Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Leave Private Schools Alone! - Thread To End The Private School Debate. Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    The private school debate still rages on. However, it is clear that arguments against private schools do not have much of a strong basis upon which to stand.

    Some arguments against private schools range from education being a fundamental human right to socioeconomic segregation.

    However, a few simple points will illuminate the silliness that arguments against private schools are basked in:

    - Would you ban private hospitals/healthcare?

    - Would you ban private companies/services?

    - The fact is that most private schools are private institutions. They provide services to those who wish to make use of them - why on Earth would you want to ban them if they are operating within the law?

    - The existence of private schools should not be blamed for the poor quality of education in *some* state schools. Such is the fault of the government and the government alone.

    - The "wealth and unfairness" argument is ridiculous - surely, you would also be arguing against private healthcare and private hospitals? Surely you would be arguing against private car services?


    What do you think? Surely arguments against private schools are petty and ridiculous - if you would ban private schools, you would also ban private healthcare and private tutors, no?
    • PS Helper
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    Study Helper
    (Original post by HumanSupremacist)

    However, a few simple points will illuminate the silliness that arguments against private schools are basked in:

    - Would you ban private hospitals/healthcare?

    - Would you ban private services?

    Yes to both actually.

    Certain things should be controlled by the government because they damage our society when they are privatised. This includes services such as national water companies, train lines, the NHS, and obviously the education system. This does not include (as the OP mistakenly believes) chocolate bar companies and businesses.

    I'm tired of seeing things privatised, working for one generation, then being destroyed by a second wave of controllers who maximise profit at the expense of social stability, and anyone who doesn't realise this has clearly been living under a rock since 2008 when the world economy went down the drain.

    Private schools aren't the worst culprits at all, they're small fish in comparison to these. Tying private schools to such catastrophic failures in policy as your 'point to end a debate' shows a massive lack of engagement with the issue.

    - The fact is that most private schools are private institutions. They provide services to those who wish to make use of them - why on Earth would you want to ban them if they are operating within the law?

    - The existence of private schools should not be blamed for the poor quality of education in *some* state schools. Such is the fault of the government and the government alone.

    - The "wealth and unfairness" argument is ridiculous - surely, you would also be arguing against private healthcare and private hospitals? Surely you would be arguing against private car services?


    What do you think? Surely arguments against private schools are petty and ridiculous - if you would ban private schools, you would also ban private healthcare and private tutors, no?

    In an ideal world, I would ban them so that everyone would be born with as much of a chance as possible, and your eventual place in society is based on your ability rather than your parents. Whilst the private schools arent to blame for poor state quality, think of all the private school teachers that could be teaching state school kids. The existence of them exacerbates the problem and drains on state schools.


    Parents are still welcome to teach their kids extra things on the side. That's a basic element of family dynamic. Why is it 'fair' that instead, parents can throw money at the problem and provide a better chance than a parent who might spend countless evenings tutoring their child?


    The actual process of banning private schools would be extremely difficult: It just isn't feasible at all. However, in my ideal world, they wouldn't exist, because they create a classical and unavoidable oligarchical culture.


    P.S.

    I'm sure many of you who have been to private school will now take offence. I have no issue with anyone who's been to a private school, I would have loved to have gone to one myself. But unfortunately for me, completely beyond my control, there was no chance. I even won a scholarship and couldn't afford the extras. This is the case for thousands of kids every year, and I find that fundamentally wrong.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hal.E.Lujah)
    Yes to both actually.





    I would ban them so that everyone would be born with as much of a chance as possible, and your eventual place in society is based on your ability rather than your parents. Whilst the private schools arent to blame for poor state quality, think of all the private school teachers that could be teaching state school kids. The existence of them exacerbates the problem.


    Parents are still welcome to teach their kids extra things on the side. That's a basic element of family dynamic. Why is it 'fair' that instead, parents can throw money at the problem and provide a better chance than a parent who might spend countless evenings tutoring their child?


