Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Selfish to send your child to private school, or selfish not to?

Announcements Posted on
    • Thread Starter
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by soempty)
    Obviously average for state schools will be lower, thats because there are like 12 times more of them. It's like picking 100 people and 10 people to compare their wages, chances are that 10 people's wages would be way higher on average.
    You clearly don't understand the concept of an average (mean). :rolleyes:
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I personally would send my child to a private school if i had the money to, even if that meant 'scraping the barrel' just to have enough money. In my opinion, as earlier posts have stated, some claim there is a better standard of teaching and opportunities etc. so why wouldn't I want my child to have access to that? I think that if i could then i would to give my child the best chance they could in the future, for the real world is a competitive place...
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Torpedo Fish)
    You clearly don't understand the concept of an average (mean). :rolleyes:
    I do, but it is very subjective in my opinion. This piece of data cannot be relied on, because it wasn't taken from similar samples... (tell me if it did though)
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chimocho)
    Private schools give a better education and get better marks. There's also the factor of not having scumbag idiots that distract and can essetially ruin any chances of letting the brighter children in state schools achieve their potential. If you care about your kid's future and have the money to give them the best chance in life, then send them to a private school. It's not about being selfish, it's about realising that the benefits outweigh the costs and that why should you care about the education of anyone other than your own children?

    EDIT: I have a feeling I might get negged for this...
    I agree with the general idea behind what you're saying... it's sad but true, at least in my experience, that the most disruptive pupils come from a poorer background with no real family support. Their parents take no interest and see school as a waste of time, so the children are the same. If parents are paying for their child to attend a private school for the sake of a better education, obviously the parental support is there (with the exception of rich people who dump their kids at boarding school) and more often than not those with successful parents also have the drive for success in themselves. Therefore, no - or at least fewer - scumbag idiots.

    Although sending the bright children away to other schools clearly doesn't help the situation overall, and quite possibly has a negative effect on those pupils who could benefit from their influence, I personally wouldn't want to sacrifice my own child's education for some political ideal.


    This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
    • 167 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Torpedo Fish)
    Because whilst the donation itself is optional, the proportion of the donation that filtered into a national education trust would be compulsory. So in order to invest in their own child's education they would have to accept that a minority of their donation would be used to improve the prospects of disadvantaged children.
    Then they just wouldn't pay. They would just buy resources for their OWN child, e.g. buying computers for their own child, buying books for their own child, taking their own kids for cultural holidays...
    • Thread Starter
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    Then they just wouldn't pay. They would just buy resources for their OWN child, e.g. buying computers for their own child, buying books for their own child, taking their own kids for cultural holidays...
    They do all of that anyway. And as I've said, moving abroad or hiring a full time private tutor are not realistic or desirable options for most parents. Do you have the faintest idea how much private tutors costs? Well I'll tell you, on average about ~£30 per HOUR. That means that to get the same amount of teaching time their child would receive in full-time education would cost ~£36000 per year. The average private school, by contrast, charges ~£13000 per annum. Full-time private tutoring would quite clearly be out of the reach of all but the very richest of parents.

    If private schools were no longer an option, most middle-class parents (the largest demographic) would focus on getting their child into the best possible state school and then would set about getting together with other parents to improve the school as much as they could. This would benefit their own child as well as other children.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lollyage)
    However, on the flip side, if my household income ends up being so much that my children will be significantly richer than anyone at a state school (and I mean 200k - millions) then yeah, I'd send them to a private. I would just want my children to be wherever they would fit in best; there's more to a well-rounded development than better school facilities/smaller teaching groups.
    So you think the average household income at a private school is over £200k pa?
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    I'll comment as the second person in the thread who has actually paid for his children to attend private school.

    The main strength of private schools is that all concerned (parents, teachers and pupils) are united in their desire for a good education, even in non-selective schools. The school's policies are directed towards providing an environment in which children can learn (because the parents want that). The teachers can carry out these policies with a lower level of misguided state interference and get on with the teaching. Discipline is generally very high: the parents don't want their money wasted and the pupils are both self-motivated (generally) and encouraged to work and behave. Bad behaviour, use of drugs etc, would interrupt all this and isn't tolerated.

