Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    And coming back on any argument that state schools are tough **** and therefore you should send your child to them to toughen them up for life's struggles (I hope somebody said this somewhere in this forum btw), would it be better to leave your child in the streets to cope for his/herself and just not look after the child all its life, or to give it a home, a bed, food, a caring family etc? Sure.. if you leave him out he/she'll toughen up and see the reality of life, but as a parent is that really what you want? Do you not just want to provide the child with the best education available? And trust in your child's ability to work hard and take advantage of all the advantages offered by private schools?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Ace is Back)
    I'm afraid I have to say that I disagree - if your child is one who works hard naturally then there shouldn't really be an argument for not sending him to private school if you have the money - you should assume he will carry on working hard at private school EVEN WITH the 'spoon-feeding' that seems to go on, make use of the overall better quality of teaching there, the facilities, societies etc that they generally have and end up doing even better than a hard-working student from a state school. Surely?
    But if your child works hard and has the ability to succeed at a state school, surely sending them to private school is a waste of money? Given that many state school students (granted, not as many, but still a fair few) get straight As in their A-levels and get into top universities, why would you bother paying to send them somewhere else to do exactly the same thing? They may get higher UMS marks at a private school, but who cares? It's trhe grades that count.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Ace is Back)
    Any idiot can blunder his/her way through common entrance - there are some *serious* idiots at private school who are there on other things like sport or because they fortunately made out that they were cleverer than they really are or fluked the exams.

    There is a huuuge variety of abilities at private schools - some people are there on music scholarships, art scholarships, sport scholarships, academic scholarships, some are just of average/above average intelligence, some are stupid, some are computer types, some are actors, some are all-rounders. And moving away from just abilities:

    Some are from China, some are from America, some are lords, most are rich (admittedly), some can't afford the uniform, some are famous, some will live insignificant lives, some are small, some are tall, some are fat, some are thin, some have blond hair, some have green eyes - ok i'll stop I'm getting a bit carried away, but you get the point I hope
    Yes, I get the point I still believe there is a greater mix of people at state schools though. Whilst it's true that some private school students are idiots, some are there because of art, music or sport and some can only afford to be there through bursaries etc, the majority of students are well-behaved, hard-working, intelligent and well-off. At a state school, these students tend to be in the minority. Even in abiliy sets, there can be a difference of 3 or 4 grades between the top and the bottom. There are people getting A*s and As through to people leaving with no GCSEs at all. And even though there aren't any rich people, due to both the area the school is in and the existence of private schools, there's a fairly big gap in income between the richest and the poorest.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Ace is Back)
    And coming back on any argument that state schools are tough **** and therefore you should send your child to them to toughen them up for life's struggles (I hope somebody said this somewhere in this forum btw), would it be better to leave your child in the streets to cope for his/herself and just not look after the child all its life, or to give it a home, a bed, food, a caring family etc? Sure.. if you leave him out he/she'll toughen up and see the reality of life, but as a parent is that really what you want? Do you not just want to provide the child with the best education available? And trust in your child's ability to work hard and take advantage of all the advantages offered by private schools?
    I think there's a slight difference between sending your child to a state school and abandoning them on the streets! The fact is, private schools can sometimes have a 'bubble' effect, shielding their students from what is really happening in the world. If all you've ever known is an atmpsphere where your fellow students are well-mannered, well brought up, hard-working and intelligent members of society and your teachers are competent and willing to help, you're going to get a shock when you move away from home, go off to university and start work. You may say shielding your children from the negative aspects of life is a good thing, but I don't think it is because they'll have no idea how to cope with things then they occur.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kellywood_5)
    I think there's a slight difference between sending your child to a state school and abandoning them on the streets! The fact is, private schools can sometimes have a 'bubble' effect, shielding their students from what is really happening in the world. If all you've ever known is an atmpsphere where your fellow students are well-mannered, well brought up, hard-working and intelligent members of society and your teachers are competent and willing to help, you're going to get a shock when you move away from home, go off to university and start work. You may say shielding your children from the negative aspects of life is a good thing, but I don't think it is because they'll have no idea how to cope with things then they occur.
    I think you're right, but the "bubble effect" exists in state schools too - I'm sure, for instance, that state schools don't have regular fieldtrips to the red light district! But I understand your point and you are largely correct.

