Do you think we should abolish private schools? Watch

This discussion is closed.
MindTheGaps
Badges: 17
#141
Report 5 years ago
#141
(Original post by Ripper-Roo)
That's a good point about cheating, it's a reason why I wouldn't send my children to private schools (if I ever have any and if I had the money to), because I want their achievements to be due to ability not the convenience of me being able to afford it! I'd rather invest into living in a nice house in a good neighbourhood which is in the proximity of high-achieving state schools.
How is this morally any different?

You may not be directly paying for it, but the premium charged on houses in certain catchment areas is little more than another way for the middle classes to buy their way into a good school.

In my opinion this is worse than privately educating your child. It could be said that you are directly snatching a place in a good state school from a child whose parents can't afford to live in that catchment area. As has been pointed out before, private eduction hurts no one.

I'm not that bothered about the practice, but I think it illustrates the hypocrisy of many of the 'private schools are evil' brigade.
0
John Stuart Mill
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#142
Report 5 years ago
#142
(Original post by Ripper-Roo)
That's a good point about cheating, it's a reason why I wouldn't send my children to private schools (if I ever have any and if I had the money to), because I want their achievements to be due to ability not the convenience of me being able to afford it! I'd rather invest into living in a nice house in a good neighbourhood which is in the proximity of high-achieving state schools.
So you would deprive your child of a superior education because it was unfair? The problem is the link education has with the workplace, most people learn fk all to do with the job they do in the modern period - leave education to actually accumulating knowledge not political bureaucracy that limits freedom.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with charging money for someone to access better tuition or resources; if it were available to everyone that would be fantastic - but in reality under capitalism things cost money and frankly with teachers having such a low salary private tuition is a good thing.
1
qwerty457
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#143
Report 5 years ago
#143
I think, to encourage social mobility, the private education system and the department of education's attitude towards them needs a complete overhaul. A reintroduction of the assisted places scheme would help and some sort of reprimand if the schools don't offer enough free/discounted places for underprivileged children e.g. removing their charitable status.
0
JamesTheCool
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#144
Report 5 years ago
#144
(Original post by Rinsed)
So if a child has a parent who can help him get his head around a subject he is struggling with, is that 'cheating'? Or is it just the introduction of money that is so reprehensible?

What if a parent buys the child a revision guide to work from, which perhaps a poorer parent could not afford?
EDIT: I can't believe you continued to defend your petty little argument after what I just said...

Yes. It's a power that shouldn't be, and if a child isn't particularly bright then why does he/she deserve to do as well as smart kids? Although smartness doesn't really equate to good grades; the link seems very spurious to me (especially if you look at how many affluent kids there are at Oxford University who obviously went to private schools, and, despite their high levels of confidence, buffoonery and level-headed-ness, I find it embarrassing. It's shameful evidence of just how pathetic our social mobility is that these Hooray Henries are the dominance of all things that are creme). However I do think success should be open to all who put forth the effort, and I don't like to label kids as either 'smart' or 'dumb'; it's more the case that some kids happen to be faster learners in some areas than others, and I think sometimes you should just accept the talents you're born with. On the other hand that does sound horribly right-wing...

Schools generally provide for revision guides anyway. But that's irrelevant because in most subjects you're given an exercise book which contains everything you'll need for the exam(s), and most revision is freely available online.
0
Sheldor
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#145
Report 5 years ago
#145
(Original post by JamesTheCool)
Yes. It's a power that shouldn't be, and if a child isn't particularly bright then why does he/she deserve to do as well as smart kids? Although smartness doesn't really equate to good grades; the link seems very spurious to me (especially if you look at how many affluent kids there are at Oxford University who pretty obviously went to private schools). However I do think success should be open to all who put forth the effort, and I don't like to label kids as either 'smart' or 'dumb' but some kids happen to be faster learners in some areas than others and sometimes you should just accept the talents you're born with and stop trying to artificially make yourself multi-talented.

Schools generally provide for revision guides anyway, and most revision is freely available online.
So if your kid asked you for help with his times tables, you wouldn't help them? Or if they asked you to read to them, you wouldn't? And you wouldn't discuss current events around them? All these things help a child do better in life, and not every child gets them, which is what you say you're against.

Posted from TSR Mobile
1
JamesTheCool
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#146
Report 5 years ago
#146
(Original post by Sheldor)
So if your kid asked you for help with his times tables, you wouldn't help them? Or if they asked you to read to them, you wouldn't? And you wouldn't discuss current events around them? All these things help a child do better in life, and not every child gets them, which is what you say you're against.

