Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

This will get you all going - State v private again!

67 replies

DecorHate · 17/03/2010 11:03

You need to scroll down to around the middle of

this

Bit of an odd article and I wonder if he has been misquoted but the jist of it is the Head of a private school (and leader of a private schools organisation) is criticising well-off parents for not sending their children to private schools!

Sour grapes in the current economic climate perhaps? I can't believe that there are that many £3M houses where he teaches (I know the area well...) Plenty of people there may own a house which is worth 0.5-0.75M but in most cases that means nothing to them as they bought their houses when they were significantly cheaper - possibly couldn't afford to buy them now!

Or is he so out of touch that he doesn't realise that private school fees are out of reach of most families, even those of above average incomes in the area his school is in, particularly if you have more than one child.

And why not send your child to a perfectly good state school if that is what you want? Lots of people prefer them for their ethos....

OP posts:
wahwahwah · 17/03/2010 11:04

Can't see the link. He is probably just trying to drumb up business to keep him in a job.

Original poster
DecorHate · 17/03/2010 11:06

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/school_league_tables/article7063947.ece

try again

OP posts:
cory · 17/03/2010 11:28

Hasn't occurred to him that families might have other priorities than keeping his independent school going. If they choose to send their child to a local comprehensive rather than to his private school, isn't it quite likely that they have weighed their options and decided that this is the best solution for their child and their family?

QueenofHerts · 17/03/2010 11:28

Oh not him again

I do know a few in £3m houses and live the lifestyle he describes, but they all go to either his school or one of the other independents.

Meanwhile, those who have a mere £1m or less in house value live in/move to areas near some outstanding comps, those with a bit less manage to cope fine. I know quite a few paretns with dcs there and yes of course they're happy there but I really fail to be envious of or see the 'point' of spending £12k per annum to go there, frankly. If I had that amount of money floating around I wouldn't be sending mine there.

AMumInScotland · 17/03/2010 11:34

I think what's he's complaining about is the parents who buy expensive houses in the best catchment areas and then claim the moral highground about how they're sending their child to the local state school. But I don't know what right he has to be "irritated" by what parents choose to do.

I do find this kind of article odd - I agree that a lot of children at independent schools are not "posh", but equally they are an elite, because it's not a choice that is open to most families. The concept later down the article that fees at some schools are "virtually the same as the cost of educating a child in the state sector" are complete nonsense, since to the family the cost is not the same at all - the parents pay the tax which covers the state education system plus the school fees. (And I think it's right that they should have to)

So, independent schools are always going to be something which is only available to a small percentage of children, either because their families can afford the fees, or because they excel in some area which gets them a scholarship or bursary, or they are lucky enough to get a bursary on the basis that the school wants to bring in a proportion of children from other backgrounds.

Original poster
DecorHate · 17/03/2010 11:46

Yes I found that price comparison with the state sector odd too, AMuminScotland.

I suppose one of the problems for private schools in his area is that the income level for bursaries is set quite low so rules out a lot of local families who may have a good income relative to the national average but don't in fact have much disposable income due to the high cost of living in their area... So of course it is only the mega-rich who can afford to go there so it is hard to change the demographics of the intake

OP posts:
QueenofHerts · 17/03/2010 12:06

And as for his point "Why aren't they living in a council flat and driving a Trabant", I would be tempted to ask him if he'd like to do that then. Seriously.

He is living in cloud cuckoo land financially. I'm not sure how anyone could spend 12k per year on cars and holidays (unless it's running an aston martin and flying long haul first class) but as I said, if I could ever find that amount of money I would very much like to try.

scaryteacher · 17/03/2010 12:30

I think this 'why is there a moral pressure not to use your disposable income for the education of your children, but to use it quite happily in other ways.' was his key point, and it is an attitude quite often seen on MN.

When you've earned it, it is up to you how you spend your disposable income, and if you choose to send your child to private school, it is up to you.

MumMeh · 17/03/2010 12:33

I think he's right.

