[Closed] The abolition of private schools

She writes something extreme in the hope it goes viral and generates hits. It works.

If she'd written something sane it wouldn't have been shared on a cycling forum.

educational performance has high genetic component

Has it not then?

I'm betting she was educated privately which, if that is the case, is a strong indicator that the abolition of state funding for private schools is an excellent idea.

It may be true that genetic potential plays a large part but "Private schools facilitate genetic potential better." isn't necessarily true at all. At an individual level or otherwise - because your genetic potential isn't contingent on your parent's will or abiltity to pay for an education and what's the point of of only some people reaching their potential.

Its in my selfish interest that all children get the best education they can, not just my own ones- one day they'll all be in charge.

What a perverse world we have encouraged these last few years.

Its a shame that we've come to measure schools competitively on their performance in terms of outcomes. But the measures of output take no account of the input.

The theories have been around for years, they tie into race theory and all that crap

Anyone who espouses this tripe just needs to be quietly ignored whilst pointing out that as a nation we don't go in for nazi ideology

As far as I am concerned the schools can stay. But they shouldn't be allowed to charge fees, and every school can get the same funding. Then we'd see about 'genetic potential' wouldn't we?

Its a shame that we’ve come to measure schools competitively on their performance in terms of outcomes.

I thought Offsted had changed to a value-add metric some years back?

For me the question is simple. Do state subsidies for private schools cost more than the equivalent cost of providing state education to those pupils?

I do not have a problem with private schools, I have a problem if they cost the public pound more than equivalent state education

It's an interesting idea, it would massively change the way the UK works in a generation or two.

I wouldn't really work though, what are they going to do? Bulldoze Eton? Or make entry based purely on performance? It would still be full of Toffs kids who were all taught the entrance exams buy their very expensive tutors.

I can see why Labour leaders aren't as keen as Labour Party Members, well, lets be honest Momentum are. It's all very Eastern Bloc.

Just remove the ridiculous charity status and get some tax to support state schools.

....which they do (see Nick Davies' 'School Report'). Plus they subsidize wealthy foreign students. Plus the Cambridge International exams are easier than the ones allowed in the state schools. Plus... I shall shut up and go away.

Corbyn was privately educated.

He's still thick as mince.

I do not have a problem with private schools, I have a problem if they cost the public pound more than equivalent state education

An interesting point and a Liberal point of view in that you don't think it matters what people do with their own money.

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.

What a load of nonsense! she has absolutely no understanding of genetics

the paper she seems to be talking about is here

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41539-018-0019-8

its conclusions (and caveats) talk about selective schools rather than private, so it pretty much contradicts everything shes saying

the Daily Mail has the largest responsiblity for the MMR hoax being spread,

Charitable status at the least must be under pressure, when (at least our local one) seems to tout for business from China and Russia. Not sure where the charitable benefit is there.

I'm in two minds, having seen the amount of money being donated by parents to a very highly rated state school (two individual donations of £50k) you are never going to even out the playing field, especially where 12+ still exists and fee paying foreign students is a good earner for the UK, maybe remove charitable status if schools don't offer a certain percentage of bursary places? In another country my nephews school openly stated that 10% of fees went to pay for pupils where parents faced financial hardship.

Whats nice about Labour's position is that revoking charitable status is now seen as moderate, so some of the imbalances will be addressed & that one seeming particularly unfair

People should not be allowed to buy an advantage for their own kids

But if we stretch that further.....
I can afford to take my kids on interesting holidays. They therefore learn more about cultures, travel etc. That gives them an advantage. Should I stop?
I pay for my kids to do loads of sports, drama, dancing, music lessons etc. That places them at an advantage, should I stop?

maybe remove charitable status if schools don’t offer a certain percentage of bursary places? In another country my nephews school openly stated that 10% of fees went to pay for pupils where parents faced financial hardship.

this seems very sensible.

she has absolutely no understanding of genetics

What on earth are they teaching them at Sutton Valence these days? It's 20 grand a year, you'd think that they'd at least touch on the value (and limitations) of polygenic scoring.

I wonder if it would also lead to the creation of home schooling groups bringing in tutors for a small number of students, certainly something we would consider.

A bit bemused by the plan to redistribute private schools’ endowments, investments and properties to the state sector. Is this made possible by their charitable status?

Be interesting to see how they are going to find 615000 school places in an already overstretched state system.

But if we stretch that further…..
I can afford to take my kids on interesting holidays. They therefore learn more about cultures, travel etc. That gives them an advantage. Should I stop?
I pay for my kids to do loads of sports, drama, dancing, music lessons etc. That places them at an advantage, should I stop?

I bet you can afford a nice house for them as well. Maybe even a safe, economical and environmentally friendly car. 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.

In another country my nephews school openly stated that 10% of fees went to pay for pupils where parents faced financial hardship.

From the web site of our local private school:
The bursary funds provide financial support for new pupils
joining the School at Removes (Year 7) and for Sixth Form. This
year we will be spending over £500,000 supporting over 50
families with the cost of fees, many of whom would have been
prevented from sending their children to ..... because of
financial circumstances.
We are committed to helping low and middle-income families
with bursary support from 5-100%, means-assessed based on
net disposable income

I wonder if it would also lead to the creation of home schooling groups bringing in tutors for a small number of students, certainly something we would consider.

