Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Tristram Hunt's Speech

143 replies

kellyandthecat · 25/11/2014 12:19

So, what did everyone think?

www.theguardian.com/education/2014/nov/24/private-schools-labour-warning-tax-breaks-tristram-hunt

Seems to me like Labour have made a big deal out of it but he hasn't really done anything at all, and it's a bit hard for him to sound sincere when he's so posh himself. Honestly, I don't know why Labour don't just admit they were wrong and bring back the grammar schools. DH and I both went to grammar schools and are putting/have put our DCs through private. Hate how in this country politicians can't just admit they were wrong! It's a strength in any other area of leadership surely?! All this messing around on the margins just looks like pointless busy work - I would not support it but I would be more impressed with their convictions if they said they were going to take away the charitable status. Making them play football together?! Stupid.

OP posts:
rollonthesummer · 26/11/2014 14:46

Barcodama-some of your replies are quite astonishing. You appear to be spectaularly missing the point about the problems in state schools. Are you an MP?

barcoda · 26/11/2014 14:48

Well that's funny because some of the replies on here are amazingly ignorant about private schools and what they can/are supposed to do.

barcoda · 26/11/2014 14:50

its a red herring argument anyway as it will never happen (labour almost certainly wont get in, and if they did Hunt would never be able to make this happen or I presume it would apply to all charities not just private schools)

MN164 · 26/11/2014 17:14

I think there is confusion between:

a) trying to break down the perceived divide between state and private schools

b) trying to improve state schools overall

This policy might have some impact on (a) but will have very limited impact on the much more important (b).

It's just political positioning and point scoring. It might even happen and become policy, but don't hold your breath on it being how under performing students and schools improve.

Giving state school teachers more resources and time to teach will do that and there is no mention of that in this policy.

happygardening · 26/11/2014 17:22

"Giving state school teachers more resources and time to teach"
Now that could be something governments could learn from the independent sector and giving staff the freedom to "go off piste" if they wish too.

TalkinPeace · 26/11/2014 17:56

happygardening
State school teachers would gladly go "off piste" - and with top sets in naice leafy areas regularly do so - but they cannot get into the habit of it because their next lesson will be with a lower ability set - UNLIKE in private schools

Please note : private schools do not know or care about the outcomes of the children they chose not to admit
state schools have to admit everybody between them

MN164 · 26/11/2014 18:09

TP

Nit picking but every school deals with it's own intake and also "do not know or care about the outcomes of the children they chose not to admit". This could spiral into selective schools, catchment areas, faith schools very quickly and would be a distraction.

Hunt doesn't have a policy or funding to give teachers more time and resources so this is a smoke screen policy to distract from that fact.

If he did have a real policy, I think the run up to the election would be the time to announce it, instead of this "diversion"

TalkinPeace · 26/11/2014 18:11

MN
If a state school excludes somebody to a PRU, it pays the PRU fees out of its budget.
If a State school permanently excludes a pupil it has to find them another place.
LEAs have legal obligations to find places for pupils in their area

not the case for private schools

BUT YES, Yes, Yes Its all hot air written by twonks without kids in Central London

MN164 · 26/11/2014 18:21

State school have selection policies. Even distance from the school gates is a selection policy. Each school deals with it's own intake. It isn't a difference worth highlighting.

TalkinPeace · 26/11/2014 18:30

But the ability to exclude without recourse is absolutely KEY to the discipline and results regimes of private schools

No state school can "invite" poor performing year 11's to leave.
No state school can permanently exclude on the basis of drugs possession.
No private school has to accept kids who have been excluded from other schools just because they have moved into catchment.

It is absolutely core to the ethos and classroom control.
Private schools very, very rarely have to put up with parents who do not give a shit about education

Parent to Head of Year "Its work experience week next week"
Head of Year "that is correct"
Parent "I do not want my daughter involved"
Why?
"I've never worked, her mum's never worked, why should she work?"

MN164 · 26/11/2014 18:42

Grammar schools "invite" pupils to leave after poor GSCE results.

When you make an absolute statement is makes it too easy to undermine you with a counter example.

Besides, my point was simple - no headteacher or teacher in any school has material responsibility for students other than the ones on their school roll. Can you argue with my point directly or only extrapolate it into something else and shoot that down?