[ducks for cover]

Original poster
DecorHate · 17/03/2010 12:39

Well I think he mighty have a point if parents were sending their children to sink schools and spending their disposable income on fancy holidays, etc but afaik the state school he is alluding to is very very good...

OP posts:
Staggers · 17/03/2010 12:40

like people who smoke. in the eyes of the non-smoker, it is not a necessity, it is a choice.

Blu · 17/03/2010 12:40

yes, to be fair, in the middle of his self-interested and deeply snobbish rant, what he is actually objecting to is parents who use their wealth (according to him) to get into good state schools then claim 'moral high ground'. But the way he dresses it up is just silly.

Admittedly I live in London where it's usual for housing of extreme contrasts to be cheek by jowl, but even so I can't quite imagine a state secondary school that has a catchment that is so small that it ONLY encompasses £3m-type houses.

Blu · 17/03/2010 12:42

And a MumInScotlad is right - HE is taking it upon himself to criticise the CHOICES that people make???

BadgersPaws · 17/03/2010 12:44

"I think this 'why is there a moral pressure not to use your disposable income for the education of your children, but to use it quite happily in other ways.' was his key point"

That's my understanding of the issue too.

Spending money on all sorts of other things such as housing, cars or holidays is fine.

However if you spend your money on education you're elitist and should be damned and spat up.

It's not about priorities or saying that people should spend on private education.

Just saying that if they do make that choice then don't curse them.

ajandjjmum · 17/03/2010 12:44

I reckon I could give it a good go QueenofHerts.

Original poster
DecorHate · 17/03/2010 12:48

I tell you what, I will forego my cheap mobile home holiday and 11 year old car if he will assure me that the money I have saved will pay for fees at his school for both my ds's

OP posts:
QueenofHerts · 17/03/2010 12:59

I assume applications to STABS must be down this year

yellowcircle · 17/03/2010 13:00

I do agree with the sentiment of the article, not sure about the specific details. There are plenty of posters on MN who repeatedly take the moral high ground because their children are in state schools. One poster I "know" has her DCs in the best state school in the region and regularly bashes private schools on MN. She is lucky to have her DCs at an outstanding state school, I don't begrudge her that, but I do feel upset when she bashes me for my choice of private school when I do not have the excellent state school available to my DCs.

BadgersPaws · 17/03/2010 13:01

"HE is taking it upon himself to criticise the CHOICES that people make"

No she, and it is a she (which makes me wonder who's actually read the article and who's just guessing what it says), isn't saying that at all.

She's not saying you should drive a Trabant and send your children to private school.

She's not saying that you should give up your holidays and private educate your children.

What she's saying is that if you have the money and choose to spend in on private education you get criticised and judged.

However if you have the same money and choose to spend it on luxuries you're fine.

In particular she then also complains that people who do have money use it to take advantage of the school admission system and then take the moral high ground over those who just use the money to fund private education instead.

Both are using money to get into the "best" school.

But one set claims they're "right on" and that the other is elitist.

QueenofHerts · 17/03/2010 13:05

Badgers - we're referring to the comments of the master of a boys school whose rather silly statements appear halfway down the article. The 'she' to whom you refer is just the first two paragraphs of the article.

SleepingLion · 17/03/2010 13:22

Which makes ME wonder who's read the article!

bedlambeast · 17/03/2010 13:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

UnquietDad · 17/03/2010 13:29

He (Mr Grant, which is who we are all referring to), makes the classic schoolboy error of lumping education in with "consumer" items like cars and holidays and assuming it should be judged in the same way. For someone in his position this is shameful.

MollieO · 17/03/2010 13:33

I am just outside catchment for an excellent, highly rated village school. I would love to live in the catchment area but unless I can sell my house for 4 times what it is worth I would never be able to afford it. It makes paying private school fees a reasonable and affordable alternative.

There are lots of threads on MN about private v state and I find the housing cost point is usually overlooked.

UnquietDad · 17/03/2010 13:38

It's always there, MollieO - I've seen it discussed numerous times on here. The mark-up on houses in decent school catchments is criminal.