abolish private schools

I hate to say it but this argument is pretty much as flawed as they come. Would you let your child speak to heroin pushers because you don't want them to be in "shock" when they find out that such things go on?

During out younger (formative) years we are easily influenced - even strong minded children. I think that by sending them to a school where courtesy, hard work and dedication are promoted your are equipping them far better for dealing with these problems later. A child amongst disruptive pupils is more likely to become disruptive him/herself.

I have been at a private school all my life but I have done voluntary service (compulsary at some point during one's school career). I know that there are under-privileged people out there. This doesn't mean I need to become under-privileged myself to be able to understand them.

Adam

You have the most encredibly false opinion that all state schools are t=bad! I think this proves the point that you really dont have a clue outside of your own school.

Of course i want my kids to go to a GOOD school, who the hell wouldnt? Accept the fact that there are excellent schools out there that do not require thousands of pounds a term. They have good teachers, good students, fairly good facilities. Kids need to be around people to see what other people, different people, are like.

Why are you talking about heroin addicts? thats an entirely different thing. if you think there are heroin addcits at every school you are seriously bizare. My school is not knoe of the cbest state schools by a long shot, and there was a stage when i realised there was cannabis around. I just avoided it. you have to learn to say no to what you dont wnat, other wise you get pushed around.

Anywya, from what i hear the £10000 a year private school up the road has far worse drug problems cause all the students have too much money, its just the teachers either dont realise or dont want anyone to know, would look far too bad.

I think you got the wrong end of the stick on the whole drug thing. I wasn't suggesting that there are drug problems at state schools. It was an analogy which I thought seemed pretty clear.

I realise that there are better and worse state schools (I dated a girl from a state school for 16 months). The point is (whether or not you like to admit it) that at state schools there is less money for facilities and teachers would rather teach more motivated students.

Adam

Teachers will still find themselves back in the state sector. A good, motivated teacher can do wonders for young people.

Alternatively, the government could just set a cap of 0 fees on these schools, and provide them with the same funding that a state school receives now.

The motivation for teachers in public schools is the increased level of behaviour, and higher salaries. Why the hell would they want to work in state schools?
J

Bear in mind, as several people have noted before, mertiocracy as supported by Tony Blair, was an idea first touted in a satirical 50s comedy. It also has the effect of suggesting that the poor/ "lower classes" are where they are because of their own inate stupidity and not because of some accident of birth.

Well I'd agree with that, maybe not so much twenty years ago but today we can all be who ever we want to be.

Thats sooo untrue. I've always wanted to be a cat. Laze about all day by a roaring fire, then take a stroll outside to terrorise the neighbours cat

i've just been reading a somewhat argumentative thread about discrimination against state educated students by those who have enjoyed the massive good fortune of an independent education. or, woe betide, vice versa.

which made me think, what do you think, why don't we outlaw and ABOLISH PRIVATE SCHOOLS once and for all? make everyone attend a bog-standard blair-funded comp? this being the only honest route to meritocracy- right?

uk learning should be a right, not a privilege. nobody should be more equal than anybody else.

LOL

I'd like to be a cat too, they have it sooo easy and they have like twenty different homes!

But seriously I don't think people on here can accept that some people don't want to be successful and they think it's our fault and we should change that they don't think ambitious enough.

lol this is stupid if you pay more you SHOULD be allowed to get a higher quality product!

Agreed. People are just generally lazy in such cases. I find it rather funny when these types of people win the lottery. I watched a tv program once and it showed what they spend their money on, it was hysterical. They try to become part of the 'upper class' by going to country clubs etc and take up golf, its just so funny to watch them because they are so out of place. Installing a pub inside their house was proably the best one and buying really flashy cars, when in most cases real rich people just have cars which blend in so to speak.

The validity of that statement when applied to education is questionable. Certainly, I agree with those principles when buying a watch or whatever - but I do not think that a direct translation is a good idea. Does the fact that rich people buy a expensive cars adversely affect the quality of a cheaper car, for example? Education is more complicated than that.

Ben

rich people going to Public School does not adverselt affect the quality of state schools? But wouldnt you say that a Rolls Royce is better than a Ford Fiesta?

I've seen what they spend their money on! I know what you mean they think buying quad bikes and other useless stuff makes them have the same life style that the hard working, rich business man has.

Have you seen Michael Carroll from Norfolk?

What? I wasn't replying to you! Where do the best teachers go...

Ben

rich people going to Public School does not adversely affect the quality of state schools?