You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I note non of you have engaged with the fact that private schools entrench privilege and also damages everyones education and damages the country as a whole
They don't operate in the market anyway. Their status affords them all sorts of benefits.
Also, private schools started as a way to educate poor children...
As I understand Finland integrated the system and did very well as a whole.
My partner works at an Independent school, and as Labour voters we're prepared to suck this up.
private schools use teacher trained in the state system as does Private health use staff trained at the states cost.
I'm not a teacher but doesn't getting a PGCE require a state school placement and you don't need a PGCE to teach in a private school anyway? I would suspect it's not as clear-cut as you're trying to make out that private schools siphon off tax payer funded teachers with zero contribution. Anyway you're also espousing the fallacy that all kids in private schools have rich parents - but if that were true wouldn't they be contributing proportionately more of the tax payer burden funding teacher training?
Oh no wait I forgot, every kid at a private school has tax dodging Russian oligarchs as parent! pfft
I swear you watched that TV series on behind the scenes at Harrow and think every private school is like that. Eton, Harrow etc. are NOT like most private schools...
The vast majority of parents with kids at private school are rich. £14000 per kid per year means you are rich and yes - being trained in the state schools system at cost to the state but then taking those skills into the private system is a huge cost to the state that the rest of us get no benefit from.
I suspect once again this is the unrealistic ideas about being rich that many on here seem to have. If you can afford school fees at that sort of scale you are rich. No doubt at all. You will be in the richest few % of the people of the UK
No doubt at all. You will be in the richest few % of the people of the UK
You say that like it's a bad thing, TJ.
How much does it cost the country to train a teacher? How much of that is put back into the system by private schools?
CFH - just pointing it out as two folk on here have claimed they are not rich but put their kids into private schools
TJ - and what’s your problem with ‘rich’ people?
I thought we had got to the stage where communism state controlled earnings was clearly known to be flawed
Anyway you’re also espousing the fallacy that all kids in private schools have rich parents
Its not a fallacy
Funcy dunc - I just want them to admit their privilege and wealth - not to pretend they are not rich. I am rich. I happily acknowledge that on a wage far less than those on here that deny they are rich and privileged.
If you can afford £14000 a year school fees you must be rich.
TJ - people don’t engage with you because you put out such a negative opinion of anyone who has more money than you.
I don’t know if you mean to, but it certainly comes out loud and clear from your posts.
I also loathe the subsidy to the rich from the general taxpayer by taking skilled people trained at the public purse and using them purely for the benefit of the rich
Thats simply not true. I find it weird that on here rich folk refuse to aknowledge it. I am perfectly happy to aknowledge I am rich comopared to the vast majority of the country and I could not afford school fees
You have a strange definition of rich. Being above the breadline doesn’t make one an Etonian JR-M parody.
TJ is just feeling guilty because you're all paying more tax than him.
I also loathe the subsidy to the rich from the general taxpayer by taking skilled people trained at the public purse and using them purely for the benefit of the rich
So you'd deny the rich their share of the commonly paid for training for teachers? It looks like it really is all about hating the rich.
No - I simply want them to pay their way not be subsidised by the genral taxpayer
rich is in the top 10% of the country.
Its a very strange definition of rich yo have that being in the top few % of the countries earners and having tens of thousands a year spare cash does not mean you are rich. I have a household income of £55000 pa and know I am rich and happily aknowledge that and that barely puts me in that top 10 %
TJ is correct the median UK wage as of October 2018 figures is 569 per week or £29588 annually. It is noteable that the statistics make no mention of average wage due to the 10% of high wage earners that distort things.
Our household income is around TJ's and we're comfortable but like him I'm the wrong side of 50. Those in their 30's may not feel wealthy if in some parts of the South East where house prices are ludicrous but these individuals are rich if they stop and think carefully about it.
TJ - sorry to have to tell you you aren’t rich. Rich people earn that in a week or 2!
You need to stop having such binary views on everything.
I also loathe the subsidy to the rich from the general taxpayer by taking skilled people trained at the public purse and using them purely for the benefit of the rich
How is that any different to any other graduate. I was educated from the public purse, got my degree and started to work in private industry. Why shouldn't teachers especially now that if they have an independent degree they will have paid for the tuition themselves?
TJ – sorry to have to tell you you aren’t rich. Rich people earn that in a week or 2!
