I haven’t read that yet, although I would say it’s probably one of those things where you can prove anything with statistics. I’ll have a gander.
I did take the exam indeed. Because we weren’t a well off family, and it would mean my parents sacrificing a lot, only on of my friends at the time was attending, and a decent local state school we decided it probably wasn’t worth it.
Ok, read the article. So we’re talking A Levels, and we’re also including Grammar Schools. I see what they’re getting at, and fair enough, but I think to say that the average state school student does better is at best a misnomer, at worst a misrepresentation of both types of school in general. We’re also comparing the top state schools in the country, but unless you live in the catchment area it’s very difficult to get into these schools.
From a GCSE point of view I think my point stands.
Its an emotive subject, but one that has its roots less in snobbery or even reverse snobbery, but IMHO in one of equality. I dont think there is anyone who feels it’s not a fundemental human right to have access to a high quality education. The problem is that for many (not all) there is no choice. You get what is available to you locally. You cannot escape the fact, no matter how unpalatable it is to acknowledge, that there are many parents who sadly dont give a shit about their kids behaviour, aspiration or education. I admire Pap and countless other teachers that see this as a true vocation and therefore these kids as a priority - without support they stand no chance whatever their ability.
Sadly there are also teachers who were either poor to start with or have lost motivation after years of seeing the profession undermined both in status and resources.
Its also true that there are many independent schools that are also crap - it’s too easy to sterotype.
25 years ago as a student, Billy Bragg Albums and a copy of Robert Tressel’s finest carried about, 
I would never have consdered an independent education for my daughter. With the benefit of experience and repsonsibility, its not such an easy choice (if you are fortunate enough to be able to have one) - I never had those advantages being the first in my family to go to University, but fortunate enough to grow up in Kent and go to the local state Grammar school (itself an advantage).
For us the choice was made easier because the local comp is far from ideal and the costs of child care etc were not far off the monthly cost of a good local independent where after school activities etc were inclusive.
Am I in favour of it in principle? NO. As a parent who has to put their childrens educational needs first (who is just about lucky enough to have a choice), am I prepared to compromise on these principles? Yes.
Unless we view education as much more imporatnt and are prepared to pay for it through higher tax - we will never see the investment necessary to see true EQUAL opportunity. When there is consistency in standards and appropriate funding for decent and appropriate class sizes etc, then the debate will be closed.
That sounds exactly the debate we’re having. I couldn’t agree with what you’ve said more.
So we have to decide that education is more important, and we do that by completely ignoring the performance of local schools, and paying for something outside the system?
The path to state school salvation lies there 
A fair point. The problem is pap, that this approach involves risks with our own kid’s education… it’s catch 22 in some respects. Kids dont get the luxury of a second chance at this so its natural that parents try and give them every advantage they can… as unfair as that may seem to those not so fortunate. sadly at present I know that my daugheter would not receive anywhere near the quality of education at the local comp - for a whole number of reasons. However, I can hand on heart say that none of my reasons for our choice include and assessment of the ‘types’ of children she comes into contact with… in that respect IMHO she would be better off at the comp.
PS. at the very least I dont have to suffer the misery of being called a ‘‘hey mister, you fat cunt’’ when out riding my bike, by an 11 year old who attends the local school - however accurate the description may be.
I don’t think many would play the principled role cocernig their kids education as such, with themselves sure by why risk it for a political belief if you could afford better?
As I say you get what you pay for and in the main paid education is better, this doesn’t mean I like it it simply means I am a slight hypocrite and I have absolutely no faith in the education system as it stands, class sizes, political correctness, a lack of discipline and respect have eroded teachers authority.
The police and teachers were the cornerstone of a community, now they are nothing more than a verbal punch bag for the masses.
I consider myself fairly lucky in that I am an Army brat and spent most of my, pre-A level, education in Army run schools abroad. That is schools where the teachers were english but were also paid well and seemed more innvested in what they were doing.
