Private Schools Ought to be Abolished Watch

Aphotic Cosmos
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#341
Report 9 years ago
#341
(Original post by Aeolus)
Yes but surely that would just push them further into the realms of 'elitism' as the amoutn of scholarships dissapear?
Countered by my ideal increase in grammar schools, where social cohesion is not an issue for working or middle class students.
0
reply
ewandougie
Badges: 0
#342
Report 9 years ago
#342
This is a completely unjust and unfair topic, I went to a private school. The state schools in Carlisle were seen by my parents to be unacceptable, (for example we have the only academy to go into special measures 1 month after it opened) . They wanted something better than what was on offer so they paid for it, what is wrong with that ??
0
reply
Aeolus
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#343
Report 9 years ago
#343
(Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
Countered by my ideal increase in grammar schools, where social cohesion is not an issue for working or middle class students.

My mistake.
0
reply
Aphotic Cosmos
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#344
Report 9 years ago
#344
(Original post by Aeolus)
My mistake.
It happens :hugs:
0
reply
necessarily benevolent
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#345
Report 9 years ago
#345
This is a fairly ridiculous proposal. It's not necessarily an issue of "ancient institutions" this and that etc. it's simply one of getting the best for those who can get the best - to abolish or ban the private sector in any industry I think is abhorrent and, believe it or not, unfair. There is absolutely no reasoning behind a total comprehensive system. It is especially abhorrent for the government to shove children who've grown up in, admittedly, affluent conditions, taught by their parents to be academic, to read, to enjoy learning and aim for the highest, with an underachieving "no-hoper" who's perhaps never even seen a book, let alone read one. Oh, but this is a terrible stereotype and not all poor people are "no-hopers" I hear you say. Of course I'm not suggesting all poor people are like this - I personally know many people from less-affluent backgrounds who've been extremely academic. And there is only one solution to this; as has been touched on above, with grammar schools. I am yet to hear a convincing argument by anyone anywhere that there shouldn't be a meritocratic schooling system in the UK. This socialist nonsense can only go so far. Not everyone can be a winner and the sooner you can accept this the easier it will be for you to deal with it. Instead of using stupid little excuses like the unfairness of the Eleven-Plus and the poor standards of Secondary Moderns to undermine an entire policy (which does, of course, result in a comprehensive system where the standard school is even worse than the standard Secondary Modern) work on dealing those issues independently. Have seperate entry points to grammar schools, have interviews, work to improve those schools in the state sector which aren't grammar schools. The comprehensive system is nonsense, it's idealist **** and has dragged teaching standards down to pathetically low levels. To hell with this.
0
reply
Aphotic Cosmos
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#346
Report 9 years ago
#346
(Original post by necessarily benevolent)
This is a fairly ridiculous proposal. It's not necessarily an issue of "ancient institutions" this and that etc. it's simply one of getting the best for those who can get the best - to abolish or ban the private sector in any industry I think is abhorrent and, believe it or not, unfair. There is absolutely no reasoning behind a total comprehensive system. It is especially abhorrent for the government to shove children who've grown up in, admittedly, affluent conditions, taught by their parents to be academic, to read, to enjoy learning and aim for the highest, with an underachieving "no-hoper" who's perhaps never even seen a book, let alone read one. Oh, but this is a terrible stereotype and not all poor people are "no-hopers" I hear you say. Of course I'm not suggesting all poor people are like this - I personally know many people from less-affluent backgrounds who've been extremely academic. And there is only one solution to this; as has been touched on above, with grammar schools. I am yet to hear a convincing argument by anyone anywhere that there shouldn't be a meritocratic schooling system in the UK. This socialist nonsense can only go so far. Not everyone can be a winner and the sooner you can accept this the easier it will be for you to deal with it. Instead of using stupid little excuses like the unfairness of the Eleven-Plus and the poor standards of Secondary Moderns to undermine an entire policy (which does, of course, result in a comprehensive system where the standard school is even worse than the standard Secondary Modern) work on dealing those issues independently. Have seperate entry points to grammar schools, have interviews, work to improve those schools in the state sector which aren't grammar schools. The comprehensive system is nonsense, it's idealist **** and has dragged teaching standards down to pathetically low levels. To hell with this.
Pretty much this.

