Turn on thread page Beta

Private schools should be banned? watch

  • View Poll Results: Should private schools be banned?
    Yes
    134
    21.65%
    No
    457
    73.83%
    Not Sure
    28
    4.52%

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Adman32)
    A friend of mine comes from a relatively wealthy family and went to the same school as me up to last year. In September he left and enrolled in a private school. But I, and most people I know, would never be able to afford this.

    I know many on this forum are indeed from private schools, so please try and be neutral.

    Perhaps I'm too far on the left, but in my opinion noone should better opportunities simply because of parental wealth. All people should be born equal, and should find success with hard work and ability, not money.
    Why should people with wealth be held back from giving their children advantages they can afford through years of hard work?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 098)
    ...
    (Original post by Adman32)
    With a luxury item yes, but not a basic human right like education. Truthfully, there is little doubt they should be banned. The practicality may be hard I agree, but what are the arguments for why they should exist?
    (Original post by win5ton)
    ...
    We can't stop money, but why should a child who has absolutely no control over their parents income have to get anything less then someone down the road that has no control either.
    Why should a child who has no control over their genetic level of intelligence blah blah....

    See the issue here? Being born into wealth is just as random as being born intelligent.


    Now, let us address a more fundamental, underlying issue here, one that you haven't addressed yet. Do you not think it would be a better solution to bring state schools to the level of private schools? Thus removing their existence by providing an equal standard of education. Banning them reinforces what I call Morality enforcement, something i see a great deal in left-leaning politics, where people try to enforce morality on others and make them 'guilty' for giving themselves a head-up over one another.

    Lets look at a crucial element here, and look at why Private schools [And indeed Grammar schools are so successful]. It is not merely the facilities and teaching staff that make a school good, but it is the Pupils too. If one creates an environment of prestige, then one can expect an individual pupil to respond positively to that. It is a wide generalisation, but part of the reason State schools are failing is through a lack of engagement on the pupils behalf. This is not the teachers fault, as I would wager that teacher would easilly teach pupils at a private school/grammar school who were readilly engaged from the get-go, rather than requiring the teacher to entice them into the subject. To put it simply, teaching in a state school is HARDER by a considerable margin because of the human element involved. You can give kids a great school, but in the end, if the child is brought up believing 'academia is for pussies' at home, it won't make a blind bit of difference because other factors will always act against the other, probably making the life of the pupil worse. Referring back to the 'prestige' factor i mentioned earlier, the school does not only create this through tradition, old buildings etc, but is also creates it through accepting only a very specific type of pupil, namely, the offspring of wealthy parents, who will have laid the groundwork whilst the pupils are young.

    I am also going to posit you a more abnormal example, I attend a Private school, but i attend it not purely because of my academia, but because of my needs as a sportsmen. No state school in the country [One that is bound by the national curriculum], would be able to make my schedule flexible enough to facilitate my extensive training regimes. Lets pass this onto somebody else you might know of, Tom Daley, if i recall correctly he became a national star whilst in State school. What happened? He was socially outcasted because of his ability to perform well, not only has transferring to private school allowed him to mix with people who are well acquainted with success, but it has also granted him access to the facilities which I have prior mentioned [Flexible curriculum, dedicated diving facilities etc].

    The truth at the heart of the matter is this, aspirational and high achieving pupil will do better when they are surrounded by other aspirational and high achieving pupils. Even though people can pluck examples out of the air where 'second-rate' Private schools achieve mediocre grades [thereby invalidating your point ANYWAY], the majority all provide similar environments with pupils who have an innate understanding of why they are there and will work to get it.


    I will surmise my post with the following; 'It is not the instruction that makes a man intelligent, for if he was intelligent, he would seek out his own source of knowledge regardless'.

