Private education

[Barry the Badger]

Andy, how is your idea of everybody receiving the same education even workable?

 

Even within the State sector there are massive fluctuations in the quality of resources, teachers etc from school to school. How on earth would you go about making sure everybody received the same education?

 

If you closed the private schools, people would just get private tutoring for their kids if they could afford it.

[hypochondriac]

Nope.

 

Simple economics - you'd know that if you went to a decent school

 

Private education pays better money, so attracts the better teachers, just like Chelsea and Manure pay better money and can attract better players. Therefore more money = better education.

 

Why should we restrict the education opportunities for people who can afford it - we don't live in 1960s Russia do we?

 

Why should everyone have 'equal opportunities' [to me that phrase is ridiculously out of context]? It's like saying everybody should have to drive a 1 litre Renault 5 whether they can afford a Bugati or a Porsche or whatever, just so the 'rich' people don't gain an advantage.

 

Totally untrue. Yes there were some good teachers at St Marys (where I went) but there were some absolute shockers who would not have got into other schools. Mrs Tomkinson FFS.

[hypochondriac]

That's not right.

 

I've taught in both private and state schools. I'd say if anything the harder working, more talented and more dedicated teachers were in the state system. There were more lazy and uninvolved teachers in the private system, but generally they're pretty similar. The difference is more as a result of class size, funds and parental involvement. Parents who are paying tend to follow things up a lot more at home.

 

 

Totally agree with this.

[hypochondriac]

No, I just want everyone to have the same opportunity. It's not a coincidence that a disproportionate amount of the better jobs go to those from private schools. It's not fair. In a way though, I think going to a state school with some 'bad people' and 'bad teachers' is a good thing, helps you to learn how to cope and deal with all sorts of situations and people.

 

I promise you, there is some awful private school teachers and in many cases you can get away with a lot more than at a state school.

[Saintandy666]

Andy, how is your idea of everybody receiving the same education even workable?

 

Even within the State sector there are massive fluctuations in the quality of resources, teachers etc from school to school. How on earth would you go about making sure everybody received the same education?

 

If you closed the private schools, people would just get private tutoring for their kids if they could afford it.

 

I know we are never going to reach my utopia where everyone gets an equal start in life, and everyone receives the same standard of education and those with the silver spoon don't stay ahead. I want to live in a world where it is what you know and not who you know that matters(and a lot of the time it is who you know). Like I say, I realise this will never be reached, but for ****s sake, what we have at the moment is totally ridiculous, unfair and unjust. We have to even it out... it's a total postcode lottery unless you have the money to get out and it helps the circle of poverty that many families are stuck in.

[Jonnyboy]

No, not at all, I'm just saying state schools should offer the same opportunities that private schools do.

 

A lot of private schools teach a very limited traditional range of subjects, eg Latin, Classics, not more relevant and useful stuff like IT economics and business studies etc

[Jonnyboy]

I would rather we scrapped trident and put the money into getting our state schools top notch, Tories aint gonna do that though are they?

[Jonnyboy]

Bill Clinton had it spot on "its not ability which is unevenly distributed in society, its opportunity".

 

however there are a lot of parents who are ignorant, and ignorant of this fact

[rpb]

I would rather we scrapped trident and put the money into getting our state schools top notch, Tories aint gonna do that though are they?

 

I was once told by an inspector that the cost of equipping all of our school children with a PC for use in school would be the equivalent of one Hawker Harrier Jump Jet - he wasn't too impressed by Blair's promise of 'Education, Education, Education'.

[Johnny Bognor]

No, I just want everyone to have the same opportunity. It's not a coincidence that a disproportionate amount of the better jobs go to those from private schools. It's not fair. In a way though, I think going to a state school with some 'bad people' and 'bad teachers' is a good thing, helps you to learn how to cope and deal with all sorts of situations and people.

 

OK, let's look at an example where kids have exactly the same educational opportunity. Pick any state school in the country where the facilities, classes, teachers and everything is equal irrespective of parents stature. I'll wager that the kids from the better off families (let's say middle class for the sake of argument) will outperform in more cases than not, those from a disadvantaged background.