Posted from TSR Mobile
I'm not against that but it doesn't tie in with education unless you want to get straight A*s for so-called outside-the-box originality (well, it's not really originality; just attempting something that most people are too lazy to accomplish). Kids with privileges should have some sort of limit because it's not fair for middle-class pricks with names like Rupert and Fiona to have such an advantage over working-class pricks with names Adi and Jade.
0
JamesTheCool
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#147
Report 5 years ago
#147
I can't believe how stupid all you pro-establishment people are. I bet you all have crappy music tastes too...
0
John Stuart Mill
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#148
Report 5 years ago
#148
(Original post by JamesTheCool)
I can't believe how stupid all you pro-establishment people are. I bet you all have crappy music tastes too...
okay
0
JamesTheCool
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#149
Report 5 years ago
#149
(Original post by Rinsed)
How is this morally any different?

You may not be directly paying for it, but the premium charged on houses in certain catchment areas is little more than another way for the middle classes to buy their way into a good school.

In my opinion this is worse than privately educating your child. It could be said that you are directly snatching a place in a good state school from a child whose parents can't afford to live in that catchment area. As has been pointed out before, private eduction hurts no one.

I'm not that bothered about the practice, but I think it illustrates the hypocrisy of many of the 'private schools are evil' brigade.
Private education does hurt because it's essentially one big middle finger aimed at the majority of society. Letting people have a superior education because their parents are wealthy is completely disheartening. The fact that private schools exist in the first place is absolutely criminal. Unfortunately this country and its media are practically dominated by people who were privately educated themselves, who will of course do everything they can to keep things the way they are by brainwashing their pro-establishment views onto the masses of ignorant underclass patriotic turds who read their vile tabloid newspapers. The precious little cycle of elitism is maintained as the rest of us exist like continuous, raw pieces of cattle, living our meaningless little soap-opera lives just for the sake of it. Evil prevails...
0
MindTheGaps
Badges: 17
#150
Report 5 years ago
#150
(Original post by JamesTheCool)
Yes. It's a power that shouldn't be, and if a child isn't particularly bright then why does he/she deserve to do as well as smart kids? Although smartness doesn't really equate to good grades; the link seems very spurious to me (especially if you look at how many affluent kids there are at Oxford University who obviously went to private schools, and, despite their high levels of confidence, buffoonery and level-headed-ness, it's actually embarrassing, shameful evidence of just how conservative Britain is and how pathetic our social mobility is that these Hooray Henries are the dominance of everything desirable). However I do think success should be open to all who put forth the effort, and I don't like to label kids as either 'smart' or 'dumb'; it's more the case that some kids happen to be faster learners in some areas than others, and I think sometimes you should just accept the talents you're born with. On the other hand that does sound horribly right-wing...

Schools generally provide for revision guides anyway. But that's irrelevant because in most subjects you're given an exercise book which contains everything you'll need for the exam(s), and most revision is freely available online.
Are you actually saying that parents should not try to educate their children? It is something only the state should do, to guarantee 'fairness'? If so that is the most oppressive thing I have ever heard. The USSR didn't go far enough...

to the fist bold bit: because exams are literally designed to distinguish the clever from not so clever kids, that's why.

And look, I go to Oxford. I went to a comp, and I am in the minority in that, but I have never looked at all the private school guys and thought 'oh, I'm so much cleverer than them, they're just here because they went to the right school'. There has never appeared to me to be any correlation at all between school and grade. It may be that their eduction has better set them up for university, but is that a bad thing? I mean, it's not good for me, but I at the end of the day life if about results, not excuses.

As for the second bold sentence. If objective truths start to sound horribly right wing, then maybe the leftist, Guardian-approved view of the world is just wrong. Of course you should accept the talents you are born with, what else are you to do?
0
MindTheGaps
Badges: 17
#151
Report 5 years ago
#151
(Original post by JamesTheCool)
Private education does hurt because it's essentially one big middle finger aimed at the majority of society. Letting people have a superior education because their parents are wealthy is completely disheartening. The fact that private schools exist in the first place is absolutely criminal. Unfortunately this country and its media are practically dominated by people who were privately educated themselves, who will of course do everything they can to keep things the way they are by brainwashing their pro-establishment views onto the masses of ignorant underclass patriotic turds who read their vile tabloid newspapers. The precious little cycle of elitism is maintained as the rest of us exist like continuous, raw pieces of cattle, living our meaningless little soap-opera lives just for the sake of it. Evil prevails...
Oh boo ****ing hoo.

