Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

Private schools should be banned!!!!!!!! Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Millie228)
    This.
    It is how the world operates. There will always be a difference between people influenced by where they come from. Well off parents can pay for extra tutorial classes with specialist teachers even if they go to state school. They can pay for first class tutoring in extra curricular activities - sign them up to learn French, tennis or the violin from a young age - all things which will be appreciated later in life. If they have connections, it will help them get into Ivy League or be recommended for a good job. Children of wealthy parents always have an advantage.
    I know many socialists are forever striving for an ideal where your family background have absolutely no influence, but that's just not how the world works.
    Not to mention the fact that I genuinely believe you should be able to work for something, earn the cash and then provide a good life for your children. My mother came from a poor background, was the only one who pursued an education in her family, she managed her salary extremely well and is now wealthy. She wanted her children to grow up in a safe neighborhood where most people were educated. Parents will always do what they think is best for their children - and they should. If someone provides what you believe to be a better alternative than the standard and it is achievable to you - you take it.
    I'm not striving for a world where background has no influence - that is an impossibility within a capitalist society.
    I'm trying to provide an equal, basic opportunity for all children regardless of financial reasons and to mingle with all socioeconomic classes. Your mother who you cited is not representative of a whole population.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by roh)
    They're technically charities, if they're going to start calling themselves businesses they've got a ****load more tax to pay.

    I agree, whilst private schools still perform better than state schools there is an argument for them, I would be more inclined to ban them if (hopefully when) state education can match them, as then they simply serve as a method of social segregation, though I assume at this point they would be significantly less popular.

    Saying that I personally wouldn't send my child to one, if they're bright they'll do well wherever.
    I've never agreed with the whole charity thing, it's a load of rubbish if you ask me.
    The reason I go to one is because there's two schools in my town - one state and one private - and the state one is a bit rough to be honest. My boyfriend goes there and he says there's actual fights nearly every day, which I couldn't believe. Saying that, both of the schools get along well and we're all quite good friends, so I don't see the social segregation bit in my area. I don't doubt it happens though.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Calllu-m)
    As someone who has attended a private school and a state school, I'm inclined to disagree with you on a number of levels.

    Academically, private schools are superior (lets not get all butthurt and call me elitist, because I'm not). They have better resources and small class sizes that allow more teacher-student contact. For many people, who need extra help this can be hugely advantageous, and promote learning in a way the state sector cannot. This isn't the schools fault, and in no way am I suggesting that, but private schools help people who need extra support academically. Furthermore, they have the facilities to expose the child to a wider range of academic disciplines, that in a state school would just not be possible.

    Secondly, pastoral care is much better at private schools. I was bullied a lot at my old state school because frankly the teachers didn't care as they just wanted to get paid. In private schools, there is very often a zero tolerance policy on bullying and people may be suspended on their first offence, which greatly discourages bullying amongst children and makes the learning environment safer and friendlier and thus more enjoyable.

    Finally, private schools offer a holistic outlook to learning which makes it's pupils more rounded individuals. There is greater access to clubs such as MUN, debating, charity work, a greater range of sports and skills you would never find in the state sector, such as specialist instruments. Private schools are more likely to promote that pupils engage with their professional interests, through law and medicine societies, for example.

    I'm not saying it's fair some people have a better education that others, I'm just saying you can't slam all private schools just because some people can afford them and take advantage of the oppertunity.
    What happens with the children who are severely bullied but unable to afford private education fees?

    Do you think truancy rates also has a connection to this?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pikachu123)
    Prostitution is illegal in the UK. It was legal before; but made illegal (please correct me if I'm wrong).
    The same should be done with private schools. By your logic, the current law is static and unchanging; which it is not.
    Prostitution is not illegal.
    I believe in the freedom to make consensual transactions. Sending a child to private school is an example of this.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    All schools are essentially businesses, but some are run better than others. I was lucky enough to go to a grammar school and while I didn't enjoy it, I genuinely think it helped raise the prospects for a lot of students that went to it.

