You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Just because your kid starts at a mixed school doesnt mean they'll turn out rough/illiterate. After my Parents divorce I ended up at a primary school in Deighton (Fartown). Didnt harm me now did it?.........
statistics show if you wnt rich kids send em to private school.
I'm not sure that my child's future earning potential is the main factor I'd consider when choosing a school.
For reference, from my year group in my crappy (<30% getting 5C grades) secondary school, I and my friends are now a train driver, a GP, a (medical) consultant, an IT director (via accountancy in Cayman Islands) and a teacher (me). I earn slightly above the national average, and I'm the lowest paid of these.
My brothers and sisters who all went to the same crap school are now: teacher (me), joiner, sexual health charity worker, unemployed and petrol station attendant.
I'm not sure that my child's future earning potential is the main factor I'd consider when choosing a school.
Nor me, but then we are both teachers and not captains of industry! Dont get me wrong I think private education should be banned because of the points I'm making, whereas the captains of industry most likely think its a good thing for the same reasons.
Go and watch Crash .... might provoke a little thought.
I went to a school where they even let in black and asian kids, I never got stabbed once.
😛
Any private school isnt guarantee of a good education. Dont forget 'private' schools also fail, go bust and close. I know girls (great shags mind) who went to two such schools in Hudds that rolled over and closed. Both old schools are now converted into posh flats.
A couple I know called their daughter Trinity,he has his own business & their house is worth half a mill......
Yes you're being a snob......
As the OP on this thread and just got back from a lunchtime football session, I'm amazed to see the number of replies. Haven't had time to catch-up on all the replies but will do in due course.
I've been interested to read comments by coffeeking and miketually.
As a parent I want the best for my children. I'll do what I have to do and can do to ensure my children get the best from life. If my children achieve academically, then they will have better choice later in life. Academically, the school achieves OK, and has a good ofsted report. It's not the [i]whole[/i] school at fault - it's probably a minority but nevertheless a significant percentage. My child would *probably* progress even more from closer tuition and calmer influences at a better school. We lost out on our 1st choice school. Private schooling is now an option. Another is a waiting list at another local school. Children are easily influenced in their early years of education and this is the worry.
Yes, from my OP I probably am being a snob (well, I did ask) but if wanting better for your children when your parental instinct tells you so makes me one - then so be it.
And to reaffirm "Blade Trinity" on a DVD - yes. Not on brother and sister birth certificates. And incidently the mother looks like Vicky Pollard.
A couple I know called their daughter Trinity,he has his own business & their house is worth half a mill......
I bet they made their money through IT, eh?
statistics show if you wnt rich kids send em to private school.
No, statistics show that if you've got rich kids they get sent to private school.
Molgrips was spot-on about the problems with this type of statistic.
"No, statistics show that if you've got rich kids they get sent to private school."
I'm sure stats show both, stats remember dont show cause and effect
Well, me and Mrs Grips were considering home-schooling.. how's that for controversial?
Well, me and Mrs Grips were considering home-schooling.. how's that for controversial?
I only know family who home school. They're, erm, a little unusual...
I'm sure stats show both, stats remember dont show cause and effect
Yes, my point was that the same figures will undoubtedly show what I said as well as what you said.
It's not a chicken-and-egg dilemma really though.
I mean, which came first? The rich kids or the schools for rich people to send their kids to?
It's pretty obviously the rich kids, in case I'd left any doubt.
I didn't go to private school. I went to public school.
And look where I ended up: the North.
So, it's not all a bed of roses people.
Well, me and Mrs Grips were considering home-schooling.. how's that for controversial?
This option has the added bonus that you can cut their hair with the pudding bowl and there won't be any other children to bully them over it.
yeah you sound like one. Dont judge a book by its cover
Oh the irony!
(to help out the confused, I'm quoting from the first page having only just started reading this thread)
ourmaninthenorth - Member
I didn't go to private school. I went to public school.
I say!
Yah!
A couple I know called their daughter Trinity,he has his own business & their house is worth half a mill
I'd almost certainly be accused of being a snob if I posted my thoughts on that!
Wun Hun Dred!
I think anyone who is happy with themselves and their life will defend their own upbringing and see it as the best way to go, so there is no all-encompassing right or wrong answer.
