Were you privately educated? Watch

This discussion is closed.
kellywood_5
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#241
Report 14 years ago
#241
(Original post by technik)
indeed, i and my parents rejected it because we didnt believe it was providing a good education. but does that mean the children who had gone to my private school since they were 3yrs old and never had been anywhere else were less entitled to support though?
Everyone is entitled to AN education, but not a private one- that's why you have to pay for these schools in the first place. These kids were entitled to, and would have been provided, a state education, but obviously that wasn't good enough for them, which is their choice.
0
horsecrazy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#242
Report 14 years ago
#242
technik what exactly is it that you learned then, since you obviously didnt learn very much from the examined subjects you were taught if you got low grades? And please dont say people skills, values, citizenship...i managed to learn about those as well as getting getting good grades.
0
technik
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#243
Report 14 years ago
#243
(Original post by kellywood_5)
Everyone is entitled to AN education, but not a private one- that's why you have to pay for these schools in the first place. These kids were entitled to, and would have been provided, a state education, but obviously that wasn't good enough for them, which is their choice.
you again assume all the parents were paying big money.

some of them were single parents and paid nothing. again blowing away this stereotype of the private school.

to use some logic, because a parent made a choice to have their child schooled away from the state system, should that parent therefore pay less tax because they arent benefiting from it?

in reality that parent still pays for the states education, while their child gets shafted.

thats unfair, and i doubt you'll disagree.
0
kellywood_5
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#244
Report 14 years ago
#244
(Original post by technik)
you again assume all the parents were paying big money.

some of them were single parents and paid nothing. again blowing away this stereotype of the private school.

to use some logic, because a parent made a choice to have their child schooled away from the state system, should that parent therefore pay less tax because they arent benefiting from it?

in reality that parent still pays for the states education, while their child gets shafted.

thats unfair, and i doubt you'll disagree.
Yeah, I have to agree with you there, that is unfair.
0
technik
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#245
Report 14 years ago
#245
(Original post by horsecrazy)
technik what exactly is it that you learned then, since you obviously didnt learn very much from the examined subjects you were taught if you got low grades? And please dont say people skills, values, citizenship...i managed to learn about those as well as getting getting good grades.
not all of the education i received was related to exam requirements. i remember doing a physics unit on nuclear engineering, but i didnt do physics for GCSE.

i did other things like basket weaving and other funny craft stuff.

fair enough, on paper my grades are probably lower than yours, but does that mean i know less? or im less intelligent? thats impossible to answer. i may be, i may not be.

thats what im getting at. i could have went and did some 10 class rigid routine, but i got to do so much more and had a far more enjoyable time in school than most of my friends.
0
technik
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#246
Report 14 years ago
#246
(Original post by kellywood_5)
Yeah, I have to agree with you there, that is unfair.
i think parents should be allowed to choose. i dont think its right the government should force people to pay tax and then tell the parents they are getting nothing back because they dared to make a choice that they believe is better for their child and goes against the states wishes.

if my parents had paid less tax for the state, and could have given that money to my school, perhaps it wouldnt have been in the poverty it was.

im not doing a sob story, just highlighting how the government is just interested in cash and grades, not actual education and choice.
0
horsecrazy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#247
Report 14 years ago
#247
Its an unusual private school that lets parents pay NOTHING. The question is , is it fair that one child is sent to the 'best' private school in the country whilst another cant because they cant afford it?
Is education something that should be payed for ?
0
technik
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#248
Report 14 years ago
#248
(Original post by horsecrazy)
Its an unusual private school that lets parents pay NOTHING. The question is , is it fair that one child is sent to the 'best' private school in the country whilst another cant because they cant afford it?
Is education something that should be payed for ?
ideally no, but buildings dont cost nothing, and neither do teachers. everything has a cost in the real world.

the school i went to had a very different ethos from what would be considered standard in the UK.
0
4Ed
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#249
Report 14 years ago
#249
(Original post by horsecrazy)
it must have been if you were in it - ahem "Working class people have no opinions" lol
that's not what i was saying. there's a difference between generalisation and specific cases. i can think of many friends from my old school who can talk about almost anything. but for every single of of them, there were quite a few more who never really had much interesting to talk about.

i didn't do debating soc in 6th form... i listened to a few debates and that was it :aetsch:
(Original post by horsecrazy)
Its an unusual private school that lets parents pay NOTHING. The question is , is it fair that one child is sent to the 'best' private school in the country whilst another cant because they cant afford it?
i don't think you've understood technik's point. most of the best private schools do actually offer scholarships and bursaries to bright but 'poorer' children to give them the chance to have that same education. so anyone who wants the chance of public school education need only apply. it's there for you to grasp if you want it, same as the information provided in lessons.

the government is actually doing alot to encourage private schools to take state pupils.... almost bullying private schools into doing so, with the withdrawal of the school's charitable status as the penalty (as i mentioned earlier).
0
edmundwillis
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#250
Report 14 years ago
#250
Just thought I would add my perspective to the debate (just for the sake of it).

