Sam Freedman wouldn't send his kids private

[noblegiraffe]

Because he went to a private school and had no idea that the world of working class people existed until he started working in education.

twitter.com/samfr/status/898845134028029952

I guess it helps that he lives in London where the state schools are great.

(Posting this because I've seen people speculate on here about where he will send his kids).

Today 18:14 Sadik

I do think that a big advantage of comprehensive schools is that you get to have friends from across a wide range of social backgrounds and abilities

Yeah and you get to see the British social pecking order in all its glory... thugs and hard men and rich kids at the top ... hard working kids dismissed as swots and geeks ... bottom of all the SN kids left to flounder 😡

noble it isn't. If for arguments sake tower hamlets gets £8k per child, whilst podunk high gets £4k and Podunk private charges £9k, tower hamlets funding is still closer to the private than the state. If you take off pp and say that towers is now on £6.5k, and Podunk on £2.5k it doesn't matter, towers funding is still closer to podunks private than podunks state.

No argument that towers funding doesn't go as far as in a private, but then again podunks state doesn't go as far as towers because Podunk doesn't have the infrastructure of London. And Podunk has just as much deprivation.

I think it depends on the school HopeClearwater - I don't think that would be a fair description of dd's (admittedly rural) comp. There are definitely 'golden kids' - those who are both sporty and academic, but I don't think it's social class related.

Tower Hamlets from the figures I could find get £7k per child (set to fall sharply with the new funding formula!). Take off your suggested 1.5k PP so we're now comparing £5.5k to £2.5k and £9k and Tower Hamlets comes out closer to the worst funded state than the cheapest private.

So it really depends on which figures you make up! Teachers are much more expensive in London too, I looked up a random school in Tower Hamlets and they are paying £400 per pupil more on teachers.

"Yeah and you get to see the British social pecking order in all its glory... thugs and hard men and rich kids at the top ... hard working kids dismissed as swots and geeks ... bottom of all the SN kids left to flounder "

Where do you get this characterisation from?

My kids' state school
And many other small-town state comps!

I mean the pupils' internal pecking order. The staff are doing their very best.

i don't think it is really is possible to be 'socially aware' when you've been cossetted at private school. I think all kids should go to the same local schools. We all do have to live in the same world. education has got more segregated now than it ever was when i was growing up and of course if means fear as people don't understand each other.

shame really.

I think it is much harder the other way round. For poor kids who suddenly find themselves in the presence of wealth and class and social power. Kids that climb the social ladder through their education, job choices and they haven't had the confidence and background to get them ready for interaction.

I do think its a myth that after school people socialise across the broad spectrum. I can say since I left my comp in a socially deprived area I never ever befriended or got to know anyone who lived in a council home. My world just never got me the chance to mix in those social circles again so I am hugely appreciative that I know poor people exist and the hand to mouth living that goes on. But I think the cons of going to a poor performing comp in a socially deprived area deeply outweighed any the pros in my case.

This thread makes me feel old - Sam Freedman and his wife were the year below me at college. It annoyed me a few years ago that he was an advisor to Gove and I was a teacher in a London state school, especially as the sum total of his secondary educational experience had been St Paul's. It just seemed to sum up the whole Gove tenure, for me.

"I think it is much harder the other way round. For poor kids who suddenly find themselves in the presence of wealth and class and social power. Kids that climb the social ladder through their education, job choices and they haven't had the confidence and background to get them ready for interaction."

No need to worry about that in Britain............

It wouldn't be surprising if he couldn't afford it. He works for Teach First, a charity, in London. His father is a lecturer. Solidly middle class but both occupations not known for being hugely well remunerated.

I've never understood the logic in the idea that if you attend school with people poorer than you it will somehow make you more understanding, more moral, more able to appreciate their concerns.

The vast majority of adults in the UK attended state school yet the working classes have never been more demonised. The division between the working class and the middle class is incredibly acrimonious and has certainly not improved since the vast majority of the MC can no longer afford private school.

Maybe his wife earns money too?

Well, I'm assuming his wife earns a similar amount to him. Still not enough for private school and a mortgage in london.

Of course it is.

His father is a lecturer.

His father is not just a lecturer! Besides, he did manage to afford an exclusive private education for his son so he can't have been doing that badly.

So we've had London state schools are just as good as private schools so he wouldn't need to and he probably couldn't afford a private school anyway so it's just sour grapes.

I do think that a big advantage of comprehensive schools is that you get to have friends from across a wide range of social backgrounds and abilities

This is lovely idea but it's generally not what happens. Kids become close friends with others who are like them. They might know people in their class / year group who are totally different from them but they rarely become close friends.

Just like you I expect - how many of your closest friends are from a very different social background and ability from you?

Look, I've no idea if this family can or cannot afford it.
But it is absurd not to recognise that the cost of housing and private education has risen disproportionately from the last generation to this. Especially in London.

The traditional middle classes have been priced out of much private education.

noble
Out of interest, what sort of combined salary do you have in mind for a (North) London property and 3 sets of school fees?

His father is not just a lecturer And if he has 5 or 6 grandchildren is he obliged to pay school fees for all of them?

Maybe his wife earns money too
Of course, but there is another dilemma - does she work full time just to pay school fees or would she rather spend more time at home with her young family? Or perhaps she would prefer an extension?

it's just sour grapes
Not necessarily - he obviously has a social conscience but it's easier to give up something you cannot easily afford in the first place.

On the other hand, Haringey has some excellent schools, if for example, he has bought a house in the catchment of Fortismere, then how exactly is buying a 1 million pound property in the catchment of an already 'outstanding' school helping social equality?

Bertrand
I am slightly stunned that you didn't send your youngest dc to a private school (or move house) if you have been able to afford private school fees for the past five years.

I have a friend who lives in London on a not huge salary who owns a house bought in the last few years and his DW doesn't work. If she did work, earning the same salary as him then that would cover school fees for 3 kids. I suspect that Sam Freedman earns significantly more than him.

Obviously affording a certain lifestyle alongside the school fees would be extremely difficult, but that would depend on your priorities. And I now suspect that people are going to be picky about what they mean by 'London' and 'private school'.

Clavinova the point about the dad being a lecturer was that someone said a lecturer earns a modest salary. Well it can't be that modest if it put Sam through St Paul's and gave him no experience of a working class lifestyle?

Mixing with working class children certainly doesn't automatically make middle class children 'better'. But that individual, isolated, model isn't what it's about for me; it's a bit like saying 'I don't see how sending my bright child to the comprehensive will suddenly make the comprehensive better'.

It's more about the ideal that it's generally good if everyone goes to school together, I think.

It really is odd that someone says that they don't want to put their kids through a private education in part because they thought it gave them a very narrow view of the world and people are angling for that to actually be a made up reason to hide that really he can't afford it.

Surely if the reason was that he couldn't afford it, he didn't need to say anything about it in the first place?