Don't seem to like private schooling

[Chickpea17]

So off the back of a thread I just seen why do so many people on MN seem to dislike private schooling so much? I'm not judging one way or another just curious.
I have a almost 5 year old and we can't afford private schooling so haven't given it much thought.

US schools vary hugely. I wouldn't send a dog I liked to US schools in bad areas; looking at the enrollment figures for public schools in big cities in the US in the last few years, it appears Americans are increasingly in agreement with me.

@Kokeshi123 there are terrible schools in any system. The general provision is much much better in the US vs. UK based on my experience, and I live in an area with supposedly ‘outstanding’ schools.

Sorry that was meant as a rhetorical question! Of course it's unfair but people don't complain about things like that in the same way they do about state/private education. I think the start that babies and infants have in deprived/poverty stricken areas is really unfair. Often the learning journey for them is stunted before they even get to the stage of private/state education. It's not fair but society doesn't seem to have the same outrage. Instead there's a culture of parent blaming and shaming for these differences before school age.

Yep - nailed it here.

Its unfair and stands in the way of a more equal society.

Ah thanks for clearing that up @Neverhappyalwayshopeful and yes, I absolutely agree with all that you’ve said on your last post. Definitely more intervention is needed in those very important early years - the social inequality gap is well established before they even start school. I think the relationship between poor housing, health, lower school attendance and consequently, lower attainment also needs to have more focus. It’s all interlinked. It’s a horrendous situation for parents who also want the best for their own kids and who also work hard, make sacrifices for their children, etc., but will never have the privilege of being able to choose to send their children to private school or pay for private health.

Having thought about my own question I think the reason private healthcare gets less attention than private schooling is simply because it’s less obvious who has benefited from it.

It’s easy to look at the government, media figures, CEOs and see which schools they went to. It’s less visible that James Richperson is only here because he had a heart operation privately while Jim Poorperson died on a waiting list. Or that Child X has benefited from a private operation or diagnosis whereas Child Y has struggled with their health due to that operation/diagnosis being refused on the NHS.

I guess can education ever be equal ?

My basis,
All schools are the same, same class sizes, same equipment etc.
Then as school as school begins you will have to

some parents that don't care about school and this may reflect in the child's perspectives.
Some parents will want their children doing all the extra circular activities they can
Some parents will hire tutors , summer camps etc
The with the children themselves, some will struggle, some will do ok, some will excel.

Overall can there ever be a set standard for the school system or will it always be unequal ?

It's true that parental background is one of the largest indicators of future achievement. That's never going to change.

However private school skews this even further providing networks of privilege that many, at base more able, may not be able to access. If only 9% of schools are private why are a far higher % of attendees holders of senior positions in our workforce?

Many universities make contextual offers, which, while something of a blunt instrument, is an explicit recognition of the inequality in our schools. And also an acknowledgement of the statistic that state school-educated DCs generally do better than privately educated DCs who enter university with the same grades.

I think the networking aspect of private schools tends to be over-stated – it probably does still exist in politics, big-city law firms and some financial jobs, but everywhere else it is slowly changing. More companies are engaging in blind recruitment and/or their own interviews/tests/engagement processes. And if you apply for a Masters course the large majority of universities do not ask about your schooling or A level grades – there isn't even a space on the application form for these – they are only interested in your undergraduate course.

Lots of people on this thread have said they don't send their DCs to private school for better grades and the contacts they make, and I'm sure that's quite true. Those that are relying on this aspect may find it gradually eroding.

As long as society is unequal then so will education be unequal for the reasons you have identified.

Interesting.

I think some of it is background and perspective as well.

I'm very rural. Scotland.

I don't overly use nursery, certainly not full hours, and often when DD goes she has two teachers, two children. Other days there are twelve maximum. The learning experience and equipment is absolutely outstanding.

She is only one going into primary one, tiny class size.

I have friends in our nearest towns who would be horrified at that, they have sixty in nursery, more going to primary one.

Mine would be lost in those numbers, I would hate it, they would hate it here.

Due to the size of the school, the staff and the resources it is outstandingly the nursery scored highest across the board.

I would never contemplate private school.

However secondary will be another matter. Our catchment school is poor, so the choice will be apply for a place further away or private.

There is absolutely here the thought of they go to school where they live, where parents went, regardless.

As long as society is unequal then so will education be unequal for the reasons you have identified.

Education is itself a driver of inequality so you might say, as long as education is unequal then so will society be unequal. This is why people get so exercised about it.

