Labour has voted to get rid of private schools Watch

Palmyra
Badges: 20
#81
Report 4 weeks ago
#81
(Original post by Drewski)
As if you're deluded enough to think that this would stop that... The kids that were previously private schooled wouldn't be suddenly enrolled in state school, they'd be home schooled with those same private school teachers being private tutors. It wouldn't change a damn thing.
Yes, that's why there is so much concerted opposition to this move from the classes most affected. Makes sense.
1
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#82
Report 4 weeks ago
#82
(Original post by Palmyra)
Yes, that's why there is so much concerted opposition to this move from the classes most affected. Makes sense.
Yes, it's no surprise that there's opposition to a plan that won't work. Glad we're in agreement.
0
reply
VegetableMarvell
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#83
Report 4 weeks ago
#83
Hi guys,
This is a useful article for those against private schools being abolished. Interesting perspective that can't be put down to the 'bitterness' of a state school kid like me.

"I was educated at a Private school - and I think they should be abolished."
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...box=1569235724
1
reply
Guru Jason
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#84
Report 4 weeks ago
#84
(Original post by Drewski)
They're attracted by the money... What makes you think they'll happily go to state school and get paid peanuts in comparison?

They'll leave. It'll be a massive brain drain.
If they leave for another country then so be it. If we believe that education is a right then there should be no advantages for one over another.
0
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#85
Report 4 weeks ago
#85
(Original post by Guru Jason)
If they leave for another country then so be it. If we believe that education is a right then there should be no advantages for one over another.
As has been mentioned already in the thread, what about private healthcare? That's the same boat.

What about housing? That's a right. So why do we allow some people to have massive mansions while others make do with one room studios?

Where do you draw the line?
1
reply
VegetableMarvell
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#86
Report 4 weeks ago
#86
(Original post by __itertools__)
I can see your point. I am not very literate in this matter but I hope the reason state schools are underfunded is not due to most of the government money for education going towards the public schools (not sure why private school are called misleadingly public schools). How would getting rid of private schools improve standards of public school?

To the oxbridge question; same thing can be said about the students who have private tutors, they have an advantage. What about the students whose elder sibling studies the same subject as they are applying to at a university? It is clear that more funding and a better policy regarding teaching in state school is necessary but I do not see that banning public schools being in the right spirit.
No, social services in general have been cut widely. But the fact that one school is cut whilst another tier thrives emphasises a degree of segregation. You can't just abolish private schools whilst not funding state schools, of course. But in my opinion, private schools are full of people who will become our country's leaders. They should be aware of all their future constituents, not just the wealthy and lucky ones.

42% of Oxbridge places go to students from private schools. This is not proportionate to the number of state schools in the country. There is a clear separation here to which private tutors would not make such an extreme difference.
1
reply
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#87
Report 4 weeks ago
#87
(Original post by Guru Jason)
If they leave for another country then so be it. If we believe that education is a right then there should be no advantages for one over another.
Thats impossible to enforce. You get advantages and disadvanatges between state school. Some teachers are better than others etc.
0
reply
AngryRedhead
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#88
Report 4 weeks ago
#88
(Original post by londonmyst)
Much of the Labour Party despise grammar schools even more than independent schools.
Still smarting about their own grammar school experiences decades later or bitter that they couldn't pass the entry exams when they were 10/13 years old.
It’s unfortunate that their parents were not affluent enough to be able to afford entry exam tuition for them to get in. Creating more grammar schools and increasing funding to state schools would solve this
1
reply
londonmyst
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#89
Report 4 weeks ago
#89
(Original post by AngryRedhead)
It’s unfortunate that their parents were not affluent enough to be able to afford entry exam tuition for them to get in. Creating more grammar schools and increasing funding to state schools would solve this
It is not always a question of money or not getting exam tuition.
Some of the worst school bullies I went to school with had millionaire parents and trust funds, they still failed to get into grammar school and were expelled from state schools by the age of 13.
Very fortunate for the grammar and state students, the thugs ruled the school for years and tyrannised everyone before they were finally expelled before a levels.
0
reply
AngryRedhead
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#90
Report 4 weeks ago
#90
(Original post by londonmyst)
It is not always a question of money or not getting exam tuition.
Some of the worst school bullies I went to school with had millionaire parents and trust funds, they still failed to get into grammar school and were expelled from state schools by the age of 13.
Very fortunate for the grammar and state students, the thugs ruled the school for years and tyrannised everyone before they were finally expelled before a levels.
I’m sorry that you to had to deal with bullies in school; as a relatively affluent (in north western English terms) pupil that went to a school in a deprived area I found that the poorer kids were the worst bullies by far. All the more affluent kids focused on knuckling down and cared about their grades.
0
reply
username4920716
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#91
Report 4 weeks ago
#91
(Original post by AngryRedhead)
It’s unfortunate that their parents were not affluent enough to be able to afford entry exam tuition for them to get in. Creating more grammar schools and increasing funding to state schools would solve this
Has it occurred to you that sometimes it's nothing to do with money? Some people are just a bit thick.
0
reply
Dexter321
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#92
Report 4 weeks ago
#92
Creating more grammar schools would only work if every child sat 11+ (whatever it's called these days). Unless that happens, all you're doing is lowering the entry requirement for every extra grammar school place....
1
reply
AngryRedhead
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#93
Report 4 weeks ago
#93
(Original post by James23121)
Has it occurred to you that sometimes it's nothing to do with money? Some people are just a bit thick.
Opposing grammar schools whilst dismantling private schools works counter intuitively to solving the problem of social mobility, it just drags everyone down to the same base level.

