Why is it fair for people with money to get a better education than me?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by detinus
This post exemplifies why we need the grammar school system back - nationwide.
I'm yet to here a convincing argument against them; in terms of social mobility they're fantastic, which makes me wonder why it's people on the left that often oppose them.
I'm yet to here a convincing argument against them; in terms of social mobility they're fantastic, which makes me wonder why it's people on the left that often oppose them.
Yep, I went to a grammar school and I'm all for them!
Original post by Miracle Day
I've already done my GCSEs and am working as hard as I can for AS.
Perhaps at post #205 has said, if I went to a private school they would have gotten the best and I would have ended up higher. Evidence shows this is true. I am happy with my GCSEs, although I know I probably would have done better if I went to a private school and that's the bottom line.
Perhaps at post #205 has said, if I went to a private school they would have gotten the best and I would have ended up higher. Evidence shows this is true. I am happy with my GCSEs, although I know I probably would have done better if I went to a private school and that's the bottom line.
****ing hell, what kind of attitude do you have?
Remember, private schools are selective so they probably had better students in the first place (hence better grades).
Why don't you stop acting like a child, grow up and realise that if you really want to get the top grades - you can if work hard instead of thinking "I got crap grades, and that's the fault of my state school".
Original post by Miracle Day
But the facts do. And people can't really argue with them.
I started this thread being on the fence, but really there's not an actual argument against them as Finlands got rid of them and they now have one of the best education systems in world according to a previous user so there's no reason why we can't copy them.
I started this thread being on the fence, but really there's not an actual argument against them as Finlands got rid of them and they now have one of the best education systems in world according to a previous user so there's no reason why we can't copy them.
So many reasons why...
The obvious one is cost. Explain OP how you're going to transform the whole of the education system in the UK to be like Finland's one?
Original post by Miracle Day
Actually, in my situation this isn't right.
English Language and Literature: Mostly down to being naturally talented, obviously my talent couldn't surpass the A* boundary.
Maths, Biology, Chemistry and Physics: I was put into low sets based on my year 9 results, where I had no work ethic etc.. Perhaps I would have had one if I were inspired and put into such a setting.
Religious Studies: My teacher was fired, infact I had the third highest grade (being a B) out of 30 people because we were taught wrong.
History: Did one exam in year 10 which i got a low B. Got high As in my year 11 exams, and was 2 ums away from an A so I never had a work ethic in year 10.
Welsh Language and Literature: Same as English, except I was actually good at English and bad at welsh hence the B and C.
ICT: Put into low sets based on my performance in year 10 which was poor.
Drama: Don't know why I took it.. I suck at acting and ended up with a D-E in my dramas and an A* in my written exam so I got a C overall..
It was only in year 11 I started to work. My parents haven't contributed even slightly into my education, they just don't care, in contrast to my friend who's parents do yet they all did much worse than I.
So as you can see my biggest downfall was the fact I had no work ethic up until year 11, when it was too late. This is emphasised by the fact I'm getting As this year in Sixth form. I was happy with my GCSE results and got what I expected and I'm not blaming my results on not going to a private school because I was happy with them anyway.
The evidence however suggests I would have done better in a private school. I would have had more attention from teachers instead of 30 per class and even competent ones.
English Language and Literature: Mostly down to being naturally talented, obviously my talent couldn't surpass the A* boundary.
Maths, Biology, Chemistry and Physics: I was put into low sets based on my year 9 results, where I had no work ethic etc.. Perhaps I would have had one if I were inspired and put into such a setting.
Religious Studies: My teacher was fired, infact I had the third highest grade (being a B) out of 30 people because we were taught wrong.
History: Did one exam in year 10 which i got a low B. Got high As in my year 11 exams, and was 2 ums away from an A so I never had a work ethic in year 10.
Welsh Language and Literature: Same as English, except I was actually good at English and bad at welsh hence the B and C.
ICT: Put into low sets based on my performance in year 10 which was poor.
Drama: Don't know why I took it.. I suck at acting and ended up with a D-E in my dramas and an A* in my written exam so I got a C overall..
It was only in year 11 I started to work. My parents haven't contributed even slightly into my education, they just don't care, in contrast to my friend who's parents do yet they all did much worse than I.
So as you can see my biggest downfall was the fact I had no work ethic up until year 11, when it was too late. This is emphasised by the fact I'm getting As this year in Sixth form. I was happy with my GCSE results and got what I expected and I'm not blaming my results on not going to a private school because I was happy with them anyway.
The evidence however suggests I would have done better in a private school. I would have had more attention from teachers instead of 30 per class and even competent ones.
It was your fault, you got what you deserved.
Bottom line is you failed to motivate yourself, it is a good job your parents didn't waste their money putting you in a private school where you would have done similar things. You can't turn donkeys into horses, a private school wouldn't suddenly be able to motivate you. In fact, performing worse against your peers would only have demotivated you further.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Miracle Day
Not really. I just haven't seen a decent reason on here why they should stay.
