I send my child to private school because....?

[jabed]

Well, I don?t actually, I just work in one. But it seems to be a constant source of questioning on MN and given the current news articles (I have been reading the DM and Tory graph online) about how many of our left wing leaders hypocritically claim to be egalitarian and socialist whilst buying education for their children , or have had education paid for by their own parents. I just wondered, what is it we expect from education, and why is it some of us are willing to pay for whatever that is and how they see that as worthy of their money.

There you go. :)

Thinking about it, it seems that what some parents want to do is perform a kind of Henry Higgins stunt on their kids, who they (the parents) see as basically socially inferior, and so wish to try to hide that in the hope they will be accepted by their social superiors and so trick their way into a job beyond their social station.

I find that attitude pretty reprehensible - maybe because my family come from abroad I don't worry where I stand within the British class system, but the very last message I would wish to impart to any child is that they ought to learn to hide who they really are and their origins - on the contrary, true confidence comes from being comfortable in your own skin, being yourself.

Can't imagine how tiring it must get going to work every day trying to keep up that kind of pointless facade, of posh accents and Latin madrigals for breakfast. Sheesh.

I agree with the John O'Farrell article-it is more or less what I have been saying-that my DCs are where they want to be, and all for free.

breadandbutterfly - whatever you say about grammar and whether something is "grammatically correct" or not, the fact is that if you are speaking to someone whose first language is not English, there are grammatical norms (the norms which we are generally expected to use for written communication at school and to use for speech where necessary for purposes of effective communication with non-local dialect speakers). If you cannot demonstrate that you are capable of using that form of English where necessary you are limiting your employment opportunities somewhat. Just as people from Southern Germany, Austria and Switzerland have to learn a bit of High German at school in order to be able to understand a single word the other supposed German speakers say to them. Yes, the problem with English is that some people try to take the norms further than they do, in reality, go, but there are, nevertheless quite a few accepted norms (eg that "I did it" is preferable to "I done it" and is therefore what you would teach first off to someone learning English as a foreign language....).

A colleague was told (brutally) at an interview that he had no hope of getting a new job unless he improved his grammar. He took the criticism on the chin, did something about it, and was successful at the next interview he attended.

I've been lurking and watching this tread from the begining but decided not to post at first because all my 6 were educated by the state in an area where almost everyone goes to the village primary and then onto the catchment comp . It is a rural area but not a wealthy rural idyll. Lots of DC on FSM and a few kids who never have a holiday even in the UK let alone have a passport (so no school trips abroad).

There are private schools in the nearby town. One for boys and its sister school for girls. Very selective and expensive and has a very wide catchment so takes weekly boarders too. My 3 dyslexic sons wouldn't have passed the exam to get in even if we could have afforded the fees. I would never have sent my sons there because it is single sex. I don't just want my boys doing drama/music productions with girls and the occasional lesson at 16+. I want them in the same playground, dining room etc.

The only other private school which would be close enough IMO is an ex boys boarding school which now takes day pupils. The intake in year 7 is 60-70. I think that is too small for secondary. I prefer mine at a large school split into houses. One DS was in a year of 450+ that is a massive year even for a large comp. The same DS had 45 in his class at primary and that class 'worked' better than his older sister's class of 11 at the same primary school.

Sorry this has moved onto accents!

Mine all have very naice east midlands accents and anyone who thinks them northern are wrong. It never held my older ones back. Both went to good universities.....one even went posh.

DS2 and DS4 both got onto good apprenticeships the youngest 2 are now 17 and 15 so we will soon be finished with school!

The main point I want to make is if some state schools are leading children up the garden path in thinking accents and grammar do not matter then that is a great shame. Of course in some jobs you need an accent - there was a time at the BBC when you could not get in without a regional accent as that the then current ethos. You may need a particular accent for some jobs but just learn what you need for particular jobs and act accordingly (or avoid those jobs like the plague if you can't be bothered to change or fit in).

(I think I do know the difference between aitch and haitch, but have no problems if people want to think otherwise.)

This makes interesting reading and I think nicely demonstrates what a wide range of reasons there are underlying the educational choices we make for our children.

I have just moved my children from the state sector to the private sector and have many reasons for doing do:

1. Geeky ds stands out less and is no longer ostracised by his peers.

1. Ds is not effortlessly top at everything so this gives me hope he might be pushed to acquire the work ethic which his father and I struggle with.

