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

Is it wrong that privately educated, middle classed people take most of the top jobs? Watch

    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AspiringLinguist)
    I could perhaps agree with the first two, but really? Better teachers? Yes, my school does have the odd poor teacher, but there are just as many fantastic, inspiring ones - and we are by no means an exceptional school.

    Yes better teachers - they can pay more and the working environment is better. Not to mention the holidays are often longer in the private sector. Out of interest, were you educated in the north or south of England?


    I have received a brilliant education, both academic and otherwise, thanks to the state system, and am very very grateful. I wouldn't change my experience for the world. How exactly do you think I would have benefited? Just curious.

    Your lucky, and location plays a huge part. Some areas of the country do have fantastic state schools, but most don't - just look at league tables. Well, as above, smaller class sizes and better opportunities.


    That's such a shame. I don't know anyone whose feels failed after having been educated by the state system, but I know that the system isn't without flaws. Did he manage to carry on with Maths nonetheless?

    Nah he went on to do Computer Science. I think he regrets it a little - seeing me study maths :p:

    It really sounds as if your brother had quite a poor experience of the state sector, in comparison to the education that you received. I just dispute your claim that really good opportunities are necessarily only available to those in the private sector. I just don't feel that it's true. Yes, perhaps I haven't been to as many amazing places with school, but my school - as well as others my friends attend - has been completely committed to ensuring that everyone achieves their potential, whatever that is. I have never really felt as if I am not being pushed enough, and if I ever feel as if I fully comprehend what is being taught and could learn more, I am inspired to do my own reading, which gives me confidence in my own ability.

    I never said that, I just said your more likely to recieve better opportunities in the private sector. My other brother went to the same state school and ended up going to Cambridge (plus just look at the amount of state school cambridge applicants on here) so it does happen. You can and will succeed wherever you go, provided you work for it, but its definitely easier if your privately educated.

    Yes, I do! This will unfortunately be fairly difficult to overcome, as these extra-curricular activities are expensive and thus funded by fees, meaning that the cost of running these activities is virtually impossible for the state sector's budget to stretch to. I never claimed that you could gain a more rounded education in the state sector - or never meant to! I just mean that I think you become a more well-rounded person, since you meet those from all walks of life and are not restricted to meeting those who are predominantly middle-class. (That said, I realise that bursaries etc. are available...)

    Actually most people at my private school weren't middle class. Hell, including myself there were 4 people on £30 EMA per week that I knew of. Most were working class and owned their own business.


    Sorry for the long post, but this topic is just pretty interesting tbh.
    Bold.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AspiringLinguist)
    I think that sometimes, parents pay money because they feel that by paying for education, it must be of a higher quality. Don't get me wrong, valuing your child's future in not something that I have a problem with by any stretch of the imagination.

    I never claimed this. I just think that it proves that excellent grades can be achieved without having to pay for private education. Perhaps, at present, private schools do achieve better results, but that's perhaps because the large majority of parents sending their children to private schools care enough about their son or daughter's education to pay for it.
    Results drive private education, just like private healthcare. Sure some parents may ignorantly/naively pick a school at random but that isn't the case for the majority of people.

    I went to a state school but by all accounts it was a very good one. At the time shrewd parents were actually taking their kids out of the local private schools and trying to get them a place. Kids were travelling for tens of miles to get there. Why? The school I went to offered a standard of education which was equal if not better than the local private schools. They quickly realised that there was no need to pay for a private education (at least in the area that I lived).

    Yes some people can achieve 'good' results from a state education, but equally you could argue that they could do better elsewhere. Also there are a lot of people who would do better under a private school due to the smaller class sizes, greater level of support, etc.

    (Original post by AspiringLinguist)
    But you're largely mixing with similar people - those who are middle-class and come from relatively similar backgrounds. Naturally, there are those whose parents struggle financially to send their children to private schools but continue to do so, as well as those who are recipients of scholarships or bursaries. However, for me, being well-rounded isn't about how many extra-curricular activities a person does, but more about appreciating the diversity of life. You can go on as many trips abroad as you like, but a broader knowledge of a historical period won't make you more attractive as a potential employee.

