Michael Wilshaw tells private schools to do more for the state sector

[muminlondon]

www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/teacher-blog/2013/oct/02/ofsted-michael-wilshaw-independent-schools

He's not afraid of being disliked, is he? He gave a speech to the heads of private schools telling them to sponsor academies in deprived areas - only 3% do so.

My favourite quotes are:

'... think less globally and more locally, "less Dubai and more Derby"'

'What might you say to parents who think that noblesse oblige is the latest perfume from Chanel?'

'Your pensions, many of the public may be surprised to learn, are subsidised by the taxpayer. Most of your teaching staff were educated at public expense. The independent sector gains 1,400 teachers from state schools every year.'

And what about the people who dont bother, and who complain endlessly about their lot in life. The ones that wouldnt dream of working, or having just 1 child because thats all they can afford. The people who make terrible judgements time and time again especially around men and who then blame them as opposed to themselves.

I get private medical care through my company. I work full time, I am often required to do extra hours for weeks on end. i dont always make all of the events at my children's school. I have had to pay someone to pick them up when they were younger from school as the vast majority of jobs dont allow you to finish at 1500.

Some people dont make these choices in life. They choose to stay at home and rely on the partner to provide for them. They even claim their partner pays their share of tax. All fine, until the partner leaves claiming their wives dont understand them...I never wanted to be in this position so we agreed that I would go back to work after mat leave full time.

I have said this on another thread. The break up rates are pushing 50% and the living together rates are even worse. All those people are on the Lone Parents section of the forum trashing and swearing about the partners THEY choose!

I could almost understand it if they had an arranged/forced marriage but they havent. We can date and sleep with anyone we want. Yet, it seems some make this terrible decisions and then it comes back to bite them

elastamum, just you sending your children to your under performing state school isn't going to achieve it, no. but if all parents who sent their children to private schools, grammars, other selective schools were forced to use the state sector, and the state schools were genuinely comprehensive, I wouldn't mind better things would start to improve in lots of schools quite quickly.

I'm in no doubt it would cost the state more money. I'd be happy to pay more tax to pay for it (and for the NHS too) but lots wouldn't. And lots like the status quo too. It means they can get an advantage for their child. But what About the other children left behind?

Honestly Handcream, put away the stereotypes! I am also a lone parent - with 2 children in public school - for which I contribute my 50%. I dont define myself by my marital status - neither should you

The 'fuck the rest of you, why should we care?' posts on this thread make it very clear how many private school users think about other people!

I'm not sure if that comment is totally fair. I'm a private school user and I'm a state school user too. One of my children goes to a non academically selective private school (primary level).
My other son goes to a highly selective STATE school, not just anyone can get a place, they are very fussy who they take.

The state school educated child has severe learning disabilities and wouldn't be accepted in the local comprehensive - so in some ways even the local comp is selective too and turns away the students who they think will cause them too much grief and be too difficult to educate.

People make choices (if able to have the choice) on what they feel is best for their child. Some people try state and move to private when for whatever reason they realise their child is not well suited to the school. Some people choose private from day one. It isn't a crime and doesn't mean they think less of the children who are in state schools or that they don't give a shit about anybody else. Parents are just doing what they feel is right for their child. Something different suits each child. If people have a choice and want to exercise that choice then they should be able to do so without accusations of how they think very little of those deemed 'beneath them'.

Ok Fay You have at least acknowledged you may use private healthcare should the situation demand it.

Please now consider this point. I live between two schools. One is a very high performing private school which appears to turn out nice kids (on the whole). The other is the 16th best performing school in the area. Last year a pupil was stabbed on the premises. There is a young man who lives on the next street to us who has sn. He is very vulnerable and I have had to shoo away schoolchildren from this school away from him because they think it's funny to take the piss out of him. A pupil from the school has also harassed my own ds on his way to school.

If I had the money to send my ds to the private school I know I would be 'wrong' but frankly, why shouldn't I?