    EDIT : Just adding people to the quote list until i get a semi-decent response.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blue_shift86)
    i'm ex state comper and voted no. Like if u didn't have toff aka private schools u'd get these toffs in our state comps. Like that'd be nightmare init? **** em and let them go to their posh schools and leave us alone. That's the best way man. Leave system as it is. And those douches who want to go to private currently being in state comps....think hard before u go to the dark side. Private school peoples are arrogant, have head shoved so far up their arses they no nuffin about common people - you'll become a mini david cameron - i.e. an effing ****...or worse still...clegg...a ****ing two faced liar.

    The choice is yours. :rolleyes:
    I'm from state school, I voted no. AND I'm literate.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    i really wish state school pupils would just stfu about the mass injustice they seem to think is pushed onto them by private schools.

    If you work hard you will come out with exactly the same grades etc as a privately educated person, in fact you may end up being in a better position as it is not unheard of for universities and employers to discriminate in favour of state school pupils.

    If you just work hard then it will be fine, people seem not to choose to do this and just cry 24/7 about how there are people with better 'opportunities' than them.

    As well as this, from an economic point of view, the existence of private schools improves the quality of state schools. Say you were to shut every private school overnight, that means that hundreds of thousands of children will now have to be educated by the state school system, which is already pretty strained. The parents of a child at a private school are paying taxes which fund a place for their child at a state school, which they then choose not to use so that money can be spent on others.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by minniemoo100)
    Getting rid of private schools wouldn't close any gap between the rich and the poor. Purely because more wealthy parents would make sure that their child was getting the best tutor etc etc and in the end eventually a similar system would be set up.

    As unfair as it is, life is full of inequality and the education system is merely one branch on a tree.

    Private schools are unfair in terms of that ultimately a child is more likely to get better results due to better teaching etc, but getting rid of them isn't going to solve anything. Surely improving the state school system is a more benefiting way to help more disadvantaged but bright students?
    :yes:

    Just because someone goes to a private school doesn’t mean they’re rich. They might be, but I know an awful lot of people who aren’t - people who have parents that pay for them to go to that school instead of splashing out on holidays to Florida. I have a friend who is at private school who wouldn’t be there without a bursary; another who managed to get an academic scholarship. It’s up to the parents to decide whether they can afford it, how they can afford it, and how much more beneficial a private school will be to the achievement of their child. (And, whether the child itself wants to go in the first place of course!)

    For the record, I don’t go to a private school; I go to a pretty rubbish comprehensive. But my parents aren’t shelling out 10,000 a year to keep me there; I’ve got friends there; and I’m not failing all my subjects. I’m perfectly happy, and while sometimes I wish I could be somewhere that has better teachers, or more engaged students there are an equal amount of times I’m glad I’m where I’m at. There’s very little completion or cattiness, and I’m the one who pushes to do more work - it’s not enforced by my parents or teachers.

    At the end of the day - your school or financial background doesn’t define who you are or dictate whether or not you’re going to succeed in life. I don’t see any problem with private schools or any other type of school. For all those talking about ‘equality’ just be glad you have a chance to have a free education in the first place; thousands of other kids don’t.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think they should be banned. After all, it's people's choice whether they decide to pay for an education or not. I, myself, am against private schools completely. I don't believe people should buy their children's education - I believe you can have just as good an education at a state school etc. As long as you work hard, you can get to where you want to be in life. Just because you don't have lots of money, doesn't mean you can't get into a top university. Aim high, basically, and don't let the idea of people with lots of money get in your way.

    Getting your child into private school is a way of showing off really, like a big message written across your forehead saying "Look at me, I'm loaded with cash and you aren't." But, at the end of the day, it's their choice. It's not doing me any harm!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I would feel proud being successful starting low and going high instead of starting high and ending high...

    If you know what I mean?