He does own multiple properties so that will go some way to increasing his wealth.
read sanwhiches post
Given that the pinnacle of private education has produced Cameron, Mogg and Johnson it would seem a sensible precaution to abolish the system.
Am I the only one disappointed that nobody has resorted to graphs yet?
capital wealth ie the two properties? around £400 000 with an income of £55000 certainly makes me amongst the richest in the country.
Edit - thats shared between the two of us - the capital and the income.
Unfortunatly given life choices when I retire next year I will drop back a long way
I’m not a teacher but doesn’t getting a PGCE require a state school placement
Maybe during the training year and you could argue this just puts strain on the training school, but not any obligation once qualified.
Fee paying school teachers can also sign up to teachers pension scheme which seems a little generous imo...although mrs anagallis diesnt mind!
How much does it cost the country to train a teacher? How much of that is put back into the system by private schools?
Not sure but you can get up to £30k I think to train in a shortage subject such as Physics.
TJ, a fellow with no children, going full pelt about schools reminded me of this...
I went to a private school, my parents weren't rich (one a RAF officer one a part-time teacher - in a state school no less!). OK they only had to pay 10% of the the fees so not a normal case but then there are plenty of forces kids in private boarding (for continuity of education).
There were also plenty of bursaries (up to 100% of tuition) and scholarships available so whilst a lot of the kids had well off (some even rich) parents there were a lot of us that I certainly wouldn't class as having rich parents.
I actually agree state funding should be very limited or non-existent for private schools but that's very far from abolishing them.
How much does it cost the country to train a teacher? How much of that is put back into the system by private schools?
Yes but compared to a great majority you probably were.
Forces kids boarding is the lesser of two evils and IIRC there are actually state run boarding schools to cover this.
As regards banging on about it - I guess it is tiresome for those who are rich but refuse to acknowledge it to have their assumptions challenged. Many times on here I see people claiming they are not rich when in actual fact they are in the richest 10% or the country. thats tiresome
I have no issue with private schools so long as they pay their way. ie they pay for the teachers they take out of the state system, they pay taxes as the business they are and they lose their charitable status.
As mentioned above the frothing - I attended private school on military subsidy and I also had a pretty hefty academic scholarship, and I think some sort of sports one too.
When I was having an arguement once with my stepdad about how much boarding school cost him, I was able to show that I would have actually cost more in food / light staying at home. That didn't go down too well to be honest.
And TJ, others are being a bit too polite about your simple mind.
Income does not equal rich
Averages are just that averages they do not take into account other meaningful factors (cost to live)
I know people who are so 'rich' their taxable income is pretty much nil, most were born into money and have not made any themselves
Someone on a joint income of £55k now would not be able to buy one property let alone two in many parts of the country.
AA - in fairness those teacher that get the £30 000 payout for training in subjects where there are shortages of teacher have to sign up to working in state schools for a whole two years (IIRC)
the cost to the public purse of trainig teachers is a lot more than that. again IIRC its around £50 000. maybe a bit less now with graduate loans that some will pay a bit of.
People don't seem to have picked up on what's really needed. Improving the state system for both pupils and the teachers in it. TJ is worrying about paying for training teachers for the private sector, I'm not. I'm not too worried about trained teachers doing other things, after all how many graduates do a job they were educated to do, not many. Education is good for society and the benefits go far beyond a direct cost-benefit analysis. What sucks is the job content of a teacher in England which means people make a logical decisiion to quit.
The problem with teachers is that they are bright enough to do other things if the conditions are shit (which they are in many English schools). And if they really have a vocation for teaching there are so many better places in the world to do it. Being a teacher in England rates as the worst job I've done apart from industrial cleaning and mindless data entry. And yet teaching in other contexts I rate as one of the best jobs I've ever done.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/oct/02/never-return-teach-england-refuge-abroad
If you earn in the top 10% of the countries earnings you are rich. You have life choices available to you that are simply not available to those earning the median. Paying for privvate school is one of those life choices.
yes a joint income of £55 000 would be difficult but just about possible to buy those two properties now. However that joint income still puts me amongst the richest part of our country.
AA – in fairness those teacher that get the £30 000 payout for training in subjects where there are shortages of teacher have to sign up to working in state schools for a whole two years (IIRC)
Not sure thats the case, certainly our last science trainee went straight to private, mind you they couldnt teach a dog to bark.
Someone on a joint income of £55k now would not be able to buy one property let alone two in many parts of the country.
Doesnt mean they are not much better off than many/majority. Buying a house is but a distant dream for huge numbers of people.