 

Nurture plays a significant part in a childs upbringing so even with equal educational opportunities, things are still not fair. As suggested before, the only way to level the playing field is to confiscate children in the labour ward and have them brought up by the state, only to be released to their parents when they are 18.

[teamsaint]

Th well off will always make sure their kids are at the "best" schools, whether its by fee paying or postcode.

 

The real culprits in a system that perpetuates social inequality are the universites, who are hppy to take the quick easy way to select students, ( A grades and a beautifully crafted personal statement) rather than testing and interviewing to find out a persons real capabilities.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

I disagree in the main with private schooling but I have to admit it is easier to have principles about private/state education when you don't have kids. Secondary school is a long way off for my two but was discussing this the other day with my wife and we came to the conclusion that we wouldn't want them to attend any of the local state schools - it would either be pay for private or move somewhere else. Obviously I'd rather not pay and I'd hate them to become snobs etc but you want your kids to thrive and the local state schools are simply too rough.

 

If your children are intelligent and you take an interest in their education (which it sounds like you do) then they will thrive regardless of what schools they are in.

[bridge too far]

If your children are intelligent and you take an interest in their education (which it sounds like you do) then they will thrive regardless of what schools they are in.

 

This.

 

And it's common practice these days, in state schools, to give very bright children extra tuition / time to ensure they don't get bored and to ensure they're constantly challenged. My grandson is classified as 'special needs' because he is so bright and his parents have chosen to continue his education at the local state school although they could afford to send him to a private school.

[dubai_phil]

Two arguments.

 

1) Why can't public Schools be as good as private Schools? What stops them employing the best teachers? Why can some Public Schools be better than others? Why must they all aspire to be EQUAL and not aspire to be BETTER? Would it be down to the quality of the staff and management? But surely not, as in this argument all teachers must be of equal mental & emotional intelligence as this argument determines that Children all are. So, why is there not a crusade to remove poor management in poorer schools? Why is there resistance in many schools to implemeting changes and improvements from public schools that are performing better? Answer in most cases - Political Doctrine

 

2) Why can't Experienced Teachers returing after raising a family get teaching jobs? Answer - because salary levels are so set in stone (due to "Union Agreements") that teachers pay is determined by the length of service/age. So if a returning teacher aged 45+ wishes to return they cannot get a job as the schools are not allowed to pay them the same salary as a kid straight out of college even IF they desperately WANT to take the job at the reduced salary. (Source Wilts CC submission from my ex wife in my Divorce Case) So Unions protect the interest of their people and stop good experienced teachers getting jobs

 

3) DNA, I'm sorry this whole everyone is born equal argument is rubbish. If we are all equal why am I not a World Class Golfer? Why is St Stevo not playing for Man Utd? Why is TDD sitting in a Submarine and not in Whitehall? Why should a kid with Einstein level intelligence be in a class that is held back by a numpty with no interest in learning that disrupts the class? YES, every child SHOULD have the chance to be the best they can be and SHOULD have access to the best resources. BUT do not mix up the misfortune of "location or class" with the fundamental way that our Brains are all wired differently. Kids SHOULD be given the education level that they can cope with. Kids from "Inner City Areas" can have high levels of intelligence - it isn't class it's Genetics. So if (ok unlikely example I know) a child is born in Skatesmouth with an IQ over 25, why should THEY be held back by the "likes of the fish fiddlers?"

 

Private Education is not JUST about class. It exists because the State system IN GENERAL cannot give every Child the chance to be the best they can be - the State system all too often manages ONLy to bring all the kids in a class down to the lowest level, and that is NOT right.

 

Private Education is a Black Market. If something isn't good enough then you go and buy it elsewhere. Think of the inverse - you don't like the cost of a pack of smokes so you go buy it from a dodgy bloke who imports them from the EU whenever you can. It's the same system but in reverse.

 

Politics should have NO place in Education.

