Has this board always been dominated by questions about private schools?

[minifingerz]

... and the Education board?

I'm sure I remember this board being relevant to most parents even as recently as last year.

Wouldn't it make sense to have a separate board for private education, rather than having these ones silted up with queries about fee paying schools, given that it's of no relevance to 93% of UK parents?

Badbadbunny why don't people put their efforts into actually improving the state offering which is very patchy to say the least.

I'll join your movement. Tell me, what have you got planned?

If we abolished private schools, all us ex-private school parents would open our sacks of gold from our mahoosive vaults and poach the tutors who are currently working with the kids in state schools trying to get into selective secondaries (especially in Herts).

[waits for Mumtrying to ask me to BACK THIS UP WITH EVIDENCE!]

2016IsANewYearforMe I don't have any complaints, I don't think I can do it better, I just write the cheques.

Sounds like a good situation to be in. I would very much like to be in that situation too, Do you think anyone will mind if all my cheques bounce?

They would definitely mind mumtryingherbest. I have gone back to full time work after more than a decade.

stephanie totally agree. And for what it's worth, it's actually parents like that - who bash the entire concept of private schools and make ludicrous generalisations about people in them - who I will be specifically trying to avoid when my boys go to private school, despite there being a couple of very decent state primaries near us. Similar people no doubt who bash and generalise people on here, solely due to their preferred make of car! Double yawn.

DSClarke Wed 24-Feb-16 10:18:56 [waits for Mumtrying to ask me to BACK THIS UP WITH EVIDENCE!]

I only know two local children who have gone private for secondary. One got allocated a non ranked school and opted for a non selective prep. so did not need tutoring. The other left in year 5 to go to a private school that specialised in SEN and did not need to sit an entrance test so again did not need tutoring. A fair number of children have left the primary school to go to local preps. to prepare them for the 11 plus though. Again they didn't need tutoring to get into the preps.

Whilst without a doubt there will be children being tutored for local selectives, the vast majority of them will be coming from Harrow, North London etc. so surrounding areas that overlap with the consortium catchments rather than the area that I live in. I could be quite wrong in this but I have see nothing to suggest otherwise.

I should add that I do fully understand why state selective schools are as bad as private schools. If every single one of them was closed tomorrow I wouldn't have any problems with it. However, I'm not sure there is such a thing as a non selective state school.

DSClarke Sorry I completely miss read your post. I can assure you, tuition is a fast growing market and not just for 11 plus. There would be plenty of tutors to go around, I'm sure.

I tend to agree with Mini, and I send my kids privately and I don't feel good about it. I feel like shit on the school run.

That said, we can afford it and the state schools in our neighbourhood are incredibly bad. If I were to really live by my principles, which I admit I am not, I'd homeschool them. Then they'd be equally privileged, but in a different way.

Parents do what's best for their kids, there are a few exceptions, but please show me someone whose state options are truly bad, they can afford to opt out and they don't?

"Badbadbunny why don't people put their efforts into actually improving the state offering which is very patchy to say the least."

Why would they?

A large proportion of people in this country who have the resources - professional and personal - and who are very well connected in business and politics, have fuck all interest in improving state schools because

• their children don't go to them
• their children benefit from state schools being shit

mini the reason most people capable of making a change to state schools don't bother isn't because they're all in private, it's because the majority are in good state schools and turn a blind eye to the fact state comprehensives select on parental status for the most part.

A large proportion of people in this country who have the resources - professional and personal - and who are very well connected in business and politics, have fuck all interest in improving state schools because

- their children don't go to them
- their children benefit from state schools being shit

I really, really disagree with this. Only 7% of the children in this country go to private schools. More than 7% of the parents in this country have intelligence, connections, and resources to make schools better. Many professionals send their children to state schools. In my neighbourhood, just going down the street, I can think of parents who are

Teachers,
Doctors,
Consultants,
Surveyors,
Heads of HR,
IT directors,
Economists,
Private bankers,
Builders,
Small business owners

All of whom are sending their children to the local comprehensive school. It is not ofsted outstanding either. They are there because they feel priced out of private school. They all have more than one child, a large London mortgage, and live off of earned income. I hear the complaints all the time. They know better, they want better, they join the PTA. Their biggest problems are:

1. The National Curriculum is unambitious
2. The teachers could be better educated and more capable themselves
3. The schools cannot properly differentiate the teaching to stretch all pupils because other parents whine and whinge when other more capable and more motivated children pull ahead of their own offspring.

Frankly, the teaching profession as a whole and its various unions has had a huge impact on those three problems.

Finally, even though one of my children is in private school, that does not mean that my children benefit from state schools being "shit." My children will live in a stronger, healthier, wealthier and more rewarding and enriching society and economy if the standard of education improves across the board. To put this in stark relief, let me ask you: Where would you rather be a doctor/lawyer, Sudan or Singapore? Who has the better lifestyle? More security? More opportunity?

Lurkedforever1 Wed 24-Feb-16 12:30:55 I agree with your point about some have DCs in state schools. I doubt it is the majority (referring to top level politicians and political advisors btw).

I think it is stretching it to refer to the supposed state schools that many top level politicians are choosing as state schools rather than an extension of the private education sector which offers 100% bursaries whilst riding under the banner of "state education".

mum a politicians income wouldn't get them a 100% bursary. And if it did, it would be an independent school, and classed as such, not a state school.

charley I'm not sure it is respect that causes the main problem for 'bad' schools. The 2 nearest (none religious) comprehensives to me have very similar catchments, and while one is crap for academic kids, behavior wise and every other way it's a good school. The other is crap in general and behavior wise is awful. Same as Dds (great in all ways) primary had the same catchment/ intake as my nearest crap in all ways primary, and yet the latter had/has a lot of behavior issues.