Couple that with the inherent discipline of the children in the school and I think I had the best education I could get outside of a private one. I was also fortunate that I somehow managed to do well at school without really extending myself.
I did notice the difference when my dad came out of the Army and I went to a local Upper school, there were only a few teachers there that seemed to care about the kids so much and more of the kids were unruly and baulked against the constraints that were placed on them by the school rules.
Would I send my kid to a private school, probably not however if there were more american style military academies he would be going to one of them 
You’re taking a risk either way, and like Cherts, I feel you’re massively diminishing the role of the parents, who are teachers all their lives. Reception didn’t teach my kids to read and write, neither did it teach them the value of right and wrong.
I don’t buy the advantages angle entirely either, largely because I’m not sure that sending your kids to private schools confers many advantages. Unless you’re planning to exploit the old boys network, employers don’t really give a toss where you got your GCSEs and A Levels.
If the worry is that your kid will fuck up GCSEs and A Levels by virtue of going to a comprehensive, again, that’s on the parent, imo. My first kid has done both, my second is doing GCSEs now. It’s all about work ethic and independent study. They can go to school for six hours a day, but that is nowhere near enough time to get the grades they need.
Now I know that some choose to sort this problem by needlessly spending exorbitant sums on education they don’t need. I handled it in a different way. First, I don’t tolerate any thick cunts in my house. Second, a visit to a nice single mother on benefits every once in a while gives my daughters all the incentive they need to not end up in that spot. From the outset, I’ve decided that my girls are going to be independent brainboxes that can look after themselves. I really wouldn’t have helped that objective if I’d kept them away from people that Cherts might call a “bad crowd”.
Originally posted by @pap
You’re taking a risk either way, and like Cherts, I feel you’re massively diminishing the role of the parents, who are teachers all their lives. Reception didn’t teach my kids to read and write, neither did it teach them the value of right and wrong.
I don’t buy the advantages angle entirely either, largely because I’m not sure that sending your kids to private schools confers many advantages. Unless you’re planning to exploit the old boys network, employers don’t really give a toss where you got your GCSEs and A Levels.
I think, with private schools, the teachers are more invested in their jobs be that through pay or through the fact that it’s easier to get rid of kids that upset the apple cart.
I also think that they get to spend more one on one time with the kids (smaller class sizes) and can bring through the ones that are failing/starting to fail.
I see what you say about parents and I agree entirely however, sometimes, it’s not so easy to spot when the kids are failing, especially when you have other concerns in life. Teachers should be able to communicate this more easily but it seems that this is not always the case.
We ask our son constantly how he’s doing at school and what he finds hard or not but it’s like getting blood from a stone.
I find all this political debate over state vs independent a bit bemusing. Surely it should be about what the best decision is for your kid within your financial constraints. That is not to say if you can afford it you should send your kid private, if there is a good comp in the area eg Thornden (always used to have a good rep) then the need to send your kid to a private school is less. However if you fall into a catchment of a non performing school then I think it is entirely reasonable for any parent to send their kids to private school
This is what happenedto me in the 80s - I believe my old man had a pretty disastrous meeting with the headmistress of Hamble where he came out fearing for my education and said either we move or I go private and I ended up at KES. It meant that we had some pretty lean years because of the fees but that was the choice they made.
Was KES better? Yes and No. The facilities were much better. The teachers were far more engaged - the comp teachers were all striking at the time. But ultimately any success was down to the graft and application of the pupils and I suspect that most would have flourished in the state system - KES just provided an environment that gave kids an improved chance of reaching potential (again no guarentees that they took it though)
I think you’re missing the point. The ideal of the comprehensive system is to provide the best possible education for kids, irrespective of income. That’s not happening, and anyone that sends their kid to a private school is part of the problem, because they’ve completely removed themselves from caring. Fuck everyone else. My kids are okay. Which is a reasonable position to take if your kids are going to live in a world on their own.