[toofarnorth]

Totally untrue. Yes there were some good teachers at St Marys (where I went) but there were some absolute shockers who would not have got into other schools. Mrs Tomkinson FFS.

 

You dont require a teaching qualification to teach in an independent school and in state schools you most certainly do. I went to a state school that provided everyone with the same opportunity to learn and prosper. The fact that some chose to p*ss that opportunity up the wall, meant that the qulaity of the school was irrelevant to them.

[ecuk268]

The parents who can afford to send their children to private schools have usually done well in life due to their intelligence and usually manage to produce intelligent children - perhaps that's why children at private schools tend to do better?

 

Not exactly. My parents were working class and I passed the 11+ and went to grammar school. Some of my not-very-bright contemporaries at junior school went to Greggs because their parents didn't want them mixing with those common children at secondary school. How bright they were had nothing to do with it.

[bridge too far]

Phil - every child born is, to use a hackneyed phrase, a blank canvas.

 

How they turn out depends on a whole host of factors - parents, innate intelligence, opportunity and environment.

 

It behoves us, as a country, to develop each and every child to its full potential. Contrary to your assertions it does happen in state schools. I've already mentioned my grandson. He is 7 and has a reading and maths age of 13. He gets special tuition in his state school to cope with his ability and to stop him getting bored.

 

Back in the 70s his father was equally bright but this special attention wasn't available in those days - it was only children with learning difficulties who got extra attention then.

 

So you're being very unfair when you say that bright kids in state schools are 'held back' by those who are not so fortunate.

 

I can't see that private education offers anything to clever children that the state system doesn't. It may well offer something extra to the not-so-gifted child. It may well offer some parents some sort of satisfaction by seeing their children mix with children from posher backgrounds.

[Scummer]

I disagree in the main with private schooling but I have to admit it is easier to have principles about private/state education when you don't have kids. Secondary school is a long way off for my two but was discussing this the other day with my wife and we came to the conclusion that we wouldn't want them to attend any of the local state schools - it would either be pay for private or move somewhere else. Obviously I'd rather not pay and I'd hate them to become snobs etc but you want your kids to thrive and the local state schools are simply too rough.

 

An interesting point, as my kids will be in the same situation and catchment area as yours. I don't really have a problem with my two going to Priory when the time comes, I'm more worried they'll get beaten up for being scummers.

[CB Saint]

My folks scraped every penny they had to send me to KES. Not for any social climbing reason, but because in their opinion the local comp just wasn't up to scratch. My wife did go to the same comp and has been very successful both academically and profesionally. Thinking about it there is one difference I can see. At KES all pupils were pushed to learn and as a result I would say most pupils were able to reach their potential. It the comp, based upon my wife's experience, there was a sink or swim culture - pupils who wanted to learn, did; pupils who couldn't be bothered, didn't.

 

The other reason why I was sent there was at the time teachers were striking on a regular basis and my parents didn't want my education to be disrupted. I have to say at the time I was gutted that my state school mates were getting extra time off whilst I still had to go to school

[dellboypete]

Not exactly. My parents were working class and I passed the 11+ and went to grammar school. Some of my not-very-bright contemporaries at junior school went to Greggs because their parents didn't want them mixing with those common children at secondary school. How bright they were had nothing to do with it.

 

This made me smile, because my wife went to Greggs and ended up getting a degree in Maths (I'm not sure if it was because of, or in spite of going to Greggs!).

 

As it turned out we put all our children through private education. One of the drivers was that we moved to Surrey, having lived abroad, and the local state schools were seriously over crowded with poor facilities. The school our kids went to had superb facilities, for teaching (although some of the staff were pretty average), sports and extra-curiccula stuff.

[Deppo]

Private education pays better money, so attracts the better teachers, just like Chelsea and Manure pay better money and can attract better players. Therefore more money = better education.

 

It is not about that. Most of the best teachers ARE in state schools. It is the attitude towards education of the individual pupil (which probably comes from family and upbringing) which is the key differentiator in grades coming out of both schools. Most pupils in state schools achieve; more pupils in public schools achieve. That can't just be down to the teaching?

