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

Why British people dislike private education? Watch

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dheorl)
    Sure, it would be grand if private schools existed because they weren't needed, but because of the feedback loop we're stuck in of private schools having lots of money so providing a good education to those who then go on to make lots of money and donate it to private schools, the only solution is to simply ban them.
    I don't think that's the only solution. It's not even a good solution, as all it would do is reduce overall standards of education. We'd create a society in which our best and brightest are not quite as bright as they were before.

    The solution is to focus on improving state schools, to the point that they're of such good quality that private schooling no longer carries much of an advantage. That requires heavy investment in state education to get it up to scratch. Of course, because they're state schools, it would need to be taxpayer funded.

    The other option would be to simply privatise the whole system. All schools would become fee-paying, but for competitive reasons they would have to work much harder to become efficient, improve their standards and keep those fees low (part of the reason they became so high in the first place is due to oligopoly and price fixing). Of course the taxpayer would again need to foot some or all of the bill for those who can't afford the fees.
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dheorl)
    I want to prevent people from achieving success purely due to luck of whose vagina they popped out of.
    So that would include yourself. We should all achieve as much success as the least successful person in the world. That's what I meant by equality for the sake of it.

    U jelly bro? You have to take away every aspect of nurture and nature for dream to come true. I cannot take you seriously now.

    I, on the other hand, want to help all people, but especcially the least successful, achieve success. As opposed to making the successful unsuccessful.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think British people do dislike them. Only the envious ones.

    Rich people can eat better food, drive better cars, live in nicer houses, have better healthcare or whatever else. It might not be fair but we are not a communist state.

    By all means campaign for better transport, housing, healthcare and food for poor people but in a free society we should be allowed to spend our money on what we want. The state should not knock down mansions or ban sports cars out of spite.

    People should be free to educate their child how they want.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    Idk much about private education and I don't dislike it either. I'd just rather live in a closer community (even though the state school I go to is ****)


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    I don't think that's the only solution. It's not even a good solution, as all it would do is reduce overall standards of education. We'd create a society in which our best and brightest are not quite as bright as they were before.

    The solution is to focus on improving state schools, to the point that they're of such good quality that private schooling no longer carries much of an advantage. That requires heavy investment in state education to get it up to scratch. Of course, because they're state schools, it would need to be taxpayer funded.

    The other option would be to simply privatise the whole system. All schools would become fee-paying, but for competitive reasons they would have to work much harder to become efficient, improve their standards and keep those fees low (part of the reason they became so high in the first place is due to oligopoly and price fixing). Of course the taxpayer would again need to foot some or all of the bill for those who can't afford the fees.
    Lovely to see that you assume the best and brightest are naturally those who've been to private school.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RVNmax)
    So that would include yourself. We should all achieve as much success as the least successful person in the world. That's what I meant by equality for the sake of it.

    U jelly bro? You have to take away every aspect of nurture and nature for dream to come true. I cannot take you seriously now.

    I, on the other hand, want to help all people, but especcially the least successful, achieve success. As opposed to making the successful unsuccessful.
    Yes, it does include myself, and I often feel terrible about it.

    Nature is obviously unavoidable, but I do believe the differences caused by nurture should be minimised as much as possible.

    And tbh now you're just being ridiculously ****ing pedantic. It amounts to the same ****ing thing, you're just trying to sound all high and mighty about it.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sternumator)
    I don't think British people do dislike them. Only the envious ones.

    Rich people can eat better food, drive better cars, live in nicer houses, have better healthcare or whatever else. It might not be fair but we are not a communist state.

    By all means campaign for better transport, housing, healthcare and food for poor people but in a free society we should be allowed to spend our money on what we want. The state should not knock down mansions or ban sports cars out of spite.

