Labour to abolish independent schools?

[cooky1257]

If it had no charitable status you would still hate it.

You would just find another reason.

Why the attachment? My experience teaching the product of such schools is their confidence always exceeds their ability, they often resent getting their arses kicked by the bright kids off an estate but rather than get up and try harder they will just shrug safe in the knowledge their career path is already mapped out to transcend innate talent.

 

[Seanm]

That only works if person B had not said something in context before. But in most cases on pfm, someone says something, then someone else makes a slur, using generalising sentence structures as defence.

It might wash with you. But it doesn't with me. You are very keen on associating people with racism on comments that are miles away from being racist. Yet you don't see a connection here.

What he said makes absolutely no sense and it was offensive. But you are not bothered.

I was really talking about guest and his "I sent my children to private school how dare you call me and my family total bastards!" which no one had. Well, until F1's contribution!

 

[ks.234]

In all your posts in this thread you come over as mean, vindictive,spiteful and resentful. You seem like someone with a huge chip on your shoulder. Do you mean to do that?

If you do could you just stick to posting in the Brexit thread ( where it is the norm to be so ) this conversation was a pleasure until you chipped in with your "burn down the world".

It is not down to you to tell me where I can and cannot post. This is an open forum and you have no business assuming the misplaced sense of self importance telling others what they should and shouldn't be doing

I do not resent people for their privilage, but I do, and will continue to question such people, not for their privilege as such, but for their failure to recognise their privilege and that they do not represent the 'majority', or represent 'ordinary people'. If you can post evidence that I have initiated anything 'mean, vindictive, [or] spiteful' in my criticism, then I'll apologise.

In the mean time I suggest you look to your self as you come across as someone who it either totally ignorant of, or without any sort of care or consideration for those less well off than yourself, as well as being somewhat pompous.

 

[Jim Audiomisc]

It is nonsense that only people who pay can get a decent education. The majority of the well educated people in this country came through the State system.

Agreed. Becauae of the absolutist form of your assertion. Nice example of the kind of rhetoric such schools teach their scions to deploy.

But you then need to note that there are far more state/local schools than private ones to understand the stats correctly.

Note that the intake at the 'Russel Group' Unis has a disproportionate number coming from public schools. Then ask why the provision at so many state/local schools is so 'poor'.

Then ask if this might improve if the well-off *had* to send their kids to the same schools as everyone else. And that the level of provision was the same at all state/local schools even if that meant poor (economically) areas had to get more money per kid than elsewhere.

By allowing the wealthy/ powerful to segregate their kids we enable them to use their influence to:

A) hold down the provision in state/local schools so they can pay less tax.

B) gain advantages private school gives their kids because of the 'badge and polish' it provides.

 

[Joe]

. Often their main strength is in confidence and being able to blather their way though. But of course your experience may differ.

.

No.. that is my experience of them too...of all the middle classes in fact. Better educated parents produce better educated children...children more confident and relaxed with their place in the world. Many more parents have been better educated since the 60's when university education was opened up to far more and the pupils of comprehensives started to come through the system . How many people on here in their 60's have parents from very ordinary backgrounds? A great many I would think .

To read this thread you would think that this is how they see the world.... ( maybe they do )

 

[roman]

There is one a couple of hundred yards away from my house. The notion they are all Eton, Charterhouse etc is a myth. I live in a decidedly working class area and I suspect the school is good for the local economy. Its a PITA road wise as every single kid gets dropped off in a huge 4x4 and it just makes for gridlock.

PS Back in the 1990s I put in a proposal to restructure the LAN and computer infrastructure at Charterhouse. I didn’t end up getting the contract, but it was fascinating to see the place. I’m glad I didn’t get it to be honest, it was a real fiddly job due to the listed status and number of different outbuildings etc. I always far preferred highly paid contracts where I could sit with my feet on the desk all day playing Doom or Quake, and that certainly wasn’t going to be one of them!

Some of my closest childhood friends attended Westminster and later one went to charterhouse. All super smart and successful with very little nepotism to help them on their way.

As a state educated lad it was an eye opener for sure. I don't know that I'd deny them what they experienced (it was a lot cheaper then and their much younger siblings didn't get the same treatment)

I’m completely independent thanks, I serve no one bar my own customers!