TJ - if it makes you feel any better my nephew went to a private school (100% bursary) and now earns what he calls an obscene amount of money in banking, so pays a fair wack of tax & donates 10% of his salary to unicef, so it's not all take take take. On the flip side my cycling buddy went to state school, got kicked out of uni and went on to make millions, so again paid ££££ in tax. To start trying to make private schools pay for the education of their teachers just looks petty and envious rather than a sensible approach.
Edit
Edukator +1
I suggest those of yo who do not think yo are rich but have high incomes try this.
https://www.ifs.org.uk/tools_and_resources/where_do_you_fit_in
for me it comes to
you have a higher income than around 65% of the population - equivalent to about 41.9 million individuals.
so I am just about in the richest 1/3 of the country.
To start trying to make private schools pay for the education of their teachers just looks petty and envious rather than a sensible approach.
In times of severe shortages of teachers, where most schools are struggling to recruit enough science and maths teachers, let alone good ones I'm not sure it is petty.
53% allowing for the 7% 'rich people' that have been discounted.
So you're nearly in the poorest half 🙂
See this boils down to definition of 'rich'
I would say if you are at 51% of national average you are lucky to be above average....that doesn't make you rich
Interesting bbc article:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15822595
A survey of professional households by insurance firm Hiscox suggested an annual income of £93,000 in the UK was hard to manage on. Those polled complained of feeling broke and said they would need to earn more than £150,000 before they felt wealthy.
Anyway according to TJ's definition I'm well into the 'rich' bracket. I can't afford private school for my kids - we need a new definition for those that can. super rich?
A survey of professional households by insurance firm Hiscox suggested an annual income of £93,000 in the UK was hard to manage on. Those polled complained of feeling broke and said they would need to earn more than £150,000 before they felt wealthy.
Most meaningless post ever!!!
People say they want more money, everyone does!
I expect all their spare cash goes on school fees, abolish those schools and they'd be much better off!
did you read the article I linked?
where most schools are struggling to recruit enough science and maths teachers, let alone good ones
It's not the few who go into the private system that creates shortages, it's the droves leaving the profession or going abroad. In just the STW sample there are many more ex-teachers than teachers. You are one of the rare survivors a_a. There was a thread by a teacher in trouble for having defended himself reacently, I didn't reply, because it was too late to help him. There but for walking out went I. I kept my hands in my pockets, got out without injury and left UK teaching mid class, mid week, mid term and prospered from then on. There is f-all support for teachers in the UK, you're on your own with the legal cards stacked against you. Any trouble with the head, the parents, the pupils, the institution - one solution , get out fast before it gets worse (which it will because of the way the system works and the useless unions) - and thousands do.
No – I simply want them to pay their way not be subsidised by the genral taxpayer
They (parents of private school pupils) are the general taxpayer as much as anyone else is. Collectively they more than pay their way. They are entitled to their share of a common resource.
From page 1
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.
Is exactly what my point was going to be. In fact the MOD already own their own private school in Scotland, many of the pupils there have moved every couple of years as a parent is redeployed. Maybe the solution is more state run boarding schools for those that require or would benefit from the stability or just being removed from present circumstances? I fear such a move would only result in them being a dumping ground for kids the local authorities have given up on and treated as borstal lite though.
@Edukator The teaching unions are pretty good as supporting teachers and I don't hear that picture from the teachers that I know. It's an oddly pessimistic view. Teaching is a tough relentless profession but many teachers stay in the profession for a long time and have rewarding careers.
Just realised I miscalculated my income - should be:
With a household after tax income of £583 per week, you have a higher income than around 86% of the population - equivalent to about 55.4 million individuals.
Thats on a gross income of £62000 pa for two
There's a crisis of overworked teachers, underfunding and lousy conditions for both teachers and pupils in many (if not all) state schools guys and girls. Banning private schools won't improve that, worrying about who pays for teacher training for private schools won't change that. The state system needs to take some cues from education systems in the world where the pupils are the focus rather than the stats, where teachers are happy in their jobs, and where bullying of both staff and pupils isn't rife.
I really don't care how much you earn or what you're worth TJ. It really doesn't make your arguments any more tenable.
Are you a teacher, Tony? Have you ever been in conflict with your headmaster over a serious issue?
Teaching is a tough relentless profession but many teachers stay in the profession for a long time and have rewarding careers.