    People should be free to educate their child how they want.
    None of the things you mentioned though effect the job you're able to get, and therefore the money you'll be able to make in the future and the way in which society will perceive you.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dheorl)
    None of the things you mentioned though effect the job you're able to get, and therefore the money you'll be able to make in the future and the way in which society will perceive you.
    Some people have more trust fund income more than you can earn in most jobs and can do what they want so why does it matter if a kid gets good grades and a good job? Rich people have more money and their kids and their kids, kids will have more money.

    It doesn't affect how you are perceived. Who cares which school you went to?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dheorl)
    Lovely to see that you assume the best and brightest are naturally those who've been to private school.
    Well if they're not, why do you want to ban private schools?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    Well if they're not, why do you want to ban private schools?
    Because it means that many of the people who are academically bright aren't able to attain the education that others are purely based on money.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sternumator)
    Some people have more trust fund income more than you can earn in most jobs and can do what they want so why does it matter if a kid gets good grades and a good job? Rich people have more money and their kids and their kids, kids will have more money.

    It doesn't affect how you are perceived. Who cares which school you went to?
    You're genuinely saying someone's job doesn't affect how their perceived? Why then is it whenever a person is introduced, be it on TV, at a public speaking, in a news article, the first thing mentioned is their job. You don't see a contestant on a gameshow saying "Hi, my name is Bob and I own two cats". It's "Hi, my name is Bob and I'm an accountant" because most of western society see's a strangers job as their defining characteristic.

    And sure, the mega rich will be so rich their children would never need a job, but that's not the group that makes up the majority of private school attendees.
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dheorl)
    Yes, it does include myself, and I often feel terrible about it. Nature is obviously unavoidable, but I do believe the differences caused by nurture should be minimised as much as possible. And tbh now you're just being ridiculously ****ing pedantic. It amounts to the same ****ing thing, you're just trying to sound all high and mighty about it.
    Although I kind of agree with you, it is about providing equal opportunities for all by raising the standards for the lowest. Not by banning the spending of money in useful ways.

    Yes I was, because you were being so ridiculous. However, you are correct. I should never have stooped to your level. You haven't addressed the points regardless.

    (Original post by Dheorl)
    None of the things you mentioned though effect the job you're able to get, and therefore the money you'll be able to make in the future and the way in which society will perceive you.
    I disagree. They all have a big effect.
    Having a better life in general allows you to do more and succeed in your career.

    One obvious example is that better nutrition and healthcare will allow you to stay fitter and become a successful sportsperson. The soft skills that are gained from the higher sports participation rates of the well off help in their careers.

    But apart from that I would suggest being able being able to eat better food and have better healthcare, thus being fitter in general, will enable you to succeed in your career through for example, not having to forego time for other things to look for an immediate job to put food on the table, not having to spend as much time dealing with health issues that prevent you from taking up a job or supporting your own business, and even just looking better.

    Being able to afford transport and housing or better versions of such would allow better job mobility, which I think is a very important issue.
    One would also then be able to afford housing in the best area for living, which improves everything further, and that includes wherever the best schools are, regardless of them being private or not. So in effect, by banning private schools, you'd still have private schools. Some of the best state schools are like this now. The downside of this is the resources would be shared as the taxation system intended or you'd have to punish the best state schools, which would be a weird phenomenon.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RVNmax)
    Although I kind of agree with you, it is about providing equal opportunities for all by raising the standards for the lowest. Not by banning the spending of money in useful ways.

    Yes I was, because you were being so ridiculous. However, you are correct. I should never have stooped to your level. You haven't addressed the points regardless.



    I disagree. They all have a big effect.
    Having a better life in general allows you to do more and succeed in your career.

    One obvious example is that better nutrition and healthcare will allow you to stay fitter and become a successful sportsperson. The soft skills that are gained from the higher sports participation rates of the well off help in their careers.

    But apart from that I would suggest being able being able to eat better food and have better healthcare, thus being fitter in general, will enable you to succeed in your career through for example, not having to forego time for other things to look for an immediate job to put food on the table, not having to spend as much time dealing with health issues that prevent you from taking up a job or supporting your own business, and even just looking better.