This. Brits are inherently jealous of wealth except it's situated in the RF. Majority have been conditioned to see everyone else as a lowly commoner, so they romanticise poverty and prefer to look to the govt (formerly king) for financial security.

They won't criticise the RF for sending their children to private schools, tons of staff and domestic servants, avoiding tax, owning more than one property etc but if they smell a whiff of a commoner doing such they'll be up in arms. 🤣😆😅

We are sending DD to a private school. We cut back on everything to do it as education is our priority. We have friends who earn more and have a nicer car, more expensive home who don't send their DC to private. It's not always reflective of income but what each individual family values.

Sorry posted too soon - meant to say yes people judge you for using private schools. We haven't really told anyone who doesn't need to know that we send DC private, as we would get snide comments. However those same people post beautiful images of their holidays in the Caribbean on social media and we are all happy for them.

It's a strange situation where you are badly judged for spending on education - I believe it's extra emotive as people equate it to class, and obviously it's about your children.

Each child should be given a voucher for education and be free to go where they wish. Schools will sit up then.

It is normal to get irate when people buy fast track tickets at a theme park. Private schools are the educational equivalent of pushing in front. On top of this they provide access to networks of privilege that have profound impact on life chances. They create societal unfairness which goes way beyond academic ability.

In a country where education could drive towards a true meritocracy if it were prioritised it is utterly depressing that private schools are allowed to thrive.

I don't judge people for sending their children to them. I do judge the mentality that it is ok to buy privilege.

You are still buying privilege if you pay an overinflated price for a house near a good state school, if you use private healthcare, if you pay for extra curricular activities not everyone can afford. If there were no private schools it would be the same kids over indexed in the big jobs as parents would use their money in other ways to get ahead.

If you use the money you could have spent on private education on a nice house in a leafy comp catchment, on cars and nice holidays and extra curricular stuff for your kids you are not doing that for the good of society. If you used that cash to invest in poorer state schools or to fund a child from a deprived catchment to go to a better school than fair enough.

Hating private schools is an easy target to detract from the social inequality that you are also benefiting from. Private healthcare doesn't get the same rap as it's used by all the leafy comp parents complaining about private school...

In a country where education could drive towards a true meritocracy if it were prioritised it is utterly depressing that private schools are allowed to thrive.

But a “true meritocracy” is also based on inherited privilege, just a different form. It would push those who were born naturally more intelligent, driven or talented to the top. There is no reason these people would inherently “deserve” to do better than those born less able.

It would push those who were born naturally more intelligent, driven or talented to the top. There is no reason these people would inherently “deserve” to do better than those born less able.

That is the whole point of a meritocracy. People deserve to do better on individual merit, most typically defined by intelligence, drive and talent.

Of course our society needs the best and most able.

Unless you have a one size fits all, everyone the same like a production line then how do you expect society to be equal ? with human nature being different ect how can everyone be the same ?

I think the argument is that those who attend private schools aren't de facto more intelligent, driven or talented than those who don't. And yet they are disproportionately represented in the upper echelons of business and government, for example.

More equality of input (ie schools) should lead to more equality of outcome (ie a level playing field post formal education). Although of course as PPs have said, it's more complex than that simple equation implies.

I agree that meritocracy benefits society and the economy. We need intelligent and talented people to be able to, and incentivised to, reach top positions.

That’s not the same as saying those individuals born with talent or intelligence are more “deserving” however.

But @minipie this is not a discussion about who is more 'deserving' of a good education. It's an incredibly subjective term and depends very much on a personal view of which groups of society are owed the most by the rest of that society. Whether by employment, social or financial situation.

For a true meritocracy to have even a little bit of a chance we need to level the education playing field as much as is humanly possible. We can't iron out people's backgrounds and level of parental input which are in fact key drivers of success BUT we can provide access to a good education for all.

We can remove situations where money buys a chance to jump to the front of the queue, even before that queue has really formed and largely regardless of ability.

Practically speaking removing VAT exemptions and charitable status would go a long way to making private schools unattainable for many who currently use them and, whilst it may cause logistical problems in the short term, creating a more level playing field for all.

In my experience people who have parents that are teachers or university professors do extremely well in state education. They have wall to wall teaching out of school from birth.

I would not be surprised if a lot of people who profess the most vehement dislike of the private system have careers in education themselves. They are happy to tutor their kids to an advantage with full knowledge on how to do it and therefore such views are quite frankly, hypocritical.

The only logically way to have true and absolute fairness is to remove all children at birth and give them the same ‘control’ type of foster parents.