Impact of abolition of public schools

[daffodilbrain]

Labour want all public schools abolished - hypothetically how much pressure would this put on the state- could we afford an extra 7% in the system. Can a government really abolish them if so how? Make them
Illegal? Remove their charitable
Status and probably make them even more elite?

Furthermore the issue with the private education system is that it perpetuates the class divide. We still have far too many from the likes of Eton running the country who have no empathy for how most people live.

It’s a scourge and should be tackled.

I KNOW THE TORIES HAVE RUN EDUCATION INTO THE GROUND IGGLY, I’M A TEACHER.

Fuck’s sake. Labour might be ‘kinder’ to its teachers, but there aren’t enough of them. By miles. Recruitment and training doesn’t happen overnight.

Hmm well, having had a look at the charitable purposes list www.gov.uk/government/publications/charitable-purposes/charitable-purposes education is quite a broad category. Getting rid of education as a charitable purpose might hit more than the "posh" schools.

AFAIK you can't just take away charitable status as the law stands at the moment anyway. Otherwise some schools would have done it already. You'd have to close the school and sell off any assets - buildings etc.

I actually think they should impose a tax on school fees. Not 20% as that would push too many people out of the system but 5 or 10% a bit like insurance premium tax and ring fence that money for state education funding.

For every child in a top private school.costing £30k that would £3k into the state system.

Some won't be able to afford it but most would 'fnd' the money a bit like they find the money for the £2k sxhool ski trip etc.

Pandoras box has been opened. I expect if Corbyn got into power every thing he tries to do will be mired in the courts for many years. Enough time for private schools to shut up shop, sell the land to property developers and leave the country before it is destroyed.

Never mind ending Universities ability to academically select. I am still wondering when he is going to announce the abolition of student debt.

God help us.

I know people who have taught in a top private ("public") school for many years. From what they tell me, many teachers aspire to teach in the private sector, because the class sizes are small (10-12 max), the facilities are good, and often the pupils' parents will be very motivated to push their children to achieve good results, as the fees aren't cheap so the parents don't want to waste money if their kids won't put the work in. Plus, the wages are better.

So, for all the above reasons and many more besides, teachers rarely move from the private sector back to state schools, and truth be told, after years of teaching small classes in well equipped schools, chances are they'd find it pretty challenging teaching classes of 40, with poor facilities and violent pupils in the mix (like the awful school I went to).

I feel sad about the unfairness of some kids having a great private education while others receive a poor education in overcrowded, underfunded state schools, but I don't think abolition of private schools would solve that. I don't agree with private schools having charitable status though, as many of the parents are absolutely minted and can well afford the fees. A private education opens doors and gives you advantages that others don't have, and the "old boys' network" looks after its own regarding top jobs. Charity is the last thing these fortunate families need, as the private school system perpetuates the status quo, where wealth buys the best education, the right accent and decent contacts, which often leads to lucrative jobs. Even so, I don't think abolition is the answer, but I'd like to see better standards for all children.

I am pretty dumbfounded at this for two reasons.

First, from a basic strategic perspective, I have no idea why labour thinks such a hard leftist policy is in any way sensible at a time when the tories practically gifting them a win. It's like they are coming up with reasons to not make people vote for them.

Second, this is an entirely populist decision. It will have no real impact on social mobility, because all those private school pupils will suck up the places at the best grammar and other state schools. It won't do anything to address the social connections, class bias and other restraints on mobility which are in place. It will also further stress a crumbling state system. Far better to invest in free university places for those from socially deprived or in represented backgrounds and frankly far better to stop Brexit and not send us into a decade of turmoil. But no Jeremy and his chronies think it's better to mess around with 600,000 private school pupils.

If the real problem is a lack of diversity in MPs. Then the problem is with the parties themselves. And yes, Good old comrade Corbyn was educated privately and his kids went to a selective grammar school.

@Blankscreen - a tax on school fees is a great idea, especially if it could be used to improve state schools.

@Iggly - I agree, it does perpetuate the class divide. What do you think of Blankscreen's tax idea, surely that would be a start to levelling the playing field a bit?