Unlikely, Corbyn will have probably politicised social services - so they’ll come knocking on your door. Can’t have anyone having a non state directed education now can we?

@P-Jay

it would massively change the way the UK works in a generation or two.
</bockquote>

... except it wouldn't, as you tacitly admit a few lines down.

If it were part of a concrete plan to massively improve state education then fine but it looks more like a "politics of envy" stunt.

The charitable status is fair game to attack in my view but the "redistribute their assets" part is going too far and I suspect will backfire in any election campaigning.

 

You capitalist pig dog

Organic, free range pig from local farm shop and pedigree dog actually.

People should not be allowed to buy an advantage for their own kids

Does that mean that private health is next on the chopping block?

Be interesting to see how they are going to find 615000 school places in an already overstretched state system.

.... that the parents of those children already pay for but do not use.

pedigree dog actually.

Your dirty dog racist.

Private schools are linked to the lack of social mobility in this country but bringing in fees to universities is probably even worse.

I wouldn't scrap private schools, I'd just take away the charitable status, as others have said. People can and always will pay money to assist their children's education where they can but removing private schools seems like it would cause as many problems as benefits.

Now scrapping funding for the royal family.....

Oh and the eugenics stuff from the MP is ludicrous...

😀

Does that mean that private health is next on the chopping block?

In Canada, private health care is illegal. So actually, I would not mind seeing private health care go to the chopping block either.

I bet you can afford a nice house for them as well. Maybe even a safe, economical and environmentally friendly car. 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.

It's terrible isn't it, council estate scum expecting their kids to be educated to the same standards as those who's parents drive expensive cars. I bet some of them are even struggling with the stable fees for their ponies, bunch of workshy scroungers.

It seems that a big chunk of the 'subsidies' are the payment of fees for the children of MoD/foreign office staff who move around internationally - so the children get a stable education [so probably 100% boarding schools].
I'm not sure how they'd deal with this if those schools did not exist.

Does that mean that private health is next on the chopping block?

...and after school clubs. Some children are disadvantaged because they can't go to all the clubs, it's abhorrent. (My daughter can't do maths club because we get home from work too late - why should she be disadvantaged? None of the other kids should be allowed to do it, either.) And football. There are kids with no legs and meanwhile other kids are out playing football! It's abhorrent they need to be stopped!!!

council estate scum expecting their kids to be educated to the same standards as those who’s parents drive expensive cars

Yep, I'd far rather see that happening. Sadly, shutting down private education won't do anything to improve state education.

For me the question is simple. Do state subsidies for private schools cost more than the equivalent cost of providing state education to those pupils?

That's my question to, I've not looked into any research but if a private school (inc. savings from charitable status) costs more per pupil to fund (from the government) than a state school then something is very wrong and it should be addressed.

I'm fine with private schools as such though, whilst I understand Molgrips arguments against them I'm not sure in reality such equality is ever going to be possible. Just as we have the option to buy healthcare privately instead of using the state offering why shouldn't parents be able to purchase education privately? It might be perceived as better (as with healthcare) but that's not necessarily the case and if it is better then the issue is with the state provide option (i.e. the answer to improving the nation's overall education isn't to remove the best performing part of it but to address the worst performing parts - but this is where the question of funding comes in, if private schools cost the government/tax payer more than state schools then the private school funding does need to be reduced and the savings diverted to state school funding).

Also what about parent's who fund additional schooling/teaching outside of normal school time - should that be banned lest parents with money be able to give their children an educational advantage?

I know a lot of people are against boarding on these forums but many private schools do also offer a boarding option which, in certain situations, is important. I boarded for secondary school, the reason being by father was in the forces so we'd move around every 2-3 years. With the myriad of curricula out there if I'd have gone to a state school not only would I have had the general disruption of changing schools 2 or 3 times but I could had repeated stuff I'd already learnt between terms and missed completely other stuff.

But hey I know some people are under the illusion that all private boarders are part of some elite society with masonic handshakes etc.

Sadly, shutting down private education moving private school provision abroad to places where it's still legal won’t do anything to improve state education.

Corrected for you.

Meanwhile some kids aren’t doing as well because they are surrounded by gormless undisciplined ****s who hold education in contempt and who smoke in class or abuse the teachers (like my old state school before I went to 6th form).

It seems that a big chunk of the ‘subsidies’ are the payment of fees for the children of MoD/foreign office staff who move around internationally – so the children get a stable education [so probably 100% boarding schools].
I’m not sure how they’d deal with this if those schools did not exist.

With a massive private boarding school provision in Calais.

Indeed outofbreath, mine would just be going to an international school in Asia if private and selective schools were banned.

educational performance has high genetic component

Has it not then?

It's a lot less than you'd think. Parental attitudes and support to education (rather than their intelligence) are better indicators of performance. 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.

E.G. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/jun/16/accesstouniversity-private-schools

State boarding schools are a thing. Could be more of a thing if there's demand for it

FWIW, a lot of private schools are actually a bit crap. I've heard of one that boosts it's academic results by entering the poor performers as independent candidates.

Whats nice about Labour’s position is that revoking charitable status is now seen as moderate, so some of the imbalances will be addressed & that one seeming particularly unfair

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.

Abolishing private schools is clearly correct if you're building Society 1.1, but we're somewhat further along the line than that. Have to be realistic.

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.