Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

arabella weir on why we must send our kids to state schools

614 replies

nowirehangers · 03/09/2008 13:55

Arabella on why she would never send her kids to private schools
What do people think?
Fwiw I find the tone unbelievably smug. I also disagree with a lot of what's being said. I don't think all parents send thier kids to private schools so they can avoid the great unwashed, though some do. I would love my dcs to go to a state school for the reasons she mentions.
What puts me off is the fact the teaching is so often mediocre - as the Chief Inspector of Schools admitted this week. Of course there are so incredible teachers in the state system but I fear there are a lot of second-rate one too. I went to a state primary where the teaching was awful then was moved in to a private school and couldn't believe how much more stimulating the atmosphere was and how much more inspirational the teachers were. I dislike the idea of my dcs mixing only with posh kids, so I'm going to put mye experience down as an unlucky one and give the local state school the benefit of the doubt but if I feel they're being taught badly I will remove them and remortgage the house or whatever to make it work. Anyway, that's my opinion, interested in others.

OP posts:
Quattrocento · 03/09/2008 14:46

Ah, The Grauniad in full spate (or should that be trickle?)

This article is so tired and lame. Notice the careful preface (Oh we're in the position where we can afford private education but choose not to use it). Most of the time I hear that, it's embarassingly obvious that the parents in question really can't afford it. Of course in this case she may be telling the truth. There again, she may not.

Let's deal with her points one by one:

(i) Private schools produce children who are less socially and emotionally capable. Sez who? Any empirical evidence to support this assertion? No. There's rather more evidence to demonstrate that private schools produce more independent (relatively there is an extremely low proportion of people on benefits who have been privately educated, for instance).

(ii) There is so much more diversity in state schools. Nonsense. My local state primary schools are almost exclusively white working class. There is nothing wrong with being either white or working class of course, but there is nothing diverse about the local state schools. My DC's (private) schools have a massive range of colours and backgrounds.

(iii) There is an inherent tolerance and kindness in state school educated children. This isn't a point worth discussing IMO. My children are the kindest children I know bar none. They don't have a nasty bone in their bodies. Again another unsubstantiated assertion from old Groany.

(iv) State schools would be just as good as private schools if they only had the money. No they wouldn't actually. The reason my DC's school scores an average of 1150 points per pupil at A and A/S level against a national average of 731 is because they are selective schools. This means they only take above average pupils. You can throw all the money in the world at a dim child, and it won't get them good A level results (witness Prince Harry).

(v) The world is very unfair because privately educated children are overrepresented at top universities. No dear. Bright children go to private schools in disproportionate numbers (because their parents scrimp and scrape to send them there to get better teaching) which is why private schools are overrepresented at top universities.

We send our children to private schools so that they get good teaching, at a level that is appropriate for their own ability levels, to mix with a diverse range, to benefit from the sporting, musical and dramatic opportunities available, and so that they get good academic results.

Not to avoid the great unwashed. Mind you, there is the added bonus of avoiding Arabella Weir's children, which until I read the article, I hadn't appreciated.

scaryteacher · 03/09/2008 14:49

We live in a society where we can make choices - she chooses not to pay for private education, while others do. If that is what you want to spend your money on why not? I fail to see why paying for your kids education is immoral whilst spending silly money on handbags for instance isn't. If you earn it, you can spend it as you like within the law.

Her article was smug and full of assumptions about private school parents, many of which are untrue. I also know several private school products and have been married to one for the past 22 years. He seems perfectly normal to me.

What has always fascinated me is how the same child taught first at state school and then reappearing in my classroom at the private school I taught at could change so much from a revolting specimen to one who toed the line. Conversely, a lad from the private school who then moved to the comp at which I taught, changed from a pleasant lad to an utter toerag, in trouble with me and everyone else.

Some children just don't fit the state sector and vice versa...if you have the means to send your child to a school that suits them, then why not?

AuraofDora · 03/09/2008 14:51

a breathe of fresh air arabella wier nice one
(dont she sound like a mner?)

and waaay nicer to hear than the diane abbots of the world who deem it good enough but just not for them

bundle · 03/09/2008 14:51

I've been past the school her kids go to, had no idea they went there it's pretty rough

msdemeanor · 03/09/2008 14:52

I think people see secondary as different because parents have more influence with younger children, wheras older kids live to be like their peers.
I agree with her, but I don't think it is necessary to slag off kids who go to private school to make her point. I have met lovely kids who go to private schools - really polite, charming, hardworking, thoughtful etc. You can defend the state system without making sweeping generalisations about other people's children like that.

AbbeyA · 03/09/2008 14:52

I agree scaryteacher -it is all down to choice of how you spend your money. I don't think it is helpful to say that what suits you suits all. Most of the population don't have the choice anyway as they simply can't afford it.

charliegal · 03/09/2008 14:53

Wow, was that really Arabella Weir. Agree with every word.

Some of the cheerleaders for private schooling ie the 'best' of everything, on this site (not this thread) also make all Arabella's points very well.

LittleMyDancing · 03/09/2008 14:53

I think this is an interesting piece - she is obviously lucky in that there is a good state school near her.

But her comments about our duty to raise standards in the state sector by participating ring very true - Bristol has one of the highest concentrations of fee paying schools in the country, with the result that a LOT of the children whose parents are committed to education, value it, have money for school trips, fundraisers, encourage learning and homework, support the school through PTA etc go to private schools.