1. Shy, underperforming dd went into a class of 10 where her voice can now be heard and her difficulties identified.

1. Dh and I are both state educated and both went to Oxford. All our lives we have been held back by a lack of self confidence. From my observations of colleagues and knowing how they wer educated, I think that a private education may help to give my children the confidence which I lack.

Xenia - you could argue that having the 'right' accent matters in terms of getting a job in much the same way as being from the 'right' religious/cultural background matters but surely even you would never try to persuade someone to change religion because it is easier to get jobs as a C of E than a Catholic or Muslim, say, surely?

What is wrong with being true to yourself, and your roots? The only reason I can think of for encouraging your children to lose your family's accent is because you are ashamed of it. I find that rather sad - I am sure your accent is just fine and there is no need to pay through the nose so your children can ape their supposed social superiors.

Why anyone would want a job where they have to effectively act at being someone they are not every day is just beyond me.

There's a poster on this thread who very honestly talks about his hiding of his roots from his current social circle. Very sad- and even sadder that his children are being encouraged to forget their roots even further. But a classic British trope of course- not sure whether the same thing happens in other countries.

Two other things. It is a myth that state primary schools don't put any emphasis on grammar, confidence and public speaking- that's what the much disposed "listening and speaking" is about.

And it has struck me again that people talk about moving their children to private school because they were unhappy about some element of the state school. This is just about moving your child from a school that doesn't suit them. Being unhappy with a state school is a good reason for moving schools. Not necessarily a complete explanation for choosing private.

rabbitstew - a few points. Firstly, English is not like German or say Arabic - in that your quote;

"Just as people from Southern Germany, Austria and Switzerland have to learn a bit of High German at school in order to be able to understand a single word the other supposed German speakers say to them"

demonstrably makes no sense in English. e can understand perfectly well what is meant when someone says 'I done' instead of 'I did'. Whilst Americans may have needed subtitles to understand Trainspotting (the film) that is a pretty extreme example and relates to two very far away countries, and relates to the accent not the grammar anyway.

Whilst of course I would teach a non-native speaker standard English grammar to begin with, speaking is only one skill they need to master. To survive in the UK their listening skills will neeed to be able to cope with people (ie the vast majority) who do not speak RP - you seem to have failed to understand the difference between productive and recetive use of language.

I'm sure even Xenia understands what her cleaner says without the need for translation - we all understand a range of accents in practice. Whilst I'm not suggesting that Xenia's children learn to speak like her cleaner, her children would be at a distinct disadvantage if they could not understand what the servants were saying without translation.

Likewise, as long as the cleaner can understand Xenia, then the language has fulfilled its aim ie communication.

Working class accents do not in any way impede communication. I see no evidence from my work as a teacher that those with working class accents lack the ability to communicate appropriately when it matters eg write a formal letter, for example.

There are no logical reasons for prejudice against working class or regional accents - it is just really offensive snobbery. I am shocked if not surprised tht in this day and age people are still tring to justify denying people jobs because they are the wrong caste class, just as I find people who discriminate on grounds of race or gendr offensive. Yes, I know it happens but that is no excuse for trying to mould oneself or on's children to 'fit in'. I would no more try to change a child's accent than I would whiten their skin.

Sorry, breadandbutterfly, but I think you will find that a lot of people find some accents difficult to understand. Maybe you have only ever heard already-modified versions of some accents... I know, for example, that whilst I had no problem understanding Geordie accents when people were speaking to me as an outsider, but sitting on a bus in Newcastle and listening to people talking around me was the closest I've ever got to hearing English as a foreign language.... People do modify their accents for non-local speakers in order to be understood.

And try explaining to someone already struggling with English as a 2nd language that it is their problem they can't understand the strong regional accent of the person supposedly helping them on the telephone - I would have a strong preference as an employer of someone having to deal with people from all around the country and overseas over the telephone to have an accent that was not too broad.

I have various in-laws from different countries, whose English is very good but not fluent (they don't live in this country). I promise you, it is hard enough to keep up with us all speaking very quickly without having to translate into their language a form of English they haven't even been taught. If you can't employ people who speak hundreds of different foreign languages, then any job which involves contact with people from an awful lot of different countries where English is not the main language, then the more neutral your English grammar and accent, the better for them. Being unable to modify your speech and grammar IS, therefore, potentially harming your employability, since so many jobs require you to communicate with a huge variety of people with differing degrees of ability in English. You can't assume everyone is so well educated that they can understand any accent and any version of English grammar that is thrown at them.

