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.

because it's heartless, like victorian england, let's segreate 'thick' children

And where would the "thick disruptive working class children from bad homes" whom all sensible parents wish their clever well behaved offspring to avoid go to school if all schools were private, I wonder?

Thanks Doteressaa

Woah, steady on Xenia

"thick disruptive working class children from bad homes "

Not on there! Very judgemental.

There are just as many disruptive or non-clever/non-common-sense children from all backgrounds IME.

The only thing we'll all agree on here is that Xenia won't be winning any prizes for political correctness in this lifetime

Xenia badger baiting and hare/deer coursing were banned years before fox hunting, presumably demonstrating a right wing bias?

As for educating "thick disruptive working class children from bad homes" - the reason for this is the hope that they will not turn into thick disruptive working class adults, and thus improve life for society as a whole.

"thick disruptive working class children from bad homes "

I'm trying to unpick this, but it isn't easy.

(i) Thick - well I agree that mixed ability education leaves very bright children bored and very dim children frustrated and is not the right approach at all

(ii) Disruptive - well I agree that disruptive children are a menace in any classroom

(iii) Working class - I struggle with this comment. I can't find any justification for working class to be used as a derogatory label and I am not sure the label itself is useful or relevant nowadays.

(iv) From bad homes - well I think that children who have been badly brought up are generally to be avoided - issues with manners and behaviour etc but it is not easy to work out who these are and it is not something that attaches to class.

A heroic effort there, Quattro, but as you are well aware Xenia is being unnecessarily provocative, so we should probably just sit her on the time-out step for a while.

Yes quattro class has nothing to do with it.

Revise "thick disruptive working class adults" to simply "disruptive adults" but I think the gist was clear.

ph god of course it is - leave the hippy shit at the doorplease and lets gets down to brass tacks.

people who can afford private education - are in the main people with money (or) people with one child. in the main. there are always exceptions.

generally therefore the rest of society are left to battle it out over which state school to go to - in thee you will generally find the disruptive kids are from workng class/underclass homes usually with a plethera of problems and multi agency involvement.

now, this is a big country and so to try and generalise especially on a website full to the brim of middle class or aspiring mums is probably not reflective of society at large. there are exceptions and differences between small towns and area of country.

however if we are going to generalise - there is a class difference. there may be those who wish to be MC but aren't. those who have what are on mumsnet known as MC ideals - but infact are not - are just common sense good parenting - and one can be in any class for that

there are good parents and bad parents - but i would bet my arse on the fact that the poorest section of society are the least educated and the least interested in societies 'norms' and #values' and therefore parent badly - the children of thee children i would speculate - predominantly go to state schools. This is the reason why those who can afford it do not want their children to go to state schools.

in an ideal world we would all send our children to state schools. this would force equality of education - and i think some may speculate that those with influence would bloody well influence the education system to ensure it was the best it could be considering their child was in it.

i dont blame those parents whith money one bit in reality

but in an ideal world - we should be looking for an equality of education or all our children - if some rich fekker wants to give a few thousand to a school as a donation then that would benefit all

but then this leads us to the catchment situation

if there wasn't private schools we are left with the richest all buying on one area to get little tarquin into the best state school

there will always be a hierarchy. the systme as it stands is shit

and i am pissed and i dont have an answer

am thinking lottery

Religion is the main reason why we opted for private. Nearest 2 state schools are Catholic when we're atheist and a community school which though secular in its teaching its students are 99% Muslim. It is a sad irony that the only school not segregated by religion (and with that ethnicity and social class) is private.

For us it really was a moral dilemma and in the end it felt better for us to opt out of the state system and therefore not use taxpayers money to educate our children in a religious school when we're atheists or where they would be completely isolated as the only non Muslim girls in a local state school.

Then, of course, the after and before school care, the educational and extra curricular opportunities, small class sizes, good behaviour, fact that at early years the school is performing 10 X over the LEA average etc etc when compared to the local state schools are all advantages.

But I remain angry that we felt forced to opt out of the state system because of the existence of faith schools and what they have done to exacerbate social divisions.

And I remain angry that the advantages offered by our private school are not offered to all kids.

We have Muslim and now a hindu school (as well as Jewish, Catholic, C of E schools) in the state sector where I live, probably uniquely for the country to have all that choice but certainly I suspect there is better religious mixing in the private sector in some parts of London than in the state.

I am not angry my children's schools' facilities are not offered to all. I want to advantage mym chidlren. I am sure most parents do at heart and that means advantage them over others which is why we all try to do the best for them, teach them good morals, over them, feed them well. It is in our evolutionary heritage to do this to ensure the survival of the fittest ideally our own children over others. it is how humans are made. Now I accept that if British employers cannot get workers who can read that damages me indirectly although we could just ship them in from abroad anyway which is probably pretty good for this planet anyway so I would like state schools to be okay and I would certainly like all children to have a stable home life which enables them to function in good long term relationships and not turn to crime. But I don't agree that everyone should be the same. I wouldn't like all babies genetically engineered as clones with the same IQ and looks.

on the Qu list 1 - 4 from my comments most people agree with 1 - 2. Working class - I don't have just issues over this although I would not want my children with friends who all said things like you was, "for free" different to rather than different from etc ALthough my mother in very very poor state schools in the 40s with 40 children a class felt able to teach them correct grammar so I suppose if the school is teaching them how to speak properly then that may not matter. Plenty of fairly ex working class people around here in the private system and I don't think the segregation by class is something I particularly feel I am buying.

The last point was "bad homes" by that I meant a parent in prison, a home where the mother is taking drugs and there is no proper care etc. That is more likely on sink estates than private estates although I accept parental neglect and abuse occurs in the homes of fee paying parents as well although not quite so much as there are fewer pressures on the parents.

My public boarding school had a lots of children from bad homes in that they were dysfunctional, where boarding school was the solution to being either unwanted or fought over. It was a very sad situation and some of the children were very damaged. As a sixth former that didn't really affect me very much, but I imagine it affected some of the younger children because of the house system meant the older boys were in charge of the younger ones a fair amount, plus the peer influence as some of the boys were very wild (drugs, doing stupid things etc). These kids were rarely expelled because the school felt some responsibility knowing the situation they would be letting the boys go back into (for example I knew one boy who slept rough when he was suspended).

The other thing to bear in mind is that it is al very well if you have bright academic children, but what if you have children with special needs (maybe they are even disruptive?), or just not so bright? Highly academic schools are not for everyone (well I guess that's the point).

Why is a child's whole 'interaction with he real world' deemed to be at school???
DS1 attends an independent schol. He was at a state school and plays with his friends from there after school, as well as with children from various schools, state and independent at Scouts and the church youth club. He also mixes with his brother ( state school), his parents (both state schools) his elder sisters, both state schools, now at university), and takes the bus home mixing with poepl who are doubtless both state and independent. Not to mentions his forays to the newasgent, woolworths and numerous other places...
School is like work - you go there in working hours, but most people have friends outside work, and do not mix solely with thier colleagues... If Arabella wants to benefit council tenats with her presence and improve their lives, why not go and live on a council estate? I bought an ex-council falt and lived among council tenants - never occured to me that people like her would brag aout thei ability to alk thru my neighbourhood unscathed due to their streetwiseness gained at a local school... Why is she so chippy, and sonobbish about council estates?