TalkinPeace · 26/11/2014 19:23

MN164
There is a huge difference between after poor GCSE results and during Year 11
No State school is allowed to kick kids out before their exams just because of poor anticipated grades.

And please note what I said, LEAs have the responsibility for all kids in an area.
If they dump a kid into a school then the head has to handle it, they cannot kick that kid back out because their face does not fit.

Private schools are great at what they do.
Mr Hunt is an arse if he thinks it can be extrapolated across the full spectrum.

rollonthesummer · 26/11/2014 20:03

Private schools are great at what they do.Mr Hunt is an arse if he thinks it can be extrapolated across the full spectrum.

He's probably succeeded in doing what he set out to do; get private and state school teachers arguing over his pathetic sound bite then we'll forget all about the fact he has no actual real education policy at all.

TalkinPeace · 26/11/2014 20:08

rollon True

By the way HappyGardening
Can you find out whether WC are still involved with that school in Sussex? : I could not tell from either website
and hence why they chose that school rather than one nearer to hand such as, say, Everest in Basingstoke who could desperately do with the support and are only two hops away on the train so the two sets of staff / pupils could feed off each other in a symbiotic manner

Toomanyhouseguests · 26/11/2014 20:14

Are you arguing for more selection in state schools TalkinPeace?

TalkinPeace · 26/11/2014 20:32

Toomany
No. I do not believe in any segregation in taxpayer funded schools - by God, gonads or guesswork at tests Grin

But I am realistic that state school heads have little or no control over what arrives through their door - which is not the cases in fee paying schools.
Even segregated state schools have to look as though they comply with the Admissions Code, so the catchments and criteria and pass marks flex year on year.

AmberTheCat · 26/11/2014 20:37

no headteacher or teacher in any school has material responsibility for students other than the ones on their school roll

They don't have responsibility for students not on their school roll, but it think I'm right in saying that the exam results of kids in PRUs are still included in the stats of their previous school. It's extremely difficult for any state school to wash its hands completely of a pupil.

happygardening · 26/11/2014 22:08

So because independent schools can exclude children they don't like either because of behavioural issues or because poor academic performance, they can choose their pupils and have generally supportive parents they have nothing to offer to state education in it's efforts to improve.
That's great, Im sure heads of independent schools have better things to do than become involved with state schools, many parents will also be pleased, because when the push comes to the shove they probably don't want state school children being educated alongside their children or staff spending to time helping out their local state school rather than working in the independent school.

TalkinPeace · 26/11/2014 22:16

Happygardening
I suspect your comments are much more in accordance with the views of most parents (both sectors) and most politicians (all parties) than the sort of drivel that is spouted in the press.

As was said up thread by others
politicians should stop banging on about making private schools cuddle up to state schools
and should put their focus and efforts into dragging up the dire state schools

the backtrack from Academies has begun BTW
www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/26/struggling-academies-schools-intervention-powers-improvement

TheWordFactory · 27/11/2014 08:08

I think Mr Hunt is playing to the disaffected middle class gallery.

People who find themselves unable to afford what they think their status befits them...

They spend a lot of time mithering about 'the rich', latch on to any criticism of bankers, and have a new hatred of private schools (no longer ebbing able to afford them).

Conversely, they spend little time considering 'the poor', especially the working poor.

What they want is to remove any advantage that their DC cannot access (whilst preserving the ones they can Wink ). So attacking private schools whets their whistle.

Though of course what it won't do is ensure all state schools offer triple science, proper advice about GCSE options, decent language provision etc. you know, stuff that might actually make an improvemt.

HamishBamish · 27/11/2014 08:09

I don't think teachers in private schools are any better than the state sector and imagine in some cases they aren't as good. Personally, I think you have to be a better teacher to be successful in the state sector.

For me, the main differences are class sizes, resources and the ability to cherry pick their intake. If a child is too difficult or disruptive they simply ask them to leave.

The first 2 differences could definitely be applied to state schools. I think smaller class sizes make a huge difference, more resources in the form of more specialist support teachers and of course money for materials etc. A lot of state schools around us no longer have their own sports fields as they were sold off, so we need to rectify that too. Having to bus children across the city simply to play football for instance is a waste of their time.

The answer imo is to increase investment in state schools. Reduce class sizes, increase resources, update buildings. It's not the teaching that's the problem. I don't think simply getting private schools to do 'more' is the answer. Of course they can (and do) share facilities, but to say that private school teachers hold the key to sorting out state schools is insulting imo.

