Do private schools have better teachers?

[hercules1]

Read this on a different thread and it has peed me off a bit. I know lots of really good teachers who don't and won't teach in private schools. I've also known some teachers leave the state system to go to the private as they could no longer cope within the state.

Private doesn't equate with better teachers Of course it means lots of other things and I am sure there are lots of excellent teachers in the private system but no more so than the state.

No, because they're not qualified

In my old school, some of the vocational courses were taught by people with no teaching qualifications. They had experience in those fields, and also in the classroom thanks to working as TAs, but they did not have, and were not working towards QTS.

They were paid less than teachers, but had responsibility for their classes and the preparation and marking of work.

Their students considered them to be teachers.

I should add that they were very good at their job.

Thanks, mb.

As I said, eons ago on this thread, my brother has a Cert Ed and he is a superb teacher. Was voted one of the best teacher in the year, last year. On paper he doesn't look that good, because he teaches in secondary but trained in primary. When he started teaching he didn't have a degree. (does now)

Shit hot teacher though

There is an interview with the Headmistress of N. London C., B. MC, who was mentioned by Xenia. She (BMC) gives reasons why she wanted to work in state schools (and did for many years).

here - scroll down to page 20.

Thanks for the link to N London Collegiate Head interview - have just read it. It says it all really - that an intelligent, articulate,passionate, successful teacher can make a difference in a variety of contexts.
Interestingly, i don't see her mentioning salary, nice house etc as motivating factors.
Even more interestingly- Xenia clearly wants someone with these values teaching her kids!!

you do have to be fully qualified to teach in the state sector in Scotland

I was only messing about. Any teacher would have to have a very low IQ to go into it thining it was well paid in either sector. But I have known about 100 teachers in the private sector where my children's father taught for the 19 years we were married so have talked to many of them about motivation, why they are in the private not state sector etc. so I don't think my comments below are entirely without substance and BM did end up in the private sector.

Someone mentioned fees. A case called Pepper v Hart held that if you don't want to have to pay tax on the perk you charge the teacher/parent 15% which is what applied to us so free is not quite accurate but almost free but some private schools offer very little discount, depends on the school. On pay differences may be it depends on the schools but the ones I've known the pay has been higher but those are big very successful private schools. Smaller ones may pay less.

2006 " 1,786 teachers came into the independent sector from the maintained sector and only 570 moved in the opposite direction."

martianbishop there was an article in the TE a few years ago discussing power dressing in the classroom and to my amusement a guy said that having armani printed on the side of his glasses made a difference to his classroom management!

AS for motives for teaching in a private school, myu motives were in order-

1. I loved teaching and it was the only job I had seen advertised for over a year thatI could get to.

2. I could teach stuff I had covered in my degree such as greek, hebrew, latin, philosophy and theology as my old teaching posthad lacked some academic challenge.

3. A lack of discipline problems.

4. discounted school fees for my daughter.

I realised quite quickly though that this was not a school that I would want my daughter attending and not one I could teach in so I withdrew, whereas my present school with its crumbling walls, graffitti, non aesthetically pleasing grounds, low GCSE pass rate and boistrous but malnurished looking students made me fall in love with it as soon as I walked through the door.

I think it is harsh to say that you rae not making a difference or do not have noble reasons for teaching in a private school but I knew that many more teachers would want to teach in the private school than the present "sink " school I am employed in. The kids at the private school needed help and guidance but in my view there were many other teachers who could do that but not many good teachers would be willing to quite frankly put up with the crap and abuse that comes with working in a "sink " school. That was evidenced by the fact that my post had previously been filled and vacated about four times in three years and I was selected after three rounds of advertisements as qualitycandidates were not applying and even then I was the only one shortlisted. I am part of a fabuoluos tecahing staff that changes lives, enables kids who ahve never known a family member work in their lives go out and get that dream college place or earn thatelusive paypacket. I am cerain actually thatthe fantastic education that my collaeagues and I provide does more than transform lives it probably saves lives and thatis worth more than discounted school fees and posh buildings

As someone who has taught in both, no, NO, and a million times NO!

Private schools generally (but not always) have (in my order of importance):

1. better discipline and parental support
2. teachers teaching their specialist subject
3. fewer timetabled hours for each teacher, more "frees" (teachers will know why the quote marks are there)
4. better ratio of textbooks to pupil (it is scandalous to say this, but many state schools in this country are teaching with a ratio of 4 pupils to 1 textbook, or fewer (depending on size of year-group). In practical terms, this means 2 students sharing one textbook in class. Obviously, they cannot take them home except in exceptional circumstances. This is a national disgrace)

I am seriously convinced that with a little investment in state education combined with some really well thought out common sense practice (NOT far-fetched theories implemented in haste) the state system would very easily achieve what the private system does now. The teachers in the state system tend to be much better teachers, but are too stretched, exhausted and beleaguered to ever do their best.

As far as I'm concerned, parental income is a minimal influence in the relative success of private schools, as many parents prefer to stay on the bread line as far as disposable income is concerned in order to be able to send their kids to private school. It is a myth that all kids at private school are rich. It is a question of priorities.