Statistically many more don't. The profession bleeds good people. In the school Madame works in no-one has left other than to retire or to go to another school in all the years she's been there. It was the same in a German school I used to organise an exchange with. Teacher retention in the UK is catastrophic:
And FFS it shouldn't be 'tough and relentless'. Madame goes off to work as happy as could be, she used to dread going to work in Leicester.
A survey of professional households by insurance firm Hiscox suggested an annual income of £93,000 in the UK was hard to manage on.
Farcical
Putting that into the IFS calculator with two kids one at secondary school and a high council tax gives:
With a household after tax income of £1093 per week, you have a higher income than around 76% of the population - equivalent to about 49 million individuals.
Just realised I miscalculated my income
You're coming across as desperate to convince us all that you're so rich you're definitely in the top 10%.
It makes you seem more aspirational than any pushy parent packing their kids off to boarding school.
So as a non-teacher, I’m interested to know:
What are teachers biggest gripes?
What simple changes would make a difference?
I get really annoyed with government talking about “productivity increases”. That is just bollox speak for “Make your staff work harder for less money”
so I am just about in the richest 1/3 of the country.
You're also in the poorest 2/3 of the population. Rich being top 10% of top is your definition of rich, not everyone's. Also it doesn't factor in out-goings, someone on £50k in London married with 4 kids is a lot less well off than someone on £50k who's single and doesn't live in a city (this is basically my brothers vs my situation so not an unrealistic case).
And stil they waffle on about how rich they are.
I merely used my numbers to show those on here who despite earning a lot more than me do not think themselves rich. thats all the point was. 2 of 3 folk on here claimed not to be rich but able to afford school fees of around £14000 pa per kid
anyway - sorry I drifted this thread off point. apologies for that.
Back to schools - private schools entrench inequality and damage the entire populations education. I am here concerned with the entire population not the individual.
If you go to the right private school you will get more opportunities related to the contacts you make, you will have little knowledge or empathy ( generalisation) of and for those less fortunate. You take money and personnel out of the state system to the detriment of the majority. Most importantly to me tho you remove role models and committed parents from the state system which entrenches the difference between state and private education.
Read the post I made above about what happened to the school I went to. This went in ten years from being a great school to being a sink school simply because all the middle class parents removed their children from it - and removed them to go to a shcool that was actually worse in education terms but had acedemy in its name and a history of being a grant aided school
enlightened self interst says its in all our interests to have the best state schools we can have. Private schools are one of the barriers to this
Not being a totalitarian I would not abolish them - but I sure would make sure they paid their way properly and were treated as the businesses they are not as charities which they are not.
That would entail a large increase in fees and thus free up money for state schools. Everyone wins if state schools are better.
It’s not the few who go into the private system that creates shortages, it’s the droves leaving the profession or going abroad.
Its a big enough issue to be a problem, especially as its often more experienced teachers that go and less experienced who replace them.
The profession bleeds good people.
This and a lot of it is driven by ofsted pressuring slt to hit certain targets who then heap pressure on the teachers all set against a backdrop of insufficient and falling funding. Someone somewhere needs to put their foot on the ball and say no, it cant be done at present but slt do not have that freedom so the cycle continues.
What are teachers biggest gripes?
What simple changes would make a difference?
The biggest gripe is stress not work load per sae. As class sizes grow due to lack of funding and hours doing my subject science fall due to lack of teachers we are still expected to improve grades, this just cannot happen. Meanwhile lack of funding means the support of senior staff or support staff over behaviour issues is less and issues cannot be dealt with in any way other than shoving it back at the teacher and telling them to do it better. For new teachers behaviour is a massive challenge and phoning parents and arranging DT's takes huge amounts of time and then lesson planning suffers and these are the people who need to hit targets to progress up the pay scale so get even more pressure from above.
Me I've been doing it a while and love it, but then I did need to realise I couldnt enjoy teaching and manage other teachers at the same time. I'm also at the top of the class teachers pay scale and could move schools within a week of looking so the pressure that can be put on me is less but its those first 5 years that are crucial in a new teachers career.
What would your immediate fixes be?
It’s STW so circular arguments on trivia are rife, but that aside, I think we all agree our education system has serious issues.
What would your immediate fixes be?
Improve funding, scrap or redesign offsted to actually look at a school properly why is it always the same outstanding schools and same inadequate schools?
Put more money into state education some of which would be obtained by stopping the state subsidies on private education
Abolish offstead and go back to the previous system of education professionals assessing schools and being co operative and nurturing not punitive.
