Forum menu
To people suggesting that there are all sorts of imbalances in the system:
I would propose that we're never going to get rid of ALL inequalities. That would be impossible. HOWEVER... I think it is reasonable to suggest that education and health should be considered two social "basics" in which the only real differentiation should be in terms of local, discretionary, provision.
So, for example, if a parents group at local school wanted to band together and fund extra MFL teaching, or additional music provision, or something, that would not breach the idea of equality in education. At least the way I am thinking about it.
I think it does, however. People should not be allowed to buy an advantage for their own kids. This means that people who don’t have money end up disadvantaged, which I think is abhorrent. Money should not define your potential for achievement; lack of it should not reduce your chance of success. So if this means certain freedoms of the rich are curtailed, then so be it. They have enough other advantages as it is they don’t need any more.
But it's not as black and white as that. Many poor families are aspirational for their kids, work hard to support them through school etc and they get success. They might have got more if they went to Eton etc but they still managed to significantly improve their lot. A lot of the failure to progress is a sub culture issue, some parents do not engage or participate in their kids education, some actively fight the system.
Yes, classic politics as the art of the possible (meaning it was certainly an accident on behalf of labour). Stake out an extreme position to frame the debate, to shift what you really want in the centre making it appear reasonable and achievable.
When a policy is so bad that even party supporters can only justify it with "We really want something else."
It's just a mental policy from a party that knows it's gonna lose and can therefore keep Momentum happy rather than making any attempt at a sane manifesto.
It’s a lot less than you’d think.
Surprised you know what I think.
I suspect this press release was timed perfectly to cause indigestion whilst the Labour Party have lunch in Brighton this afternoon.
Surprised you know what I think.
Ah, so we're doing the deliberately confrontational thing.
Would a change to "It's a lot less that one might think" make the, what I certainly considered rather obvious, meaning any clearer?
The charitable contributions to fees tend to be for children of the teachers at the school, children of members of the cathedral choir and for the distressed gentlefolk, certainly not for Joe Blow from down the estate who happens to be sharp-witted. Another consideration is the damage done to kids by boarding (see Oliver James), he says 'don't'. Eton has inflicted enough damage on this country, time to change.
You don't have to close them per se: the private schools could just be turned into academies (the Co-op has an academy trust and is very successful at turning around failing schools) and the next academic year be selected on postcode same as all the other schools in that area.
If you selected on postcode then it would provide evidence once and for all that these vaunted private schools really are the academic bastions they proclaim because they'd have academically challenged kids from the poorest families suddenly turning into A* pupils.
Another consideration is the damage done to kids by boarding
All kids at boarding schools? Of course, no one ever had any damage done at a day school did they? Let alone at a state day school. It's only boarding schools that are bad. The posh ones even more so, amirite comrade?
The vast majority of those who went to boarding school suffered none of the "damage".
This policy is just a nice prop for Labour to bash the poshos with, nothing more.
If you selected on postcode
Wealthy parents would buy property in the "right" postcode, as they already do in some areas
Of course, no one ever had any damage done at a day school did they? Let alone at a state day school.
Day school?.....or, as I like to call it, a school.
Could state sector private schools still provide the education they do as private schools? Absent changes that would happen over time (perhaps selling off of facilities, staff attrition), their funding per pupil would immediately be cut (I assume), class sizes would increase, teacher numbers fall.
Further, a big problem in the (in the main, ofsted ‘inadequate’) schools I work in is that a great many classes have one or two deliberately immensely disruptive children, and another one or two kids with (generally non statemented) SEN. It’s hard to balance these classes, a problem generally not present in private schools.
Further, a big problem in the (in the main, ofsted ‘inadequate’) schools I work in is that a great many classes have 1 or 2 deliberately immensely disruptive children, and another one or two kids with (generally non statemented) SEN. It’s hard to balance these classes, a problem generally not present in private schools.
Maybe they should take all the disruptive / SEN kids and teach them in the former private schools with smaller class sizes and greater resources and allow the ordinary schools to teach the rest of the kids in a better environment as a result.