    Some private school myths you may have heard certainly aren't true. Teachers aren't necessarily better paid, teachers aren't necessarily better teachers, pupils aren't spoon-fed (indeed, they are encouraged to think for themselves), facilities aren't necessarily better, and the schools don't prioritise exam results at the expense of other factors - indeed, a big benefit is that the education given is one that would be recognisable to people educated in the mid-twentieth century in that it develops the whole child and isn't just geared to passing exams. Non-selective private schools don't necessarily guarantee good exam success, but they do generally provide a solid education in a good environment for the less able.

    An enormous mistake was made in the 1970s when, in an attempt to equalise opportunities for all, and in response to pressure from the left, and instead of improving provision for the less academically able, grammar schools were largely abandoned in favour of comprehensives. Now, instead of 25% of pupils getting a very good and consistent free academic secondary education (which genuinely provided class mobility to the academically able poor), a much smaller proportion of children have such access - and, in the main, it is concentrated among those whose parents can afford to pay for it so it entrenches immobility rather than breaking it down. It is an excellent, if tragic, example of the Law of Unintended Consequences in action.

    If we still had grammar schools nationally I'm quite sure a much smaller proportion of children would attend selective private schools, and the same would appy to non-selective ones if the state system managed to get a grip on disciplinary and motivational problems.

    The state system should make proper provision for the non-academic, with an engaging programme not geared towards academic exams that are unsuitable for the sorts of careers these people will, in the main, follow. The attempt to make sure everyone can pass academic exams has resulted in A levels without rigour that are no longer fit for purpose, and generations of people emerging into the workforce with numeracy and literacy levels (despite the supposed exam success) that employers complain are inadequate. It has also spawned a generation of people for who deem the sorts of jobs Britain has to offer as inadequate to meet the aspirations they have been mislead into having, so employers are having to look to immigrants to fill the gaps, putting pressure on housing and transport infrastructure and society as a whole.


    Absolutely spot on.

    We should be increasing the number of grammar schools and in fact there is one "expanding" into Sevenoaks.

    My three kids have been educated at grammar schools and done exceptionally well. My sister in law sent all four of her children to private schools - the results have been mediocre to say the least. They have a posh accent but little else.

    So in answer to the original question is it selfish - yes I think it is. By using private schools, you are perpetuating the two tier system and bringing children up to think that they are better than others. You are not necessarily getting them a better education.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I definitely wouldn't send my child to a private primary school I think the entire concept is absolutely ludicrous (sp?) particularly for infants (KS1). As for secondary school, I live in an area with grammar schools so would hopefully send them to a grammar school. If they didn't pass their 11+, I might possibly consider private school.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by illusionz)
    So you think the average household income at a private school is over £200k pa?
    No I never implied that, I just said that income will be significantly above what the vast vast majority of those at state schools have.
    • 56 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheCurlyHairedDude)
    Understanding the streets and hood life, appreciation of people from different background, REAL preperation for life.
    What's so important about "hood life"? You mean gang culture, right? That isn't something that should be tolerated.
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iron Lady)
    What's so important about "hood life"? You mean gang culture, right? That isn't something that should be tolerated.
    It's about the appreciation, understanding why people act the way they do, I'm not saying go to a state school to be part of a gang. But be aware, and opne-minded.
    • 56 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheCurlyHairedDude)
    It's about the appreciation, understanding why people act the way they do, I'm not saying go to a state school to be part of a gang. But be aware, and opne-minded.
    In your opinion, why do they act the way they do?
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iron Lady)
    In your opinion, why do they act the way they do?
    T.I - That's the way that you want it