    I think (and, in the case of my school, know that) you are wrong in the assumption of everyone being well mannered and hard working in private schools. Maybe at the posh-most schools this is the case, but in the lower end I think there is clear disparity between the most and lest "well mannered" or "hard working" pupils. I appreciate this disparity would be greater in a state school, but it doesn't not-exist in the private sector.

    As for "the real world", I can only speak for myself, but I am aware of the great difference between how friendly/helpful/polite/smart different people are. It's not as if the majority of people in private schoools are unaware of what happens in "the real world", I just prefer being inside the "bubble" for my schooling. You're right that when I leave the bubble, so to speak, that I will experience a change to the system, but I don't think it will have an adverse effect one me. After all, if I didn't like the people at university, or if I couldn't cope with the work, then I wouldn't (be allowed to) stay there.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kellywood_5)
    But if your child works hard and has the ability to succeed at a state school, surely sending them to private school is a waste of money? Given that many state school students (granted, not as many, but still a fair few) get straight As in their A-levels and get into top universities, why would you bother paying to send them somewhere else to do exactly the same thing? They may get higher UMS marks at a private school, but who cares? It's trhe grades that count.
    As I said, you make some valid points (including the points following this quote), but as someone else said somewhere (rather randomly at the time I thought), grades aren't the be-all and end-all and I agree. The argument that it's likely that going to private school will turn you into a lazy bum I can agree with in many cases, however in the case of a hard-working and diligent student who has the right attitude, I would still say send him to private school, NOT because it will make it easier to get the straight grades (and therefore you argue why not send him/her to the free state school), but for the facilities, opportunities offered there which are often not offered at many state schools. Private schools provide as rounded an education as they possibly can because they generally have the extra funding to do so and that would be why I would say you should still send that child of yours to private school - not only will he/she do just as well academically but can really excel in a number areas other than just obtaining good grades.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kellywood_5)
    But if your child works hard and has the ability to succeed at a state school, surely sending them to private school is a waste of money? Given that many state school students (granted, not as many, but still a fair few) get straight As in their A-levels and get into top universities, why would you bother paying to send them somewhere else to do exactly the same thing?
    Very valid point

    I think the most important part of the post is the first word - "if". There's also the beautifully ambiguous term "succeed", though in it's context I take it to mean "get good grades".

    My personal answer to your first question is: no, it's not a waste of money at all. My parents sent me to a private school not because they had so much money they didn't know what to do with it, but because they realised that at the age of 4 there was no way of telling what kind of marks I would get in exams I'd take 11 years down the line. In light of this, they wanted to give me the best chance to do well they could, and statistically (year upon year) private schools give this. It so happened that they could affoard a private school, though not without sacrafice, so they sent me there. If my parents knew the grades I get now at the time they sent me to private school then I don't think they would have gone through with it. but I'm glad they did. Very glad. Many people view it as an "investment" in their child's education, and I believe rightfully so. Do you think that because around 50% of state school students don't go on to higher education, the parents (of those who could have affoarded to do so) were wrong not to send their children to a private school?

    As for your second question, I can't resist the urge to give the old "8% of students make up just under 50% of Oxbridge students", and remember it's not always been as favourable a statistic as it is today. Again, if you know how well your child will do before you send them to school, then it probably is a waste of money, if you care about your child getting good grades more than anything else in their education.

    I don't want to get into a "are you saying my parents don't care about me?!?" discuss by the way. I'm not saying that. Were I not an only child my parents wouldn't be able to afford private education.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    The fact is, private schools can sometimes have a 'bubble' effect, shielding their students from what is really happening in the world.
    State schools also have a 'bubble' effect but it's often a much darker bubble.

    You may say shielding your children from the negative aspects of life is a good thing, but I don't think it is because they'll have no idea how to cope with things then they occur.
    By your logic then we should send our children to the worst school possible so they learn how to cope? I don't think so. Children are unable to cope with things like this - it's only right that we shield them from the negative aspects of life.

    I disagree with the terrible situation we have where the goverment wants to mix all classes and abilities together in the education system. We always hear about how important it is to not discriminate against people but surely the intelligent people are discriminated against in many state schools.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by smeets)
    I think you're right, but the "bubble effect" exists in state schools too - I'm sure, for instance, that state schools don't have regular fieldtrips to the red light district! But I understand your point and you are largely correct
    Lol no, we don't! I'm glad you see where I'm coming from though.