Sadly, as ever, the far-left is just as authoritarian and dictatorial as the far-right. Both extremes always result in the suppression of personal choice and removal of civil liberty. As stated previously I firmly believe in progressive taxation, closing tax loop-holes etc, and folk who have the intellect, creativity, skills or luck to do well paying their way and helping building national infrastructure in which we can all be proud (including education, obviously), but beyond that the state should not dictate how you spend your money. If that really is what this Labour party stands for it is just as repugnant in its 1970s class warriorism and politics of envy as the Tories are in their elitist tax-fiddling and trough-feeding. Both are just obsolete shite as far as many of us are concerned. I am neither landed gentry nor am I a mill worker, so both dinosaurs still rooted in that timeframe are beyond irrelevant to me.

PS I have already (with the caveat of special needs provision) stated I believe charitable status should be removed.

As things stand I broadly agree with your stance on personal choice and civil liberty but if you'll allow a deviation from the main topic, how does this stance survive as it collides with climate change?

I doubt whether the masses doing the right things of their own volition will suffice, although it is likely to be pressure from the public, or changes so obvious and awful that will force government to act as required.

In other words cherish those freedoms while they last. Change is coming.

 

[Seanm]

I’m completely independent thanks, I serve no one bar my own customers!

Sadly, as ever, the far-left is just as authoritarian and dictatorial as the far-right. Both extremes always result in the suppression of personal choice and removal of civil liberty. As stated previously I firmly believe in progressive taxation, closing tax loop-holes etc, and folk who have the intellect, creativity, skills or luck to do well paying their way and building national infrastructure in which we can all be proud (including education, obviously), but beyond that the state should not dictate how you spend your money. If that really is what this Labour party stands for it is just as repugnant in its 1970s class warriorism and politics of envy as the Tories are in their elitist tax-fiddling and trough-feeding. Both are just obsolete shite as far as many of us are concerned. I am neither landed gentry nor am I a mill worker, so both dinosaurs still rooted in that timeframe are beyond irrelevant to me.

PS I have already (with the caveat of special needs provision) stated I believe charitable status should be removed.

Sure, on the one side Johnson's deportation-happy, traitor-threatening, Grenfell-mocking, pauper-killing band of self-identifying psychopaths, and on the other a few nods towards addressing an obviously unjust and socially destructive archaism in the education system. Drawing an equivalence is beyond absurd, unless what you want to do offer tacit support for the side that's obviously worse by withdrawing it from the one that's obviously better.

As for the personal choice routine, education is always where it comes unstuck. If you do well in life through hard work and good decisions you should be able to rig the system so your children can succeed without having to bother. That's where we end up if you refuse to think about anything beyond people's freedom to spend their own money how they like. People obviously should not be allowed to spend their own money how they like: we accept that principle when it comes to buying and selling e.g. children and it shouldn't be an unimaginable stretch to extend it to buying and selling their futures.

 

[Joe]

.

In the mean time I suggest you look to your self as you come across as someone who it either totally ignorant of, or without any sort of care or consideration for than those less well off than yourself, .

That is a very small group of people...especially on here. I have never earned more than half the average wage of this country . I have never resented nor blamed anyone else for that. I would rather celebrate other peoples success that destroy them for it though.

 

[cooky1257]

That is a very small group of people...especially on here. I have never earned more than half the average wage of this country . I have never resented nor blamed anyone else for that. I would rather celebrate other peoples success that destroy them for it though.

Ahh, is this an example of how a working class person can be confident and relaxed with their place in the world?

 

[Ponty]

Removing charitable status will simply make public schools more elitist. Labour could expect serious legal challenges. Surely they’d have to apply the same rules to other charitable educational establishments, Universities for example, even nurseries. They all offer advantage for a price so Labour must target them as much as Marlborough et al.

Many parents make huge sacrifices to send their children to public school. Making it more expensive will mean it’s simply not possible for many, even Labour MP’s, placing further burden on the state. My school, along with most, has an Alumni Foundation, where funds are raised through donations and legacies to provide bursaries to gifted and disadvantaged children who would otherwise have zero chance of attending. Some of the journeys are amazing, inspirational and life changing.