    I'm proud to go to a state school.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    How about the other way around? Ban the state schools. Get the government out of our life. School costs would go down, quality would go up, what's not to like?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wheelyjoe)
    I'm from state school, I voted no. AND I'm literate.
    oi, i'm perfectly literate. I just chose not to be in that above post. Stop picking on me and pick on the private school kids!:rolleyes:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dudeydan)
    If they didn't receive these tax breaks then they would indeed cease to exist, as most wouldn't be able to pay the inflated rates. Now tell me where exactly the Government would get the cash to pay for the tens of thousands of extra pupils that they would have at state funded schools?
    Even if the Private Schools did stay open the local community on the whole might suffer. In order for private schools to have charitable status they give back to the community. At my school this comes in the form of sharing our fields, pool and astro with local sports clubs and state schools. I don't see what would be gained from taking away the tax breaks tbh.
    They would not cease to exist at all you hyperbolic fool. It would generate £100m in currently lost tax revenue, which could be reinvested into the state sector. And unless you have some substantive evidence to suggest that private schools fees would be significantly inflated by losing charitable status, I'm heavily inclined to treat that claim as scaremongering. What's the cost to society of continually re-entrenched inequality, anyhow? Somehow I think that's a great deal more damaging than the possible loss of access to a few sports fields.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mjeezy)
    How about the other way around? Ban the state schools. Get the government out of our life. School costs would go down, quality would go up, what's not to like?
    The total lack of evidence and historical precedent for that claim.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Private schools aren't the problem, they have consistently performed better over the ten years (at least in my county anyway) so why get rid of something that's doing well? The injustice is that they aren't financially accessible to everyone and this is what needs to change and without compromising the quality of the education they provide. Private schools are only good because some state schools are so poor (it's all relative).

    I've experienced both, the best performing in the county and the second worst. Yes one had more resources but believe me this wasn't the reason one performed better - it's the learning culture. The state school was full of students who were disruptive and didn't appreciate their education in the slightest, they also made it difficult for the academically minded students to work and develop. At the private school everyone worked and you were seen as 'uncool' if you didn't whereas the exact opposite was true at the state school.

    Throwing money at the problem will not help, in fact i believe it has less to do with money than a lot are arguing here. Some of the worst performing state schools are funded the best. What can you do? I think the government should fund the less wealthy who are gifted (or have the potential) into private schools, or at least have a top tier of state schools, were only the best students (regardless of wealth) would attend. This has less to do with wealth and intelligence, and more to do with gratitude and desire and the willingness to better yourself. People should never be punished for being poor and given the best chance possible but they should be for having a bad attitude towards their own education and that of the others around them.

    We need worse schools otherwise we wouldn't have good ones, there needs to be segregation but not based on wealth (or anything else other than academic achievement and attitude).
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .Ali.)
    Wow, someone's rude. Just because someone has a different viewpoint doesn't mean you need to be an arse. Oh wait I forgot, this is TSR, where any deviation from the majority view = abuse and neg train. :rolleyes: In my opinion, education isn't a right in any way, shape or form.
    Sadly for youm, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights which has been borth signed and rattified by Britain as well as the European Union, disagrees.

    Part 3 Article 11:
    "education, including free universal primary education, generally available secondary education and equally accessible higher education. This should be directed to 'the full development of the human personality and the sense of its dignity', and enable all persons to participate effectively in society"

    You have every right to disagree with that, but as a signatory to its law, you have no right to contravene it. Shame buddy, you've now declared yourself on par with Saudi Arabia and Burma. Two of the only countries to reject the convention

    Dyslexia isn't non-existant you total and utter ignoramus, it's a learning difficulty.
    Lol, being stupid bad at spelling isn't an illness. You're just bad at spelling. Get over it.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jumpingjesusholycow)
    Lol, being stupid isn't an illness. You're just bad at spelling. Get over it.
    I should just point out that to my knowledge stupidity and dyslexia are not the same thing.. I'm not well read on the subject but anywhos.