I will answer my question for you. Someone being privately educated directly disadvantages no one. The reason private education exists is because it produces better educated people. There are two ways to view the predominance of privately educated people in society: people are chosen on the basis of their school, or that their better education means that they are better workers. To me the latter seems more likely than the former. I would choose productivity over equality in an instance.

Also, you criticise the 'cycle of elitism'. In your view, when does a child become rich? Can we start hating them at birth, or does it take until they have entered the education system?

And yes, that most people in this country are an 'ignorant underclass' who don't agree with you is most unfortunate. If only everyone were so enlightened.
0
Cal97g
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#152
Report 5 years ago
#152
(Original post by The_Duck)
The issue is more the idea that if a child's future is decided by their parent's income, then we are not equal from birth, which is the equality that we tend to aim for.
We shouldn't strive to enforce equality by taxation and abolishing certain parts of the private sector, that's called communism. We should, however, strive to make everybody equal under law.
0
Cal97g
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#153
Report 5 years ago
#153
(Original post by JamesTheCool)
Private education does hurt because it's essentially one big middle finger aimed at the majority of society. Letting people have a superior education because their parents are wealthy is completely disheartening. The fact that private schools exist in the first place is absolutely criminal. Unfortunately this country and its media are practically dominated by people who were privately educated themselves, who will of course do everything they can to keep things the way they are by brainwashing their pro-establishment views onto the masses of ignorant underclass patriotic turds who read their vile tabloid newspapers. The precious little cycle of elitism is maintained as the rest of us exist like continuous, raw pieces of cattle, living our meaningless little soap-opera lives just for the sake of it. Evil prevails...
Lol'd
1
Ripper-Roo
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#154
Report 5 years ago
#154
(Original post by Rinsed)
How is this morally any different?

You may not be directly paying for it, but the premium charged on houses in certain catchment areas is little more than another way for the middle classes to buy their way into a good school.

In my opinion this is worse than privately educating your child. It could be said that you are directly snatching a place in a good state school from a child whose parents can't afford to live in that catchment area. As has been pointed out before, private eduction hurts no one.

I'm not that bothered about the practice, but I think it illustrates the hypocrisy of many of the 'private schools are evil' brigade.
I can buy a house in whatever area I like, providing I can afford it.
0
Le Nombre
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#155
Report 5 years ago
#155
(Original post by John Stuart Mill)
no we need to abolish public schools so people that actually want an education can get one, universal education != qualifications
You seem to be very confused as to the meaning of a 'public school' in Britain.

(Original post by John Stuart Mill)
So you would deprive your child of a superior education because it was unfair? The problem is the link education has with the workplace, most people learn fk all to do with the job they do in the modern period - leave education to actually accumulating knowledge not political bureaucracy that limits freedom.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with charging money for someone to access better tuition or resources; if it were available to everyone that would be fantastic - but in reality under capitalism things cost money and frankly with teachers having such a low salary private tuition is a good thing.
Yes, I have the same opinion and absolutely would. If I get my child tuition they are going to feel their grades have been bought, I know I would have done. I don't want them walking out of school on results day going 'I did well, but I'm not as clever as X who got the same grades because X didn't need drilling by a tutor every night of the week to get them'. I want them to feel their achievements are their own, not something I have bought for them, God knows they'll have enough passive advantages without getting involved in purchasing active ones for them too.

If state school ithout tutoring did fine by me and their likely mother then it'll do right by them too.

(Original post by Cal97g)
We shouldn't strive to enforce equality by taxation and abolishing certain parts of the private sector, that's called communism. We should, however, strive to make everybody equal under law.
That would presumably mean giving everyone legal aid for legal issues, I can't see any other potential source for this than taxation.

Given the cost of lawyers in fields such as employmeny, family, pensions, property and all the other fields which affect the general public this is going to get very expensive. If you say companies should all have the right to equal legal representation too it's going to get ridiculous.
0
John Stuart Mill
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#156
Report 5 years ago
#156
(Original post by Le Nombre)
You seem to be very confused as to the meaning of a 'public school' in Britain.



Yes, I have the same opinion and absolutely would. If I get my child tuition they are going to feel their grades have been bought, I know I would have done. I don't want them walking out of school on results day going 'I did well, but I'm not as clever as X who got the same grades because X didn't need drilling by a tutor every night of the week to get them'. I want them to feel their achievements are their own, not something I have bought for them, God knows they'll have enough passive advantages without getting involved in purchasing active ones for them too.