If you’re referring to the difficulty of the 11 plus, I highly doubt any 11 year old could not pass it given appropriate time to prepare and appropriate tuition
0
reply
Dexter321
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#94
Report 4 weeks ago
#94
(Original post by AngryRedhead)
If you’re referring to the difficulty of the 11 plus, I highly doubt any 11 year old could not pass it given appropriate time to prepare and appropriate tuition
It is alleged that the more recent strain of 11+ isn't as easily coached as previous version. Obviously, teaching 10 years about timings is possible, and answering lots of questions is. 11+ "pass" varies anyway! Grammar schools have various scoring systems and various 'pass' levels. Where there is only one grammar in an area, the pass is likely to be much higher than where there are six.....
0
reply
harrysbar
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#95
Report 4 weeks ago
#95
(Original post by AngryRedhead)
If you’re referring to the difficulty of the 11 plus, I highly doubt any 11 year old could not pass it given appropriate time to prepare and appropriate tuition
What about the ones with special educational needs? Some of the pupils I work with won't be able to pass any GCSEs despite intensive support throughout their school years.

And they wouldn't have been able to pass any kind of selective exam at 10/11 because when they joined secondary school they could barely read or write.
0
reply
AngryRedhead
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#96
Report 4 weeks ago
#96
(Original post by Dexter321)
It is alleged that the more recent strain of 11+ isn't as easily coached as previous version. Obviously, teaching 10 years about timings is possible, and answering lots of questions is. 11+ "pass" varies anyway! Grammar schools have various scoring systems and various 'pass' levels. Where there is only one grammar in an area, the pass is likely to be much higher than where there are six.....
Hence my point about increasing grammar school numbers and funding for state schools; So then rather than being forced to choose between a rubbish comprehensive and trying to get into a strict grammar school if you can’t afford independent school you have more choice of grammar schools and if worst comes to worst and you can’t get in either then going to a state won’t be as bad
(Original post by harrysbar)
What about the ones with special educational needs? Some of the pupils I work with won't be able to pass any GCSEs despite intensive support throughout their school years.

And they wouldn't have been able to pass any kind of selective exam at 10/11 because when they joined secondary school they could barely read or write.
My reply above is relevant to this issue also
0
reply
Anon0601
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#97
Report 4 weeks ago
#97
(Original post by Fruli)
I'm a commoner that intends to prioritise private school education for my kids.
Why would you feel the need to prioritise this for your children? My assumption is that you feel it is inherently better than State Education which is the nub of the issue.

There are hundreds of thousands of parents who could never afford to send their children to private schools even if they prioritised this above everything else. In 2018 the average private school fees were £17k pa whilst average wage was £28k pa. Therefore it would be impossible for anyone on the average wage to send their child to the 'average' private school.

You are thus excluding the majority of the population from the opportunity to have a 'better' education purely on the basis of their family being relatively poorer.
2
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#98
Report 4 weeks ago
#98
(Original post by Oxford Mum)
Just to say that I am a single parent and my kids were on free school meals at primary school, however they won scholarships and bursaries from a private school. There are no grammar schools in our area either, so they were lucky. Now this opportunity for social mobility will be lost, if Corbyn has his way. But if there is a demand for private schools and parents can and want to pay, I can't see how they can stop them.
But non state schools don't provide a form of social mobility, they entrench class divisions by reserving most of their spots for the children of the rich, not necessarily those who are academically capable.
1
reply
Dexter321
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#99
Report 4 weeks ago
#99
(Original post by AngryRedhead)
Hence my point about increasing grammar school numbers and funding for state schools; So then rather than being forced to choose between a rubbish comprehensive and trying to get into a strict grammar school if you can’t afford independent school you have more choice of grammar schools and if worst comes to worst and you can’t get in either then going to a state won’t be as bad
Sorry, but you've lost me. How is increasing grammar school numbers doing anything other than lowering their entry requirements? The only way to negate increased grammar school places reducing entry requirements is to make every pupil sit 11+. Increasing grammar school places and making no other change will simply lower entry requirements.
0
reply
Sinnoh
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#100
Report 4 weeks ago
#100
(Original post by Guru Jason)
I'd be all for getting rid of them. They serve no wider purpose than to line the pockets of the already rich. I'd rather the best teachers that get attracted by money, teach in state schools where everybody gets a chance to be taught by the best rather than just a small percent of a privileged few.
Bahaha yeah nothing lines your pockets like spending £20k a year with no real returns
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Would you turn to a teacher if you were being bullied?

Yes (65)
23.21%
No (215)
76.79%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed