Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Maybe you should consider the fact that schools in Finland have higher, better standards then the state schools anywhere in the world?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by upthegunners)
    anyone else smell jealously?
    The nose of the upper classes often confuse jealousy with fairness.

    Fairness has a much more subtle smell of freshness... and this is what this debate is all about.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    So what? Those in private schools automatically get accepted into better universities?

    People pay for private education because the quality of teaching and structure there is better than in state schools. Because of this better quality the students get better grades and hence get accepted into better universities. Now, just because you (or me) do not attend a private school it doesn't mean they should be banned. I might have a better computer than you but that doesn't mean the company who made it, or how I got the money to pay for it, should be banned.

    You pay for the better things in life and education is one of them. If there was no difference in the quality and results of students attending state compared to private schools then people wouldn't pay them. I mean, I wish that I'd have been able to go to private school and I'd want my kids to because it offers better opportunities in life.

    Furthermore, I think that being accepted into better universities has more to do with you as an individual: From my (state) school 2 people went to OxBridge and another to UCL but not because they are rich, but because they obtained high results for their A levels. If you have good A levels then you can get into a good university regardless of your household income or the school you attended.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by UnderPost)
    The nose of the upper classes often confuse jealousy with fairness.

    Fairness has a much more subtle smell of freshness... and this is what this debate is all about.
    The world is unfair... complaining about ain't gunna do anything.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by UnderPost)
    And that's the reforms I'd like to question. I question how allowing a local comp to use your cricket ground every 2 weeks allow you to be a charity. I question how allowing 5% of the school to be on scholarships suddenly makes you charitable.

    If these private schools were genuinely be charitable then I think they should have charitable status, but I question this status on some of them.

    Reforms are starting to happen in Scotland on this.
    Wales wanted its own charity commission to help tackle this but weren't allowed. So she, like England must wait for reforms.... yet again!
    Fair enough, I rashly assumed you wanted to simply abolish charitable status.


    (Original post by UnderPost)
    The nose of the upper classes often confuse jealousy with fairness.

    Fairness has a much more subtle smell of freshness... and this is what this debate is all about.
    There's more than one type of fairness/equality. There's equality of outcome and of opportunity - every has the opportunity to go private if they have the means to do so.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Neon-Soldier32)
    Furthermore, I think that being accepted into better universities has more to do with you as an individual: From my (state) school 2 people went to OxBridge and another to UCL but not because they are rich, but because they obtained high results for their A levels. If you have good A levels then you can get into a good university regardless of your household income or the school you attended.
    I think the point is that people at private schools are more likely to get good grades. No-one is claiming there is a bias in universities. Nonetheless, rich people and people who went to higher-achieving schools are more likely to get the best grades and attend the best universities. While there are exceptions, this is a general rule. Plus, those people who went to Oxbridge are unlikely to have parents on benefits. They might not be rich, but they are likely to be middle class and have well-educated parents.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Everybody has the right to basic education, which the government provides but if I want my child to receive a better standard of education what's wrong with that. Its just like healthcare, what if I don't want to use the NHS, I want a better standard of treatment. Private schools are fine and to ban them is stupid.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sevchenko)
    Private schools are fine and to ban the is stupid.
    What if the OP's mediocre state education has led to him being too stupid to grasp why private schools shouldn't be banned
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by UnderPost)
    You've contradicted yourself:

    "I don't think private schools get any better teaching"
    and
    "pushy parents who are paying money for their child to do well"
    No she hasn't, you're suggesting that teaching is the only contributor to how well someone does.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheGuy117)
    The top 14 universities listed in the first link have 28%+ private school kids, when private school kids make up about 7% of all school children. Disproportionate by a factor of 4, rising to over 6 when reaching Oxford!!! How is this fair?!
    If you look at the private and state school applicant to entrants ratios, they're pretty in proportion.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I think people shouldn't judge unless they have personally experienced both
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    This country is already in a tight budget so banning private schools will not necessarily bring higher education as the budget will have to increase to open new schools where all the children can go. Also, more money will be spent on resources and teachers again forcing a higher budget. There will be more children in a class causing it to be out of control. Now that wouldn't increase the standards of the education system would it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I wish I could've gone to a private school. But there isn't really a big advantage, it is only the learning atmosphere which enables kids to do good. With a public school it just depends on if you're willing to learn
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by indigoheart)
    Okay, i see your argument, but what do you suggest?
    Every child who attends a private school has parents who pay tax. Therefore they are entitled to a state school education.
    So you shut all private schools, and all the children move to state schools.
    The state schools then have a load of new children, with little extra funding for the new pupils. the only way to meet that is to increase the education budget and that's a bit tight already..
    Bigger classes, but no money for new desks, or teachers, or books...
    how would you solve that problem?
    Or the state could just nationalise the education "industry" and keep the former private schools open but with no wealth discrimination.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I have read many of the posts on this thread, but I think that Private Schools should be left alone. The government should do something about state schools rather than the private ones. If the state schools are better then I think that the system would be better. Do not kick the people at the top of the ladder; rather, you should help the people from the bottom to reach the top.

    Let me give you an example. Imagine that there are no private schools and every kid attends govt. schools. After school, the rich kid’s parents invites tutors to assist their kids with extra schooling, arts or sports while the “poor” kid just hangs about. When both kids graduate and they apply for university and the top universities ask about their experience, the rich kid lists all the extra stuff that she did while the “poor” kid (due to financial constraints) only lists her high academic standing. Who do you think that the universities would pick? The student with all A*s but no extra skills or the student with all A*s and relevant experience in the degree that she is about to take?

    It is unfair to say, “Take the money that hardworking people have worked for because they are richer than the rest and share it around so that we can have an equal society”.

    I have a friend who studied at a private school and did not get into Oxford with his A grades. He attended a non-Oxbridge university.

    Please note that I am not downgrading any side of the education system. I am a product of state schooling, but I would not argue that Private schooling should be banned.

    We should aim at creating equality by developing a system that would help everyone. Improve the system at the bottom and not destroy the one at the top.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hunarench95)
    I'm going to mix it up a little, why don't we ban state schools - just joking. But what we could do is make funding dependant on performance, this would help improve the educational sector no end.

    For those of you that disagree straight off, please google 'internalising markets'. It explains that organisations competing for funding will improve the quality of their services and offer them at a lower price. Those ineffective schools will be shut down, making room for the better performing schools to expand - improving education across the country.
    Ironically ' banning state schools' is what various political parties have tried - whether it was GM schools under Thatcher / Major or academies under Blair ...

    GM, Academy or 'Free' school you fundamentally have a private school with a block contract with the State - much as many GP Practices are private businesses with a GMs or PMS Contract from the NHS ...

    the Assisted Places Scheme - abolished by Labour despite their commitment to 'education, education, education ' offered funding support for people to attend private schools

    Potentially you could have a scenario where the parent ( or other designated carer) of a child has a voucher which provides accredited schools with access to a level of funding equivalent to the current per pupil budget for their age group ( plus any extra funding attracted becasue of special needs ) each year...

    Most currently state funded schools would probably charge little or nothing extra above the value of the voucher ( bearing in mind state schools can charge for subsistence and leisure elements of school trips and try and guilt trip people into paying for transport for 'required' trips and can charge full price for none required trips , plus the various other sundries that schools charge for )

    Existing private schools would have to make a commercial decision of the level of top-up required over the voucher value and any compromises they make in terms of service to attract more pupils ( assuming they can take extra pupils or have funding to support further expansion)

    it;s likely that the big name Public schools would do little other than take the voucher as part payment , but smaller / less well known schools would have a commercial decision to make - it may also allow them to continue once the levels of CEA paid to military parents drop right off due to supergarrisons and the end of the arms plot, etc
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheGuy117)
    mmmmm I smell a troll :troll:
    I think you, sir, are a troll!

    It is ridiculous to suggest that "going to a private school" means you will do better in life. My eldest brother went to a fairly good private school (for a private school, in the top 30% of private schools), and my other older brother and I go to a Comprehensive school (though a good one, I might add). I haven't done my GCSEs yet but the private school got 2 As 6 Bs and a C whereas the Comprehensive brother got 10A*s and 2 As.... hwo do you explain that? It is more to do with intelligence than schooling. But also, some people work better in different environments, just like someone with learning disabilities work better in learning support than in an actual classroom....
    do you suggest ridding schools of them?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blake-inator)
    I think you, sir, are a troll!

    It is ridiculous to suggest that "going to a private school" means you will do better in life. My eldest brother went to a fairly good private school (for a private school, in the top 30% of private schools), and my other older brother and I go to a Comprehensive school (though a good one, I might add). I haven't done my GCSEs yet but the private school got 2 As 6 Bs and a C whereas the Comprehensive brother got 10A*s and 2 As.... hwo do you explain that? It is more to do with intelligence than schooling. But also, some people work better in different environments, just like someone with learning disabilities work better in learning support than in an actual classroom....
    do you suggest ridding schools of them?
    Wow, either you're a troll or can't use your brain...so, the hugely disparity in private/state school results is down to private school kids being more intelligent?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheGuy117)
    Wow, either you're a troll or can't use your brain...so, the hugely disparity in private/state school results is down to private school kids being more intelligent?
    You are saying that people from private schools get more opportunities (and thats why they get into Oxbridge more etc) but clearly, if these results where anything to go by, they have less. And out of everyone my Private brother knew, no one beat my Comprehensive brother.....

    And it makes me laugh when people who hear things they can't handle / are too stupid to understand, they shrug the person off with the label "troll"...

    And why are you complaining anyway.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    and fyi, i was implying my comprehensive brother was more intelligent and thats why he did better... my Private brother went to the "better" school and did worse....
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources
    Uni match

    Applying to uni?

    Our tool will help you find the perfect course

    Articles:

    Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

    Quick link:

    Educational debate unanswered threads

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • 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.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.