I got to see both sides of the education system, starting out in a normal inner city primary school where I was already one of the poorer kids to getting a scholarship for one of the best private schools in the country. After the initial bedding in period of getting posh people to understand what I was saying, I had just as great a time in secondary school as I had in primary. I think this was perfect for me, as I would never have got the grades I achieved at the comprehensive I would have gone to, due to being a lazy git. I would say that my school in particular excelled in extracurricular activities, which I think is a major contributor to that public school boy confidence (Arrogance?) that everyone is aware of. So in summary, I reckon you're better off having both types of schooling if you can get it as there's more to be gained than just grades.
As a comparison I have a sister who is doing very well in the retail world, a brother in the civil service and another sister who got knocked up at 18. I'm the only one who got any private education and went to university so I'd say it's not the be all and end all.
Plus yes, the original poster sounds like a snob to me and I've met my fair share!
Schooled at a comp... graduated from Oxford University... earn **** all! 😀
I went to a private school, my wife went to a state school; I want my kids to go to a state school, she wants them to go private.
We looked at private school costs and calculated it would cost £25Ok to put our 2 children through from 7 to 18 years based on todays prices. That would stretch us and compromise what we could financial do in our family/leisure time and therefore utimately the costs outweighed the benefits. We were very disappointed with the schools in our area and this is why we looked at the private school costs.
Instead we moved areas to where we are happy with the schools and the area in general. It is costing us as we haven't sold our house in our previous area and are renting in the new area but we are much happier in the new area and the costs are still far less than private school costs.
Having said that at the end of the day there is only so much that parents can do to find a school, private or state, their children will be happy and successful at as there are so many variables to consider...the child, the teachers, the other children etc etc
nukeproof - that's an option we could be looking into for a couple of years time (middle schools).
I'm probably going to open a can of worms but middle-class family church attendance is pretty good in our area due to a very good performing church sec'y school. Admission based on church attendance and commitment 😀
[i]nstead we moved areas to where we are happy with the schools and the area in general. It is costing us as we haven't sold our house in our previous area and are renting in the new area but we are much happier in the new area and the costs are still far less than private school costs.[/i]
How much extra mortgage interest + associated costs will you have to pay over the lifetime of the mortgage vs the cost of private schooling?
If that works in your favour, then it sounds like a good option.
I'd send any children to public school for the excellent life experience (n/w/standing TJ's baseless assertions), but I suspect Mrs North's "I went to a compa and look at my PhD" argument will likely win out. Good for the bank balance, bad for the kids who will only get six week summer holidays....
I agree with TJ, there is *no* evidence that private education is generally "better".
Like miketually said, rather than pay for unecessary education, use the cash to give your kid(s) some fun life experiences, which incidently you won't be able to if you give all your cash to some private school.
[i]lunchtime football session[/i]
COMMONER!!!!! STONE HIM!
[i]How much extra mortgage interest + associated costs will you have to pay over the lifetime of the mortgage vs the cost of private schooling? [/i]
I see your point but the house will either be rented out or sold so it is a short to medium term cost...the costs are still less than the £2k per month for our 2 kids to be in private and the duration will be far less than the 11 years they'd be in private.
[i]nukeproof - that's an option we could be looking into for a couple of years time (middle schools).[/i]
Took as about 2 years to figure out what to do for the best: many late nights and bottles of wine plus endless time on the internet. Good luck!
[i]I'm probably going to open a can of worms but middle-class family church attendance is pretty good in our area due to a very good performing church sec'y school. Admission based on church attendance and commitment [:D] [/i]
When we first moved to our previous area the secondary school we had planned was exceptionally good but the catchment changed and we were right on the edge. We *may* have got in if we had attended church, volunteered for other church duties, helped out at the Sunday school etc etc but, although parents blatantly do do it, we felt uncomfortable with doing it as we are both not that religious. I suspect we would have ended up resenting volunteering and attending every week when really we didn't want to be there.
How much extra mortgage interest + associated costs will you have to pay over the lifetime of the mortgage vs the cost of private schooling?
If you really want to game the system, you only have to live close to the 'good' school for long enough to get your eldest into it. Once your eldest is in, you can move back to somewhere cheaper and your younger kids are pretty much guaranteed to get into the school.
Schooled at a comp... graduated from Oxford University... earn **** all
I'll raise you - not only was my comp a rubbish comp and I probably earn less than you, but I also went to a better university 😉
sorry nukeproof, I wasn't clear.