    I know - I have several friends who are educated in the private sector, and they are my friends for who they are rather than because of what school they attend.
    Extra curricular activities can develop and display commitment, communication, team working skills, etc. Sure, you can achieve them without extra curricular activities, but it is harder to prove that you have them. Employers and admissions tutors look more favourably on people who do extra curricular activities than those that don't. Equally travelling develops an interest, understanding and appreciation of other people and societies.

    As for diversity a great deal of state schools aren't that diverse when you take into account the existence of private schools, grammars, etc but also parents playing the system. To give an example, where I live there are certainly predominantly working class state schools and predominantly middle class state schools. Is anybody getting a truly 'rounded' education?

    Maybe a state education is more rounded, maybe it isn't, but the privately educated students are still doing better than their state compatriots. At the very least privately educated students know how to display their skills and abilities (ie; through extracurricular activities, through travelling, etc).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ewan)
    Bold.Yes better teachers - they can pay more and the working environment is better. Not to mention the holidays are often longer in the private sector. Out of interest, were you educated in the north or south of England?
    For me, better teachers aren't necessarily going to be attracted to working in private education just because they will receive better pay or they will be in a more pleasant environment. I think that good teachers aren't simply those who have a vast knowledge of their subject (although that does help! ), but those who can inspire the less enthusiastic as well as the very intelligent. Teaching is about conveying the material in the correct way, and I think the state system (with its mix of abilities) produces teachers who are very capable of this.

    Yes, further south than north....but let's just say that we were not ranked very highly by Ofsted at all!

    (Original post by Ewan)
    Bold.You can and will succeed wherever you go, provided you work for it, but its definitely easier if your privately educated.
    Agree completely, but I just think that it's a shame that this is the way the system works.

    (Original post by Ewan)
    Bold. Actually most people at my private school weren't middle class. Hell, including myself there were 4 people on £30 EMA per week that I knew of. Most were working class and owned their own business.
    Fair, but I would say that private schools are, on the whole, predominantly middle-class. If your experiences were representative of the whole country, why are the vast majority of state school pupils working-class?

    Just to clarify, I'm not saying that being educated in the private sector DOESN'T make you better-equipped for gaining top jobs, I just don't think that it's fair.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AspiringLinguist)
    For me, better teachers aren't necessarily going to be attracted to working in private education just because they will receive better pay or they will be in a more pleasant environment. I think that good teachers aren't simply those who have a vast knowledge of their subject (although that does help! ), but those who can inspire the less enthusiastic as well as the very intelligent. Teaching is about conveying the material in the correct way, and I think the state system (with its mix of abilities) produces teachers who are very capable of this.

    Put it this way, 4/6 of my teachers were educated at Oxbridge They were extremely knowledgable and good at their job. I did have one teacher who didn't have a degree in my subject (math) for a while and I can tell you it makes a huge difference. Ever watched waterloo road? Think about the bad kids in that show and put 40 of them in a room, thats what the local state schools near me are like. I don't know why anyone would choose to teach in the state system if they had a choice.

    Fair, but I would say that private schools are, on the whole, predominantly middle-class. If your experiences were representative of the whole country, why are the vast majority of state school pupils working-class?

    The vast majority of people in this country are working class. Be assured there is a huge amount of middle class students in state education too.


    Just to clarify, I'm not saying that being educated in the private sector DOESN'T make you better-equipped for gaining top jobs, I just don't think that it's fair.

    Thats what you have been trying to argue this entire time It may not be fair, but its better than sending everyone to a failed state sector. It's not fair that I was born in England and some people are born in Africa but that's just how its turned out. What alternative is there?
    Above.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
    Results drive private education, just like private healthcare. Sure some parents may ignorantly/naively pick a school at random but that isn't the case for the majority of people.
    Difficult to dispute...but I've just seen friends failed by the private sector, who were doing extremely well in state education, but then were moved because of league table results etc and finished with good grades, but not what they could have achieved. Nor am I suggesting that the majority of people pick a school at whim, merely that - as with private healthcare - people expect that, because they are paying money for something, the service provided will be better.