Those claiming that not speaking with a naice accent is a barrier for doing well in life are utterly deluded.

DH works for a top London management consultancy. He is Scottish. His boss is a northerner. I have met a number of his colleagues- there is a real variety of accents and that clearly didn't prevent then from getting on in life. Whilst at university, a friend's father was a QC. He was a yorkshireman and spoke as a Yorkshireman should. I would imagine most of us could come up with plenty of examples...

The question about if I say change your accent to obtain a job being as bad as making your name Jane Smith rather than Reema Patel - well people can do as they choose. Some compete well whilst being very different from others. Others choose to wear the right sort of suit and speak the way of those who might hire them. As long as people know that there is a game there to be played and do not forget it is operating they can decide how much they want to be part of the game and on what terms.

What you call a 'game to be played' is discrimination, pure and simple. Reema Patel might be able to change her name, but not her skin colour. By your metaphor, she is then 'out of the game'.

This is no game - this is real life and those who discriminate against her race or someone else's accent are both below contempt, IMO.

rabbitstew - I have no reason to believe that those with local or working class accents are any less able than the rest of us to modify their accents when speaking to non-native speakers. It is common courtesy, much like not using technical jargon when speaking to a non-professional. I certainly do it, despite being RP to start with, and I have encountered no evidence that others don't do the same. In fact, part of my job involves assessing and verifying Speaking and Listening Tests in which one of the skills assessed is the ability to speak in the correct register ie formally or informally as appropriate. I can assure you that there is no difference in success at this between my plummy students and my working class ones - formal language is NOT the same as RP - plenty of posh kids still need to remember not to swear, for example, and correct use of non-verbal ie body language varies hugely within both categories.

Plenty of 'like' and 'sort of' with an RP accent, etc etc - RP does not equal perfect written formal English.

Oh come on - discriminating against someone because they have poor grammar or an indesipherable accent is not the same as discriminating based on race. I also cant imagine why someone would want to change their name (or indeed need to) whereas how you speak is important in a lot of jobs.

By the way I am Irish and speak with an Irish accent so most certainly not the Queens english. However I pronounce my words and make and effort - that is all I am looking for in employees. I havent actually lost my accent at all despite working abroad for years.

Not sure I get your point, mindosa - on the one hand you claim to be Irish and have an accent and on the other to object to poor grammar or 'indesipherable' (sic) accents - where is your evidence that those with regional or class accents different to your own are indecipherable or have 'poor' grammar?

rabbitstew rolls eyes at breadandbutterfly. At what point have I ever said that working class people can't modify their accent as a common courtesy to those listening to them? Surely the same applies in a job interview? If you can't be bothered with that common courtesy, you don't get the job. If you don't understand that a certain modification may be required for some jobs, then you are disabling yourself unnecessarily. I don't want everyone to sound the same. I like regional accents - I think the Geordie one, for example, is rather attractive. I also think that for some jobs, a regional accent is an advantage, not a disadvantage. However, refuse to modify your accent one iota to suit your audience and you are playing just as unattractive a game as the people who think that everyone should speak RP: you are not doing your best to communicate effectively with your audience.

Having an accent is not synonymous for being poorly spoken. However some people with accents are poorly spoken, this includes people with cut glass posh accents (IME such people can still use bad grammar or have potty mouths - or be inarticulate). It behoves anyone who wants a certain type of job to speak 'well' this doesn't however mean losing a regional or class-based accent completely.

In other words, accent can be relevant for non class based reasons. Particularly over the telephone - I find people much easier to understand face to face than over the phone. The same is even more true if you are slightly hard of hearing - it's hard enough then to understand people who have the same sort of voice modulations as you, but even harder if they speak with a heavy accent, or a voice which goes up when your hard-of-hearing ears expected it to go down.

People with overly posh accents often barely move their mouths as they speak - which again can make it harder for some people to understand them. Even though I'm not deaf, I do find myself looking at peoples' mouths when they talk to me in a noisy environment.

(Or should I say overtly posh, so as not to imply that you can sound too posh?... Or is "posh" unacceptable altogether?).