You could select on postcode that cuts across different types of community, I'm pretty sure Derby used to do it.
CFH, do try to avoid lowering the tone. Petty insults simply reflect impotent outrage.
Maybe they should take all the disruptive / SEN kids and teach them in the former private schools with smaller class sizes and greater resources and allow the ordinary schools to teach the rest of the kids in a better environment as a result.
Isn't that what a grammar school system does in effect? Ignoring the use of private school assets obvs.
Maybe they should take all the disruptive / SEN kids and teach them in the former private schools with smaller class sizes and greater resources and allow the ordinary schools to teach the rest of the kids in a better environment as a result.
Maybe every private school should be made to run a Pupil Referral Unit as a loss making exercise in addition to their "normal" school provision.
Maybe they should take all the disruptive / SEN kids and teach them in the former private schools with smaller class sizes and greater resources and allow the ordinary schools to teach the rest of the kids in a better environment as a result.
Yep. The ability for children who would benefit from being statemented actually being statemented and then being provided with the educational support they need combined with the necessary social, emotional and educational support being given to the disruptive kids would (IMO, obvs) utterly transform the schooling experience of the majority of pupils I see.
That said, I don’t believe that should be tied to the abolition of private schools, a policy I oppose.
Isn’t that what a grammar school system does in effect?
Not really.
Grammar schools select the brightest and throw resources at them while leaving the rest to flounder in their fate.
Might be a refreshing change if we threw the resources at the struggling kids who probably need them more and then let the smart kids do their best with what's left over.
I'm sure they'll manage.
Might be a refreshing change if we threw the resources at the struggling kids who probably need them more and then let the smart kids do their best with what’s left over.
Costs the state about 70k per annum to send a kid to an EBD - they still throw knives at each other for jollies.
I’d rather that kind of money was spent on kids who might uplift humanity scientifically and culturally.
Isn’t that what a grammar school system does in effect?
The problems begin in primary school, right from reception. If you’re unlucky (for want of a better word) with your cohort, your chances of reaching your academic potential are slashed - grammars could easily be kicked out of your reach through no fault of your own.
Yep. The ability for children who would benefit from being statemented actually being statemented and then being provided with the educational support they need combined with the necessary social, emotional and educational support being given to the disruptive kids would (IMO, obvs) utterly transform the schooling experience of the majority of pupils I see.
That said, I don’t believe that should be tied to the abolition of private schools, a policy I oppose.
They already have boarding EBDs and they cost a good deal more than sending a kid to Eton - and the teachers regularly get assaulted and abused. Think being a prison officer - but shitter - the grounds are often pretty though and can look a bit private schooley.
How does this actually poll?
a lot of commentators seem to think badly (quite likely send their kids to private schools)
but like nationalising the railways I think this may be quite popular
Be interesting to see how they are going to find 615000 school places in an already overstretched state system.
Isn't the idea that the private schools' resources become incorporated into the public sector? Anyway I don't necessarily think it's a good thing to disband private schools but I do think that public funding by grants and tax breaks should end and charitable status should be removed. Of course that would probably make them even more elitist. Can't win really.
Aggghhhhh - the politics of Envy
How does closing down private schools improve the quality of state education? If we improved the quality of state education, then private schools would cease to exist. I agree that for a pupil to be educated at private school should cost the state no more than educating the child in a state school. And remember that each child at a private school (UK residents) does not cost the state anything to educate them.
The charity commission is already working hard to ensure that any private school who has charitable status is actually doing some charitable work. If we get rid of this, then schools will simple become private companies and any benefit that they do will disappear.
We can argue that it is unfair that a child has a better education than another, but school only forms part their education. Some children will benefit from their parents wanting their children to do better.
And yet again the Labour Party is being dragged down by the dogma of the hard left. We have bigger issues than this at the moment, focus on these.
I’d rather that kind of money was spent on kids who might uplift humanity scientifically and culturally.
and just let the other kids knife each other?
That's some problem solving right there.
Just remove the ridiculous charity status and get some tax to support state schools.
Yup. And tax private schools like other things that have a cost to society such as cigarettes or alcohol.