I meant, having moved house (and assuming you have solkd your existing house), how much extra interest etc. will you be paying on your new mortgage over its lifetime as against the old one?
As I understand - and I'm not a parent - moving to an area with a good school, for which there is competition for places, will have generally have higher house prices than ares where the schools are less good. My logic being that, if you pay more for your house, you pay more for your mortgage, which in turn might be direted towards schooling costs.
To be honest, I left school in 1995 and for the 10 years that I had been in private education up to that point (I arrived in the system aged 8, having spent 3 years in a primary school of 35 to a class), I believe my parents only paid - and then at a reduced rate - when I was at prep school, as I had a scholarship at public school. So, I haven't much idea of the costs these days (other than knowing that fees have generally increased at bonkers rates across the years) for pre-prep, prep and public (or independent day) schools. Is it really £12k pa at prep school these days? Blimey!
Another point on costs, though, is that where I was at public school, only around 1/3 of the pupils were there on full fees. If you were half bright and your parents skint (my case) then there were bursaries, exhibitions and scholarships. Depends on the school, though: my sis left her school because the folks were brassic - the school only wanted people who would shell out the full whack.
At the school that my kids attend there's a Chelsea, Storm, Brad and Angelina. Dare say you'd find equally daft names in the local Private school. 😉
Another point on costs
Another point on costs would be the cost of the uniform and all the sport kit, which will soon mount up.
At Cambridge, it used to be that people who got there from state schools got on average something like 1 class higher in their degree. A big significant difference.
So the answer is, thanks to universities imperfect admission policies - paying lots of money can make your kids more likely to get into a good university. But it doesn't make them actually any cleverer once they get there.
But if you want to engineer it so your kids don't have to meet poor kids, then private school is great for that.
Joe
[i]...but I also went to a better university[/i]
Get in line, tab 😈
(only joking - never gave a stuff for such things... 🙂 )
At Cambridge, it used to be that people who got there from state schools got on average something like 1 class higher in their degree.
Good job I went to a comp then 🙄
Move to Scotland, our schools are generally better all round, particularly In the really remote areas where you could get a whole school roll smaller than yer average class elsewhere. 😉
Another point on costs would be the cost of the uniform and all the sport kit, which will soon mount up.
Sure. But presumably, state schools also have uniforms, no? And if kids play aport - which I admit is compulsory at independent schools - wouldn't they also need sports kit?
[i]Move to Scotland, our schools are generally better[/i]
you have a good source of funding.
HTTP404 - Member
Move to Scotland, our schools are generally betteryou have a good source of funding.
Yeah, thanks for that. 🙂
Want your kid to go to uni/rich? Change schools asap and have good genes/parent skills.
Why do you want your kid to go to uni, at the minute it's a dubious choice to take on the debt with poor job prospects?
In response to the first post, send your kids where ever you want. Good kids will do well where ever there are advantages to both state and private education. I don't think you are being a snob I think you're being a parent and it's natural to want the best for your kid.
Hi Http404,
I feel for your problem, I don't think you are a snob, you just want the best for your kid. Our 1st child didn't go to nursery (grief from friends and family) and then went to a good Primary in a good area (North West, not far from Rivvy). She was picked on and then ignored by teachers, badly treated, so we took her out of that school (grief from friends, family, the education and my mum -who had been a primary head for twenty years- because the 'head' was retiring and us leaving left a 'blot' on his record!) then put her in another school that had a good rep; cue 2 years of bullying and confrontations that went nowhere, so we took her out.
We have home-educated her since then, she is now twelve and very happy, has a younger sister and brother, all home-educated too. There are a lot of resources on the internet, and many other families in this country that home-educate, in our area there are at least two internet networks of home-edders, and our kids have plenty of great friends of their own age and above and below. One of the best things about it is that the kids mix so naturally despite widely-rangeing age groups, there are none of the cliques that blight schools, and nobody gets left out.
OK, I'm not saying that it would work for everybody, but I am saying that there is an alternative that works for a lot of people. I hope that it works out Ok for you.
Best,
LJ.
I used to teach a Cortnee and a Skyie.
Johnny, sounds awesome. Me and the Mrs have been fantasizing al day about how our childhoods would have been if we'd been home educated, and how cool it could be for our kid.
