Private schools have lost their moral purpose - says head of Wellington

[RelaxedAndCalm]

here

"Leadership from the independent sector has been sadly lacking and it has failed to provide an inspiring moral vision for us in the 21st century."

I wonder if this will lead the Charities Commission to rethink their stance re charitable status.

private schools should be abolished.
life is unfair enough, children should all have access to the same ed, be educted in the same way.

Once they turn 18, their lives are thier own and will do as they please.

ISWYM, hopefullyrecovering, I had thought you'd meant £(6x3)x2. Apologies.

It would take a pretty huge increase to the schools budget to absorb those pupils, both annual costs, and either buying out the charities (or in some cases businesses) which own the schools or securing premises by other means. What spending would have to be cut/rescheduled to afford it?

Interesting article from the Nottingham Economic Review on this very subject

This thread is depressing. People complaining about 'the sacrifices they have to make to send their children to private school' rather than being glad that they have the means to do so and having no compassion for children who don't have this 'advantage' (if it actually is one). It is all so self centred, and exactly illustrates why private education is not the place to look for 'moral purpose'.
If no-one went to private school, state schools would be better places to learn and teach, and everyone would benefit.

Littlewhitemice really? So lets abolish the private schools and drag everyone down to a lower level so that it's fair? What you suggest is an ideal and utterly unachieveable whilst there are such variables as parental input (and I don't mean money), human teachers, not virtual lessons taught by robots or online and school buildings and facilities that vary massively. All children are advantaged and diasadvantaged well before the age of 4/5 when schooling kicks in. Abolishing private schools will not do anything to make the state system better, it will flood it with more students and increase the postcode / houseprice issue.

littlewhitemice If you accept that people are free to spend their hard earned money on cigarettes/ holidays/ designer clothing/ expensive handbags/large cars/ enormous TVs/anything really then why would you want to PREVENT them spending on an education for their DC? You can only abolish independent schools if you BAN people from purchasing education. That would be bizarre when education is clearly a social good.

Instead, focus on bringing state schools up to a good standard and then few people would want to fork out tens of thousands of pounds a year for a private education.

"life is unfair enough, children should all have access to the same ed, be educted in the same way"

And how are you going to make that work?
Force the wealthy not to "hime educate"their children using tutors?
Make every school identical?
Fix house prices near outstanding schools so no one is priced out of catchment?

And how will you address the fact that education is not a "one size fits all" thing?

newfashionedmum

This thread is depressing. People complaining about 'the sacrifices they have to make to send their children to private school' rather than being glad that they have the means to do so and having no compassion for children who don't have this 'advantage' (if it actually is one).

I don't see that at all. I also love the snarky 'if it is one' comment, as though you can't imagine what advantage could possibly come from motivated classes, capable teachers and superb facilities.

It is all so self centred, and exactly illustrates why private education is not the place to look for 'moral purpose'.

Is any education the place to look for 'moral purpose'? Cold you give some examples of the superior morality of state teaching? I mean actual morality, not moralising.

If no-one went to private school, state schools would be better places to learn and teach, and everyone would benefit.

Beer would be a penny a pint, there'd be no war or hatred, and little butterflies would sing babies to sleep every night.

I can't see anyone complaining about sacrifices being made on this thread. I have to confess I do object to paying for an education that should be available to my DCs and those of everyone else by right. It's sickening, frankly. Yes blah blah, lucky to be able to afford it and all that, but it's entirely wrong that the state sector is a flipping shambles.

That article from the Nottingham Economic Review is weak IMO, for the following reasons:

1. Some of the statistics are wrong.
2. It fails to acknowledge one crucial point. I do not pay much more per child than the state sector pays. But I get a much better provision. That's because the state sector squanders resources shamelessly.

Yes, by all means stick VAT on school fees. But the same argument applies equally to sticking VAT on university fees, so let's do the same with those.

Oh, and if we're going to up the costs of educating my DCs by 20% pa for the next decade or so, how about some flipping accountability in public finance? How about delivering improvements in the state sector? How about making an academic education available in the state sector? How about making the independent sector redundant? Because that's what's needed.

