Alan Bennett: Ban Public Schools

[DaDaDa]

Have we done this one yet?

In an ideal world, I agree with him.

lights blue touch paper, retires to safe distance with nice cup of tea and digestive biscuit

Pointy - I think the proposal is to scrap the charitable status for those schools that are not income blind. Hence the scrabble to get there!

The end result is that for the bright child the choice will be there to go private or state. For the less bright then things are not rosy

xenia you are judging people on their educational/professional status though.

do you think that we should guide our children into well paid careers that will, in turn, allow them to earn enough to pay for their children's education?

seems like a vicious circle, where money is worshipped above anything else.

income blind meaning what exactly?

Xenia, I was about to say that the difference is, that if you are fat or ugly, then money doesn't buy a get out for you. I then realised that of course it might do

Perhaps it is time to take my share of the money pot and book the private slimming doctor

Pointy - income blind means that the school must give places to all children that pass the entrance test, irrespective of whether they can afford the fees or not. The fees for those children that cannot afford to pay are paid by burseries.

Most decent private schools have a LOT of cash to spend of burseries usually bequested to them by the 'old boys'!

You'd never end up with a mass of mediocracy. There are always brighter pple just as there are more attractive pple.

The key word here is choice, 'the choice to do well at state schl'. There is no choice. Theres no choice if you go to a crumby state no one gives a shit about because anyone who can afford it has gone elsewhere. And thats not considering the bleak background you might come from where education is not valued at all. But we can just leave them, cos they've got a choice, and get on getting on with our careers to pay fees for the next generation.

Its not chopping out the good, its helping the rest. But I agree, this is just one stand of it, its a big issue.

Yes, I need income blind explaining too. Sounds good.

thanks, soaps

Look at Bennett's face. You know he's pretty nuts but rather sensible too. You can trust that face to try to do best even though batty. That face is better than all your arguments

But abolishing independent schools will not, not, not raise the standards of failing schools.

Everything you want for state education, I want too. We just disagree how to get there.

Niceglasses, whilst it is easy to see why you reach that conclusion, it really isn't down to the insignificant proportion of people going to private school, that everyone has abandoned the crumbly school. The impact of giving parents in the state sector a choice of school is a far bigger impact.

If you want a more equitable settlement on education, then abandoning the right to choose will have a far greater impact. Everyone goes to the local school. Full stop!

I also find it interesting that people feel that having private school children at a failing state school will help it to improve. Isn't this rather an odd statement. Are the parents of privately educated children really that much more effective that they are going to pull a failing school up?

My experience is that private school parents are no different to state school parents. The vast majority want the best for their children and spend time and effort to make sure that happens. I really, truely cannot tell the difference between the two sets of parents when I talk to them about school and education.

Yes, you know Alan is right, c'mon you know he is. And if don't agree he'll force feed you crackers and drown you in tea.

Oh, its way past wine o'clock. I really am off this time.

[but I'll be back]

Soapbox, is the income-blind limited by the amount of bursary money available? I mean, supposing that the school was flooded with applicants all capable of passing the entrance test, 80% of whom couldn't afford the fees - would they then have to find bursaries for 80% of their pupils?

mash the tea and put slippers on

we had quite a few posh-os academics at my comp, it gave us someone to aspire to, to learn from.

Habbibu - in theory it isn't limited. In practice though, it is bloody hard for any child in a state school to make the grade at secondary school, at least(which I conveniently left out of my earlier posts)!

My DCs, very average, private school by the end of year 4 has the same SAT achievement as a state school has at the end of year 6 (a level 4). The brightest state school pupils will also be attaining that, I suspect, but the majority will not. On that basis, it is highly unlikely that a flood of state school pupils will make bursery support impossible.

So, what resources would be available to the state sector then if you abolish the private sector?

Do you mean human resources? Because the others have to be paid for somehow.

I just cannot see how abolishing a facility used by just 6% of the population would be enough to have any real affect on state schools. As I said earlier, I think catchment areas are more limiting of choice for most people. Though lottery and bussing is not the answer, I honestly don't know what is.

thanks, soapbox. Have a habit of taking hypotheticals to their logical extremes...

Well the model that worked well for me (in Scotland) was that everyone went to the town comprehensive school. Or at least half went to proddy one and half went to the Fenian one! (Another thread I think).

Everyone was streamed by class at the end of year 1, then streamed by subject at the end of year 2. Hence, for all of my secondary school life I shared a class with people with the same level of academic attainment as I had.

At playtime, we all mixed together.

TBF though, the advantage was on the side of the brainier child. They were vastly more represented in the school orchestra, sports teams etc. than the less clever children.

What it did mean though, was that the child that had been in the lowest form possible (8th) in y2 moved to the top stream at the beginning of Y3 for English and history. Despite his appalling achievement in all other areas, (and the fact that his younger brother knifed and killed someone whilst at school) he went onto university and did an outstanding arts degree! Ahhh, those were the days

"There is choice to do well at state school, get good A levels, pick work which will pay you enough to afford fees surely."
blimey, Xenia . I often wonder if you are serious on these threads or being disingenuous. because for a very educated woman you really have a very shaky grasp of how the world operates.
if an expensive education has left you with that level of analytical skills, then thank goodness I haven't wasted my money .

i was talking to my friends from europe about the private school situation. they said it would never come to that state in their countries because teachers are respected and looked up to.

I don't think paying the fees directly to the school is any worse than buying a house in order to get into a school. What's the difference?

I agree swedes - there is no difference morally.

Lol Harpsi

I completely agree - the best way to bring up the standards of state schools would be to send the children of the rich and powerful to them.

I still think they'd somehow cream themselves off (selective schools, anyone?) and leave the plebs much as they do now .