I go to a comprehensive state school and am a passionate believer in *comprehensive* education. Therefore, I reject the thesis which says that brighter people that are willing to work harder (grammar schools) and rich people or poor, bright people (public/private schools) should receive a better education than someone who is not particularly bright or particularly rich or someone brought up in an environment where education is not part of the main agenda.

However, I think many people are getting the chicken and the egg the wrong way round. Many people on this forum have implied (though perhaps without realising they have) that there are 'good' and 'bad' schools and that private schools and grammar schools are 'good' schools and that many 'bog-standard' comprehensives are bad schools. But the question becomes: what makes a school a 'good' school?

I would suggest that it is primarily the pupils, along with the teachers and parents and governors etc. of the school. I would also suggest that the key influence on the types and quality of staff at a school is the type and quality of pupils and parents at a school.

The reason for so-called 'sink' or 'failing' schools is due to no fault of the government but due to the Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail reading middle- and upper-class British public who scan the league tables in their area and decide upon the school that is best for 'their child'. What transpires is a widening dichotomy between 'good' and 'bad' schools.

It is the issue of 'choice' on which both the (New) Labour Party and the Conservative Party are focusing in their outlooks on improving education in this country that really makes schools 'good' or 'bad'. Because in reality the choices are only available to those educated and aspirational members of the middle- and upper-classes who have the ability and are willing to research and put time into their children's educational futures.

What is really shocking is that this population misses the point entirely. The point is that a school does not make the individual who they are and what they achieve. Those decisions have been made years before a pupil is ready to apply to a school.

The distance between being brought up in a middle- or upper-class family whose members speak of interesting and high-level topical issues with an elegant and I suppose somewhat indulgent vocabulary (oh the irony!), and where there is overt opportunity to read books and discuss complex ideas and being brought up in an uneducated and unaspirational working-class family where talk centres around when the next pay cheque will arrive and whether or not there is enough money to go out on Friday night is astronomical.

The only way to reunite these disparate groups, summarised so brilliantly by Disraeli as "two nations" - so far apart in their separation, is through institutions such as education. The opportunity to unite society through a shared education is one that I think should not be passed up. It seems to me entirely plausible that if such policies of 'choice' (carried most depressingly on a wave of public support) are allowed to continue then society will succeed in becoming even more polarised than it is already. My deepest fear is that members of each 'nation' will increase their desires to preserve the divide between the 'haves' and the 'have nots'.

I think the only way to address this problem is to reject this idea of choice. If the talents and types of pupils and teachers were pooled across schools there simply would not be any 'bad' schools. Granted there would not be any 'good' (brilliant) schools either in which to receive a well-rounded and (self-contradictory though it may be) liberal education in which one is practically guaranteed top grades and a stab at the top twenty universities and therefore the best jobs. But at least all schools would be passable, nay better than passable, decent - good.

But I do pity those members of Public schools that get chastised by their grammar (or effectively grammar) state school peers. To be honest such criticism of private education is hypocritical and trivialises the real issue(s). Though I have no sympathy for either groups I feel I have less sympathy for those 'grammar school types' that focus the public imagination on "destroying Public schools" rather than seeing the entire picture.

Rant over. Sorry, it was slightly longer than I expected!
0
Johnny 5
Badges: 11
#251
Report 14 years ago
#251
(Original post by edmundwillis)
The reason for so-called 'sink' or 'failing' schools is due to no fault of the government but due to the Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail reading middle- and upper-class British public who scan the league tables in their area and decide upon the school that is best for 'their child'. What transpires is a widening dichotomy between 'good' and 'bad' schools.
Blame it on the Mail, exactly my style of argument... any enemy of the right-wing press is a friend of mine.

Seriously though, good points. And the ones I would've made if I'd had the time.
4Ed
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#252
Report 14 years ago
#252
thanks for all that :rolleyes:

the problem of providing a uniform standard of schooling such as you propose, is that you get a whole load of 'average students', but without an elite group who can be stretched to the limit. and then we'd do crap when it came to comparing international standards of teaching (eg in international maths olympiads), and people would be complaining again.

atm, uk does have quite a high reputation in international education, but that would drop if our brightest pupils didn't get the chance to prove themselves
0
AT82
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#253
Report 14 years ago
#253
I went to one of the worst schools in Manchester, my parents took me out of a so called respectable school. The reason is the second school had teachers that really cared, there is more to a childs development then endless exams and pushing people to far. I think happiness is just as important as exams and the school regonised that, if I was forced to a lot of stuff I would have probably dropped out before my GCSEs and would end up with no qualifications.