I don't think my attitude is self-serving btw. I am entirely and completely powerless to improve the education in the state sector. I pay my taxes on time and in compliance with both the letter and the spirit of the law. Yet those taxes have not been spent wisely, they are not delivering the standard of education that I believe should be everyone's by right. So what can I do as a parent? I could send them to the local zoo (and it is a zoo - apparently there are more children with ASBOs than go to university) and try to make up for its deficiencies at home, with the aid of lots of tutors, fighting a losing battle against peer pressure and indifferent teaching. Or I can send them private. Stand in my shoes. WWYD?

wonder if any of those advocating lowering university admissions for the failed state system etc would want said graduates perhaps operating on them in future or running coporations, perhaps doing their accounts?

Umm, yes. What an odd thing to say! A surgeon's skills are demonstrated through her medical training and qualification, not her UCAS points.

The point you seem to be missing nokissy is that Bristol suggested that a student from the private sector who acheived a clutch of A*s does not typically perform any better than a student from a state school who scored fewer UCAS points. They argued that they should be allowed to take this into account, which seems perfectly reasonable if you ask me. I imagine admissions tutors know what they're doing.

That's an admission that there is lots and lots wrong with the state sector, I reckon.

No, I just think it's human nature that most people would go for the option that wasn't perceived as the most basic possible, iyswim.

... Because what was left, under a voucher scheme when anyone who could afford £20 or whatever a term, would not be the same as what there is now. Just as what there is now is not the same as it would be if some people didn't reject it now.

This word 'sacrifice' really gets my goat. If you can 'sacrifice' enough in order to pay school fees, that's one hell of a lot of non-essential fripperies you're having in the first place.

A private school place costs more than my entire annual income. Any suggestions as to what I should sacrifice?

Attila the Hen is brilliant!
just for the record I don't think anyone on this thread has advocated significantly lowering admissions requirements for disadvantaged applicants. I was pondering taking deprivation into account in a tie break situation between equally qualified candidates. some of the objectors to that idea rightly pointed out that this is more easily pondered than done as some unfair anomalies could follow if it was done simplistically eg on parental income. I still think it would be worth considering whether eg entitlement to free school meals or receipt of income support could be taken into account where there are multiple candidates with the requisite high grades . others have suggested that say AAB from a comp with a deprived intake is pretty much equal to AAA from Eton college. I don't think anyone has advocated lowering admission criteria or dumbing down.

hopefully, which statistics are wrong?

The universities have always made some allowances for the AAA or even BBB pupil from the sink school and it's never really caused problems fir the good state grammars, posh comps or private schools.
However it is rare cases. It is not a major issue or problem.

Also if they are not very bright wherever they are from they are not likely to do very well in job interviews or stay long in a job even if they get one wherever they went to school.

Xenia Your posts make me howl, I look forward to reading them and knew you would turn up here.

I think my post above is probably one with which no one can disagree and by my standards is pretty dull.

I dion't think we have reached a point where it pays ap arent to remove them from their state grammar or private school and into the nearest sink comp for 2 years to aid their getting a place to Oxbridge.

can you imagine the effect it would have on property prices?

There are some thoroughly awful people on this thread.

Yes, your children are probably getting a better education, will get into a top university, will earn more money than the rest of the oiks whose parents obviously don't give two hoots about their education.

I just hope they don't turn into smug, superior tossers, like their parents.

I feel quite sad after reading many of the posts on here.

I don't think you are being fair to the contributors to this thread. Or in fact acknowledging the unprecedented degree of consensus. I think we all agree the following:

1. Independent schools have no business advocating moral leadership to state schools.

1. Charitable status should be abolished immediately

1. Serious consideration should be given to putting VAT on school and university fees.

1. The headmaster in question is not focussing on the things that he ought.

1. The state sector is a shambles and is in dire need of proper funding and management.

Now, does anyone disagree with the above?

I wouldn't say that the state sector is in shambles. I'd question what you mean by 'proper funding and management'. Do you mean at school level (are headteachers incompetent), LEA level or Government level?

I think its a bit rich that cameron & clegg who both went to he most elite private schools in the country to expect indies to sponsor their academies scheme. One of the things which attracts me to the best independent schools is just that, the fact they are independent. The don't have to dance to the tune of politicians or their agendas but just concentrate on educating their pupils to a world class standard. I work in the public sector and often what we are told to do is not best for our clients but to make the ruling political party look good. I would rather my dc education was not subjected to the whims of politicians but based on the judgement of the best independent teachers in this country. One of the worst outcomes of politicians meddling in the education system is Our disastrous exam system which has been caused by politicians wanting voters to believe they were succeeding in raising educational standards for the masses.