Wealthy parents would buy property in the “right” postcode, as they already do in some areas
In Brighton they introduced a lottery system to avoid this sort of thing. The school the child attended was chosen at random I understood the catchment area was v small however. I don't know if it's still the scheme they use, it was quite unpopular with parents.
Personally I'm less interested in preventing a small section of society buying education than I am of raising the standard of the rest.
and just let the other kids knife each other?
That’s some problem solving right there.
Who said anything about letting them kill “each other”?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impressment
I hear the Royal Navy currently has a staffing issue. 😀
And yet again the Labour Party is being dragged down by the dogma of the hard left. We have bigger issues than this at the moment, focus on these.
Id argue that inequality is at the root cause of many of our problems
whether this will fix it is another question
certainly the genetics argument OP referred to indicates that private education confers advantages above the ability of those who go to them, compared to those who dont
But if we stretch that further…
No. Don't stretch it further. I'm not a communist, don't make out that I am just to dismiss me.
Education needs to be equal. This is the absolute bottom line. You can have your nice cars and holidays, your au-pairs, your freedom to have inspiring educational holidays. But every kid has the right to good schooling, this is fundamental.
And as long as the rich can buy their way into better schools then the quality of everyone else's education is not their problem so they won't care about it. Also private schools promote segregation. If you grow up mixing with bankers, artists, explorers, astronauts, etc etc then you may view these things as possibilities for yourself. If you never meet one, you'll see that world as something else that isn't you. School is almost a kid's whole world outside of home, and segregating people based on money is damaging to those who don't have it.
I don't want to take anyone's opportunities away. I want to make sure everyone has them. Let's fund after school clubs and school trips. Let's have free childcare so both parents can work and you can all go on decent holidays together. Let's have funded 'summer camps' so all kids can do stuff when off school and your parents aren't.
You capitalist pig dog! All of your property and earnings will be appropriated by the glorious state and distributed “fairly” among those far more worthy than you.
This kind of mockery does your arguments no favours.
I have a problem if they cost the public pound more than equivalent state education
Not an easy calculation to make given a wider view.
But every kid has the right to good schooling,
...except the stabby ones?
The problems begin in primary school, right from reception. If you’re unlucky
The second sentence should read "If you aren't from a rich family or privileged" to use the other term.
The policy is about abolishing charitable status. As a country we need to go further and avoid generating pockets of middle class occupation of 'better' state schools.
All state schools should be streamed to provide each child with a comprehensive (as in all around and good quality not secondary modern) education. We fail our children by encouraging the academically lacking middle class child while restricting the chances for the less privileged bright child.
Yes, sometimes Alexander is not as bright as mummy and daddy may think and Eton may not be the best place for him.
A thumbs up for Molgrips who posted while I was typing.
It is only a minority of private schools that feed into the political system and establishment. The rest of them are filled with kids whose parents range from electricians to billionaires.
My kids are private, its a well known school but doesn't produce any politicians (yet) however lots of Drs, accountants, lawyers, engineers, physicists etc.
My wife is a teacher, she worked in state and private, and when exposed to kids in private who admire other kids for doing well she made us work hard to save and persuade our parents to help. It is my choice, I have a 15 year old car and we don't spend frivolously elsewhere.
What pisses me off about labour (whom I would vote for under different circumstances) is that I think they are in on the same bullshit corruption as the Tories, otherwise the biggest drum they would be banging, about inequality, would be about large company and rich individual tax avoidance. If they paid all their taxes we would have hospitals and schools on every street corner.
It's the political elephant in the room. All other discussions are meaningless in the light of how much money disappears off shore.
If we improved the quality of state education, then private schools would cease to exist.
I wish people wouldn’t parrot statements like this. State education is already better than Private. Once you correct for the selective nature of private schools they do not provide a better education. Just compare the performance of state vs private pupils with that same entrance qualifications at university. State pupils do better.
certainly the genetics argument OP referred to indicates that private education confers advantages above the ability of those who go to them, compared to those who dont
The paper you posted earlier appears to undermine that notion.