This means many of the state schools are rubbish as noone is taking an interest. Her figure of 20% needing to be committed to learning to affect the school's performance is very interesting reading. If that 20% chooses the private sector, where does that leave the state school?

frankiesbestfriend · 03/09/2008 14:53

I think she makes some great points in the article, the most meaningful being her comments on how it is all of societys responsibility to drive up standards in state schools.

If the higher earning parents,who have higher expectations of their childs education, are leaving failing schools to go private, the gap between the education of the poor and rich is only going to widen.
And I can't see why it becomes different at secondary level.

bundle · 03/09/2008 14:54

tbh i think that examining the differences between her choice and the other school she mentions (presumably Coleridge is the "holy grail" one she refers to) would be more interesting than state v private, in her neck of the woods

AuraofDora · 03/09/2008 14:56

quattrocento
what was it about her kids that you now have the added bonus of knowing you should avoid?
..??

you live in the demographic she said and its true why no want to participate in what is around about you?
why are you there?

msdemeanor · 03/09/2008 14:58

Littlemydancing - I don't think most people would consider her children's school to be a very 'good' school. I think that's her point really - she thinks the middle-classes are in a panic about state schools, but instead of pitching in to improve things, are running away to the private sector.
She definitely makes good points, though when she discusses how finance would make state schools as good as private schools, I think she overlooks the parent-factor - ie chaotic parents with low educational achievements and aspirations are not a good thing for children and hold them back in a way that even the best teachers and facilities in the world cannot fully overcome.

spaghettihoops · 03/09/2008 15:00

glad you can tell how rough her kids' school is by 'going past it', bundle

building is tatty on the outside, not inside

kids and teachers are absolutely fantastic

msdemeanor · 03/09/2008 15:00

And it is such a lie -or self-delusion at best - that people send their kids specially to private schools as they are more diverse. come off it!

LittleMyDancing · 03/09/2008 15:02

She does say that she 'liked the school' though - one wonders what she would have done had her local school been really diabolical, failing, and she hadn't liked it.

Having said that, I don't disagree with her at all. I think she's a bit hard on some of the reasons why people choose private schools, but I totally agree about participation and support.

The welfare state, state education, the NHS - people seem to think of it as something other, removed from their life, nothing to do with them.

It's our school system, our health system - if we don't like the way it's run, we have to change it - but we have to be in it to do that.

msdemeanor · 03/09/2008 15:05

I think her idea of 'diabolical' is different to many of her peers though. A slightly iffy Ofsted is enough to send today's helicopter parents shrieking in the opposite direction. As are black pupils, 'chavvy' pupils etc. THere is a hell of a lot of prejudice about, all carefully veiled in talk of 'too many pupils with English as a second language', 'very scruffy' etc. I have noticed a lot more fear in the parents of children the age of my youngest (4ish) than in the parents of my older kids, who panicked less, I think.

msdemeanor · 03/09/2008 15:06

I mean the parents of my older kids' PEERS - obviously!

bundle · 03/09/2008 15:07

err I'm sure they are

v good friend from dd2's nursery (who lives between the 2) absolutely didn't want her son to go there - so a little more than my flippant "going past it" informs my comment

bundle · 03/09/2008 15:08

that was for spaghopps)

LittleMyDancing · 03/09/2008 15:09

I think you're right msdemeanour. Speaking as someone educated in a private school due to living abroad, I find myself unaccountably nervous about sending DS into the state sector, mostly because I have no experience of it beyond what I read in the papers. DP was privately educated as well, so he's no help!

(before you think we're rolling in cash - my dad's employers paid my fees, and the Masons paid DPs, so sadly we are poor as church mice)

I am, however, completely sure that DS will go to a state school.

Having spent an interesting chat with a schoolfriend of mine who is not even considering the state sector despite living in an area with some excellent schools, but is even considering boarding school in South Africa for their child as it's cheaper and better education, apparently I am even more convinced.

msdemeanor · 03/09/2008 15:14

When I was at school my best friend's dad was an investment banker. NO way would I have met her these days - she'd be in St Goat's Academy round the corner. She's still my best friend decades later.

msdemeanor · 03/09/2008 15:17

I think the fear is because society is just so insanely competitive now. And our idea of success is different to how it used to be. Being a nurse or policeman or teacher used to be though of as success. People expected less. Now we see the lifestyles of the super rich pushed in our faces constantly. We feel we have to push our kids more and more so they aren't 'failures'. And of course we are so obsessed with status - from it bags to it schools.

spaghettihoops · 03/09/2008 15:20

spaghopps here

(will be changing name later like it much better)

that was my point really, bundle, presumably article's too - schools get perceived as 'rough' for all sorts of reasons

eg tatty outside, 'holy grail' middle-class school up the road etc etc

doesn't mean teaching/school community etc isn't fantastic once you get past all that

(steps away from fray)

RunningMatePalin · 03/09/2008 15:21

This is the funniest thing I've read for ages.

bundle · 03/09/2008 15:22

hello spaghopps

well yes it does look rough
and said friend refused place there
and now coleridge is becoming victim of its own success apparently - expanding to Superschool size (not sure how many form entry - 4?)
chattering classes Up in Arms