Pilates done. Left overs eaten. What did I miss ..... woah!

too early?

Come on everyone - put yourself in a box and choose a number and a letter

But its rife isnt it. Tony Blair sending his kids to a school across town. its easy to bleat about a level playing field for everyone and then when you dont like what you see for YOUR children quietly opt out. Of course you will be caught (especially these days!).

I remember Diane Abbott being on Question Time trying to cover up what she had done and said she couldnt justify but to move on to another question. She didnt get away that lightly and she eventally played the race card. Didnt she witter on about not using the state because white teachers didnt understand the black culture. Something like that anyway. Can you imagine the uproar if a white person had said that about black teachers!

Fay If you ban private healthcare, that is exactly what the effect would be. If your mother has the health problems you claim she has you of all people should know people will do what they have to in order to improve their lives.

I have just checked re Labour party sending their kids to private school. Very interesting piece in the Economist Harold Wilson of all people seems to have sent his kids to private school and a reference to Shirley...

www.economist.com/node/244701

Joni - some people dont though do they? They sit around (I call them the glass half empty people) complaining. They are rich and poor tbh. They blame everyone for the things that have gone wrong in their lives and often like to be seen as a 'victim'.

They suck the life out of you and I try and avoid them but they are everywhere!!

bonsoir how exactly would you legislate against "luxury" schools?

Joni, I never once said I would ban private healthcare, not once. I just said I was unhappy with the system the way it is currently structured. You have been making assumptions about my posts all along.

I would ban private schools though.

I have acknowledged too, that individual families will play their hand based on the cards they have been dealt. I totally understand that. I am glad I don't have to choose to send my children to a sink school where someone is stabbed. No-one wants that environment for their child. In the situation, I wouldn't blame you for going private. I'll still choose to worry more about the people who can't afford to make that choice though.

I don't like hypocrisy, least of all from politicians who are determining policy that affects my children, whilst protecting their own.

I am arguing about what the State should do to improve education for all though, not what individual parent should do.

^elastamum
Homework for MHD:
Is an athiest paying for education making a better moral choice than an athiest using a church school? Discuss.^

Holy moly, I got homework! erm (panics, looking for textbook with answer to question in it and finds only books about anatomy and a children's world atlas).

First of all there are more combinations possible than set out in the question:

1. paying for private education at a church school
2. state education at a secular school (which might not exist according to some on this thread)

but given I was taught to RTFQ, I should ignore those.

Let's "unpack the question"....

What is morality?
People have personal morals and ethics to guide them to decisions they believe to be "good" or "bad". Personal morals almost always differ to the Group morals shared in wider society by consensus and there will almost certainly be conflict between the two.

What are the issues for discussion?
First up - Paying for things: moral or immoral?
Second up - Atheists in theists settings: moral or immoral?
Third up - Denying a place to someone else at a state school: moral or immoral?

1. I am not a communist and I believe we have a right to own property and chattels exclusively. Therefore I believe it is moral to buy things and I also believe that our society also accepts this principle. There are plenty of examples that society allow that can demonstrably be shown to damage society as a whole, but that society still tolerates to some degree in the pursuit of liberty. Smoking for example is good for no-one and costs society a great deal.

2. Atheists and theists must be able to co-exist and understand each other. Whilst I think they are a bunch of fairy tale telling fools, I will respect their right to believe whatever keeps them happy so long as it doesn't do too much harm (child abuse, mis-education about aids, fraud etc). So I personally have no moral issue with sending my kids to a theist school. Society at large possibly does as it accepts, in UK at least, a special exemption for religious selection from Discrimination Law. So maybe I am bumping up on the immoral here.

3. Given that all parents have the "right" to expect the state to educate their children, I can't be immorally denying anyone a place at a state school by sending them there.

So in conclusion, I think I am acting morally and ethically whatever choice I make for my children. The fact that people think differently is their own concern and doesn't represent the Group moral of society, merely their own personal morals and ethics.

