WHY the general assumption that private schools are better?

[tootsietoo]

I know this is similar to other recent threads, but slightly different!

I know very little about education - never worked in the sector, don't have many friends working in it, never been interested til children arrived! However, in my limited experience (DDs 6&7 at local primary school) the level of professionalism of the teachers is impressive! There seems to be such a comprehensive structure for planning progression and for assessing children's attainment, whilst the teachers seem to have the freedom to work with the children to inspire them in that they choose topics which interest them and can tailor classes and working groups to match children's abilities.

Yet within my group of friends there seems to be this inbuilt assumption that if you ever can pull enough cash in then off to private school your children will go. I also frequently read on here that the existence of private schools is unfair because it means only a few children will have the best opportunities. Which seems to assume that all private schools offer the best opportunities.

Is this a hangover from the 70s and 80s when we all grew up? Were state schools much worse then? Why is it just assumed that private schools offer the best education? I know private schools have more money therefore usually have the glitzy facilities, but surely it is down to the person standing in front of the children day in day out who is the really important part? I recall that at my small private girls day school I experienced the most inept teaching methods imaginable and I am told that at private schools today there is no requirement for teachers to be qualified! I do appreciate that my children are at a good school (that is, classified by ofsted as "good"), but are they all that unusual?

So where does the cut-off come in HE? Which kinds of institutions - and what entry grades - entitle you to a free course?

I agree that too many 18 year olds blow too much money on courses that are doing them no favours, and they do themselves no favours in doing so.

But when are we going back to, in this plan?

They'd earn more as nannies than as lecturers.

Would they be any good as nannies?

Sanctions for schools that force everyone to do double science while recommending that they only pick one arty subject in their vanishingly few free options would be good too - and forcing minimum arts ed funding requirements on all LEAs. Having the arts as the preserve of the wealthy is a hideously damaging thing to do to society. And it is happening, right here right now. Look here www.protectmusiceducation.org

Ah the old 'diversity' chestnut. Diversity's great as long as everyone has the same basic values as people like us. When 'diversity' means mothers with fags hanging out having a fight in the playground calling each other effing fat slags in front of children, people tend to be not so keen.

All sorts become nannies - at least the ex-lecturers would (mostly) speak reasonable English. I'm sure they could learn to wipe bottoms and find where the park/pool/toddler group are. And of course they could hang out with their ex-lecturer friends who would also be nannies - they would have plenty of time to talk about whatever interests them, less stress and more money.

O brave new world that has such nannies in it!

I'm scared.

The more I think about it, the better it sounds. All the research shows that early intervention in education is the key - rather than getting terrible lecturers to teach terrible 18 year olds in terrible universities for terrible pay, surely it would be better for society to get them to teach basic skills to small children for less terrible pay?

Are we going back to a world where a huge portion of the workforce become old-fashioned servants for the minority?

Rabbit, it seems to be moving that way! I think someone's getting a little carried away...

Better to be a richer domestic servant than a poorer institutional wage slave. Why is it is so fabulous to work in a huge appalling institution?

I think, Bonsoir, that perhaps some of the lecturers you would like to see wiping toddler bums might, despite working in less prestigious institutions, still enjoy contributing to research, teaching, thinking and intellectually challenging themselves.

I also think there are some 'terrible' lecturers in some prestigious institutions, whose research profiles are strong but whose teaching less so.

I'm not sure quite how we've got so specifically onto the idea of gleefully ousting lecturers into ballpools, but it seems an odd idea to seize on so joyously, and possibly even more difficult to implement than, say, abandoning selective education!

I don't think improving the nanny situation for those well off enough to afford a nanny will improve pre-school education for the least well off - nursery worker pay is most definitely lower than lecturer pay, with less freedom to spout your opinions, too.

I'd like to live in a world where people like me are in roles that reflect their skills and experience not their degree of poshness. Or gender. This week I spent several days at a high level policy event in London with global representatives from my profession. 37 people in the room. One woman (me). There were two non posh Brits out of the Brit contingent (again, me, and one other). It's not everyone's cup of tea, for sure, but it is very depressing to see such little diversity at that level. Every single invited speaker was male too. If some posh or achingly MC but less than stellarly talented men did find their employment prospects more limited as a result of the sort of sea change Word proposes, would that be such a bad thing? I don't think so.

I think it has all become a tad surreal and there might be an element of deliberate provocation going on now! All got just a little bit silly!

Mind you, you could be more subversive, spouting your opinions to the toddlers of the wealthy than by spouting them to 18-21 year olds. Give me the child until he is 7 and all that....

What, exactly, is provocative about wanting to see more 'normal' people in positions of influence globally? (And more women?)

Where I differ from Word is that I believe that abolishing posh schools would go some way to achieving this.

How can you tell posh from non-posh?

As a previous nanny employee I always thought that not being too smart was a useful requirement for a nanny, being able to develop research questions in a narrow academic field less so. Don't think I would have employed any ex-lecturers, so maybe not a solution to the prevalence of lecturers.

Employer even!

Can I check I understand your argument properly, Word? Are you saying that we need to nurture and develop the most intelligent children in order that they become the establishment, because they're the best people to have in charge? And that by saying 'I think my children are privileged enough, I'd rather resources were focused on levelling the playing field', I'm playing into the hands of the existing elite, who don't want to be challenged to give up any of their power and privilege?

Please don't read that in a sarcastic tone - I'm genuinely trying to make sure I understand your position, which is an interesting one.

Do academically intelligent people make the best leaders and establishment figures? Are people who did not do well academically automatically to be excluded from the establishment? Do we know what sort of intelligence we are looking for when we separate the wheat from the chaff?

Herc - I could say the same about the gender mix at any industry gathering I attend (less so the poshness, though)

(And as for music, he could do as many instruments as we could afford he wants, but would have timetabled practice time for them all and that would seriously mess with all the other stuff (sports in particular) which is wants to do. In fact, he was steadfastly refusing to consider even a second instrument until he discovered percussion )

rabbit They have a badge Actually, of course you can't always tell, but I know the people in question very well. The Brits that is - I can't comment on the social and educational background of the people from the US, Latin America, France or Germany.

As word will know - when you're like us, you can actually tell. Just as the poshos can always tell. Always.

I am just imagining paranoid parents agonising about whether to employ an over-qualified ex lecturer as a nanny in case they were planning on infecting the darling children with dangerous political ideals.

Personally I might have more issue with whether they wanted to / were suited to working with small children rather than young adults.