    (Original post by smeets)
    I think (and, in the case of my school, know that) you are wrong in the assumption of everyone being well mannered and hard working in private schools. Maybe at the posh-most schools this is the case, but in the lower end I think there is clear disparity between the most and lest "well mannered" or "hard working" pupils. I appreciate this disparity would be greater in a state school, but it doesn't not-exist in the private sector.
    Point taken. I know not all private school students are like that, but since their parents are paying for their education, they're more likely to be interested in how well they're doing and more likely to come down hard on them if they start slacking or misbehaving. That's not to say that parents of state school students aren't interested in their education- mine certainly are- but in many cases it comes down to a lack of knowledge rather than interest. I imagine a lot of private school students have parents who are teachers, doctors, lawyers etc, therefore they've been to university and are better positioned to advise their children than my parents who both left school at 16.

    (Original post by smeets)
    As for "the real world", I can only speak for myself, but I am aware of the great difference between how friendly/helpful/polite/smart different people are. It's not as if the majority of people in private schoools are unaware of what happens in "the real world", I just prefer being inside the "bubble" for my schooling. You're right that when I leave the bubble, so to speak, that I will experience a change to the system, but I don't think it will have an adverse effect one me. After all, if I didn't like the people at university, or if I couldn't cope with the work, then I wouldn't (be allowed to) stay there.
    My point was simply that it may be easier for state school students to adjust to univeristy and the 'real world', but as long as private school students are prepared for a change and willing to adapt, there's no problem
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gaz031)
    State schools also have a 'bubble' effect but it's often a much darker bubble.


    By your logic then we should send our children to the worst school possible so they learn how to cope? I don't think so. Children are unable to cope with things like this - it's only right that we shield them from the negative aspects of life.

    I disagree with the terrible situation we have where the goverment wants to mix all classes and abilities together in the education system. We always hear about how important it is to not discriminate against people but surely the intelligent people are discriminated against in many state schools.
    Agreed
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Ace is Back)
    As I said, you make some valid points (including the points following this quote), but as someone else said somewhere (rather randomly at the time I thought), grades aren't the be-all and end-all and I agree. The argument that it's likely that going to private school will turn you into a lazy bum I can agree with in many cases, however in the case of a hard-working and diligent student who has the right attitude, I would still say send him to private school, NOT because it will make it easier to get the straight grades (and therefore you argue why not send him/her to the free state school), but for the facilities, opportunities offered there which are often not offered at many state schools. Private schools provide as rounded an education as they possibly can because they generally have the extra funding to do so and that would be why I would say you should still send that child of yours to private school - not only will he/she do just as well academically but can really excel in a number areas other than just obtaining good grades.
    Those facilities and resources are available in other places besides private schools though. There are art classes, music schools, drama groups, sports centres, youth groups etc available in almost every town/city, so you can provide your child with a balanced education without needing to send them to private school.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kellywood_5)
    Those facilities and resources are available in other places besides private schools though. There are art classes, music schools, drama groups, sports centres, youth groups etc available in almost every town/city, so you can provide your child with a balanced education without needing to send them to private school.
    You pay for almost all those things.. and you can't do them while you're at school
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by smeets)
    Very valid point

    I think the most important part of the post is the first word - "if". There's also the beautifully ambiguous term "succeed", though in it's context I take it to mean "get good grades".

    My personal answer to your first question is: no, it's not a waste of money at all. My parents sent me to a private school not because they had so much money they didn't know what to do with it, but because they realised that at the age of 4 there was no way of telling what kind of marks I would get in exams I'd take 11 years down the line. In light of this, they wanted to give me the best chance to do well they could, and statistically (year upon year) private schools give this. It so happened that they could affoard a private school, though not without sacrafice, so they sent me there. If my parents knew the grades I get now at the time they sent me to private school then I don't think they would have gone through with it. but I'm glad they did. Very glad. Many people view it as an "investment" in their child's education, and I believe rightfully so. Do you think that because around 50% of state school students don't go on to higher education, the parents (of those who could have affoarded to do so) were wrong not to send their children to a private school?