The school I went to mean't the were loads of people around me far worse off than I, this let me see the value of education and life, I worked hard realising I didn't want to end up in a council house in Moss Side. In contrast my sister had a very different type of education, she went to a grammar school, she can do all sorts of fancy equations and stuff, but then she can't rewire an alarm system or fix the central locking system on the car. She won't even be able to work out how to get to Liverpool by herself, yet I would happily go to Paris on my own and be very confident of finding the hotel etc.

I don't think their is any right or wrong type of education, it just depends on the individual person. I was very glad I went to the school I did, despite it being rough and having amongst the worst GCSE results in the country.

A lot of parents who work full time 50+ hours plus a week sometimes spend a fortune on private education but they forget what is most often more important to a child, their parents being there for them when they need them. This in itself is education, my mum used to help me a lot with my school work even when I was in my early teens. My parents also taught me lots of stuff not in the national circulum(sp). My dad encouraged me to start computer programming at a very early age and from there I developed a gift for computing that was very obvious at primary school.

I am different, I am not brilliant at maths or anything like that but I think I have lots of skills not taught in any schools such as being very resourcfull. Some people are very good at getting A's but when it comes down to anything practical they are completly hopeless.

I often admire machinics because it all seems alien to me, I can do a bit of basic plumbing, I can do electrics but machinics I can't even change the spark plugs. Yet a lot of these machinics left the school system at 16 and seem very happy.

In constrast I think my sister was very happy with her grammar school and it was the right choice for her.
0
10634
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#254
Report 14 years ago
#254
Yes,I've been in private Catholic schools since I was in Kindergarten.
0
edmundwillis
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#255
Report 14 years ago
#255
2 + 2 = 5: Thanks very much and seeing some of your other posts it seems that many of our opinions are similar :beer:. I completely agree that the right-wing press is not particularly conducive to social cohesion!

4ed: I agree completely that such a proposal is unpractical and possibly impossible but I think that there is nothing wrong with hoping!

However, you have talked about fears that the academic elite would not be stretched under such a system. I disagree. If such a system were implemented then such members of the elite would be able to coast through 'standard' education. And therefore they would particularly have the spare time and ability to invest in their abilities and opportunities for further advancement.

And such extra teaching and support should be provided simply because of the fact that that group does have a disproportionate impact on the interests of society and advancements in thought and technology etc.

But this extra support should not be denied to anyone else and support should be especially available likewise to those at the bottom of the scale academically and/or behaviourally because they too can have a disproportionate impact on society.

So speaks the altruistic idealist!
0
kellywood_5
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#256
Report 14 years ago
#256
(Original post by amazingtrade)
I went to one of the worst schools in Manchester, my parents took me out of a so called respectable school. The reason is the second school had teachers that really cared, there is more to a childs development then endless exams and pushing people to far. I think happiness is just as important as exams and the school regonised that, if I was forced to a lot of stuff I would have probably dropped out before my GCSEs and would end up with no qualifications.

The school I went to mean't the were loads of people around me far worse off than I, this let me see the value of education and life, I worked hard realising I didn't want to end up in a council house in Moss Side. In contrast my sister had a very different type of education, she went to a grammar school, she can do all sorts of fancy equations and stuff, but then she can't rewire an alarm system or fix the central locking system on the car. She won't even be able to work out how to get to Liverpool by herself, yet I would happily go to Paris on my own and be very confident of finding the hotel etc.

I don't think their is any right or wrong type of education, it just depends on the individual person. I was very glad I went to the school I did, despite it being rough and having amongst the worst GCSE results in the country.

A lot of parents who work full time 50+ hours plus a week sometimes spend a fortune on private education but they forget what is most often more important to a child, their parents being there for them when they need them. This in itself is education, my mum used to help me a lot with my school work even when I was in my early teens. My parents also taught me lots of stuff not in the national circulum(sp). My dad encouraged me to start computer programming at a very early age and from there I developed a gift for computing that was very obvious at primary school.

I am different, I am not brilliant at maths or anything like that but I think I have lots of skills not taught in any schools such as being very resourcfull. Some people are very good at getting A's but when it comes down to anything practical they are completly hopeless.

I often admire machinics because it all seems alien to me, I can do a bit of basic plumbing, I can do electrics but machinics I can't even change the spark plugs. Yet a lot of these machinics left the school system at 16 and seem very happy.

In constrast I think my sister was very happy with her grammar school and it was the right choice for her.
This is why I think they should have kept the tripartite system (grammar, secondary technical and secondary modern schools) BUT rather than being based on 11+ results, it should be based on choice. One of the main problems with the comprehensive system is that people are interested in different things, so shoving them all together in one school will result in some people feeling that their education is boring and pointless and therefore dropping out or just not trying. If everyone who likes academic subjects could have a grammar school education and everyone who likes more practical work could have a vocational education, it would be much better. I think it would also solve the problem of bad behaviour because the students who are dismissed as 'thick' would be in their own school doing things they actually enjoyed.