There is more to schooling than acedemic results.
irony, anyone?
HTTP404 - Member
nukeproof - that's an option we could be looking into for a couple of years time (middle schools).I'm probably going to open a can of worms but middle-class family church attendance is pretty good in our area due to a very good performing church sec'y school. Admission based on church attendance and commitment
Hypocrites, I can't stand them, if you believe then yes, exploit it maybe, if not leave it.
If you believe then your conscious is clear, if you don't then what sort of message are you sending to your children?, I'm dead sure they will hear you discuss it at some point, intentional or not.
FWIW, I moved in to a 'cheap house' (and I do hate it), in an expensive area, to get the best schooling (as I see it) for my kids.
I'm sure I'm wrong in so many ways, but to me it made sense, I could never afford to send both my kids to 'private school', & I'm sure as hell I would never send just one.
Good luck, & please don't feel pressured from a bunch of people you have never met (me included obviously) into making a decision that will effect the rest of your children's lives.
Take care out there.
Instead of projecting your own fear/inadequacies, why not trust in your kids' abilities? Cream rises! 🙂
HTTP404, if you are a snob, then so am I. Totally with you on this one. You cannot choose who your kids become friends with and maybe I am being out of order, but I will do as much as I can to ensure that my kids grow up without mixing with the chav undeclass that is destroying this country.
I have two great kids and live in a good area and work bloody hard to give them the best upbringing I can. My house is too small, but to move to a bigger property I would be compromising too much as far as I'm concerned.
I am fortunate that my son (nearly 8) is mixing with good kids from good homes with intelligent parents. Long may it continue.
I am ready to now be flamed by the STW massive, and yes, I probably am a snob full of stereotypical opinions of the stereotypes you speak of, but then so be it.
I would be thinking exactly what you are thinking. Right or wrong? - I don't know, but as a parent you can only do what you feel is 'right'.
(Ducks for cover)
PS. Not sure where that smiley face came from?
Should read 'nearly 8'
Molgrips,
I think being home schooled would have worked for me too, but not with my parents, even with one being a teacher, they wouldn't have the patience for it, bless 'em.
It's a huge commitment, and a serious legal one too, also for it to work properly I reckon at least one of the parents has to stay home, or both be on flexible working arrangements. I work from home, so, it works for us, as I said before. not for everybody, but we love it. Nothing is perfect though, and teaching something we mainly take for granted, like reading and writing, can be fraught...wouldn't change a minute of it though.
BTW - By legal commitment I meant that when you opt out, you take on a legal responsibility to supply your child with an education, and they will check that you are doing that.
Best,
LJ.
Interesting reading the different views on this subject, it's obviously very emotive.
We've got a few years before we have to make the decision ourselves. I went to a comprehensive school, Mrs Mefster went had private schooling. We both have achieved similar academic results to degree level and have 'got where we wanted to get'.
I feel that we'd have both pretty much achieved the same at either state or private school, as we were well motivated through school, and most importantly had fantastic parental support. I honestly believe that the parental support and encouragement outweighs any other variable.
Plenty of my friends at school were less focused, messed around much more than I did and maybe didn't achieve their full potential. I think that for the more easily distracted child, the discipline and expected academic 'work ethic' at a private school would possible enable them to achieve more.
A big difference I can see is the extra-curricular oportunities and sports. At my comprehensive school there was a great reduction in the oportunity for activities that took much time outside school hours (cricket, outdoor pursuits, etc.) as this relied on the teachers time and goodwill. Speaking to my wife, private school offered much wider opportunities. Even our local grammar school does not always fully encourage pupils who excel to fulfil their sporting potential, lacking the flexibility needed for coaching and international competition.
We've got the option locally of state school, non-fee paying grammar school or private options. I think if we are lucky enough to be in a financial position for private schooling without sacrificing other important aspects of family life, we'll do it. But I'd like to think that if we're not, with good parental support, our little man we be able to fulfil his potential wherever he studies.
TJ - what school was that then? You may have said already, but i aint reading through all the pish.
Just to chuck in my twopeneth,
My wife is a Primary school teacher at state school. She has a number of teacher friends who have moved from State to Private because of their dissatisfaction at the ever increasing workload, which has nothing to do with actual teaching and everything to do with the monitoring and recording, and justifying their existence. Look at any profession whereby the state has overall control and you will see less "doing", and a lot more "monitoring". It is getting a lot worse - look at the Police. More bobbies than ever before and most are hiding in offices bean counting, rather than walking around the community with their big hats on.