1. Freedom to use your money to enhance your children's education.
2. If you ban private education - parents would just homeschool and get in tutors, or send off their kids to private schools outside of the UK.
Original post by Miracle Day
I would rather they did it. Finland did it and that worked out well for them.
They seem to be ignoring it now though..
They seem to be ignoring it now though..
They didn't have the problem of trying to find billions to pay for the private-schooled pupils to be educated through the state.
Original post by Miracle Day
It also could harm it. For example perhaps I'll miss out on a place at Oxbridge because 50% go to 8% of the population.
Oh please, you know **** all about Oxbridge admission if you believe a private school pupil has effectively "stolen" your place. They base it on merit. Explain how reject many private school applicants?
Original post by Beebumble
But in principle shouldn't they be better? If I had a child and I was paying thousands of pounds a year for their education I'd expect it to be at a better standard then the education they could get for free.
Also children at private schools have smaller class sizes and depending on the type are more 'free' where the child can learn what they want in their way Steiner schools for example. Teachers do not have the constant pressures that the government put on state schools either so are probably more relaxed in their teaching.
Also children at private schools have smaller class sizes and depending on the type are more 'free' where the child can learn what they want in their way Steiner schools for example. Teachers do not have the constant pressures that the government put on state schools either so are probably more relaxed in their teaching.
In principle they should be, but (for example) I went to a 6th form college which is judged outstanding and had amazing teachers but it was just a normal state one. Private schools do not necessarily have the best teachers.
They have the added pressure from parents etc. and some stick to very traditional teaching methods. Smaller class sizes can also exist in state schools, usually for classes which are lower ability/poor behaviour. Tbh most of my classes have been around 28 and it's fine if you manage it and go the extra mile to get to know the pupils as individuals (get to know their likes/dislikes and what types of lessons they like).
Private School, narr, I don't want to end up like Joanna Lumley...
Original post by MrHappy_J
in what world is this?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/dec/03/state-school-pupils-university
Original post by im so academic
****ing hell, what kind of attitude do you have?
Remember, private schools are selective so they probably had better students in the first place (hence better grades).
Why don't you stop acting like a child, grow up and realise that if you really want to get the top grades - you can if work hard instead of thinking "I got crap grades, and that's the fault of my state school".
Remember, private schools are selective so they probably had better students in the first place (hence better grades).
Why don't you stop acting like a child, grow up and realise that if you really want to get the top grades - you can if work hard instead of thinking "I got crap grades, and that's the fault of my state school".
This whole idea that because private schools are selective then they are a meritocracy is absolute rubbish. Whilst most children under the age of 11 are playing outside or enjoying their youth, the private PRIMARY schools that the majority of the students that enter private school come from are preparing the students for the examinations.
Therefore these students have always been helped, and just because some private schools are selective does not mean that they are therefore 'fair' as they still cater to only the privileged, who then in turn get a better education whilst the comparable student would not, based on the salary of parents alone.
But i agree that people who use the fact that they did not go to a private school to somehow justify the fact that they did not achieve as they wished are totally moronic and should at this point look forward and not back, although the entire system does need a change i.e the introduction of more grammar schools
Original post by JOSHIK1
This whole idea that because private schools are selective then they are a meritocracy is absolute rubbish. Whilst most children under the age of 11 are playing outside or enjoying their youth, the private PRIMARY schools that the majority of the students that enter private school come from are preparing the students for the examinations.
Instead of banning private schools that do this, why can't state ones do that as well?
Therefore these students have always been helped, and just because some private schools are selective does not mean that they are therefore 'fair' as they still cater to only the privileged, who then in turn get a better education whilst the comparable student would not, based on the salary of parents alone.
Your solution is?
But i agree that people who use the fact that they did not go to a private school to somehow justify the fact that they did not achieve as they wished are totally moronic and should at this point look forward and not back, although the entire system does need a change i.e the introduction of more grammar schools
But grammar schools only concerns secondary education. How does that solve the issue above of primary education?
Apart maybe from the smaller class sizes and good resources(esp. in Science) I wouldn't say it's the school itself that make learners perform. Many of the learners in private schools come from families that put a high value on education and the kids thus work much harder themselves and hence achieve higher grade. The same is true about most of the learners who go to state school and get above average grades.
Original post by thinbeard
Private schools are necessary because state schools are so bad.
Because private schools are like leechs. They steal very capable teachers from state education sector by offering them higher wages. The state education sector then suffers from a loss of talent.
Original post by Miracle Day
Actually, in my situation this isn't right.
English Language and Literature: Mostly down to being naturally talented, obviously my talent couldn't surpass the A* boundary.
Maths, Biology, Chemistry and Physics: I was put into low sets based on my year 9 results, where I had no work ethic etc.. Perhaps I would have had one if I were inspired and put into such a setting.
Religious Studies: My teacher was fired, infact I had the third highest grade (being a B) out of 30 people because we were taught wrong.
