I'd say that some independent schools might specify higher degree classifications from their staff from certain institutions, but that doesn't necessarily make those teachers particularly good, though some of them might be.

Yes, returning to the original point, I still believe it's possible to have a degree from the University of Gloucester and be an outstanding teacher.

So do I ET but I also believe on a practical level that the more selective schools may screen out applicants from less good universities unless that's a university which has a particular strength in the subject being recruited for. Or unless there's an outstanding letter in support. Or an outstanding record of attainment prior to attending that uni. Or something else in the application which is outstanding. And that can be hard to achieve on paper. Getting to the interview is what counts.

I don't actually care, thinking about it. I do not know what degree, or for where, my daughters' best teachers have. The kindest and nicest, sensitive, tactful and intuitively effective form tutor dd1 ever had was a PE teacher, dd2's lovely year six teacher probably hasn't a first from Cambridge in anything. It's just another of the much vaunted benefits of private schools that I wouldn't thank you for.

OK then.

Re the OP's query re whether private school teachers are more highly qualified, in this thread many of those with kids at private schools have claimed this is the case, which may or may not be true - what is more significant is their unquestioned assumption that having more highly-educated teachers inevitably leads to pupils with better results. I'm not aware of any research that proves that assumption is fact.

What the vast body of research on educational attainment has repeatdly shown, though, is (a) that children with more highly educated mothers (not fathers, interestingly) do better academically, and (b) that the surest and quickest way for any child to make progess is one-to-one tuition.

This ties in with the discussion as it appears to be the educational level of the parents rather than teachers we should be focusing on - if we want to make the biggest impact. But a bit unhelpful for hose from less well-educated backgrounds!

It also suggests, though, that if you are a well-educated mum yourself the best way you can help your kids - contrary to Xenia's suggestion - is to devote some of your time to helping your kids 1-1. (Rather than working fantasticaly long hours to pay to put them in a smaller class size of say 15.)

If you can't (not well-educated) or won't give your own dcs 1:1 attention, then rich parents often resort to the second-best of paying tutors or going for private schools, which due to the smaller teacher:pupil ratios, NOT the 'better' teachers, can go some way towards catching up with those pupils lucky enough to get 1:1 stimulation at home.

This musing came from contemplating a large nuber of educated and intelliget friends and acquaintances whose dcs did not achieve as highly, academically, as you might have expected based on their genes. Largely they had parents devoted to careers and hence educational support was generally farmed out to paid providers/schools. Obviously, my cross-section may be atypical and I don't wish to knock full-time working parents, many of whom have no other choice. But there does seem to be a correlation between v v long working hours and kids performing less well.

Xenia? Over to you.

That's a really interesting and thought-provoking post B&B

I sometimes work very long hours (and sometimes I don't). Certainly, I'm often away from home for days in end, usually overseas.

My kids all seem to be doing ok.

As I said, my sample may be skewed. Or your kids may benefit from your charming company disproportionately when you are there.

Interested to hear others' thoughts.

I think the truth may be that they benefit from my absence.

Should add that my work pattern varies, but when I'm up to my eyballs in work there is no question in my mind that my kids' progress suffers. Hard enough to get them to do essential homework let alone fun stuff on top of a v long day of work...

I like your theory, Metabilis, and would be the first to argue for a certain amount of beneficial neglect.

But there is a happy medium between hot-housing and ignoring.

Ah, my kids all know all about the Happy Medium. They already know all the really important stuff. The stuff that matters. I think they all prefer Aunt Beast though.

I tend to think parental input is more important when children are younger and that as they get bigger and learn to be independent (both as learners and in other more practical ways too) then it's good for them to fend for themselves more.

I hope so gelatinous, else mine are doomed.

Breadandbutterfly, what you say seems to be spot on and supported by the research and literature from the 1960's (Carter - Home , school and Work, Origins and Destinations) right through to the present day (Frank Ferudi and Catherine Hakim).

My DW is a well educated SAHM and we HE and I am happy to have it that way. Of course now I have said it, it will all be patronizing humbug designed to keep women at home and in their place :)

Goodnight.

All the Important stuff, my kids are learning from me. They know how to reverse the polarity of the neutron flow. They know where their towels are. They know not to get involved in a land war in Asia. They know never to build a bridge out of pearium and swans. All the other stuff they are hopefully getting from school.

Housewives often suggest working parents don't give chidlren attention but that's not true. In fact working parents are often better at dealing with children and brighter than the average housewife so their children tend to do better to. I know very few full time working parents who don't see their children in the way housewives tend to describe it on threads.

Instead most of us rush home to be there to help with homework and the like. We certainly did over almost 18 years. I suppose working parents are just all round better so of course we can manage work and home and balance of life whereas those not really up to much at work are at home and perhaps don't even manage their children and their work very well either.

Anyway I certainly don't agree that if men and women work they don't help with homework and music practice and the like.

Also if women work in high paid jobs then they can make a massive difference to child outcomes too and give a really good lead and example to their children as well as ensuring girls realise woman does not equal servant at home but can equal head of BP or whatever. All win win.