[buctootim]

If you can afford £30,000pa for a top private school you'll be able to buy the finest education for your kids in the country. If you can only afford £12,000 a year you are probably much better off saving that money and moving house to the catchment area of a very good state school. There are many many **** poor private schools where the staff are weak (though speak well at open day) and the results dreadful. Unfortunately many parents dont actually know how to choose a good school and look at marginal things like whether its got a swimming pool and the lawns are lovely.

Edited 16 August, 2010 by buctootim

[benjii]

Every debate on private education in this country descends into absurd mypoic proselytising by those who espouse egalitarianism without neither the ability to see its manifest injustice, nor the conviction to be anything other than a crass hypocrite.

 

That, and the fact I am no longer a full member, is why this shall be my sole contribution to the matter.

 

Toodle-pip.

[Wes Tender]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/aug/15/a-level-results-private-schools

 

Now once again, people coming out of private schools are getting better grades. I personally think that it is a sorry state of affairs when you can waltz your way through social mobility and get a better start in life simply because you have the cash. Everyone should have the same equal opportunities in life, and at the moment it really isn't happening. Results every year are just one example. Anyone else here think it is unfair you can pay your way to a better education?

 

I agree totally. Everybody should also be paid the same regardless of their qualifications or responsibility. At the same time, what they spend their earnings on should also be restricted so that nobody has a better house of car than anybody else, or a more exotic holiday.

 

Of course, if somebody wishes to spend their money on privately educating their children because standards are better in the private sector, then that should be their right. Don't forget, they also probable pay taxation at a rate double the average which includes education provision from the State that they don't use. You don't see them bleating about the injuustice of that and the same goes for their private health insurance costs.

 

Life is considered unfair to those who see others earning and spending money on what they cannot themselves afford. That is how it is and will always be, unless there is a revolution and we are governed by the Peoples' Proletariat whose thinking is akin to yours.

[Guided Missile]

Doing well at school, the influence of teachers over your future success and the importance of the school you went to, are all extremely overrated.

 

Your character, your parents, your friends and lastly, your health, fitness and happiness as a child, define your future, together with a shedload of luck.

 

Teachers? Lecturers?

 

If they are so smart, why aren't they rich?

[Gemmel]

 

If they are so smart, why aren't they rich?

 

Those that do, do, those that can't teach.

[Merovingian]

I was lucky enough to get a scholarship/assisted place into Churchers College in Petersfield and my mum bought me up in a 1 parent family type scenario and we lived in council accomodation, Churchers still do bursaries so it is possible for the not so well off to get in

[Special K]

Every debate on private education in this country descends into absurd mypoic proselytising by those who espouse egalitarianism without neither the ability to see its manifest injustice, nor the conviction to be anything other than a crass hypocrite.

 

That, and the fact I am no longer a full member, is why this shall be my sole contribution to the matter.

 

Toodle-pip.

 

I was thinking about posting a lucid, thoughtful and incisive contribution, but that proved beyond me (i'm soooo obviously a product of a state education), so i shall just say i agree with this.

[Saintandy666]

For people who keep bringing the argument 'children will always out perform each other', I realise this. That is not my point. I understand some children are smarter than others. My point is that it is unfair that those with wealth have access to better education than those without wealth, thus giving them a leg up in life. I understand that even if everyone did have access to the same standard of education that some children would fail and others would prosper.

[Johnny Bognor]

Doing well at school, the influence of teachers over your future success and the importance of the school you went to, are all extremely overrated.

 

Your character, your parents, your friends and lastly, your health, fitness and happiness as a child, define your future, together with a shedload of luck.

 

 

Couldn't agree more.

 

Look at the celebrity entrepreneurs, most of whom are educational failures / drop outs / flops

Theo Paphitis (1 GCSE in geography)

James Caan (Left school with no qualifications)

Duncan Bannatyne (Joined the Navy at 15, then went to prison)

Alan Sugar (Not all that academically)

Richard Branson (Although he went to public school, he didn't achieve academically)

 

 

What surprises me is the number of dyslexics in there, who are seriously disadvantaged when compared to 'normal' students, yet they have acheived the very highest levels of success. At the end of the day, you can't teach drive and ambition.