    Being able to afford transport and housing or better versions of such would allow better job mobility, which I think is a very important issue.
    One would also then be able to afford housing in the best area for living, which improves everything further, and that includes wherever the best schools are, regardless of them being private or not. So in effect, by banning private schools, you'd still have private schools. Some of the best state schools are like this now. The downside of this is the resources would be shared as the taxation system intended or you'd have to punish the best state schools, which would be a weird phenomenon.
    You're having a giggle right? "stoop to my level"?

    I'm in no mood to be trolled by someone who's going to try and act all superior, enjoy.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dheorl)
    Because it means that many of the people who are academically bright aren't able to attain the education that others are purely based on money.
    So then you do in fact accept that the education at private schools tends to be better?

    Why would you have a problem with my earlier statement then?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    So then you do in fact accept that the education at private schools tends to be better?

    Why would you have a problem with my earlier statement then?
    I don't recall ever questioning the fact private education was better, I merely question the fact that all the smartest people automatically came from one.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dheorl)
    I don't recall ever questioning the fact private education was better, I merely question the fact that all the smartest people automatically came from one.
    I'm not talking about the most naturally or genetically intelligent people. They could be found anywhere, it doesn't really matter.

    I'm talking about the people who have benefitted from the superior education of private schools. If you remove private schools, then they'd be educationally worse off. And the overall quality of our country's doctors or engineers or scientists (or whatever they happened to grow up to become) would go down, and we'd all get worse service from them.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Okay I am going to join in this debate... because yes I did attend a 'private school' and I don't even agree with them (in fact I hated my school...it just felt too unlike being in the real world)... the funny thing is, neither does my dad agree with them (the one who decided to send me there). He said 'the reason I sent you to a private school is because I wanted you to do the best you could and I don't agree with them but either way it's better than state education'.
    Therefore I understand why parents said their kids to them... Like my dad, they may not agree with them but see it as a better option either way.
    And just for the record...also like others have posted... I received a huge bursary to attend where I went (I would deffo be considered from a working class family) and my parents spent all their money on my education, no holidays, no fancy clothes, NOTHING. It was all about giving me the best chance.

    WELL TBH it's the governments fault anyway for deciding to get rid of selective grammar schools where many children used to flourish and many parents would have opted to send their children if they still existed.......
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hypnotismm)
    Maybe people can't afford to send their children to private school because they're barely scraping the money to survive?

    I think people dislike private education because these children will automatically get a better education and therefore better opportunities than other children, just because their parents have more money. The government are also constantly cutting funding for schools, which means that working class children are put at more of a disadvantage.

    It's not about the children or the parents as much as it is about the class system and the education system in the UK.
    I agree
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    I'm not talking about the most naturally or genetically intelligent people. They could be found anywhere, it doesn't really matter.

    I'm talking about the people who have benefitted from the superior education of private schools. If you remove private schools, then they'd be educationally worse off. And the overall quality of our country's doctors or engineers or scientists (or whatever they happened to grow up to become) would go down, and we'd all get worse service from them.
    Yes, if you removed private schools and the quality of all other schools remained unchanged.

    The basis though is you remove private schools and state schools improve, meaning the quality of doctors, engineers and scientists would actually go up, as those who are naturally gifted but didn't get the chance for a good education would be getting a better one, and the rich plebs who get to where they are because of the tie they wear wouldn't be put in such positions of trust.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I think it's just a massive waste of money to be honest. I went to a pretty **** comprehensive but have still reached the same level of the many privately educated students in my uni year group. Streaming helps a lot but it mainly comes down to natural ability and work ethic. I guess it's more of a guarantee that your child will get great grades in a private school, whereas they might mix with the wrong crowd in a state school or get dragged down to a lower ability? I know for sure that I would never spend an extortionate amount on privately educating my children having seen for myself how unnecessary it is - probably better to spend it on extra tutoring if anything.
 
 
 
  • 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
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • 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.