The difference is the leadership/ staff/ ethos rather than the pupils.

2016IsANewYearforMe More than 7% of the parents in this country have intelligence, connections, and resources to make schools better. Many professionals send their children to state schools. In my neighbourhood, just going down the street, I can think of parents who are

So what did your neighbours say when you told them that they should just use their power and influence to change the school their DCs attend? What's their plan of action?

Frankly, the teaching profession as a whole and its various unions has had a huge impact on those three problems.

1. The National Curriculum is unambitious

I had no idea that all teachers, schools, or teachers' unions could just set and follow their own curriculum. How does that affect SATs results and OFSTED assessments?

Take a look at the current discussions about the yr 6 SATS.

2. The teachers could be better educated and more capable themselves

I'm sure that will help the current teacher shortage or impending shortage depending on who you believe.

BTW, how do you propose enticing highly qualified professionals into the teaching profession? Better still how are your neighbours planning on doing this?

1. The schools cannot properly differentiate the teaching to stretch all pupils because other parents whine and whinge when other more capable and more motivated children pull ahead of their own offspring.

How has the teaching profession had an impact on this point exactly. Surely this is an issue with the parents?

Lurkedforever1 Wed 24-Feb-16 13:01:13 mum a politicians income wouldn't get them a 100% bursary.

I was referring to the fact that they are not paying for their DCs to go to the "state" schools they have chosen. This was with reference to: I think it is stretching it to refer to the supposed state schools that many top level politicians are choosing as state schools.

It is like calling my local selectives "comps." despite the fact their intake is on a par with some of the Kent and Bucks Grammars. It annoyes me even further when I see them listed near the top of the comp. school league tables.

charleybarley - down to a lack of a strong school ethos and teaching staff.

And quite possibly because it is unlikely that a state school would be able able to easily expel or suspend a child for:

Openly asked to help with answering exam questions
Spoke to each other in the exam hall and continued after they had been warned, so had to be removed.
Threw things at one another (unless they were throwing something like knives or bricks rather than piecse of paper etc.)
kicked the seats of the people in front.

At my senior school any of those activities would have been grounds for suspension, if not expulsion.

Do you not think this point could be a clue as to why there was a difference?

Mum

1. Teachers are right now fighting against a more ambitious curriculum. As if 10 year olds cannot learn to do long division or diagram a sentence! For

1. I'd be delighted to see more of my taxes going towards recruiting and retaining better teachers. Obviously not all are of a poor standard, but too many are. If you look around your local comp and are satisfied you are either a. very lucky, or b. you should raise your personal standards.

3.Teachers and their unions have pandered to parents who insist on low standards of attainment.

Are there really no consequences at state senior schools MTHB? Having been through one (albeit a long while ago), we would not have dared the kind of behaviour charleybarley describes. And I'm pretty sure I remember being briefed that the exam responses were mine to give and no-one else's. It wasn't even a great 'comp' and I witnessed first hand even then, how badly it let down a great number of kids, sadly.

Having been through the state system, I think leadership, aspirations and a culture of learning/achieving being cool is what is (still) missing from many state schools (ducks and runs for cover).

Well, very simple answer: if the fee is little(less than 3k each term) and money is easily earned then there isnt a question as surely the child has the right to attend the within catchment local comp or passes the grammar entrance. Because money is very hard to earn and because fee is more than 6k here mostly each term hence ofcourse a very careful research is required!

2016IsANewYearforMe Wed 24-Feb-16 13:43:11 I'd be delighted to see more of my taxes going towards recruiting and retaining better teachers.

And how are your going to ensure that the extra taxes you pay do indeed go towards recruiting and retaining better teachers, rather being diverted off into other areas a year along the line. Many schools can bearly afford to pay the teachers they have now let alone more qualified teachers.

Railworker Wed 24-Feb-16 13:51:27 Are there really no consequences at state senior schools MTHB?

My DCs are in primary so perhaps you can tell what they are?

Going through the state system a long time ago tells you bugger all about the system now. It's completely different now than it was when I started teaching in it, never mind when I was last a pupil in it.

Do you REALLY think 'leadership ' and 'aspirations' are missing from schools? In what way? And if it is true, whose fault is that? Do you think teachers do not break their bloody backs trying to get the pupils to achieve their best? Why on earth wouldn't we - we are judged on the pupils ' achievement far more harshly than the pupils themselves. The vast majority of teachers are, or were, in the job for the love of it, well qualified and hard working. Unfortunately, decades of government interference has made teaching a very unpleasant job to be in. State schools are haemorrhaging teachers and are full of supply teachers and newly-qualified cannon-fodder who will leave the profession after a couple of years.

It's not to do with the schools' and teachers' lack of aspiration for their students. It's about having a system that actually allows teachers and students to achieve those aspirations. I decided to be a teacher when I was 12. It was all I ever wanted to do. I really bloody wish I'd wanted to do something different.

charley, Socio-economic prejudice much?

See here, you state sector parents - teach your children some self-respect and self-esteem and you state sector teachers, you just aren't leading enough! Just lead more!

State sector teachers and staff aren't leading! Just lead!

And the children who misbehave = just expel them! Expel them!