    I think there is a serious problem with a huge number of schools in the UK and if a parent can afford to send their child to private school then why shouldn't they? If I had kids, I'd want to give them the best chance in life that I could afford them. I think private schools focus on the success of the individual much more than the average state school.

    I went to a lot of schools, so I've seen a range of different schools. I have been to two very good comps, but I think that while they were great at helping less able kids at passing their exams, they weren't as good at providing support for the already-achieving students. In fact, in a lot of schools (the grammar included) there was a tendency to place more focus and invest more time into kids that messed about and disrupted class. Whilst I'm not saying that disruptive kids should be abandoned, my point is that there is often an attitude that focuses on everyone reaching the minimum expected, and then there is little help for those aiming higher.

    I remember asking for extra help at GCSE because I was struggling with learning French (having previously studied Spanish) and I was told that extra classes were only available for selected students who either had some sort of learning difficulty or were disruptive. Some disruptive kids do have things like ADHD or whatever, but some of them just don't give a ****. How is it fair that more time is invested in them than someone who actually does the work?

    It isn't fair. And I don't see the educational system improving any time soon, so I'm in favour of private schools, although I've never been to one, but almost all the kids I know who have, for the most part have done well at school and gone on to good jobs and good unis. Some private schools can even offer valuable work experience placements and ways into coveted internships.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    So instead of advocating we improve Public Education so everyone has an exceptionally high standard of education and access to life changing development at a young age.

    You just wan't to stop those who do have that chance from doing anything.

    Like a petty, jealous five year old.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Better)
    You are just as bad as snobbish individuals who call others chavs, and demonise those who are not wealthy.

    Firstly nice intro, to capture attention but you are a complete moron and you from your illogical and incoherent argument it is clear to me you have the distinct inability to analyse the News, and read Global Education Statistics.

    Private Schools are not the problem. The world is NOT a black and white maths problem.

    To argue you like you do, is like saying Ice cream is the cause of Diabetes. It makes no sense. You may (1% chance) be intelligent, and I haven't et you, but you would be ripped to shred intellectually on this point of discussion by who reads the News.

    Maybe you should try to read the News or I suggest Think Tanks who have a large number of Free PDF's and Reports avaliable on the internet in relation to this topic.

    Make it a great day!
    Your point is; other than to insult me, is?

    The world is not black and white, then again nothing is. Inevitably you can almost justify everything and anything. It is pointless to do so, we can only consider which choice is the most advantageous to our society as a whole.

    Note the fact that I wrote 'chav', I do not agree with the title, I am referring to a widespread teen phenomenon that many in our society refer to as such.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Some people choose to spend their money on alcohol and become alcoholics. Others use their money on buying expensive cars. If people want to spend their hard earned money on giving their children a better education, I don't see anything wrong with that.

    And likening private education to prostitution/drug dealing is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Drug dealing/prostitution almost guarantees that someone will be harmed/exploited. Where is the actual harm in students being privately educated...it's not the same at all.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Three Mile Sprint)
    So instead of advocating we improve Public Education so everyone has an exceptionally high standard of education and access to life changing development at a young age.

    You just wan't to stop those who do have that chance from doing anything.

    Like a petty, jealous five year old.
    Trying to get personal in a debate is illogical. Debates are based on facts.

    P.S On a personal note, I attend a private school. Making assumptions is not a wise decision.