    Reading ability and IQ is normally linked, it's true, but this link is not the same in dyslexics; they have an IQ from which you would expect a certain reading ability, but this ability is in fact far lower for these individuals. (Source)

    Just be careful using words like "stupid" if you can't back it up.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lightburns)
    I should just point out that to my knowledge stupidity and dyslexia are not the same thing.. I'm not well read on the subject but anywhos.

    Reading ability and IQ is normally linked, it's true, but this link is not the same in dyslexics; they have an IQ from which you would expect a certain reading ability, but this ability is in fact far lower for these individuals. (Source)

    Just be careful using words like "stupid" if you can't back it up.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/...02/schools.uk6

    :yawn:
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I gave you a science journal article which did empirical testing, which is better than a news article, but whatever..

    I'm quite willing to say that dyslexia doesn't exist. I'm not well read on it, so I'll stay neutral on whether dyslexia exists outside reading difficulties.

    Julian Elliot has said "Amongst children who struggle to read, you find some with a high IQ, some in the middle and some with a low IQ", which is followed up by the journalist "The real tragedy of that misconception lies in the fact that children who are poor readers are too often assumed to be less capable: they are put into the lower teaching groups, given easier work at school, and are not intellectually challenged as they should be."
    (Source)

    The thing I feel dodgy about is you using the word "stupid", because it tends to refer to reasoning capabilities and IQ. However, if by "stupid" you were meaning bad spelling and nothing else, then it's a tactless choice of words, but not intentionally harmful..

    The baseline is that people can be highly successful, and intelligent, despite having severe reading difficulties.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lightburns)
    I gave you a science journal article which did empirical testing. You replied with a news article which basically says "I don't believe in it".

    I'm quite willing to say that dyslexia doesn't exist. I'm not well read on it, so I'll stay neutral on whether dyslexia exists outside reading difficulties.

    Julian Elliot has said "Amongst children who struggle to read, you find some with a high IQ, some in the middle and some with a low IQ", which is followed up by the journalist "The real tragedy of that misconception lies in the fact that children who are poor readers are too often assumed to be less capable: they are put into the lower teaching groups, given easier work at school, and are not intellectually challenged as they should be."
    (Source)

    The thing I feel dodgy about is you using the word "stupid", because it tends to refer to reasoning capabilities and IQ. However, if by "stupid" you were meaning bad spelling and nothing else, then it's a tactless choice of words, but not intentionally harmful..

    The baseline is that people can be highly successful, and intelligent, despite having severe reading difficulties.
    Fair enough, I'll edit my post.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think citing the opinion of one professor constitutes much of a proof, especially as his position is at odds with the vast majority of the medical community. I must admit, I too used to subscribe to the idea that dyslexia is a middle class excuse for poor academic ability... but since leaving school I've met a lot of people who are both dylsexic and exceptionally intelligent. How easy would you find it to go up to someone who graduated from Oxford with a Starred First in maths and say to them "you're just using dyslexia as an excuse for being a dumbass"?
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    We had this discussion in PSHE once. I would also like to state that I go to a state school and receive £30 EMA (in case I get accused of being elitist). Everyone was like 'private schools should be banned' and so I asked why and they gave the excuse that they can't afford it and it gives other who can the upper pedestal. I said there are other ways around it, like scholarships and whatever, and they argued that not everyone has that opportunity. I asked why not? If you perservere, then you will reap the rewards but they seem to have it in their heads that everything should be given to them on a silver platter because they know nothing but free education. Compared to the private school kids I know, I find the state schoolers far more arrogant and simply do not understand how much money is being pumped into their lives so they can have free education and healthcare. And I shall not get started on the university fees debate! That was nastyyyyy!
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jumpingjesusholycow)
    Fair enough, I'll edit my post.
    Ee, I might have gone off a bit ranty there. Hit me quick, before I rant too much. You probably weren't meaning to start someone (i.e. me) off on one. sorry, internet does that to me sometimes. Lets all share cake.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

2,332

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?
Useful resources

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.