Last year she had to teach a year 5 class of 40 children. Now this in a leafy lane shires village school, with a decent reputation. None of the kids are "bad" enough to attract extra funding through the SEN register, so she had to cope on her own with a non-teaching assistant.
With all the best will in the world, these kids were not getting the right amount of 1:1 they needed. The differentiation she had to build into every lesson was staggering, and as a result the children did not progress as much as their parents expected. Without going too far into the detail, the year 4 teacher had been a little generous in her assessment, so some of the kids actually appeared to go backwards in their autumn term assessments. This is not a unique position - its fairly common throughout state schooling.
Discussing this with her colleagues who have gone into Private education, the ridiculous amount of justifying and monitoring along with ever increasing class sizes are the most commonly cited reasons for switching. When a Private school has a maximum class size of 20 its basic math to realise the teacher/pupil contact time is going to be far better in the smaller size. If you refer to any of the teaching unions statistics, and anecdotal evidence from both teachers and parents, it is well documented that class size is one of, if not the most important factor with regrd to quality education.
So, if you want a good education the main thing to look for is small class sizes. It is a sad fact that private shools have much smaller class sizes, therefore the children at these will have a better education than those at state school.
One thing to add is that the "quality" of education when comparing state to private shouldn't be that far different, given that most Private schools are staffed by former State school teachers. I am told that it is a rarity for a Private school to employ someone who hasn't served their time in State schools.
I have thought about this a fair bit. My comments about education earlier were more about the general case rather than this specific.
The local schools you kids have places for - check 'em out carefully. Go and have a chat with the head teacher. Look at stuff such as facilities and extra curricular activities. Then compare this to the fee paying school you are considering.
Have a think about your children. Do they need to socialise with other kids from all backgrounds to ensure their social development or are they the sort of kids to whom this would make little difference? Are they bold and confident or timid and need support?
Have a think about the cost of the feepaying school and consider what else you could do with / for the kids for that money. Are the broad educational opportunities that you could provide with that money (holidays, coaching, sports lessons etc) an opportunity to give them more experience? would that money you would spend on fees if spent elsewhere do more for your childs development?
Only the parents can make this decision. I feel very strongly that you need to look at their total education / development not just the acedemic side of it and that you must be clear about your own motives for what you decide.
As said earlier - cream always rises. Kids will do however well they do in any enviroment and it certainly is true that kids from feepaying schools tend to do less well at university compared to kids from state schools in comparison to their A level results. ( a result of the kids from state schools having to learn more self study skills)
Good luck - but IMO this decision is not as crucial as it may seem.
kids from feepaying schools tend to do less well at university compared to kids from state schools in comparison to their A level results
Could be related to learning more self study skills. Could also be due to them underacheiving in their A levels, then studying for a degree on a more level playing field.
If that's the case, the risk is they might underacheive at A level sufficiently to not get to the university they want to or get to study the degree they want to.
Soup, thanks for the words of support. As parents we also are wary of our youngest (5 yrs old) of forming friendships that we would consider less than ideal. We can't stop it. And in true fact it is very hard to discourage for a child of 5yrs.
We have a larger than average house for parents at this school. And in the worse case scenario - it could be quite awkward at kids parties and having friends around to play ie. invitations, reciprocal invites etc.,
And yes we are considering downsizing and moving.
TJ, goes on and on about mixing with children from all backgrounds to ensure social development. In my case - what social skills will a 5 yr old gain from mixing with socially challenged children from uneducated backgrounds?
Lets face it at 5yrs they have no concept of class, by the time they get to 8yrs they do become aware of *differences* and avoid them. The period when children do mix with other children of different backgrounds is at secondary towards their teenage years - and by then parents will get little say.
" Smee - Member
TJ - what school was that then? You may have said already, but i aint reading through all the pish."
Hillpark Comprehensive. It was a school of about 1200 pupils when I was there ( many years ago) It was the last to be upgraded before the 70s recession. We had hi tech language labs, 2 gymnasiums, swimming pool, 3 sports fields, huge sports hall with climbing wall and so on.