    The actual process of banning private schools would be extremely difficult: It just isn't feasible at all. However, in my ideal world, they wouldn't exist, because they create a classical and unavoidable oligarchical culture.
    What?? Why on Earth would you ban private companies/services/healthcare? So you would only want state-controlled institutions? Isn't that socialism?

    Also, even with a ban, what's to stop parents hiring numerous private tutors?
    • PS Helper
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    Study Helper
    (Original post by HumanSupremacist)
    What?? Why on Earth would you ban private companies/services/healthcare? So you would only want state-controlled institutions? Isn't that socialism?

    Also, even with a ban, what's to stop parents hiring numerous private tutors?

    Click my profile. Scroll down to where it says Socialist Party Member.

    Congratulations detective, mystery solved. :holmes:

    Parents are welcome to hire private tutors, because it's not a stable career option. Which means nobody doing it would spend the rest of their live teaching in it, and it would only attract sub-par people looking for experience rather than a private school which attracts capable teachers and absorbs facilities from kids who haven't done anything to deserve segregation.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    Most of them are actually charities, thus they are, by definition, for the public benefit and not a mere service provider.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hal.E.Lujah)
    Click my profile. Scroll down to where it says Socialist Party Member.

    Congratulations detective, mystery solved. :holmes:

    Parents are welcome to hire private tutors, because it's not a stable career option. Which means nobody doing it would spend the rest of their live teaching in it, and it would only attract sub-par people looking for experience rather than a private school which attracts capable teachers and absorbs facilities from kids who haven't done anything to deserve segregation.
    So do you disagree with hotels? Chauffeur services? Private landlords?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hal.E.Lujah)

    Parents are still welcome to teach their kids extra things on the side. That's a basic element of family dynamic. Why is it 'fair' that instead, parents can throw money at the problem and provide a better chance than a parent who might spend countless evenings tutoring their child?
    .
    If it's wrong to provide a better chance for their kids, should we ban teachers from giving their own children help outside of the classroom?

    By this token should we also ban chefs from teaching their children to cook, as people with other jobs will likely have to spend more time teaching their kids how to cook than a professional chef would?

    It is just people using the resources they have earned to benefit their family, right?

    Further, you later claimed that no tutor tutors full time. Just informing you that there are some that do.
    • PS Helper
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    Study Helper
    (Original post by YThursday)
    If it's wrong to provide a better chance for their kids, should we ban teachers from giving their own children help outside of the classroom?

    By this token should we also ban chefs from teaching their children to cook, as people with other jobs will likely have to spend more time teaching their kids how to cook than a professional chef would?

    It is just people using the resources they have earned to benefit their family, right?

    Further, you later claimed that no tutor tutors full time. Just informing you that there are some that do.

    I did already responded to this exact criticism


    There's a difference between the freedom to be providing your kids with as much as possible, and a society that denies kids the same opportunities. We're currently the latter. I do not think that's fair.

    I'd also acknowledge there's nothing you can do about it. I will be sending my kids to private school. But if I could balance the scales and offer the same foundation to every kid in the country, I would not choose to deny the majority of a generation a chance at a good education.

    (Original post by HumanSupremacist)
    So do you disagree with hotels? Chauffeur services? Private landlords?
    No, because they are paid for and provide a service to adults. Children cannot book their own hotel room, nor own a property, or drive a car. The fundamental difference for me is the denial of opportunity regardless of any abilities or work ethic.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hal.E.Lujah)
    There's a difference between the freedom to be providing your kids with as much as possible, and a society that denies kids the same opportunities. We're currently the latter. I do not think that's fair.
    Is there? How can you have a society in which there are different amounts of provision, yet the same opportunities for all?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I've debated on the side of private schools so many times I've given up.

    But I agree, OP.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I'm sorry but private schools do so much for the community. They provide state of the art facilities such as swimming pools, gyms, astro turfs etc. for others to use.
    Private school pupils are also usually more motivated and willing to work hard so why should they be made to feel guilty to be accessing the best education?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I agree. People should be allowed to have access to better facilities if they want them. Many aren't even that expensive. But I go to a grammar school so I have the best of both worlds. :smug:
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HumanSupremacist)
    The private school debate still rages on. However, it is clear that arguments against private schools do not have much of a strong basis upon which to stand.