In my year of 140 people from an ordinary Kentish town and the surrounding area, a very large proportion were ordinary working class lads who had grown up on council estates or in deprived conditions. Many of them were given a solid shot at university - and took it happily and with a great degree of success - through the Grammar school system where they would have been dragged down to the lowest common denominator in a secondary modern [oh sorry, now they're "comprehensives"], and I'm proud that Kent stands by it's 11-plus system.

Grammars must be re-introduced across the country, and must not be further eroded. Kent will probably never get rid of the 11-plus, but other counties are not so staunch in their position.
0
reply
DougieG
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#347
Report Thread starter 9 years ago
#347
(Original post by necessarily benevolent)
This is a fairly ridiculous proposal. It's not necessarily an issue of "ancient institutions" this and that etc. it's simply one of getting the best for those who can get the best - to abolish or ban the private sector in any industry I think is abhorrent and, believe it or not, unfair. There is absolutely no reasoning behind a total comprehensive system. It is especially abhorrent for the government to shove children who've grown up in, admittedly, affluent conditions, taught by their parents to be academic, to read, to enjoy learning and aim for the highest, with an underachieving "no-hoper" who's perhaps never even seen a book, let alone read one. Oh, but this is a terrible stereotype and not all poor people are "no-hopers" I hear you say. Of course I'm not suggesting all poor people are like this - I personally know many people from less-affluent backgrounds who've been extremely academic. And there is only one solution to this; as has been touched on above, with grammar schools. I am yet to hear a convincing argument by anyone anywhere that there shouldn't be a meritocratic schooling system in the UK. This socialist nonsense can only go so far. Not everyone can be a winner and the sooner you can accept this the easier it will be for you to deal with it. Instead of using stupid little excuses like the unfairness of the Eleven-Plus and the poor standards of Secondary Moderns to undermine an entire policy (which does, of course, result in a comprehensive system where the standard school is even worse than the standard Secondary Modern) work on dealing those issues independently. Have seperate entry points to grammar schools, have interviews, work to improve those schools in the state sector which aren't grammar schools. The comprehensive system is nonsense, it's idealist **** and has dragged teaching standards down to pathetically low levels. To hell with this.
I quite agree. You ought to actually read my original post, and not just the thread title, before posting in a thread with a post that is utterly pointless in this discussion.
0
reply
necessarily benevolent
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#348
Report 9 years ago
#348
(Original post by DougieG)
I quite agree. You ought to actually read my original post, and not just the thread title, before posting in a thread with a post that is utterly pointless in this discussion.
I wasn't actually addressing the original post (except at the start). I was just putting my view forward about grammar schools.
0
reply
DougieG
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#349
Report Thread starter 9 years ago
#349
(Original post by necessarily benevolent)
I wasn't actually addressing the original post (except at the start). I was just putting my view forward about grammar schools.
No, you said my proposal was 'ridiculous' without actually reading what that proposal was.
0
reply
necessarily benevolent
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#350
Report 9 years ago
#350
(Original post by DougieG)
No, you said my proposal was 'ridiculous' without actually reading what that proposal was.
At the beginning, yes, when I claimed that there should be no abolition of anything in the private sector regardless of how unfair it may be perceived. Grammar schools aren't some form of rectification for private schools - the whole reason for grammar schools existing are for social mobility for the poor. If grammar schools and an equivalent of secondary moderns were all that existed then it'd be even worse. The rich will still get into the grammar schools through excessive tuition and there'd be no places for the bright poor children.
0
reply
Melz0r
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#351
Report 9 years ago
#351
(Original post by necessarily benevolent)
At the beginning, yes, when I claimed that there should be no abolition of anything in the private sector regardless of how unfair it may be perceived. Grammar schools aren't some form of rectification for private schools - the whole reason for grammar schools existing are for social mobility for the poor. If grammar schools and an equivalent of secondary moderns were all that existed then it'd be even worse. The rich will still get into the grammar schools through excessive tuition and there'd be no places for the bright poor children.
1. So basically your objection is that you shouldn't nationalise anything, ever? Surely in that case the rest is irrelevant?