I am all for this. Holland and Germany dont have private schools and do very well. Instead of having a select few getting a great education, rich parents would put the money on their childrens education into the state to help fund better facilities and teaching as they want their children to succeed which would mean everyone learning together in a community spirit of equal opportunity. It would upset Englands class elite but would be very good news all round. Prince George would find himself in a state school which would be interesting. This action doesn't mean getting rid of free schools which arent government national curriculum based but it means getting away from having to pay for a good education and instead having everyone hopefully getting a better education for free rather than the wealthy getting an education, the majority cant afford

Prince George would find himself in a state school which would be interesting.

Of course he fucking wouldn’t.

As for Eton - it’s a boarding school. How much will the parents care if Eton is in England, or if it moves to France?

They post of good education is to enable social mobility.

Germany has very poor social mobility, so I would seriously doubt just how good the education system there is in regards to that.
Vocational schools - yes, those are good. Of course.

www.dw.com/en/germanys-social-mobility-among-poorest-worse-than-in-the-united-states-oecd/a-44245702

point, not post. Sorry.

So taxing I can see as a reasonable idea. I guess tutoring would be taxed too but not necessarily language or music classes?

Abolishing doesn’t get rid of the problem of postcode lottery which will be accentuated because of more competition for places at the best state schools. It will also reduce national income by taking away international student fees. It will cost a lot in administration and lawyers fees. I doubt all the private school teachers will be wanting to join the state sector because even if labour pump more money into wages, pay and working conditions are unlikely to match the bigger private schools (smaller ones may be more similar).

I really don’t think the private school parents are going to get involved to improve failing state schools if private schools are abolished. They will either avoid them (by moving house or send them to international school) or send their kids there and give them extra tutoring. Besides - how would they? They don’t know about running schools - wouldn’t they just get in the way of teachers?

The "tracking" of school children — funneling some students to more academic secondary schools and others to vocational schools — in Germany tends to make it harder for children to move up and down the social ladder.

As in the article I linked.

This is at the heart of the 'good' German Educational system.

Instead of having a select few getting a great education, rich parents would put the money on their childrens education into the state to help fund better facilities and teaching as they want their children to succeed which would mean everyone learning together in a community spirit of equal opportunity

And how exactly is this going to work?

I suspect lots of teachers would.move to the state sector becuase they have to because they need a.job.

The main thing that will improve state schools is money. I don't see how having more well off parents will change state schools that much.

Niet Comrade....

Teachers in the state sector don’t want to work in the state sector (they are leaving in droves). So why would private school teachers want to work in the state sector, especially as quite a few of them left it for a reason!

So instead of aiming to improve state schools, they take aim at the schools that work, the ones that people from all over the World send their kids to. The school that my children go to sponsor a state primary school which was previously failing and they have helped to turn it around...imagine if every private school did that...

On the other thread someone suggested that
When the good private schools are gone then what’s left will be good because there will be nothing better to compare it with.
So all schools will be good. Problem solved.

It’s a hugely sexist policy. Like many working professional women, the wrap around care and extra curricular activities on site is the reason I can keep my career going. 80% of my net salary goes on fees so I will simply give up if the school is abolished (and the state will have to pay for my children to be educated but won’t have the benefit of all that tax and national insurance that I pay). I won’t be the only one. Also, there are huge numbers of first generation immigrant parents at my children’s school. If many of them decide to leave the country we are going to be in trouble...particularly as a lot of them are consultants at the local hospital.

Excuse me if I’m wrong but isn’t there a difference between “public” schools and “private” schools? Not all private schools are considered public schools.
Regardless of a school children attend, interested and focused parents will enrich their children’s education and opportunities.

Excuse me if I’m wrong but isn’t there a difference between “public” schools and “private” schools? Not all private schools are considered public schools

There are only 7 public schools. All public schools are private schools. Labour's policy is to abolish private schools and redistribute their assets. This is probably contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights.

I love the assumption that everyone who sends their children to private school are minted.

Mine are in private - the first because the state primary school we were allocated was hardcore religion (writing prayers in English lessons, drawing angels in art etc.). The second because she has mild SEN and needs the smaller class sizes. We scrimp and save to send them but it’s a sacrifice we chose to make.

Not everyone is at Eton lording it up totally removed from the realities of the world.

In reality I can see removal of charitable status and VAT on fees as realistic steps forward. Seizure of assets and restrictions on access to education on the basis of wealth????? Illegal and would never be passed through either parliament or the courts. Absolute numpty.