The kid who lives opposite us goes to our local big private school. He genuinely thinks this makes him better and cleverer than the rest of the kids. In his mind, his higher status in society is already well established at the age of ten.
I went to boarding school for 3 years - last year of GCSE and A levels, before that I was moving around schools every year due to stepfather in military
From my experience my peers were no more intelligent than any other class I spent my time with. I don't buy the genetics thing at all, the reason I think people do better at private school (based on my experience)
Far smaller class sizes / more 121 time
Staff that genuinely seem to care about the pupil more
Less misbehaving kids
Much better sporting facilities and promotion of sport
Some good experience of leading in 6th form
Leaving with a decent network - peers parents able to give you a hand with work experience
If I could send my kids to private school I would. Fees are pretty massive, I'd have to pick my favourite.
As for it not being fair on those in state school (where mine are/will go) its tough, not a fair world, you could use the argument for any 'additional service' - healthcare etc... I knew of some families that were sinking virtually all disposable income into their kids fees, living in modest homes / old cars / no holidays.
Thing is parents who want the best education for their kids will always find a way to game the system.
In my case - the secondary school I should have gone to was atrocious, so my parents sent me to the private (non boarding) school in the centre of town. We weren't well off and my mother ended up working all hours to pay for most of it and my grandparents chucked in the rest. Academically absolutely worth it, although these days I miss not having done any "practical" subjects.
Another way as mentioned above will be that parents will just move house to make sure they're in the right postcode for the right school, which will just push up houseprices in those areas and lower them near the "bad" ones, leading to stratification again, just via a different route. The house we live in now is near a good primary school, but the good secondary school is a few miles up the road. The people we bought it from did the move (to actually what seems to be a smaller house) just to change catchment area at the right point in their kids education career.
It's a lot of fuss over a quite understandable policy for a left leaning Labour party to adopt, They'll not provide funding for Toffs to go to Toff school... So what, it's hardly a ground-breaking idea.
It's a bit of easy class-warfare, they've still got to get into power and implement it
It won't remove the advantage, it will if anything narrow it to a much smaller set of wealthy parents that can afford it, meaning the 'pool' of advantage at the 'top' of education will shrink rather than opening opportunity to the proles...
And where do they sit on academy schools now? Are they to be fully nationalised?
Most importantly would the funding taken from Eton and co' be diverted directly to State run schools?
For me as a parent of kids currently going to state school(s), and the offspring of two quite lefty teachers who taught in state comprehensives for ~45 odd years, it's still not a vote winner. It's a stab at having a dog-whistle left leaning policy, when the Lib-dems are starting to look like a danger to Labour in an up-coming election...
Thing is parents who want the best education for their kids will always find a way to game the system.
Yes. But ALL schools should be good. In your example, your local secondary school should not have been so bad.
My partner is a teacher, and says there's a lot of teacher assisted cheating going on in private schools.
People pay a lot of money to get their kids educated and expect results, even if their child is utterly lazy and refuses to do anything.
Education needs to be equal. This is the absolute bottom line. You can have your nice cars and holidays, your au-pairs, your freedom to have inspiring educational holidays. But every kid has the right to good schooling, this is fundamental.
You can never make education equal, unless you make it illegal to purchase after school education and any additional learning facilities at home. It should more be about diverting money that the state would use to unnecessarily subside rich kids' education to state funded schools
I totally agree every child should have the right to a good education but unless you're telling me more money is being spent by the state on private schooling than state schooling then I fail to see how abolishing private schools helps this, surely it makes it worse? Unless ofc you're proposing killing off all the rich kids at the same time you close their schools...
My partner is a teacher, and says there’s a lot of teacher assisted cheating going on in private schools.
care to elaborate?
That said, given that once you correct for the selective nature of private schools state schools outperform them it’s about time that those who go to private schools were afforded the benefits of a state school education.
My kid's state schools are incredibly good, far better than the local private school I have occasional contact with.
However, don't worry Labour are on the case, they're coming after state schools as well by abolishing OFSTED:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-49785130
That's equality, spoil private schools and make state schools worse to compensate.