Many send their children to public school to avoid disruptive elements. I’d be fascinated to see what would happen in state schools if this was removed to help those who want to get their heads down do so without limitation. That’s effectively the environment a public school provides. It’s got nothing to do with old classrooms and leaky roofs (we had plenty of those). It doesn’t matter how much money you put into the state system, the problem kids and parents will still exist and throttle the potential of some of those who want to get on. As with many things, when it’s ‘free’, people tend to value it less. There are millions of kids throughout the world who would give anything for the opportunity of a decent education, yet incredibly so many seem to throw that chance away.

 

[droodzilla]

Public schools are not charities.

 

[35451]

No. That is not evidence that 'the majority of children attending private schools are from ordinary backgrounds.' On the contrary, it is only is evidence that if you have savings, pension pots and grandparents with sufficient funds you are in the very fortunate position of having choices. To assume that the majority are in your fortunate position is just wrong.

OK, we established upthread that there are 30 odd Eton group schools. <1% of sector with very privileged background. Agree?

And there are total 3200 schools in the sector.

I give you anecdote of how hard work, family commitment, sacrifices etc (you may call that ‘good fortune’) enables this. We are not alone in the middle classes. May not be the majority, but it’s probably a greater and more significant proportion that of the the hated Eton 30.

If not, how do you account for the other 3170 odd independent schools getting their fees? Do you really think that all those families are sitting in conservatories looking at their estates? Or could it be that a significant proportion are ‘normal’ families pulling resource together and creating their own ‘good fortune’?

 

[Schnitger]

I'm not sure they should be abolished, and one mans elevating the talentless to the semblance of talented is another mans miraculous achieving of potential against all the odds.

Nevertheless...

The toxicity is the networking, the old boys network, the assumption that their excrescence is a mysteriously gifted elite who should have preferential access to jobs, governance and money, as though by divine right.

But when the Emperors Clothes are exposed, as with cameron and more lately with rees- mog and the johnson, you have to concede the system is sick and a self perpetuating sham.

I don't think you can divorce the education from the subsequent actions of those so educated. I'm also sure there will be those on here who disagree.

There's much I agree with here, but the sense of entitlement you find in the likes of Johnson and Rees-Mogg is symptomatic of a small number of independent schools. Eton, Winchester, Harrow and a few more are a tiny proportion of independent schools. The majority are day schools that have a much more egalitarian ethos (yes, believe it or not). Of course the parents who send their kids to these schools are affluent, but so too are the parents who buy expensive housing in good state school catchment areas.

The answer here is not to abolish independent schools, but to improve state schools so well off parents choose to send their kids to the local state school. Quite how that can be done is another issue.

Another approach is to enforce entrance procedures on the Russell Group universities that require them to reduce A Level entrance requirements for state school applicants, or in some way make it harder for students from independent schools to win places. There is evidence this is happening as independent schools are finding it harder to get kids into Oxbridge and the like, partly because of the competiton from overseas students. If the strong links between top independent schools and top unis can be weakened, then the appeal of former declines.

On another note, the percentage of children attending independent schools and colleges increases to about 18% in the sixth form.

 

[gavreid]

9 kids in every classroom in the UK are living in poverty. I'm sorry but if you can afford the kind of money to send your kids to private school as your way out, then you can equally afford to pay a lot more tax.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...banks-childrens-books-britain-hungry-election

@guest claimed there was only one Eton. I showed with ease that there are 30 times his dismissal of such elitism, and without even dipping into to the lists of second ranking independent Schools.

 

[Joe]

Public schools are not charities.

"Charities " is a very loose term covering a huge spectrum of enterprises.

I imagine that not all Public schools have charitable status.

 

[35451]

@guest claimed there was only one Eton. I showed with ease that there are 30 times his dismissal of such elitism, and without even dipping into to the lists of second ranking independent Schools.[/QUOTE]

Well There is only one Eton?

You showed there are 30 similar elites. I countered that that in turn is still less than 1% of the total sector.

How do you account for the rest?

 

[ks.234]

OK, we established upthread that there are 30 odd Eton group schools. <1% of sector with very privileged background. Agree?

And there are total 3200 schools in the sector.

I give you anecdote of how hard work, family commitment, sacrifices etc (you may call that ‘good fortune’) enables this. We are not alone in the middle classes. May not be the majority, but it’s probably a greater and more significant proportion that of the the hated Eton 30.

