Alan Bennett on private education

[UrbanDad]

A great quote from AlanBennett, in the Guardian today taken from his talk last summer at King’s College Chapel, Cambridge: “We all know that to educate not according to ability butaccording to the social situation of theparents is both wrong and a waste. Private education is not fair. Those who provide it know it. Those who payfor it know it. Those who have to sacrifice in order to purchase it know it. And those who receive it know it, orshould. And if their education ends without it dawning on them, then that education has been wasted.”

I cannot disagree with any of that.

Why don't people just accept that life is not, and is never going to be, fair. Some people have a much larger house, a larger more expensive car, expensive holidays to far flung places....should we all stay at home and live in standard size houses so that it's fair. I work hard and I pay enormous amounts of tax which is supposed to be used for the common good. I use private health care and private schools....so I am paying twice and that is not fair either. However I don't complain because I accept that life is not fair.
And , to answer the question up thread, no I would not want my dcs to go to a school which was not high achieving...I don't care why it is not high achieving, I am not interested. I am interested in my kids going to the best school I can find that meets their needs and mine....ie small classes, well behaved dcs, good teachers and good results...and lots more besides.
And why does it matter if the country is run by old Etonians; what matters to me is whether the country is well run and that my taxes are used effectively

And why does it matter if the country is run by old Etonians; what matters to me is whether the country is well run and that my taxes are used effectively
Yup, it would be nice, but the twerps in charge at the moment are just into lining their own pockets a la Bliar and do not understand or care about the rest of us

As I have said before make the state schools so good that I feel it is a waste of money to pay for private schools...that is the answer. If private schools were abolished here, now, my dcs would go to switzerland or similar

I don't really get all this 'fairness' talk. I mean where does it stop? If everyone shares the same job at the same company?

Some people will always have more than others. That has been the case since the dawn of time!!!

snowbells
FAIRNESS in educational opportunities up to the age of 16 is about getting the best out of the future labour force
A country with a good education system does not need to import workers, has better chances of reducing costs of social exclusion.
Its good for all if everybody reaches their potential.
Even if for some, that potential is being a good bin man.

?! Since when was the Church of England necessarily for faith?!

mmm1701 and SnowBells - presumably you don't believe in preventing insider trading; or the concept of "cheating"; or having rules in games? After all, this "fairness" lark is all a load of bollocks. I mean, where on earth would it all end?! Some people are better at being lying, cheating gits than others. Get over it. Who needs rules and standards of behaviour?

insider trading is illegal as you well know. Well do you believe some people should have bigger houses? What about these posh holidays or maybe big cars? Fair? Or do we avoid that because it applies to you. Is it just education that should be "fair". Is private medicine ok?
I want to live in a society where parents want the best for their dcs. That doesn't involve cheating, lying or insider trading. I want the best for all dcs , but above all I want the best I can get for MY dcs. In other words I am normal.

Yup, it would be nice, but the twerps in charge at the moment are just into lining their own pockets a la Bliar and do not understand or care about the rest of us

Sorry to say it, hun... just because someone did not go to Eton, it doesn't mean they understand or care about "the rest of us". This country does not breed politicians like Merkel who have no vanity and are a little boring, but make the better politicians, may I say. People here are bedazzled by those who can make great speeches full of lies. Politicians are merely a reflection of whatever impresses the electorate.

Maybe 100% inheritance tax would help with fairness. I cannot think of anything less fair than unearned wealth. At least kids in private schools have to do the reading, write the essays, review the material etc. it's not a complete free ride.

toomany
100% inheritance tax would only hit the ill informed middle earners.
The rich already have their dosh neatly stashed in trust funds and companies.

snowbells
I've been in Berlin for the week. Frau Merkel is very unusual.
The nature of politics is that it attracts psychopaths - as anybody sane would not want to live in that bubble.

rabbitstew

Would you find it 'unfair' then, if we buy healthy and balanced food for our family while other families make do with fast food? After all it is said time and time again that the right sort of food allows people to be more energised and have higher concentration levels. This - presumably - may give my DCs an advantage. Should we from now on stop feeding them well, just so that other kids are not disadvantaged?