    Verse 1 -


    After careful consideration I’ve concluded tribulations make you great if you’re willing to go through it,
    they can hate all they want
    but in the end whatever god intends to be will be so put your trust in He and not the hearts of men
    we often question adversity’s purpose stressin’
    not recognizin’ the blessin’ often missin’ the message
    who’da thought I’d emerge from the ruins and the records even better than I was before the automatic weapons
    the lesson I took away made my testimony compellin’
    enough to leave an impression on strugglin’ adolescents
    who nobody invested put forth the effort or took a second to push it to do their best and promote forward progression
    statistically destined to be arrested
    shot in a second
    that hopelessness leads to depression
    they disguise as aggression

    tell the federal felon pressin’ to earn his way into heaven
    show up or show ‘em confessions and opportunities present
    potential is mental your destiny is in your possession
    ambition and education is first and talent is second
    you get what you can envision if puttin’ me in prison more important than keepin’ them out I respect your decision

    Check the bold, that's why. The hard act you see half these gangsters putting on is a FRONT, they just covering up unhappiness and hopelessness, as T.I said....



    It's more powerful if you listen to the song, youtube it,.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheCurlyHairedDude)
    T.I - That's the way that you want it

    Verse 1 -


    After careful consideration I’ve concluded tribulations make you great if you’re willing to go through it,
    they can hate all they want
    but in the end whatever god intends to be will be so put your trust in He and not the hearts of men
    we often question adversity’s purpose stressin’
    not recognizin’ the blessin’ often missin’ the message
    who’da thought I’d emerge from the ruins and the records even better than I was before the automatic weapons
    the lesson I took away made my testimony compellin’
    enough to leave an impression on strugglin’ adolescents
    who nobody invested put forth the effort or took a second to push it to do their best and promote forward progression
    statistically destined to be arrested
    shot in a second
    that hopelessness leads to depression
    they disguise as aggression

    tell the federal felon pressin’ to earn his way into heaven
    show up or show ‘em confessions and opportunities present
    potential is mental your destiny is in your possession
    ambition and education is first and talent is second
    you get what you can envision if puttin’ me in prison more important than keepin’ them out I respect your decision

    Check the bold, that's why. The hard act you see half these gangsters putting on is a FRONT, they just covering up unhappiness and hopelessness, as T.I said....



    It's more powerful if you listen to the song, youtube it,.
    Hello,

    That is a powerful song...

    "that hopelessness leads to depression
    they disguise as aggression
    "

    is deep.

    Thanks for sharing this

    Peace and God bless
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Seriously, who gives a **** about the rest of the country's children? People look after the interests of themselves and their family. Anyone who thinks otherwise probably wouldn't afford it anyway.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Torpedo Fish)
    They do all of that anyway. And as I've said, moving abroad or hiring a full time private tutor are not realistic or desirable options for most parents. Do you have the faintest idea how much private tutors costs? Well I'll tell you, on average about ~£30 per HOUR. That means that to get the same amount of teaching time their child would receive in full-time education would cost ~£36000 per year.
    Closer to 29k actually and that isn't taking into account discounts and a market. 5 hours a day, 5 days a week, 38.5 weeks a year. Also, share the tuition session with a couple of other kids and it will be closer to 10k with a class size of 3.
    • Thread Starter
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ForKicks)
    Closer to 29k actually and that isn't taking into account discounts and a market. 5 hours a day, 5 days a week, 38.5 weeks a year. Also, share the tuition session with a couple of other kids and it will be closer to 10k with a class size of 3.
    I was basing my calculation on 6 hours of teaching per day. My school started at 8:45am and finished at 4:15 with a 1 hour lunch break and a half an hour morning break. And what you would be doing there is essentially forming your own private school, which would not be permitted.
    • 19 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    If my child was not clever enough to go to a Grammar school I think I might. If there was a very good state school nearby though I'd send the kid there. Preferably a Grammar school, I've been to Grammar and state schools and there's a huge, huge difference.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    It depends. I went to a high quality state school and would happily send my children to somewhere similar, but if there wasn't such a high quality school in my area I would send them to a private one. I've had experience of poor state schools and I wouldn't send my child near one.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: June 20, 2012
New on TSR

The future of apprenticeships

Join the discussion in the apprenticeships hub!

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.