If not, how do you account for the other 3170 odd independent schools getting their fees? Do you really think that all those families are sitting in conservatories looking at their estates? Or could it be that a significant proportion are ‘normal’ families pulling resource together and creating their own ‘good fortune’?

yet again you miss the point. The point is that as evidence to support the contention that 'the majority of children attending private schools are from ordinary backgrounds' you cited your own circumstances, which is evidence of nothing wider than your personal circumstances. In another thread you boast about being sufficiently high up in the IT world to be part of secret trade
negotiations, while I'm sure you got there through hard work, dedication and sacrifice, it does place you some way outside the 'majority of ordinary people'

I trust you'll agree that the majority of ordinary people also work hard, make sacrifices and show their dedication and still cannot afford private school fees.

I trust you're not arguing that the less well off are only less well off because they don't work sufficient hard.

 

[Joe]

I would say that, all you can get from any Public school is 'A' Levels.


If you leave it there you will not climb the greasy pole very easily.

( is it just the Political greasy pole that people are objecting to so vermently ? )

So it is the Universities wot dun it.

That is the place all this ire should be directed at in'it ?

.......and they are all "public"

 

[Tony L]

As for the personal choice routine, education is always where it comes unstuck. If you do well in life through hard work and good decisions you should be able to rig the system so your children can succeed without having to bother. That's where we end up if you refuse to think about anything beyond people's freedom to spend their own money how they like. People obviously should not be allowed to spend their own money how they like: we accept that principle when it comes to buying and selling e.g. children and it shouldn't be an unimaginable stretch to extend it to buying and selling their futures.

As I keep on saying I am in favour of progressive taxation and closing tax loopholes in order to create high quality state infrastructure, obviously including education. As such I believe in rendering private schools obsolete by providing better quality for free. I do not believe in authoritarianism, and to be honest that is where I have historically come unstuck from Labour. I just hate the pack mentality of the trade unions, the ugly oppression of the likes of Blunkett, Straw etc. It just isn’t me.

PS FWIW I went though a state education system that to my mind failed me entirely. I’m high IQ (or at least I was once), pretty sure Asperger’s to some fairly mild degree (it wasn’t really diagnosed back then), plus I was very ill (asthma) as a young kid so missed a lot at the very start and never ‘fitted in’ as a result. I ended up utterly disinterested and dragging through at the bottom of a secondary school, hated every second of it, was constantly in trouble as I rejected authority even then, bunked off as much as possible, and left before my 16th birthday. Everything I know now I pretty much taught myself from raw curiosity, books, practical experiment etc. I honestly can’t bring to mind anything that I actually learnt in a school (I could read and write etc well before junior school, had a ‘reading age’ five or six years ahead of my classmates etc). Finding I could program computers was what actually changed my fortunes, but that came a lot later. I never even saw a computer at school. As such I do very much have an outsiders view of education. This obviously doesn’t speak to the argument between private or state education, but I just wanted to make it clear that I haven’t had any ‘privilege’ (other than having an intelligent mother who taught me to read and write very early on and allowed me to read non-children’s books etc if they interested me). My perspective on this subject is more a rejection of authoritarianism than anything else. I want state education to be as high quality and inclusive as possible. Folk like me really shouldn’t fall through it!

 

[gavreid]

How do you account for the rest?

I said that I didn't even begin to go down the list and I have no intention of doing so but they're places such as Manchester Grammar, Leeds Grammar, RGS Newcastle, i.e. in every city and larger town in the Country

 

[Seanm]

The answer here is not to abolish indeoendent schools, but to improve state schools so well off parenrs choose to send their kids to the local state school. Quite how that can be done is another issue.

We're taught to treat our children's education and future in competitive terms and as long as there's a private school lavishing 20 grand a year on each kid next to an "improved" school making do with 6 grand many who can afford it will go private. They will have effectively opted out of the social system on this and have no incentive to pay the extra taxes that it would take to get per-pupil funding up to, say, 10 grand. Abolish the distinction and you draw wealthy people into the system and offer a strong incentive to give a s__t about it. Standards rise across the board, the wealthy are paying less in tax increases than they were in fees, a major mechanism for reproducing inequality has been dismantled, everybody happy. (Except those committed to giving a competitive advantage to their children through the educational equivalent of illegal doping.)

I think we really need to examine this personal choice thing. It never looks less lustrous than in this particular situation, IMO. Ask people to compromise just a little on their sacred right to buy social and educational advantage for their offspring and you *massively* increase the level of personal choice available to millions. What is the problem, really, from an individualistic perspective?