[Saintandy666]

I was lucky enough to get a scholarship/assisted place into Churchers College in Petersfield and my mum bought me up in a 1 parent family type scenario and we lived in council accomodation, Churchers still do bursaries so it is possible for the not so well off to get in

 

It's not about bursaries and scholarships! Not everyone had access to the standard of education you received.

[bridge too far]

I was thinking about posting a lucid, thoughtful and incisive contribution, but that proved beyond me (i'm soooo obviously a product of a state education), so i shall just say i agree with this.

 

Even though the grammar is wrong?

[norwaysaint]

Doing well at school, the influence of teachers over your future success and the importance of the school you went to, are all extremely overrated.

 

Your character, your parents, your friends and lastly, your health, fitness and happiness as a child, define your future, together with a shedload of luck.

 

Teachers? Lecturers?

 

 

If they are so smart, why aren't they rich?

 

Remember kids, cleverness = money, money = happiness.

[buctootim]

At the end of the day, you can't teach drive and ambition.

 

No you cant. And those who are exceptionally driven and savvy will always do well. But the large majority of the population arent going to become successful entrepreneurs. Most their little Johnnies and Janes will end up working for somebody else - and to be successful in that qualifications from the 'right' instituion counts for far more than it should. As a parent you have to play the game for your child.

[dubai_phil]

Phil - every child born is, to use a hackneyed phrase, a blank canvas. Nope, they are not, unfortunately. Genetics is one part, DNA is one part, but unfortunately, empirical evidence disproves this statement. Some are born with Illnesses, disability or suffer early harm. The Concept/ideal is fine but we do not produce clones as humans, and so the argument about "equality and blank canvas" in a school should include making every mother consume a Government Controlled Diet, Exercise, Standard issue no-polluted air? etc? no. So the canvas is blank but the canvas has many different sizes and textures. One size fits all is political bollo in the real world

 

How they turn out depends on a whole host of factors - parents, innate intelligence, opportunity and environment. Agree, one of the MOST useful things I ever learnt in business is how to understand the "Filters" that a person you are talking to uses. What they are, how they come into being and how they get used by that person. It also shows that you CANNOT teach a child brought up in (for example) a strict Muslim family EXACTKY the same way that you can a child brought up in a Hindu or a Christian family. Heck even teh Christian filters differ. A loving caring safe stimulating family environment WILL be very different for every child, so egalitarian education will fail those grouls again

 

It behoves us, as a country, to develop each and every child to its full potential. Contrary to your assertions it does happen in state schools. I've already mentioned my grandson. He is 7 and has a reading and maths age of 13. He gets special tuition in his state school to cope with his ability and to stop him getting bored. I did NOT attack State Schools per se - that is not what I say. Obviously there are damned good state schools - I went to one and it did me no harm. The point is that "political influence" wants an egalitarian system, so WHY cannot EVERY State School offer your child (and all other "brighter children") the level of THEY need. How many "Bright Children" in your scholl are there? Is it right that the staff must use up scarce resources to give "elite" training to your grandson? Or do you have to pay for the extra tuition?

 

 

Back in the 70s his father was equally bright but this special attention wasn't available in those days - it was only children with learning difficulties who got extra attention then.

 

So you're being very unfair when you say that bright kids in state schools are 'held back' by those who are not so fortunate. But SOME are. I did NOT say ALL kids are held back. Some state schools are very very good, some are very very bad. Some benefit ALL kids and some benefit NO kids. The point is that IF a school BAD then that school should be able to die and other GOOD schools should get their resources to become able to take more kids in. WHY should you be forced to send your kids to a BAD school just because of your postcode? Why are the BAD schools allowed to keep going?