Joni, and what's all this, 'if your mother has the health problems you claim'... I do claim them, because they're true. And as you so rightly suggest, that does indeed give me an insight into the system (and particularly what it's like for those who can't afford to opt out).

You cant ban private schools though. The UK isnt a dictatorship.

There is simply no law that you could pass to force every child into the country into state education.

I think we all agree about the need to improve state education - particularly in some parts of the country that are less affluent.

BUT I think the private schools are the problem bandwagon, is a cynical political distraction from the true problem of lack of funding and provision across parts of the country.

Politicians would much rather you waste your energy taking a pop at private school parents, than turn up at their door demanding better for your children

B+?

I'm sure it is true Fay and as I've said you should therefore realise the stark reality people have. Do they spend their money on fixing the roof, fixing the car, or fixing themselves? It's the same thing with private education and believe me, I never thought I would ever find myself arguing in 'favour' of it but I can see that if you have the money, you would have to have incredible strength of moral character to choose the failing, stabby school, over the extraordinarily high performing private school.

If you're going to give me a B+ then there's room for improvement. Please provide guidance so I can strive towards a A grade next time.

All of us on this forum say things that hopefully are truthful, some wont be just by default. I was on a thread a few months ago where the OP was getting bashed. She then claimed her DS had 'special needs'. Do I think she was telling the truth. Honestly - no. I think she saw she was being unreasonable and to justify she said he had SN.

There are also a lot of parents on Mumnset saying their children have SN. An awful lot. Do I think its all true. Sadly not....

Just like people who claim all sorts of things that arent true. We dont really know people's circumstances and what they are like with money for example. So, its very easy to jump to conclusions.

I do find as well that once we get around to actual sums of money some people will start saying 'well 50p is a lot for some people'.

I think sending you DC to a theist school is fine, providing you dont lie about your faith to get them in

So my answer was fine. Still no A+ ! .....

We're not a "pitch and ditch" family. We're a mixed belief family. My wife is avid church attender and the kids go every Sunday and participate fully. I tolerated it as I could see it was a better suited school than the local primary and I put my kids welfare ahead of my own prejudices and ahead of the needs of others.

Still bummed about the B+ though ....

'
please put this apostrophe where I should have put it ....

There are also a lot of parents on Mumnset saying their children have SN. An awful lot. Do I think its all true. Sadly not....

SN is wide ranging and covers everything from being quadriplegic with no sensory function to being dyslexic, so that covers quite a number of children. I also think that there is likely to be a higher proportion of parents with SN using this forum because a higher proportion of parents with children who have significant SN are carers and have the time to come on here when the SN child is at school (can't work as need to be on standby constantly / constant hospital appointments to attend) or come on here to break the isolation and monotony caused by being carer to a child with SN.
I think it's quite sad that you think a lot of people would lie about having a child with SN. Autism alone affects 1 in every 110 children, so for a family with two children they have a 1 in 55 chance of having a child with ASD.

Hmm. Choices are complicated, aren't they? No wonder I spend my time swinging from one p.o.v. to another and feeling hideously guilty for having the choices in the first place, when I know I'm no more deserving of them than plenty of other people who don't have those choices. I can see why people of the past used to wear hair shirts.

You could ban private schools without that making the UK a dictatorship. do I think it will happen? Of course, not, I'm a realist- there are too many people with a vested interest in the status quo. Especially those with the political power.

many state schools need improving. Private schools can't be expected to solve all the state sector's ills. Those who use them, don't want to admit it, but it is the case that private schools and selective grammars have a negative impact on the whole state system; the impact varies from location to location.

Joni, as I have said many times now. I understand individuals making choices to use the private sector, especially when state provision is poor. But I'm still concerned about all the people who can't make those choices. Not because they're shiftless or feckless as handcream would like us all to believe (if only they helped themselves a bit more!) but just because they'll never have the means no matter what they do. I'm arguing about what I would like the State's role to be in all this, not individuals.