    (Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
    The school I went to offered a standard of education which was equal if not better than the local private schools. They quickly realised that there was no need to pay for a private education (at least in the area that I lived).
    Ha, if only this had been the case at ours :eek3:! I just wish that state education could be this good, and this inspiring, across the country.

    (Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
    Extra curricular activities can develop and display commitment, communication, team working skills, etc. Sure, you can achieve them without extra curricular activities, but it is harder to prove that you have them. Employers and admissions tutors look more favourably on people who do extra curricular activities than those that don't. Equally travelling develops an interest, understanding and appreciation of other people and societies.
    But the amount of extra-curricular activities often offered by private schools can be huge! Admissions tutors will realise that state school pupils have not necessarily been able to start fencing etc., and equally, extra-curricular activities are far less important than academic credentials themselves Moreover, there are normally a wide range of extra-curricular activities on offer at state schools - a wide range of sports, Amnesty International (set up by student demand), Warhammer, academic clubs such as Science Club, tutoring, Drama Club etc. Moreover, just having more of something doesn't necessarily make it better.

    (Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
    As for diversity a great deal of state schools aren't that diverse when you take into account the existence of private schools, grammars, etc but also parents playing the system. Is anybody getting a truly 'rounded' education?
    Such a shame. That said, from personal experience, as well as the experiences of others, I would say that we gained a 'rounded' education. I met a huge range of people...those who could have afforded to go to private school, those who couldn't have done so, those who were passionate about their going to university, those who were enthusiastic about pursuing vocational careers...if that's not 'rounded', I question what is. It will always be difficult to achieve equality with our present education system - nigh on impossible - but I think comprehensives show a step forward.

    (Original post by ch0c0h01ic)
    At the very least privately educated students know how to display their skills and abilities (ie; through extracurricular activities, through travelling, etc).
    I read that as 'at least' :eek3: at first! But people have to HAVE these skills and abilities in the first place. Granted, for certain abilities (in sport etc.), extra-curricular activities are a must. That said, for some skills (such as the ability to work in a team, a pleasant personality, independent thinking etc.), these can be highlighted in different ways...interview, personal statement, teacher reference etc.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Yes.

    But instead of playing the victim card, more people should just play the game. 'Most' doesn't mean 'All'. If you're good enough, you'll get into a position from which you can actually make a change.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AspiringLinguist)
    Ha, if only this had been the case at ours :eek3:! I just wish that state education could be this good, and this inspiring, across the country.
    The irony is that some Labour MPs and counsellors sent their kids there despite the fact that they'd campaigned to have it closed.

    (Original post by AspiringLinguist)
    But the amount of extra-curricular activities often offered by private schools can be huge! Admissions tutors will realise that state school pupils have not necessarily been able to start fencing etc., and equally, extra-curricular activities are far less important than academic credentials themselves Moreover, there are normally a wide range of extra-curricular activities on offer at state schools - a wide range of sports, Amnesty International (set up by student demand), Warhammer, academic clubs such as Science Club, tutoring, Drama Club etc. Moreover, just having more of something doesn't necessarily make it better.
    Yes some state schools are very good at running sports teams, debating societies, whatever, but on the whole they're few and far between. Having more, more exotic activities widens the target audience and increases student participation.

    (Original post by AspiringLinguist)
    I read that as 'at least' :eek3: at first! But people have to HAVE these skills and abilities in the first place. Granted, for certain abilities (in sport etc.), extra-curricular activities are a must. That said, for some skills (such as the ability to work in a team, a pleasant personality, independent thinking etc.), these can be highlighted in different ways...interview, personal statement, teacher reference etc.
    I never said anything about extra curricular activities being more important than grades, but they are important all the same. They are one of the principal ways (for most people) of displaying independence, communication, commitment, etc at interview, on your personal statement, etc. Work experience is great but the majority of students have little (if any).

    I know of a couple of students, from state schools might I add, who had excellent grades yet they were turned down by top institutions because they weren't rounded characters (ie; they had little or no extra curricular activities).
 
 
 
  • 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
    Have you ever participated in a Secret Santa?
    Useful resources
  • 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.