The really sad thing is the nearby comprehensive of "shawlands academy" which had been grant aided but went comprehensive had far worse facilities but onece the bogus choice agenda came in all the middle class kids went to shgawelands despite its poorer facilities and educational record because of simple snobbery. Hillpark became a sink school
HTTP - I really think this issue can be very important for [i] some[/i]kids. For me it was invaluable. Primary and secondary
what social skills will a 5 yr old gain from mixing with socially challenged children from uneducated backgrounds?
That sounds like really horrible snobbery to me.
[i]That sounds like really horrible snobbery to me.[/i]
No. It's a real question.
The class size is an intresting point, in state schools the lower sets will be small with upper sets large. The lower sets will have the teaching assistants to help kids with learning difficulties. As a teacher I enjoy teaching the lower sets more as despite more behavioural problems they are more fun and you feel like you are getting somewhere. So whilst the government and head teachers will say every child matters its bollocks, high achieving kids are not pushed enough in state schools IMO.
Well from my experience of doing youth work with kids from all different types of backgrounds, kids from 'challenging' backgrounds can often be less pretentious/arrogant than well-off middle class kids. The middle class kids are often just as badly behaved, but are better at 'playing the system' and tend to get away with more.
But if you want your kids to be arrogant and pretentious then not exposing them to the oiks is probably a good plan.
grumm that's an over simplification and a half. I might as well just send my children to the worst school in the area and reap your benefits.
I'm just quite disgusted that you seem to think that 'socially challenged children from uneducated backgrounds' are basically worthless people who your children should be kept away from. If that's not snobbery then I don't know what is.
I might as well just send my children to the worst school in the area and reap your benefits.
And then maybe your kids won't grow up into the ignorant stuck-up snob that you seem to be.
Just a thought, but what's the difference between someone calling their kids 'Blade' or 'Trinity', and someone naming their kids after someone in a 19th century novel, or a former prime minister, or historical figure? People look to their own cultural influences, for reference, and inspiration. To suggest that their method of choosing a name for their child is somewhat inferior to your own ideas, suggests that you feel in some way superior to them. Are you? Do you believe your existence on this Earth is in any way more valuable than theirs? Because if you do, let me tell you; you are as much a victim of brainwashing or 'social conditioning', as they may be. You're just deluded into thinking you are somehow cleverer.
You need to open your mind, and try to understand people as individuals, with as much potential as the next person, for your kids' sake. Otherwise, you are merely reinforcing and perpetuating the 'divide and rule' of our divisive and prejudiced class system.
Where I went to school, for Miketuallys benefit - Hummersknott, the kids from the poorer backgrounds were the most disruptive, and most came from one particular area of town, I was bullied by several of them until one day I beat the living crap out of one of them. Was never bullied after that funnily enough, but I can see why some of my friends parents chose to go private.
So its all very well getting on your ideological high horse Rudeboy but the fact is when these situations can be avoided by parents, albeit at an often huge cost, why not?
Fortunately the best state school in the area is on my street, and I made a conscious decision to live in the catchment area at a substantial cost compared to houses a few streets away..
Can't be bothered to wade through all the above...
I was at private schools (quite a long time ago now...), my 12 year old has been in state system all the way and just started secondary. Yes, some of the kids there look and sound a bit rough. She's been teased a bit for her 'posh' voice (picked up off her southern mum and only slightly modified by the Yorkshire she's lived in all her life), but has made friends, seems to be learning stuff and enjoys school.
I think if you've given them a good grounding in values and importance of education, they'll do fine and benefit from NOT being at a school like I went to where everyone is middle class.
Well bully for you, dj!
I have no problem with parents wishing to chose where they send their kids, just with the OP's attitude. Personally, I think kids mixing with all sorts can lead to better balanced people later in life. I'm glad I went to my state schools in a 'poor, run-down area'. At least I haven't turned into a narrow-minded bigot.
For balance, I also spent a couple of years of my secondary education, at a public school, with a very high reputation. I din't last, due mainly to my background, and being made to feel inferior. I've never seen such arrogance and class-prejudice, as I saw in that place.
IMO; there should be no 'private' option. All schools should be of sufficient standard to offer all our children equal opportunities, regardless of social background. Then, we might actually move out of the Dark Ages of serfs and feudal masters...
Well bully for you, dj!