History: Did one exam in year 10 which i got a low B. Got high As in my year 11 exams, and was 2 ums away from an A so I never had a work ethic in year 10.
Welsh Language and Literature: Same as English, except I was actually good at English and bad at welsh hence the B and C.
ICT: Put into low sets based on my performance in year 10 which was poor.
Drama: Don't know why I took it.. I suck at acting and ended up with a D-E in my dramas and an A* in my written exam so I got a C overall..
It was only in year 11 I started to work. My parents haven't contributed even slightly into my education, they just don't care, in contrast to my friend who's parents do yet they all did much worse than I.
So as you can see my biggest downfall was the fact I had no work ethic up until year 11, when it was too late. This is emphasised by the fact I'm getting As this year in Sixth form. I was happy with my GCSE results and got what I expected and I'm not blaming my results on not going to a private school because I was happy with them anyway.
The evidence however suggests I would have done better in a private school. I would have had more attention from teachers instead of 30 per class and even competent ones.
English Language and Literature: Mostly down to being naturally talented, obviously my talent couldn't surpass the A* boundary.
Maths, Biology, Chemistry and Physics: I was put into low sets based on my year 9 results, where I had no work ethic etc.. Perhaps I would have had one if I were inspired and put into such a setting.
Religious Studies: My teacher was fired, infact I had the third highest grade (being a B) out of 30 people because we were taught wrong.
History: Did one exam in year 10 which i got a low B. Got high As in my year 11 exams, and was 2 ums away from an A so I never had a work ethic in year 10.
Welsh Language and Literature: Same as English, except I was actually good at English and bad at welsh hence the B and C.
ICT: Put into low sets based on my performance in year 10 which was poor.
Drama: Don't know why I took it.. I suck at acting and ended up with a D-E in my dramas and an A* in my written exam so I got a C overall..
It was only in year 11 I started to work. My parents haven't contributed even slightly into my education, they just don't care, in contrast to my friend who's parents do yet they all did much worse than I.
So as you can see my biggest downfall was the fact I had no work ethic up until year 11, when it was too late. This is emphasised by the fact I'm getting As this year in Sixth form. I was happy with my GCSE results and got what I expected and I'm not blaming my results on not going to a private school because I was happy with them anyway.
The evidence however suggests I would have done better in a private school. I would have had more attention from teachers instead of 30 per class and even competent ones.
Are you intentionally ignoring what 90% of people on this thread are telling you? You need to stop blaming private schools for your attainment and take responsibility. As you say, you're own lack of motivation led to your grades. You are now assuming that if you'd gone to a private school you would have had the motivation and therefore done better?
To put these statistics you keep quoting into perspective. The children IN the private schools might have better results when compared with state schools, but that is a majority. It is not you. It is not a general rule. There will be underperforming students in private schools, just as there are in state schools. If anything you might have been more demotivated there. This is all hypothetical. You can't state that the facts prove that you personally would have done better in a different school, that's just guess work, and frankly a waste of time.
It seems to me that you've made your mind up and nothing anyone says at this point will change it. That's fine. But at least expand your arguments a little rather than going back to "it's fact, I would have done better".
Original post by im so academic
Oh please, you know **** all about Oxbridge admission if you believe a private school pupil has effectively "stolen" your place. They base it on merit. Explain how reject many private school applicants?
Original post by JustJen
Are you intentionally ignoring what 90% of people on this thread are telling you? You need to stop blaming private schools for your attainment and take responsibility. As you say, you're own lack of motivation led to your grades. You are now assuming that if you'd gone to a private school you would have had the motivation and therefore done better?
To put these statistics you keep quoting into perspective. The children IN the private schools might have better results when compared with state schools, but that is a majority. It is not you. It is not a general rule. There will be underperforming students in private schools, just as there are in state schools. If anything you might have been more demotivated there. This is all hypothetical. You can't state that the facts prove that you personally would have done better in a different school, that's just guess work, and frankly a waste of time.
It seems to me that you've made your mind up and nothing anyone says at this point will change it. That's fine. But at least expand your arguments a little rather than going back to "it's fact, I would have done better".
To put these statistics you keep quoting into perspective. The children IN the private schools might have better results when compared with state schools, but that is a majority. It is not you. It is not a general rule. There will be underperforming students in private schools, just as there are in state schools. If anything you might have been more demotivated there. This is all hypothetical. You can't state that the facts prove that you personally would have done better in a different school, that's just guess work, and frankly a waste of time.
It seems to me that you've made your mind up and nothing anyone says at this point will change it. That's fine. But at least expand your arguments a little rather than going back to "it's fact, I would have done better".
I don't need an argument because it's an obvious inequality.
Original post by Miracle Day
I don't need an argument because it's an obvious inequality.
So lets just ban private schools and force the private school kids to get a worse education without improving education for anyone?
Original post by Miracle Day
I don't need an argument because it's an obvious inequality.
What do you propose? Communism?
Because that'll make society equal.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