MN164 · 27/11/2014 08:42

Well said HamishBamish

Is this is a thread where we are all in agreement? Shock Grin

I don't think anyone thinks Hunt's policy is going to have any game changing effect and we all seem to think it is political positioning and distraction - don't we?

AmberTheCat · 27/11/2014 09:46

I think there is a certain amount of violently agreeing going on here Grin

Word - one of the things being suggested by various people commenting on this announcement is that careers advice and guidance is one of the things that private schools, on the whole, do better - so actually it might result in state school pupils receiving more of the sort of advice you often find is lacking.

For me, the potential benefits of partnerships between state and private schools aren't about teaching, which I think can be equally good or bad in both sectors, but about giving kids at state schools more access to things that their schools find it much harder to provide - facilities being the most obvious.

HamishBamish · 27/11/2014 09:53

I agree Amber. Facilities are something that the private sector can transfer to the state sector very easily and to great benefit. Many private schools in our area have retained their playing fields where the state schools have not and most have very good sports facilities (swimming pools, hockey pitches, tennis courts etc) which they do share to great effect.

dailygrowl · 27/11/2014 10:27

I'm afraid I think Tristam Hunt is speaking nonsense. I have close family and close friends in both state and private schools. What he's suggesting is impractical and likely to be ineffective. Many families using private schools are actually the typical "state school family" and vice versa - depending on where you live and sometimes social circumstances.

Some friends have the resources financially to be using private schools but have bought expensive homes near the state schools that are continually the best rated so in effect may as well be in the "privileged" private sector that gets great results, etc. On top of that their clubs and after school activities are much cheaper so they can spend their money on other things that boost their children's school results if they wish to - one has used the money saved up to pay for tutoring to get a scholarship into a top private secondary for the eldest, while still being able to afford private music lessons for each DC, as well as numerous family holidays including ones to "educationally enriching" outings to museums, galleries, theatres, etc. They may be in state schools but they are certainly not underprivileged in the slightest.

Other friends don't look like they could afford private school and aren't from a privileged background but have scrimped and saved on lots of luxuries many others take for granted to send their DCs to private school because the state school near them is failing (few pass GCSEs, cannot read or write well when leaving primary school, discipline issues, etc) or their DC simply has had unhappy experiences there.

I too have friends who have gone through the state school system and done very badly out of it, whom presumably are the ones Hunt has vowed to "help". Left with no qualifications that would help them get a job (a lone C in RE and failed English and Maths doesn't cut it) even though they speak, write and spell well (judging by their texts, emails and FB posts) and can definitely do arithmetic competently enough for most jobs when it comes to shopping together, calculating discounts and mileage, etc etc. Difficult family circumstances beyond their control as kids led to them not doing well at school. What would have helped them as kids at school was a quiet homework club (that lasts longer than the 45-60 minutes in most schools) to give them a place to do their work that home couldn't provide, a small amount of free after-school tutoring from their school - not at some posh private - not to help them beat the competition from private schools for free, but just so that they can pass a few GCSEs and leave school with enough qualifications for a job. They're hardworking, reliable people - not layabouts. The boys play football better than most private school teams I've seen. They don't need extra "mixer sessions" to socialise with "privileged kids", they just need to get enough guidance to pass.

Hunt is also wrong to suggest that private school teaching is somehow better across the board than all state schools. Teaching might not be good in some state schools that aren't run well, but in fact many state schools have just as good teaching as private ones, a few even have more well qualified or better teachers - they just have bigger class sizes.

Families who pay for private schools already pay double - both for state schools in their taxes that they aren't using and the high fees (which haven't dropped in the recession. Also, they are giving up places they are entitled to in oversubscribed or overcrowded areas to other families who might not get the school they want or even get a school place. One area near us has seen its population of under 4s triple in the last 3 years but the local authority will not build another school or increase the number of staff to create more school places in existing schools with the facilities because "we expect a lot of families will go private".

It's true that many foreign oligarchs and tycoons do indeed send their children here because many private secondary schools are indeed good ones. If Hunt has a problem with the numbers, then levy a tax on those who come in or put a cap on numbers being given visas, but don't punish local taxpayers for something the government isn't doing right.

Swipe left for the next trending thread