 

I can't see that private education offers anything to clever children that the state system doesn't. It may well offer something extra to the not-so-gifted child. It may well offer some parents some sort of satisfaction by seeing their children mix with children from posher backgrounds.

 

Bull - Somebody from a Posher Background. It's 2010 FFS and this still comes out.

 

 

BTF. Are you saying that some 20 year old Comprehensive graduate Coke addict who got lucky and got a job as a Broker in London in the Noughties and earnt obscene amounts of money is POSH?

 

Some bloke who started working on the shop floor at Marks & Spencers 30 years ago is POSH? Just because he worked his way up to the top of the tree?

 

This is where the argument breaks down.

 

You oversimplify/ All State Schools bring bright kids down to the level of the morons is the same as saying only posh kids go to Private Schools is the same as saying only riff raff live in Council Houses..

 

What you SHOULD be saying is that Windsor & Eton are evil. You won't get anywhere in the UK UNLESS you go to the RIGHT private school

 

A lot of people who DO send their kids private are people who have worked hard and want to do their best for their kids.

[bridge too far]

Then it's a basic principle upon which we'll have to agree to disagree, Phil.

 

Like most of us on here, I love my children and now my grandchildren insanely. But I don't and never have considered that they are SO special that they should have special advantage because I (and now my children) could afford it.

 

I never ever considered buying an educational advantage or a health advantage for them because I firmly believe that these basic human rights should be available to everyone regardless of income. And I do genuinely believe this.

 

And, if you read my post carefully, I opined that some people felt that they were buying some sort of advantage by having their children mix with children from 'posher' backgrounds. Not that everyone who sent their children to private schools were posh themselves. Minor but important difference.

 

Oh, and my grandson's extra tuition is given to him (and others like him) as part of the same special needs system that also exists for children who are struggling. My S-i-L is a teacher with special responsibility for children with special needs and he teaches exceptionally bright children as well as those with significant disadvantages - all in the state system. The beauty of the state system is that it is able to cater for all talents and that is part of its remit. So it's hardly diverting resources. Those resources are already there as part of the overall system.

[Johnny Bognor]

I can't see that private education offers anything to clever children that the state system doesn't. It may well offer something extra to the not-so-gifted child. It may well offer some parents some sort of satisfaction by seeing their children mix with children from posher backgrounds.

 

Private education may not offer more to clever children, however private schools offer more to children over and above academic education. Facilities are often miles better (such as sporting facilities), whilst boarding schools offer a real character building experience. Therefore, they can offer a more all round experience which includes education at the centre, but also develops children in many other areas.

[bridge too far]

Private education may not offer more to clever children, however private schools offer more to children over and above academic education. Facilities are often miles better (such as sporting facilities), whilst boarding schools offer a real character building experience. Therefore, they can offer a more all round experience which includes education at the centre, but also develops children in many other areas.

 

The bold bit first - I won't make the obvious comment about some of the things that allegedly go on in boarding schools because that would be a cheap jibe. But why on earth would people want to send their children away from home? I really don't understand that. I couldn't have tolerated my children being away from me for weeks on end. I'd make an exception for forces' children where the parents are posted abroad but, that apart, why have children if you're just going to send them away? Very strange.

 

And as for facilities being better at private schools - well that's the salient point isn't it? Surely ALL children should have the best facilties?

[Saintandy666]

I really disagree that boarding school provides 'character building'. Compared to people I know who have boarded and so on, I would say I have waaaay more experience on how to deal with real life situations that they have been shielded from in their bubble. Girls only school people are the worst.

[Quickfire Double]

The bold bit first - I won't make the obvious comment about some of the things that allegedly go on in boarding schools because that would be a cheap jibe. But why on earth would people want to send their children away from home? I really don't understand that. I couldn't have tolerated my children being away from me for weeks on end. I'd make an exception for forces' children where the parents are posted abroad but, that apart, why have children if you're just going to send them away? Very strange.

 

And as for facilities being better at private schools - well that's the salient point isn't it? Surely ALL children should have the best facilties?