If state school ithout tutoring did fine by me and their likely mother then it'll do right by them too.



That would presumably mean giving everyone legal aid for legal issues, I can't see any other potential source for this than taxation.

Given the cost of lawyers in fields such as employmeny, family, pensions, property and all the other fields which affect the general public this is going to get very expensive. If you say companies should all have the right to equal legal representation too it's going to get ridiculous.
You really think people buy their grades? They work just as hard as everyone else the difference is they get more help - which we should be encouraging - education isn't about achievment it's about learning.
0
Le Nombre
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#157
Report 5 years ago
#157
(Original post by John Stuart Mill)
You really think people buy their grades? They work just as hard as everyone else the difference is they get more help - which we should be encouraging - education isn't about achievment it's about learning.
Well what elese are private schools asking me to spend 10-12k a year on around where I live? If their pitch is 'You spend your money but we'll have little impact on your child's grades' then what exactly do they offer? The fact you're buying the help to get their child's grades doesn't mean it's not a pretty significant factor. If a client comes to us and suggests we run their case instead of themselves then yes they're just buying some legal help, but I think buried at the back of their minds might be a slight inclination that retaining us just made their chances of winning a lot higher too.

I don't object to other people doing it, it's their money to spend how they wish, but I do object to other people telling me what I should want for my child. I feel that to bring in extra help will devalue my child's grades in their own eyes as that's how I would feel. By the same token I have no objection to people using contacts to help their children into the profession or indeed just giving them training places, but I wouldn't do it for my own children as I feel to do so would devalue the achievement of winning a training contract.
0
John Stuart Mill
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#158
Report 5 years ago
#158
(Original post by Le Nombre)
Well what elese are private schools asking me to spend 10-12k a year on around where I live? If their pitch is 'You spend your money but we'll have little impact on your child's grades' then what exactly do they offer? The fact you're buying the help to get their child's grades doesn't mean it's not a pretty significant factor. If a client comes to us and suggests we run their case instead of themselves then yes they're just buying some legal help, but I think buried at the back of their minds might be a slight inclination that retaining us just made their chances of winning a lot higher too.

I don't object to other people doing it, it's their money to spend how they wish, but I do object to other people telling me what I should want for my child. I feel that to bring in extra help will devalue my child's grades in their own eyes as that's how I would feel. By the same token I have no objection to people using contacts to help their children into the profession or indeed just giving them training places, but I wouldn't do it for my own children as I feel to do so would devalue the achievement of winning a training contract.
contacts, excellent facilities and connections to business, access to excellent libraries (because they actually have money to invest), smaller class sizes - it really isn't just grades. I understand what you're saying about achievement. Why not go to Africa and educate your children there? It will add to the achievement.
0
Shruti Rustagi
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#159
Report 5 years ago
#159
It's not about abolishing public schools but according to me it's more about the mindset that "the poor go to public schools and the education differs"
As soon as this mindset is changed the work is done..no need to argue on this topic anymore...as simple as it is..
on the other hand the fact is that 90% of childern {india} would prefer going to private school just for repo..
:devil3:.. horrible to hear but true..I myself have seen my friends make faces on the name of government schools...
Coming back to the point abolishing public schools will not do any wonders..one who doesnt wanna study in public school has many more alternatives.."abroad" probably.. so why taking so much effort to abolish them and also kicking off many stomachs.. and overcrouding public schools..
0
Le Nombre
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#160
Report 5 years ago
#160
(Original post by John Stuart Mill)
contacts, excellent facilities and connections to business, access to excellent libraries (because they actually have money to invest), smaller class sizes - it really isn't just grades. I understand what you're saying about achievement. Why not go to Africa and educate your children there? It will add to the achievement.
But things like contacts and connections to business I can provide if I wished them to use those, though I don't; facilities are good but the ones for music, sport etc. are used by the local authourity and clubs on a weekend and evening in situations with kids who are of a higher standard at the respective activities, also I can give a donation to the local school to build stuff and help other kids too not just my own; access to the local uni library is 50 quid a year and it'll smoke anything a school can offer so that just leaves. That only leaves smaller class sizes which I'm not sure are worth 12k a year given thousands of kids leave state schools every year with a string of A*s in spite of the larger class sizes.

Because my job and family are here, but I wouldn't do things like buy a house in a certain catchment to help them.
0
X
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

How did your AQA GCSE Physics Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (405)
30.57%
The paper was reasonable (525)
39.62%
Not feeling great about that exam... (226)
17.06%
It was TERRIBLE (169)
12.75%

Watched Threads

View All