Should I not be allowed better beds that provide us with much better night's sleep than others, allowing us to work more effectively the following day?

Should it all boil down to the lowest common denominator?

Also, schools alone do NOT educate the child. Family and peers all have a big input. Denying their roles is just plain stupid. As I said on this thread many moons ago - the world would be a much fairer place if every parent would do the best for their child. Sadly, that isn't the case. We can have the best education system in the world, and yet, unless a child is mature beyond his or her years, if he or she is NEVER taught to value education AT HOME, that child will not take education seriously, will always be disadvantaged and may well be disruptive in class (because he/she believes it to be a waste of time).

And why do you think insider trading is illegal? Are you a moral vacuum who only follows the letter of the law?

I agree that life isn't fair and people do not always play fair. However, I think there is a difference between saying "anything goes, because life isn't fair," which is pretty much what you said above when you argued that people should just accept this, and asking yourself, "how can we make life a bit more fair, because some of this unfairness is self-created, not inevitable?"

In other words, whether or not you think life would be made any more fair by abolishing private schools is one thing, but asking whether you should bother even to try to make life any more fair is another, and pretty odious opinion - in my opinion.

As for my view - no, I do not think abolishing private schools in the UK in the near future is going to make life any more fair for anyone. I think there are far worse iniquities and inequalities to be dealt with, first. State education really isn't that bad in most instances and I view the most expensive private schools in the same way as big cars and posh holidays - a self-centred indulgence. If the current government continues to squeeze public services, however, and thus reduces the quality of what the state can offer to the majority of the population, then I will view that to be both unfair and foolish.

Talkinpeace, you said "FAIRNESS in educational opportunities up to the age of 16 is about getting the best out of the future labour force". It sounds very nice and utopic but what (1) does it mean in essence and in practice and (2) in keeping with one of the themes of the thread, why does fault lie with the availability of private education?

As someone said earlier, you would be hard pressed to find a universally agreed definition of fairness. I imagine the challenge is similar in trying to get the "best out of the labour force". For some sections of the would-be labour force, an academic education may not be best. For some a state education may be best for others, an environment in a private institution may get the best out of them.

In my view, getting the best out of people requires personal responsibility. You know the thing about bringing a horse to the waterhole but you cannot force it to drink? You can provide all the "best" you can muster to the parents and kids. If they are not willing to make the most of it, then .... Furthermore, if the private education system is doing well in getting the best out of its students, then the state education system should follow suit. This simply brings us back to government policy. So when I consider both sides of the coins, private education seems the least of the problems.

Selective private education is segregation on the grounds of parental income and IQ. In Britain, we have the lowest social mobility rates in the Western World and the greatest opportunity for social mobility is education.

This is a problem because it means that the brightest and the best do not necessarily make it to "the top". It is also a problem because it is a staggering social injustice.

Btw this isn't just my opinion, it's in a massive report commissioned by the previous Govt which has been used as the rationale for pupil premium funding in state schools by the current Government
www.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/news/archives/2007/SocialMobilityDec07.aspx

I guess we all do what we think is best for our children: it's a tough call. Although I value excellence in education, I didn't want my children in an elitist, status obsessed environment during their formative years, so they are educated with 93% of their peers in their local comprehensive schools. With a lot if support from us, they're doing well academically but, most importantly, they're well rounded, thinking and confident individuals who challenge injustice, prejudice and elitism where they see it.

One last thing: Our kids' schools are better because of the involvement of educated, aspirational parents who are angered by poor management/ teaching etc and who know how to hold the schools accountable and how to support and implement change. The schools are not only better for our kids but for the other kids who go there. By placing your kids in a middle if the road comp, you can help things change for your whole community. We should be bold and brave when deciding how to school our children and fight for good state provision, not be cowed by fear and buy our children a safe passage through because we can!

Snowbell, I just notice you already articulated the points I just made. I could have saved my fingers the bother.

Rabbitstew, I may be missing something here, but I don't understand your point. You are using exaggeration (a common trick) in an attempt to undermine the points made by Snowbell and mmm1701. You are also complicating things by bringing in the issue of legality. There are things that are legal that may be deemed unfair and things that are illegal but considered fair (whatever you conceive "fair" to be).