2. Not if you design an admissions process (i.e. interviews) which picks up potential rather than regurgitated facts. It is possible.
0
reply
CERECEREREVOLUTION
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#352
Report 9 years ago
#352
(Original post by Melz0r)
2. Not if you design an admissions process (i.e. interviews) which picks up potential rather than regurgitated facts. It is possible.
If you can do that then do that for university entrances and you solve the whole problem without authoritarian laws and the massive screwups that would come with the government trying to implement such a system. EDIT: Based on people complaining that private schools take up all the university places and therefore disadvantage people from other schools.

Also what's with the assumption that teaching can only teach regurgitated facts and not ways of thinking about things and problem solving skills? Especially with private tuition, rich parents would definately be able to give their children a big boost with regards to this.
0
reply
Melz0r
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#353
Report 9 years ago
#353
(Original post by CERECEREREVOLUTION)
If you can do that then do that for university entrances and you solve the whole problem without authoritarian laws and the massive screwups that would come with the government trying to implement such a system. EDIT: Based on people complaining that private schools take up all the university places and therefore disadvantage people from other schools.

Also what's with the assumption that teaching can only teach regurgitated facts and not ways of thinking about things and problem solving skills? Especially with private tuition, rich parents would definately be able to give their children a big boost with regards to this.
Perhaps I was being idealistic, but don't you think it's better than actually letting people directly just pay their way in?
0
reply
CERECEREREVOLUTION
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#354
Report 9 years ago
#354
(Original post by Melz0r)
Perhaps I was being idealistic, but don't you think it's better than actually letting people directly just pay their way in?
Well I think you were being completely idealistic there :P. I'd stick with the grammar schools and keep private schools, perhaps even encouraging people to go to them. Firstly that takes the strain off the rest of the system and frees up money to be spent elsewhere, secondly it'll keep the rich kids out of the grammar schools so that the poor but bright kids can go there. The problems aren't solvable, but such drastic action as suggested in this topic is going to have so many unintended consequences that it's almost guarranteed to make the situation worse.
0
reply
Melz0r
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#355
Report 9 years ago
#355
(Original post by ewandougie)
This is a completely unjust and unfair topic, I went to a private school. The state schools in Carlisle were seen by my parents to be unacceptable, (for example we have the only academy to go into special measures 1 month after it opened) . They wanted something better than what was on offer so they paid for it, what is wrong with that ??
If you read the post, the OP doesn't criticise anyone who actually went to a private school, he doesn't say people are wrong to pay to go to private schools, rather that in his ideal world they wouldn't need to.
0
reply
fraser101
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#356
Report 9 years ago
#356
If parents wish to send their children to private schools then let them.
0
reply
Olivia_Lightbulb
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#357
Report 9 years ago
#357
(Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
Pretty much this.

In my year of 140 people from an ordinary Kentish town and the surrounding area, a very large proportion were ordinary working class lads who had grown up on council estates or in deprived conditions. Many of them were given a solid shot at university - and took it happily and with a great degree of success - through the Grammar school system where they would have been dragged down to the lowest common denominator in a secondary modern [oh sorry, now they're "comprehensives"], and I'm proud that Kent stands by it's 11-plus system.

Grammars must be re-introduced across the country, and must not be further eroded. Kent will probably never get rid of the 11-plus, but other counties are not so staunch in their position.
Out of curiosity, what part of Kent are you from?
0
reply
Aphotic Cosmos
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#358
Report 9 years ago
#358
(Original post by Olivia_Lightbulb)
Out of curiosity, what part of Kent are you from?
Ashford
0
reply
Olivia_Lightbulb
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#359
Report 9 years ago
#359
(Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
Ashford
I'm from Tonbridge. :five:
0
reply
Aphotic Cosmos
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#360
Report 9 years ago
#360
(Original post by Olivia_Lightbulb)
I'm from Tonbridge. :five:
:five: for Kent ^_^
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (214)
39.12%
No - but I will (38)
6.95%
No - I don't want to (36)
6.58%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (259)
47.35%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise