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

[nowirehangers]

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.

But cissy, it does cut them off from most of the other children in their community, at least during the school day (which is at least half of a child's waking life during term time). So, it doesn't completely cut them off, no - but it sequesters them in a pretty stark way.

No, I disagree. And kids are just kids aren't they? Or are some more 'worthy' of knowing than others?

In fact, doesn't that just sum the whole smug thing up. 'Why don't you make friends with Anya darling, her Daddy's a refugee and may have some interesting life experiences he could share with you.'

i do find it sad that lots of kids round here just don't go out to play, they get off the coach at 5ish then i suppose stay at home

You disagree that the children in independent schools aren't spending as much time with state-school children as they would if they were in the state school??

If your argument is that the social make-up of independent schools is the same as the social make-up of comprehensives, then I doubt that that's supportable.

And yes, I think children benefit from meeting all types of people. I'm sure that state school children would benefit from spending time with independent school children, as well as vice versa.

Don't all kids these days?

Cuts them off in what sense? What is this "real life"? Clearly no parent unless they're an idiot wants their children learning in a class room in their teens where the other children have an IQ of 100 and can't sit still and disrupt the lesson in the state or private system if they have a bright child or even if their child's IQ is 100 but wants to work and can't because of disruption so what's wrong with paying to ensure you don't get that kind of low level constant disruption.

There are children in the community I really wouldn't want my children to get to know too closely and that includes as much the mega rich with too much money and not enough parental care and too many drugs as much as the underclass. Children in prviate schools arguably see more of different parts of the world, the richer parts of course and learn to operate in those with confidence but also do loads of things in the community like working with the very poor elderly in their homes etc I suspect most private schools give children more contact with others different from them than any good comp which parents select in effect by house price.

We're not going to agree are we Cissy

''Why don't you make friends with Anya darling, her Daddy's a refugee and may have some interesting life experiences he could share with you.'

You think that's smug - I think it's a plain statement of fact.

I sent my son to a state primary and attended state edcuation my entire school career and he and I are/were surrounded by people almost entirely from the same backgrounds as ourselves, white, roman catholic, upper working class.

Perhaps things are different in London.

my son is in a class where children want to learn and they all behave surprise

xenia your children are lucky to go to that school it's very selective, you just like bragging about it

I do think it's a patronising attitude.

The patronising comment is directed to the comments made by supercollider btw.

Cissy - that did make me laugh!

I don't understand why you think it's patronising - really.

Someone grows up in a country -say, a developing world country. S/he experiences a life completely unlike any life that is lived in the UK. S/he makes the decision to uproot and move to the UK, and in doing so will experience an extraordinary change in circumstances.

In what way would this person's experiences not be interesting to a child born and bred here?

I really don't understand this attitude. To be honest, the smug/patronising accusation seems to me to be a lazy insult that gets slung by those who feel vaguely guilty/chippy about the choices they've made.

kaz33 - where I send my child to school is mine and my DH's business and no one elses IMO. It is a choice that we made, based on the choises we had available to us.

And thanks, but I am not a selfish arrogant or otherwise type of person. I do my bit for society and the greater community. I was a state school teacher for over 9 years, over 4 of those years in a "failing" school. I now work in a male prison, helping prisoners through their sentence. I also work voluntary on my 3 non-work days, doing work for others without pay.

I reckon I can balance out my conscious perfectly well thank you.

Oh FGS supercollider. Are you taking the piss?

No. Is there something unclear about my post?

supercollider:

"I'd consider it if I thought the local state schools had a serious problem with pupil violence or violent bullying that was not adequately addressed by the staff. However, I suspect that those of us for whom comprehensives are the default expectation are much less inclined to dramatise these problems than those who have an innate preference for fee-paying schools.
"

I worked in a school with very por pupil behavour and very poor management and leadership - meaning the discipline was not in place and the behaviour got worse. I feel I am entitled to "dramatise"it to an extent - as I was actually there and saw it first hand daily.

Supercollider: Sorry - I don't do guilt (about anything, never mind school choices). I think that whether you see Cissy's comment as funny or serious is merely a reflection of one's own personality/outlook. It's just a difference in perspective. It's not something that I could change your interpretation of any more than you could change mine!

Perfectly clear darling.

Fair enough hula - if it's something you witnessed first-hand then I wouldn't call it 'dramatising'. I absolutely accept that there are some comps - mostly in London I'd guess - in which pupil violence is a serious problem. If I lived near one you can bet I'd be searching around for the money to get my DCs into an independent.

""I would perhaps be more likely to move house to an area with a good state school rather than pay for private as it would probably be better value long term.""

Better for who? You? Your child? The child whono longer has a place at the school as his mum can;t afford a house in the right catchment?

None of out education systems are actually right at the moment. WWhichever way we look at it money pays for a better education - either directly to a private school or indirectly through paying for a house in the right catchment. Neither way is "fair" - but life isn;t fair. Never has been, never will be.

Have seen both sides, both directly and indirectly.

london is like that now though isn't it, money and not much money, nothing much in between

Well said Hula, well said.

I am not in London. I am in Yorkshire. Have worked in an excellent state school and a failing state school. They were world's apart. But then so were the catchments. Many people were completely priced out of the excllent state school catchment - house prices very high and no social housing in the catchmnet. As a result there was a lot of money coming into the school; this helped fund enrichment activities and resources. All not available to the failing school.