Anyway, if I understand Snowbell and mmm1701 correctly, they are driving home the point that the concept of fairness is nebulous and that appealing to a utopia (that few people understand or agree with) is a waste of time. What is "fairness"? What does it look like? My idea of fairness may be different from yours?

rabbitstew

Insider trading is illegal because the person who makes use of it is privy to material information that can move the market that no one else outside of the relevant companies, etc. has been informed of.

You can't use that argument with education. Every single bit of information that one needs to know to get good A-level results is out there. Books. Internet. Everywhere. In theory, these days, you don't even need to go to school to be educated.

The best independent schools are more akin to the best fund managers in the world, who do nothing illegal, but who marry information that is openly available to everyone out there to form their own conclusions and, more importantly, conviction about the market. If they are good fund managers, they might (but not always) get it right. Please bear in mind that these fund managers may benefit from better infrastructure within their own firm, much nicer facilities, access to more and better support staff simply because they make more money. You may say that this gives them an unfair advantage when compared to the average fund manager, but no one in their right mind would think it's illegal.

Newrule, I think you'll find I was the one who pointed out that everyone has a different view of what "fairness" is... (Direct quote from myself, to be found on the previous page...: "I'm not sure any two people would entirely agree on exactly what "fairness" looks like, tbh. Wouldn't life be simple if everyone agreed on what is "fair."").

My point, which you appear not to be able to understand, is a simple one: just because we may not always agree on what fairness looks like, that doesn't mean we should therefore reject any argument made from that standpoint, which is what Snowbells and mmm1701 were trying to do, by crassly pretending that "fairness" is synonymous with "sameness" and that all types of unfairness are equal, and thus arguing that you cannot say private education is unfair unless you also say that having a bigger car than someone else is unfair, or eating healthier food than someone else is unfair.

Disability legislation and equality legislation tackle what most people would interpret as potential unfairness. There are rules in cricket, tennis, football, and even war, because of concepts of "fairness." You can play about by pretending it's a meaningless word if you like, but pretending that society has absolutely no sense of what is "fair" and that law is created in a moral vacuum is ludicrous.

It can be argued that some children have an unfair advantage because they have well informed, intelligent, interested parents who value education. Perhaps we should identify these people and insist they undertake training in "how to be an interested, well informed parent". Then my children would not have such an advantage.
Look, no matter what you do, some parents are just not interested and their children will always be at a disadvantage. Why on earth are schools responsible? Why not hold the parents to account....why does it all rest with the school?

And education is not and should never be about "getting the best out of the future labour force". It is so much more than that, or should be.

I used to be anti private education especially boarding schools and was such an inverted snob it was unbelievable.

I wasn't openly nasty about it, but if asked would give my view and whilst I know life isn't fair, it used to bug that somehow these people thought themselves better than us.

Of course they didn't think this, I realise this now, well maybe except for Etonians? . So now, I am going to be the biggest hypocrite ever, have to swallow my pride and join them, more than likely.

Anybody know how to sew names into socks and knickers?
Oh, and social mobility rocks

rabbitstew
You have a habit of only commenting on things when it supports your argument. As both, Newrule and I, said... how do you 'make' kids who haven't been taught the value of education at home (or even worse... a home where education is ridiculed) want to take the offer of free education?!

You keep on saying that providing the same education to everyone is more fair. What if you offer it to a child and they (and their parents) throw it away?

As mmm1701 says... Some parents are just not interested and their children will always be at a disadvantage.

Education always starts at home. But when I mentioned that the world would be much fairer if all parents wanted the best for their kids, someone immediately said something along the lines of 'how dare I blame poor parents' kids'... when really, bringing up your child with discipline and respect costs nothing. That could be seen in that TV programmes where troubled UK brats were sent to live with strict families in developing countries.

mmm1701 - now that really would be unfair on everyone if the well informed, intelligent, interested parents who value education were the ones who had to undertake training in "how to be an interested, well informed parent."

Snowbells - where have I said that providing the same education to everyone is more fair???!!!

And who says it is unfair to offer something to someone which they then reject?...