 

I like that response, as a new(ish) parent. I would love both my children to have access to the best possible facilities. I couldn't pay for them though, and if I could, I still couldn't think of anything worse than having either of them live away during term-time (when they reach school age) in pursuit of that.

[Quickfire Double]

I really disagree that boarding school provides 'character building'. Compared to people I know who have boarded and so on, I would say I have waaaay more experience on how to deal with real life situations that they have been shielded from in their bubble. Girls only school people are the worst.

 

It's still character building, the issue is perhaps more about the type of character being built!!

[Saintandy666]

It's still character building, the issue is perhaps more about the type of character being built!!

 

It's leaves them very intelligent, but with no idea how to cope with things and people! I know one person who came from a private school and went to my college, and then went back to private after 2 weeks because they couldn't deal with all the different types of people and how busy it all was. I just don't think that is good!

[bridge too far]

I remember being told that Freshers' Day at University are hunting grounds for boys looking for girls who had been to boarding schools - because the girls are, allegedly, so naive and therefore easy pickings.

[derry]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/aug/15/a-level-results-private-schools

 

Now once again, people coming out of private schools are getting better grades. I personally think that it is a sorry state of affairs when you can waltz your way through social mobility and get a better start in life simply because you have the cash. Everyone should have the same equal opportunities in life, and at the moment it really isn't happening. Results every year are just one example. Anyone else here think it is unfair you can pay your way to a better education?

 

Years ago we had a good education system. At 11 the brighter kids went to grammer schools, the remainder to secondary moderns. Then late developers were transferred to grammer schools and good GCE 'O' level results got them to the grammer school sixth forms. Most firms ran apprenticeship schemes and the professions had articled pupils with 5 'O' levels.

 

The academic kids were catered for as were the practical kids but the Labour government wanted equality. It was better to have a crap education system than allow streaming. Which is where we are now. Parents sometimes can't afford private education for their kids but give up luxuries to send their kids to a good school. And anybody who can afford it would be stupid not to give their kids an edge.

 

It won't happen but the old system was a whole lot better than the present fiasco.

[Saintandy666]

I remember being told that Freshers' Day at University are hunting grounds for boys looking for girls who had been to boarding schools - because the girls are, allegedly, so naive and therefore easy pickings.

 

Naive and the fact they've had none for so long. Some of them are just so clueless about us males it's funny. I imagine it's same for all boys schools, but I don't know/have met any of them so wouldn't know.

[bridge too far]

In a segment discussing the proposed changes to the Scottish education system, the improvements or otherwise in Maths were looked at.

 

Although Scottish children are doing less well now, English children have risen from 10th in the world (in 2000 I think - I can't find a link) to 7th in the world in more recent years.

 

Aah here we go: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7773081.stm

 

At the bottom of this piece it can be seen that England's children have risen from 25th in 1995 to 7th in 2007. Wow! Great achievement!

[hypochondriac]

From my experience, the main advantage of private schools was that the teachers did not feel under so much pressure to perform for a league table or to pass an exam, so more emphasis was placed on the teaching experience as a whole. I think that sort of thing should be extended to all schools but then we didn't have w*nkers at my school ruining it for everyone else.

[hypochondriac]

Nothing else to add at the moment except to request that I hear more details about bridge too far's exceedingly gifted 7 year old grandson. I didn't hear enough the first or second times.

[bridge too far]

Nothing else to add at the moment except to request that I hear more details about bridge too far's exceedingly gifted 7 year old grandson. I didn't hear enough the first or second times.

 

Any time - I'm very proud of his achievements. I would equally defend state education if he had learning difficulties, to praise the state system for the encouragement and help it would offer.

 

I was using him as an example of how children will achieve given the right encouragement, state or private. But of course I think he's wonderful - all my grandchildren are, including my 2 and half year old granddaughter who knows all her alphabet and numbers up to 12 and who has just started to read, and my 18 month old grandson who doesn't say a word!

 

That's what grandmothers do

[hypochondriac]

I'll forgive you this time because I am in a good mood. See, even Tory supporters can be charitable