Edit: I sound a bit like your sister. I get good grades at school, but I'm useless at practical stuff. I wouldn't have a clue how to fix a car or get somewhere beyond walking distance by myself.
0
edmundwillis
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#257
Report 14 years ago
#257
...and in terms of comparison with other countries and specifically the mathematics olympiad I think it would be wise to feel proud that in this country we do not make our children over-worked slaves to such examinations as happens in Russia and China especially.

amazingtrade: I likewise go to a 'bad' school with a 20% A*-C pass rate. And I agree that one gains a different (and I think beneficial) perspective on education.
0
AT82
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#258
Report 14 years ago
#258
(Original post by kellywood_5)
This is why I think they should have kept the tripartite system (grammar, secondary technical and secondary modern schools) BUT rather than being based on 11+ results, it should be based on choice. One of the main problems with the comprehensive system is that people are interested in different things, so shoving them all together in one school will result in some people feeling that their education is boring and pointless and therefore dropping out or just not trying. If everyone who likes academic subjects could have a grammar school education and everyone who likes more practical work could have a vocational education, it would be much better. I think it would also solve the problem of bad behaviour because the students who are dismissed as 'thick' would be in their own school doing things they actually enjoyed.

Edit: I sound a bit like your sister. I get good grades at school, but I'm useless at practical stuff. I wouldn't have a clue how to fix a car or get somewhere beyond walking distance by myself.

I think that as well, however I can see the point of 11+ because I suppose grammar schools are supposed to be for very clever people. I think forcing you to do the 11+ is wrong though, failing a major exam like that at 11 must be quite hard to cope with. With these new specilaist schools they are trying to create schools which specialise in a certain area, my school for example specialised in science and technology. It mean't I was able to take GCSE electronics and get to build real circuits which a lot of schools would not let you do.
0
kellywood_5
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#259
Report 14 years ago
#259
(Original post by amazingtrade)
I think that as well, however I can see the point of 11+ because I suppose grammar schools are supposed to be for very clever people. I think forcing you to do the 11+ is wrong though, failing a major exam like that at 11 must be quite hard to cope with. With these new specilaist schools they are trying to create schools which specialise in a certain area, my school for example specialised in science and technology. It mean't I was able to take GCSE electronics and get to build real circuits which a lot of schools would not let you do.
They attempted to offer that at my school, but the teacher had a nervous breakdown halfway through the course and they never got another qualified one, so no-one got higher than a D, and only 2 people got that! That really pissed off the top-scoring student in the year, who got 4 A*s, 8 As and 1 B but also a D because of electronics.

My school applied for business and enterprise specialist status, but was rejected. I think they're going to try again this year. I would have liked to have gone to a specialist languages school because my school only offers Fench or German from Year 7 right through to A-level and you can't even choose. It's based on what tutor group you're in! Luckily I got to do French, which I would have chosen anyway, but one of my friends got stuck with German when she hated it and really wanted to do French. I would have liked the chance to do both, and Spanish as well...stupid system :confused:
0
technik
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#260
Report 14 years ago
#260
(Original post by kellywood_5)
This is why I think they should have kept the tripartite system (grammar, secondary technical and secondary modern schools) BUT rather than being based on 11+ results, it should be based on choice. One of the main problems with the comprehensive system is that people are interested in different things, so shoving them all together in one school will result in some people feeling that their education is boring and pointless and therefore dropping out or just not trying. If everyone who likes academic subjects could have a grammar school education and everyone who likes more practical work could have a vocational education, it would be much better. I think it would also solve the problem of bad behaviour because the students who are dismissed as 'thick' would be in their own school doing things they actually enjoyed.

Edit: I sound a bit like your sister. I get good grades at school, but I'm useless at practical stuff. I wouldn't have a clue how to fix a car or get somewhere beyond walking distance by myself.
grammar schools arent just useful for those who like maths or science...

and i believe you do need selection at some point. one size fits all simply doesnt work.
0
X
new posts
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

University open days

  • University of East Anglia
    All Departments Open 13:00-17:00. Find out more about our diverse range of subject areas and career progression in the Arts & Humanities, Social Sciences, Medicine & Health Sciences, and the Sciences. Postgraduate
    Wed, 30 Jan '19
  • Solent University
    Careers in maritime Undergraduate
    Sat, 2 Feb '19
  • Sheffield Hallam University
    City and Collegiate Campus Undergraduate
    Sun, 3 Feb '19

Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?

Remain (539)
80.21%
Leave (133)
19.79%

Watched Threads

View All