    As for your second question, I can't resist the urge to give the old "8% of students make up just under 50% of Oxbridge students", and remember it's not always been as favourable a statistic as it is today. Again, if you know how well your child will do before you send them to school, then it probably is a waste of money, if you care about your child getting good grades more than anything else in their education.

    I don't want to get into a "are you saying my parents don't care about me?!?" discuss by the way. I'm not saying that. Were I not an only child my parents wouldn't be able to afford private education.
    I agree there's no way of telling what a child is capable of at such a young age, but personally I can't see the point of private primary education at all. I can obviously see the point of private secondary education because that's where you take all your important exams and apply to univeristy, but I don't see how primary school is that important. Personally I learnt very little because my primary school was rubbish, but I still passed the 11+ and hence had the choice of attending a grammar school. If a child is showing signs of needing extra help academically or lacking motivation, that's, in my view, when parents should think about seding them to a private school.

    I don't think the parents of the 50% of state school students who don't go on to univeristy did anything wrong by not sending them to private schools. If a student has the intelligence and really wants to succeed, they'll go to university regardless of the school they attend. If they don't, it's true that a private school would help them get there, but university isn't for everyone and forcing them to continue in education when they don't really want to would mean they wouldn't enjoy it anyway and would probably end up dorpping out.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kellywood_5)
    Those facilities and resources are available in other places besides private schools though. There are art classes, music schools, drama groups, sports centres, youth groups etc available in almost every town/city, so you can provide your child with a balanced education without needing to send them to private school.
    Take any service - the more you pay for it, the more you get out of it. Of course, you can work your way around this, you could get your academic education free from the government then enrole your child in extra-curricular art lessons etc in the town/city where you live, but the public school provides all of this, at a price. That's why I say if you can comfortably afford it you should send your child to a public school! The only *real* valid argument against them is what you have been repeating, the fact that you are less likely to work independently if you have so much spoon-feeding from a public school
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    The argument that it's likely that going to private school will turn you into a lazy bum
    Then why is it that a greater percentage of people in state schools end up either getting pregnant at a young age or living on benefits?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Ace is Back)
    You pay for almost all those things.. and you can't do them while you're at school
    Why not? What's wrong with doing them in the evenings at weekends? I know they cost money, but I doubt they cost as much as private school.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gaz031)
    State schools also have a 'bubble' effect but it's often a much darker bubble.
    True, but that's what life nowadays is like, unfortunately.

    (Original post by Gaz031)
    By your logic then we should send our children to the worst school possible so they learn how to cope? I don't think so. Children are unable to cope with things like this - it's only right that we shield them from the negative aspects of life.
    I disagree. You have to get used to the negatvie aspects of life eventually and children who are exposed to them from a young age will find this a lot easier than those for whom they've been hidden.

    (Original post by Gaz031)
    I disagree with the terrible situation we have where the goverment wants to mix all classes and abilities together in the education system. We always hear about how important it is to not discriminate against people but surely the intelligent people are discriminated against in many state schools.
    I agree, but this wouldn't have happened if the government had retained the old grammar and secondary modern system. How is mixing people of different social classes a bad thing though?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gaz031)
    Then why is it that a greater percentage of people in state schools end up either getting pregnant at a young age or living on benefits?
    I think that has a lot more to do with the parents than the school.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gaz031)
    Then why is it that a greater percentage of people in state schools end up either getting pregnant at a young age or living on benefits?
    !!! You're taking what I say out of context and assuming I'm arguing the other side. I said I can agree that it happens in a number of cases, as kellywood says, and that is all - I have not made my opinion on the number of state school pupils who turn out as lazy bums, just that there are definitely a large proportion of private school pupils who are arrogant, lazy and feel they don't need to work! If you go to one, you should know right? There's no denying it!! I'd still send my child to a private school though..
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    for the reasons previously mentioned
 
 
 

University open days

  • University of East Anglia
    All Departments Open 13:00-17:00. Find out more about our diverse range of subject areas and career progression in the Arts & Humanities, Social Sciences, Medicine & Health Sciences, and the Sciences. Postgraduate
    Wed, 30 Jan '19
  • Solent University
    Careers in maritime Undergraduate
    Sat, 2 Feb '19
  • Sheffield Hallam University
    City and Collegiate Campus Undergraduate
    Sun, 3 Feb '19
Poll
Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?

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

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