I probably came across as a bit of a snob there! 😆
No, not really. I can fully appreciate parents wanting the best for their kids, and surely it's better to send yer nippers to a school where there's minimal disruption. But, wherever they go, they will encounter bullying and that. Maybe better to let them toughen up a bit; the World is not a perfect place.
high achieving kids are not pushed enough in state schools IMO.
I always think that actually 'high achieving kids' are pretty much defined by how much they can be bothered to work. If they get bored and don't work, that probably suggests that they aren't really high achievers. Real high achievers don't need their hands holding, and will just get on with learning stuff anyway. I was around when they started bringing in special educational needs for highly able kids, and what a waste of time that was. The whole 'my child isn't being stretched thing' always seems like an excuse for people who have money to claim that their kid is quite clever but somehow the way in which the school are dealing with them isn't letting them flower.
Joe
Grumm - [i]I'm just quite disgusted[/i] you can't read or interpret what I said.
I didn't say 'socially challenged children from uneducated backgrounds' were worthless. I stated you grossly over-simplified a very complex situation focussing in on a single aspect. These are the wants for my children's school
- Better discipline
- Better PTA support
- Better achievement
And what is wrong with that? I can get this from a better school!
But according to [i]some [/i]this is wrong and it is better for them to turn out like qualified street savvy geezers from a Guy Ritchie movie.
Rudeboy has really got to come down from his separate plane of existence. You've addressed real world problems - with esoteric waffle.
[i]perpetuating the 'divide and rule' of our divisive and prejudiced class system.[/i]
wtf? I'm talking about my family's welfare and development and you are talking about some theoretical social responsibility to remove class division. Well, all I can say is - do it to your own.
I think you've just been to the shed and got out a longer handled shovel. You're not coming across terribly well with some of the things that you've written and you're just adding to them.
I'm quite often surprised by the recurring need to get public peer group approval for decisions - can't any of you make up your own minds?
HTTP. Calm down dear! There are a lot of good points raised on this thread. Only you can decide 'cos only you know your kids. Myself I am 100% sure that the wider education that you get in a state school - socialisation and understanding of others and so on was of huge benefit to me and I would not have got this in a private school. This does not apply to everyone but I am convinced it is important for many.
Another wee point - save the money you would spend on school fees and you kids can go to uni without debt?
Your kids, your choice and I think you have plenty of helpful comment on here
aP - You're probably right. there was no need to go create a thread on a subject that quite clearly parental prerogative overrules. But it was a Friday work thing 🙂 Some responses have been a bit hard not to bite - that's all.
TJ - [i]HTTP. Calm down dear![/i] Yes. It's not like poor people can only buy SSC pads. 😀
If I was you I'd turn the beige box off and go and do something with your family - before they bury an axe in your head 😛
If I was you I'd turn the beige box off and go and do something with your family
Can't. Wife's down the pub watching football, oldest daughter has taken her baby for a walk in the park, the youngest is happily kicking a ball against the neighbour's fence and I've got to wait in for an appointment from the local authority housing association. 😀
We all have to share this country, segregating our kids from others whose views and life-choice we don't agree with isn't doing anyone any good in the long run.
I'm talking about my family's welfare and development
Are you? So, can you then explain this:
there are a fair few parents with an excessive number of tatoos, sporting the Croydon facelift, smoking and taking their little 5 year olds (with pierced ears, skinhead haircuts) to school in the morning. But there are some "normal" people too.
Do you actually know any of these [i]untermenschen[/i]? Ever actually tried chatting to any of them? Or do you just base your judgement of people on whatever crap you read in the papers, or see on some crappy sensationalist TV show?
Sorry, but your comments stink of prejudice, and an arrogant assumption that you and your family are somehow 'better' than others. You've put yourself, and others, into boxes, and labelled them accordingly. Unless you can see beyond such compartmentalisation, I doubt you will really be able to offer as well-rounded and objective an upbringing your children deserve. Seriously, try stepping outside your Safety Zone, once in a while. You might find, it's not quite as bad as you imagined.
you are talking about some theoretical social responsibility to remove class division. Well, all I can say is - do it to your own
Fortunately, there are many others who also feel that we live in too divided a society, and who are willing to make an effort to change this. Sadly, we all to often have to deal with ignorance and bigotry. And a selfishness that cares for no-one except Number One. Ah well, you can but try...