I have no problem with either private or state education. I do have a problem with running both systems concurrently. The education system should be built around education being either ALL private or ALL state, not both. A mix of both fosters inequality. The same issue for private healthcare. The more money you have the more of an advantage you gain.
I can’t be bothered reading all this thread, but I e had a skim and here’s my thoughts.
I see the problem being the head line “abolish Private schools” being a head line grabbing manifesto type of thing. It appears to have little or no thought to the second half of the policy, that being use “the money” to make the rest of schools better.
But once you’ve got shut of them there seems to be no extra money, just more pupils in the state systems.
Sounds a bit like a “let’s leave the EU” thing that’s been going on. Easy to say up front, but very few think it trough to the end.
You will always have parents who are more willing, and/or financially or time rich and chose to invest that wealth in their children and thus give them an advantage.
I recon they will try and get shut of them, waste loads of money doing it and then abandon the idea.
I see 2 possible solutions.
Either
1. Take kids of their parents at birth (so parents cant read to them at night, that would be an advantage) and raise them by the state.
Or
2. Shut all state schools and make parents pay the extra £8k a year to fund their kids to all go to private schools.
That way everyone is the same.
Shut all state schools and make parents pay the extra £8k a year to fund their kids to all go to private schools.
More like 8k a term!
Two old Etonians with key roles in unlawful attempt to prorogue parliament. What exactly did they teach them while they were there?
But once you’ve got shut of them there seems to be no extra money, just more pupils in the state systems.
Good point. If there's spare money to fund 600,000 extra state school places, far better to spend that money on the existing state school system rather than giving posh kids a state funded education that they don't need or want.
(It costs from £3,950-£8,595 per pupil to educate a kid. Multiply that by 600,000.)
A truly mad policy.
Meaningless though because the only issue that matters is Brexit right now.
A mix of both fosters inequality. The same issue for private healthcare. The more money you have the more of an advantage you gain.
wiganer what do you mean exactly by private healthcare? Do you mean as a taxable perk offered by a company? Please expand, thanks.
Sqyuadra - that they are the masters and everyone else must bow down to them - arrogance and hubris.
More like 8k a term!
I was going on it being about £14k a year (one by me is only £12k) and current state fees are around £6k, thus an £8k up lift.
current state fees are around £6k,
?
6k ppf is what I think he is saying.
Actually you still use both services. Private health care does not cover emergency treatment nor some other healthcare needs and private schools use teacher trained in the state system as does Private health use staff trained at the states cost.
also to be able to afford both you must be in the richest few % of the country.
tj - sorry, a bit late responding. I am currently working on the other side of the world in a different time zone, spending a week away from the family working 16 hour days. Just one of the sacrifices that I chose to make in order to fund my decadent bourgeois lifestyle.
Teachers and doctors generally come out of university having funded their own education through loans. That doesn't strike me as too much of a burden on the tax payer. Twice this year we have benefited from emergency treatment from the NHS when solarider jnr fell seriously ill. Once he was discharged, his ongoing treatment placed no further burden on the NHS and we made a contribution to a local children's charity as a way of balancing the world and showing our gratitude.
And yes, I am unapologetically in the top few percent of earners in the country. I can't see a problem with that and won't apologise for it. I am rich, I am fortunate and I appreciate every choice and benefit that this gives me - there I have said it. I haven't got there through inherited wealth, exploitation or ill gotten gains. We don't live on Animal Farm, and even if we did some animals are always more equal than others. As with any communist ideal, the people spouting it are often the most hyprocritical. Let me just point some of that out to you:
1) Your thread about the return on investment of putting a dorma window in your second property. Despite my apparently inequitable and unjust wealth, I do not own a second property like you. Are you one of the greedy landlords so despised by 'the poor', or is your second home some sort of non profit organisation, and when you sell it in 10 years time will you donate the proceeds to worthy causes?
2) I note from your several threads about trekking and overseas holidays that you take a summer holiday? Something that we haven't done since solarider jnr was born as part of the sacrifice to make the choices that we do. I guess we all have the right to spend our income on what we want right?
3) Your long running court cases with your local council divert valuable time and money (paid for by national and local tax) away from much needed services. Would you not rather that time and money were redirected to improving the public services that you rightly cherish so dearly?