    Edit: There is less of a chance of a push for improving the state educational sector as long as as the whole population is not affected by it.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheBritishArmy)
    Prostitution is not illegal.
    I believe in the freedom to make consensual transactions. Sending a child to private school is an example of this.
    I agree. People are allowed to pay for tutors, giving their children further education outside of school hours, and there is no outrage. Not every parent will be able to afford this. Why is it so different for private education? Education will never be 'equal' for all because as long as there are private schools, tutors, online tutoring systems etc there will be someone willing to pay for it. It's just a fact of life.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    What would the world do without teenage communists?
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by -strawberry-)
    I've never agreed with the whole charity thing, it's a load of rubbish if you ask me.
    The reason I go to one is because there's two schools in my town - one state and one private - and the state one is a bit rough to be honest. My boyfriend goes there and he says there's actual fights nearly every day, which I couldn't believe. Saying that, both of the schools get along well and we're all quite good friends, so I don't see the social segregation bit in my area. I don't doubt it happens though.
    It's hardly the most outrageous tax dodge out there. I think there's a fine dividing line, for example KES in Birmingham which uses its profits to help support the King Ed's grammar system around the city definitely deserves charitable status, others that transfer the money into the accounts of trustees maybe not so much. The issue recently went before the Supreme Court and confirmed what we all knew anyway, that a consortium of private schools can afford a lot more expensive lawyers than HMRC and that judges who nearly all went to private school and have kids/grandkids currently in one are very attentive to anything which may increase fees.

    I think it happens a lot more with boarding schools and in big cities to be honest, and a fight a day whilst not exactly good at the same time doesn't really impact education (assuming it's outside the classroom), as long as they punish the offenders appropriately (remembering exclusion is exceptionally difficult for a state school) I don't know what the school can really do about it.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pikachu123)
    I'm not striving for a world where background has no influence - that is an impossibility within a capitalist society.
    I'm trying to provide an equal, basic opportunity for all children regardless of financial reasons and to mingle with all socioeconomic classes. Your mother who you cited is not representative of a whole population.
    I never said my mother was representative of a whole population.
    But in the sense that most wealthy people have worked hard during their lives, then yeah, that is the case. I don't know a single person from a wealthy family whose parents are lazy. They're all people who want their children to benefit from what they've worked for. So in that sense, my mother is a typical example.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pikachu123)
    Trying to get personal in a debate is illogical. Debates are based on facts.
    Nonsense, debates can be led , framed and ended with insults, ad homs and clever wordplay.

    In the real world, charisma and ability to push the conversation to your strengths of conversation wins debate.

    P.S On a personal note, I attend a private school. Making assumptions is not a wise decision.
    I made no assumption, you attending a private school does not change a jot or tittle of what I said.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pikachu123)
    x
    Just going to chip in and say I agree with you entirely.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 'Ello Dave!)
    What about selling drugs or soliciting a prostitute?
    selling 'drugs' is legal , however some drugs require additional checks and balances ...

    prostitution is legal in the uK, street soliciting and running a brothel however aren't ...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    Just going to chip in and say I agree with you entirely.
    Thank you, and I thought I was in an extremely small minority in this view of how education should be dealt with, judging on how many posts do not support my view.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    While I'm all for consistency in educational standards, banning private schools would be bringing the top down rather than the bottom up. The fact of the matter is that the teaching in most private schools is a lot better than that in most state schools, because they don't have anything like the budget constraints and can select their pupils. It'd be far better IMO for the government to allocate more funding to education so that the good parts of private school teaching can be incorporated into the state system.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by infairverona)
    I agree. People are allowed to pay for tutors, giving their children further education outside of school hours, and there is no outrage. Not every parent will be able to afford this. Why is it so different for private education? Education will never be 'equal' for all because as long as there are private schools, tutors, online tutoring systems etc there will be someone willing to pay for it. It's just a fact of life.
    There was a pretty hefty amount of outrage when Tony Blair got in some teachers from Westminster to tutor Euan. If anything I've found tutoring attracts more opprobrium, as it's seen as somehow more covert than private schooling. Everyone I know associates tutoring with champagne socialism, probably not helped by the Blair connotations.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Three Mile Sprint)
    Nonsense, debates can be led , framed and ended with insults, ad homs and clever wordplay.

    In the real world, charisma and ability to push the conversation to your strengths of conversation wins debate.


    I made no assumption, you attending a private school does not change a jot or tittle of what I said.
    Disguised insults perhaps. Not crude and direct insults more appropriate for an argument akin to those of a domestic nature.
 
 
 
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?
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

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.