    Some arguments against private schools range from education being a fundamental human right to socioeconomic segregation.

    However, a few simple points will illuminate the silliness that arguments against private schools are basked in:

    - Would you ban private hospitals/healthcare?

    - Would you ban private companies/services?

    - The fact is that most private schools are private institutions. They provide services to those who wish to make use of them - why on Earth would you want to ban them if they are operating within the law?

    - The existence of private schools should not be blamed for the poor quality of education in *some* state schools. Such is the fault of the government and the government alone.

    - The "wealth and unfairness" argument is ridiculous - surely, you would also be arguing against private healthcare and private hospitals? Surely you would be arguing against private car services?


    What do you think? Surely arguments against private schools are petty and ridiculous - if you would ban private schools, you would also ban private healthcare and private tutors, no?
    Britains becoming a socialist state.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TaylorGang_4)
    Britains becoming a socialist state.

    Posted from TSR Mobile


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    but what about the left wing and their nonsensical right of entitlement?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hal.E.Lujah)
    Yes to both actually.





    I would ban them so that everyone would be born with as much of a chance as possible, and your eventual place in society is based on your ability rather than your parents. Whilst the private schools arent to blame for poor state quality, think of all the private school teachers that could be teaching state school kids. The existence of them exacerbates the problem.


    Parents are still welcome to teach their kids extra things on the side. That's a basic element of family dynamic. Why is it 'fair' that instead, parents can throw money at the problem and provide a better chance than a parent who might spend countless evenings tutoring their child?


    The actual process of banning private schools would be extremely difficult: It just isn't feasible at all. However, in my ideal world, they wouldn't exist, because they create a classical and unavoidable oligarchical culture.


    P.S.

    I'm sure many of you who have been to private school will now take offence. I have no issue with anyone who's been to a private school, I would have loved to have gone to one myself. But unfortunately for me, completely beyond my control, there was no chance. I even won a scholarship and couldn't afford the extras. This is the case for thousands of kids every year, and I find that fundamentally wrong.

    your "solution" is to drag everyone down to the same level rather than lift everyone up to the same level.

    youre suggesting that you turn round to a rich well off family and say "actually no, you're not allowed to learn science in this state of the art lab, you have to go to this state school where there isn't enough equipment for one each. Why? because i'm jealous of how much your parents earn and i'm scared that if you reach your full potential you'll turn out rich as well"

    FYI i went to a state school
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hal.E.Lujah)
    Yes to both actually.
    Oh god. :puke:
    • PS Helper
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    Study Helper
    (Original post by blue n white army)
    your "solution" is to drag everyone down to the same level rather than lift everyone up to the same level.

    No, what I'm actually arguing for is for anyone and everyone to be able to go to a private school in an ideal world. As I said in all of my above posts, it's not possible, and will never happen, but I wanted it clear that I thought it unfair to place one kid above another because of something they have nothing to do with.


    Did you even read my post before rage negging? Might want to go back and actually read it rather than getting angry about something you've made up in your head. :rolleyes:


    (Original post by Cannotbelieveit)
    Oh god. :puke:

    Cheers for your valuable input. S'shame you're too cowardly to actually make a point. Is that all you could manage to read before it got too hard?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hal.E.Lujah)
    Cheers for your valuable input. S'shame you're too cowardly to actually make a point. Is that all you could manage to read before it got too hard?
    No problem, I just get incredibly sick when I have to listen to the absolute bull**** some people spew out.
    • PS Helper
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    Study Helper
    (Original post by Cannotbelieveit)
    No problem, I just get incredibly sick when I have to listen to the absolute bull**** some people spew out.

    Well aren't you just adorable, too scared to make a point when you know you're in the company of your intellectual betters. I'm calling you out sunshine, say something productive or don't spam the thread.
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • 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.

  • 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.