4) From your recent thread - "Both me and t’missus work 37 hour weeks, we earn a decent whack but not anywhere near the high tax bracket. Its plenty of money for us and our needs. I could work 48 hours a week and obviously would earn 30% more. I’d rather have the time to lie in the sun and ride my bike." And I totally respect your choice. If you are comfortable, why waste your time worrying about whether others are more comfortable or make different choices? Live and let live.
I don't force my opinions one others, and respect that you might have different view. But stating your opinions as fact is never going to lead to reasonable debate.
(It costs from £3,950-£8,595 per pupil to educate a kid. Multiply that by 600,000.)
A truly mad policy.
Are you implying it's a mad policy because we can't afford to educate all the children in the UK?? Perhaps things need to change to fix that then. Re-balancing wealth will require sacrifices by the few for the benefit of all, who would argue against such a policy?
Don't forget the wealthy will be saving a fortune in fees so will no doubt be paying/donating/fundraising into kiddies new state school and still be considerably better off. Will also be able to sleep well knowing they are helping the whole of society not just their own child climb the ladder quicker than others.
I have no problem with either private or state education. I do have a problem with running both systems concurrently. The education system should be built around education being either ALL private or ALL state, not both. A mix of both fosters inequality. The same issue for private healthcare. The more money you have the more of an advantage you gain.
Welcome to capitalism. You could always try socialism if you think that's going to be better. It's certainly been tried before and didn't look like much fun for the masses. The more money you have the more choices you are free to make. That applies to anything and everything in life. It might not be fair, but to quote Churchill:-
“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.”
Teachers and doctors generally come out of university having funded their own education through loans.
Teachers can be paid up to 30k to do pgce
Don’t forget the wealthy will be saving a fortune in fees so will no doubt be paying/donating/fundraising into kiddies new state school and still be considerably better off.
Of course they won't as the money will no longer be gaining an advantage for their kids when they leave school. Other than grades they will be the same as anyone else leaving the school.
Unfair Kerley. The wealthy are looking for the best education not an advantage over others so they will become a huge asset to the state schools that their kids now visit.
Maybe? :o)
Okay nobody has pulled TJ up on this glittering pile of bollocks yet:
Most importantly to me tho you remove role models and committed parents from the state system which entrenches the difference between state and private education.
So what you (and at least one other) are saying here is that only middle class and above parents are capable of being role models or being committed to the education of their child. That without these "role models" working or benefits class kids are totally incapable of doing well or fostering the ambition to do well. That it's not the teachers and teaching environment (lack of disruption, well resourced) that counts but who the parents of your cohorts are?
Sorry but that is utter pish. And ironic given your counter to elitism seems to be that the notion that the middle classes and above are just "better".
And it goes both ways, the amount of shit I got for going to boarding school was unreal. Suddenly I was a toff, posh or whatever because I was given an opportunity to get away from a toxic environment for less money than folk spend on a piss up to Benidorm every year.
So what you (and at least one other) are saying here is
Not what you wrote!
That's what TJ wrote, in as many words. If that's not what you meant (assuming you are the other I referenced, I honestly can't remember who it was) then that was how it came across.
My point is that mixing does nothing as it is, those who are nurtured will develop and those who are left to rot will continue to do so. Class has nothing to do with it, it's just the lazy work shy progeny of the rich may have an additional safety net to fall back on. I can remember the classes at school that were disrupted by a handful of or a dedicated solo prat(s). Smaller or "better" classes don't change that.
This policy, as people are taking at face value, does nothing to address equality of opportunity and instead only serves to affect the equality of outcome by reducing the top to the lowest common denominator. The net effect of this isn't going to be the top tier in shit schools, its going to be offshore boarding for the top % and everyone else dealing with the same broken system. Oxbridge isn't going to care whether an entrant has A levels or a baccalaureate.
That’s what TJ wrote, in as many words.
So its not what he wrote then? It either is what he wrote or isnt what he wrote. If you need a caveat then it isnt.
I can remember the classes at school that were disrupted by a handful of or a dedicated solo prat(s). Smaller or “better” classes don’t change that.
I can remember the lessons I taught for the last 15 years and am sure smaller classes help a great deal as does having supporting staff outside the room to deal with issues, these cost money. I agree though that ditching fee paying schools alone wont help this but imagine the dilution effect would. The opposite is true in grammar school areas. Grammars do slightly better with the few but the rest do worse with the majority. I would expect the reverse may be true more role models, more possibility to see a real life investment banker etc may raise ambition generally.