A decent education should be something that is a universal right, not an upsell opportunity targeted at fretful parents.
I would stand by that principle for myself but not one that could jeopardise my child’s future, you can stand on beliefs I agree but not one that could harm your child’s education.
As I say it is the Governments fault for allowing such shite schools to exist and such irrelevant learning, surely a more practical approach to the more practical student would help?
We need youth who can make things that require skill, not worthless shite that means they can be fast tracked in to a job at pound stretcher.
Bollocks pap - A parent naturally puts their own kids first - its normal to do so, but to suggest by placing your kids in an independent school means you dont care about everyone else is pretty ignoarnt and somewhat insulting to be honest. The only real way to make a difference is through the normal political channels - the fact none of the parties offer any real solutions is not the fault of parents… but a sad reflectrion on what folks seem to expect from manifestos. Its has to be said, as uncomfortable as it is to say it, but too many schools do NOT have the resources to manage the challenges faced by so many kids within their care - because too many parents do not offer the discipine, support and aspirations that helps these kids reach their potential.
Chosing to place your kids in an indepndent school is NOT contributing to this problem… your POV suggests that you think that if all kids went to the comps then somehow this would effect a sudden change in the system, in funding, in quality of teaching, resources etc… who is changing funding system and given the numbers we are talking about, will they be enough to ensure we get a government with education as a priority that demnds taxation levels to pay for it? NO, the numbers are too small and if we go by your assumption then these are the types who wont be voting for higher taxation anyway!
The weight of pressure to effect change must come from the majority… not the minority. I just dont see any party with a desire to do so… That ois what is failing kids, not the minority that go to independent schools.
So how many times have you demanded better services from state schools? Or been a governor, or member of a PTA? Apart from well meaning platitudes about caring about education, how exactly do you care about it? Seems to me you’ve just thrown cash at an alternative, therefore part of the problem.
There is of course also the point that you are removing your kid from the school system, reducing the burden on the state schools thus contributing to a better state school system.
That assumes the wider school budget still provides money for students that go to independent schools, which gets reallocated to state schools. I doubt it does.
That’s assuming money is allocated on a student by student basis - I very much doubt it does.
Originally posted by @BTripz
I think, with private schools, the teachers are more invested in their jobs be that through pay or through the fact that it’s easier to get rid of kids that upset the apple cart.
Fuck me, I’m not letting that go. Absolutely not true. I’m not saying private teachers are less invested than me but myself and the close team I work with are, if anything, too invested. I regularly pull a 60 hour week and put work (i.e. other people’s kids) ahead of own family.
You have yet to make a cohesive case for how the minority of kids that end up in independent schools contributes to the problem, or how you feel by not doing so would bring about change - Do you really believe PTAs and governors can effect the kind of change necessary? Seriously? Sounds to me you are just going round in circles wth the same rhetoric. These bodies have existed for almost as slong as teh schools themselves and what change have we seen?
Maybe when I can finally stop working 60 hours a week, I will have time to offer practical support to the local schools…
but does your stance effect change? No, because this situation of underfunded state schools has been around for… guess what 40-50 years? And no political party has ever suggested a solution that will change this - let alone made it attractive to vote for. Given that there are simply not the numbers of parents that send kids to independent schools to out vote the majority, its not as if these parents are ‘preventing change’ - come on, tell me how it works?
This is a political stance - admit it - because there is no practical solution other than a comprehensive shake up of the way state schools are funded, the support staff get for discipline and perhaps more importantly, how can some parents can be convinced of the importance of supporting their kids. There are much bigger social considerations at play here than whether a few folks send their kids to independent schools and yet you wantt all these parents to be responsible for this as well?
Apologies for not sending my child to a crap school on the hope that it may benefit others in 20 years time… yes it is a selfish view, but its normal to be so where ones children are concerned. She will get a rounded education because of the way she is brought up and the friends she has locally from ALL social/economic backgrounds.