I am not convinced that they are always better teachers. I know a couple of teachers who really struggled in the state system. I suppose because classes are smaller, and children are supposedly easier to teach, an Average teacher is not such a disaster as it is in a State school
I am sure there are some good ones. But the good ones I know who work in the private sector, say their job is made impossible by difficult parents who wont ever accept that their little darling has done wrong etc. So they end up feeling that they can't teach the way they want.
That said, it must be easier to sack bad teachers in private schools, as they have less rights and they are replacable.

sorry I wasn't very clear, the teachers that I know who struggled now all teach in a private school, and some still have difficulties

crumbs DS must be very dominant as he brings a textbook home for all his subjects he must be the one out of the four who grabs the book first to bring it home every week from his state school

Love the continuing assumption on this thread that all the students attending private schools are little Stepford robots who never misbehave or present a challenge . And that state school teachers are the brave and noble, fight the good fight types for whom no child is too challenging...And that private school teachers are all work-shy cowards who would hide behind their interactive whiteboard at the first sight of a REAL teenager crossing their perfectly manicured lawn, just counting the seconds until the beginning of their six month Easter holiday complete with pay packet too heavy to carry home...

IME private schools have poorer standards of teaching. Poorer standards of everything, in fact. I wouldn't let my two within 50 yards of a private school.

Greensleeves, I would really like to know why you think that - my two are currently in the state system but I was thinking of switching. If you have good arguments you might save me a few quid!!!!

Sorry, horrible generalisation there

What I really mean is - many private schools are shoddier and have poorer standards of teaching/discipline/pastoral care than a good state school, and yet people continue sending their children to these schools because of the widespread assumption that you get what you pay for.

Of course there are excellent private schools too.

Greensleeves- hate to challenge your assumption, but I go back to what I said earlier. Discipline is certainly better enforced in the private sector (fees depend on it) and too much very bad behaviour goes unchecked (based on my experiences of the 6 state schools I worked in) in the state system. Most of the state school pupils I have ever spoken to firmly believe that their school is not run by the senior management team but by the bullies and miscreants. As far as I'm concerned, running a school is less about being in charge, and more about being seen to be in charge. If you appear not to be in charge, then you are not in charge, whatever the plaque on your door may say.

Better discipline means the kids who want to learn, can. The reverse is also true.

No need to go abck to what you said earlier, duchesse, we've already read it

I have attended and worked in private schools where the discipline and bullying issues were absolutely atrocious. The assumption that private schools are more orderly and better run simply is not true. Some of these schools are reliant on this assumption to stay afloat, while the reality is that parents (often abroad for long periods and in very sparse contact with the school) are paying money for old rope.

Also, I find the notion of a "good state school" abhorrent. Why should some parts of the state education system be "good" and others "bad"? Surely that makes them not part of a "state education system" but merely state-funded autonomous units. As a person of the French persuasion, I find the idea that yoru education might depend on where you live, and god forbid, how many taxes the local residents pay, as is the case in the US, abhorrent. It is merely reinforces socio-economic distinction/ deprivation rather than solving it. It seems to me that accessing a "good" state school is a very it and miss affair, and certainly less easy to decide than choosing the right private school for your kid. Also, it is becoming harder and harder to actually choose which state school you send your child to, unlike the private sector.

I am sure there are some cr@p private schools, but people who choose to place their kids there are probably not exercising the choice of the wise parent, and I go back to what I said about parental involvement earlier. Also, in my experience of teaching in state schools, the parents were just as demanding, and often just as dishonest about their level of control of their child, and just as likely to push the blame back onto the teachers when their kid misbehaved as in the private sector. There are appalling people everywhere.

Sorry, I appear to be loghorreic (sp?) on the subject today...

I can tell you one reason teachers teach in the private sector: because they need a job to pay the bills like anyone else. At the end of the day, working in a private school is not like being an arms dealer, and the children and other staff there are not evil! I'm choosing state education for my kids, at least for their primary years, because I have loads of reservations about how good private schools really are for kids, and because I do feel state education is important. But I'm not rabid about it, and if I was a teacher looking for a job I'm sure I'd consider jobs in private schools too.

I know someone who after a couple of years of supply jobs here and there had to apply for a job in a private school. She thought long and hard about it, not because she thought they were evil, but because at that time (about 20 years ago) it was definitely a one-way decision - as she would have been seen as having 'jumped ship', her chances of getting state school jobs would have gone down subsequently. Definitely the teaching was easier in some ways, but also not quite as interesting - because it was academically selective, her specialist literacy-teaching skills weren't as needed, for instance.

There are good and bad teachers everywhere. Most independent schools are very well inspected, so it's not like they can get away with any amount of crap without it being picked up on, even if parents are not paying attention and just assuming it's better, which I don't think they are - they're probably assuming smaller class sizes etc. have an effect though.

I used to know a teacher who would only consider teaching in private schools because he had a heart condition and had promised his late mother that he would never work in a state school - presumably their assumption was that state schools were universally bad enough to endanger teachers' health .

I can't have any respect for that at all. What a weak shallow arsehole attitude.

It's true that most teachers in private schools are there because that's the job that was on offer when they were looking for work. At least I hope the attitude of that one teacher isn't widespread - it's very sad.