On the Breadline on £190k a Year

kinger101

setmefree2 wrote: »

There is a correlation between great grades and private schools because they are full of middle class kids. The causality of the great grades is the middle classes of the kids not the school. The kids of parents with the right attitude will do well an any school (provided the kids are up for it)

It's not the attitude of the parents you have to worry about a many state schools. It's the teachers. Many of them have already written the children off.

I think you're being rather too generous in your assumption that the middle classes are the way they are due to the right attitude or intelligence. For one, intelligence only has an heritability of around 0.5-0.6, meaning many clever parents well have less intelligent children, and vice versa. Secondly, there are, and always has been, barriers to class mobility. Two generations ago, very few of the working class would have had the chance to enter further or higher education (even with good grades), as their parents would not have had the means to support them. They needed to become breadwinners on leaving school.

IMO, at the less desirable schools, you usually have a small handful of unmanageable pupils that are disruptive to the extent that they'll drag down everyone's grades as the teacher is unable to complete the syllabus. Private schools don't have these pupils.

mwpt

kinger101 wrote: »

IMO, at the less desirable schools, you usually have a small handful of unmanageable pupils that are disruptive to the extent that they'll drag down everyone's grades as the teacher is unable to complete the syllabus. Private schools don't have these pupils.

Yes. But not just at the less desirable schools. My partner works in a fairly decent state school and has this problem in certain classes. She is looking to move to a private school because of this. She says a common factor is awol fathers, broken family units. These kids role models are their elder siblings, many of whom have already spent time in jail. The other pupils wanting to learn suffer the consequences. It's a very hard problem to solve.

kinger101

mwpt wrote: »

Yes. But not just at the less desirable schools. My partner works in a fairly decent state school and has this problem in certain classes. She is looking to move to a private school because of this. She says a common factor is awol fathers, broken family units. These kids role models are their elder siblings, many of whom have already spent time in jail. The other pupils wanting to learn suffer the consequences. It's a very hard problem to solve.

It's probably the main reason for the high turnover in teaching. Unless you experienced the problem as a pupil, you might not be aware of the extent to which this problem exists, and realize that a significant part of your day may be spent dealing with these challenges rather than actually teaching.

Generali

mwpt wrote: »

Yes. But not just at the less desirable schools. My partner works in a fairly decent state school and has this problem in certain classes. She is looking to move to a private school because of this. She says a common factor is awol fathers, broken family units. These kids role models are their elder siblings, many of whom have already spent time in jail. The other pupils wanting to learn suffer the consequences. It's a very hard problem to solve.

I went to what on the face of it should have been an excellent school in the rural SE.

The level of disruption from disengaged kids that had no interest in being there and just wanted to smash the place up was horrible and extremely disruptive to my education.

The solution? By the age of 13 - 14 if you're going to be numerate and literate before you are an adult you will be and most of what you learn at school after that time is the nice to haves. If you have no interest in education I suspect you'll learn little or nothing more from school unless you decide to come back to it when you're older.

So make education compulsory up to 13 or 14 and make it up to the pupil and parents after that. If either side want education for the child then they should get it (i.e. if the child wishes to remain at school but the parents want them working then the child gets to stay) but if neither parents nor child value education over a minimum wage role then let them go. I see no gain in trying to force a child to receive an unwanted education.

kinger101

Generali wrote: »

I went to what on the face of it should have been an excellent school in the rural SE.

The level of disruption from disengaged kids that had no interest in being there and just wanted to smash the place up was horrible and extremely disruptive to my education.

The solution? By the age of 13 - 14 if you're going to be numerate and literate before you are an adult you will be and most of what you learn at school after that time is the nice to haves. If you have no interest in education I suspect you'll learn little or nothing more from school unless you decide to come back to it when you're older.

So make education compulsory up to 13 or 14 and make it up to the pupil and parents after that. If either side want education for the child then they should get it (i.e. if the child wishes to remain at school but the parents want them working then the child gets to stay) but if neither parents nor child value education over a minimum wage role then let them go. I see no gain in trying to force a child to receive an unwanted education.

Part of the problem here is that many children may be forced to leave school by their parents to become breadwinners.

But I agree that there is not much point in any student studying any subject further if the outcome is very poor grades or exam failures. Anything less than a C was regarded as a failure in my day. It would be better for them to receive vocational training instead. Learning a trade would be far more useful than an F in History and an E in French.

mystic_trev

Adam and Megan Brownson became overnight internet pariahs last week, after daring to admit, on this very website, they feared the costs of privately educating their two daughters would leave them “financially broken”, despite a healthy-sounding joint annual income of £190k.

But I can’t have been the only privately-educated parent wincing with empathy - and quietly echoing their fears.

They may have faced a barrage of vitriol for drawing attention to their 'first world problems’, but I know how many of us, despite working hard to bring home high salaries, have scant hope of providing our children with the same educational advantages we enjoyed ourselves.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/secondaryeducation/12021947/Private-school-fees-have-priced-us-out-of-Britain-were-moving-to-Denmark.html

Groan.......

kinger101

mystic_trev wrote: »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/secondaryeducation/12021947/Private-school-fees-have-priced-us-out-of-Britain-were-moving-to-Denmark.html

Groan.......

I beginning to wonder what they mean by an education standard similar to their own. They don't seem the sharpest tools in the box.

Are they not aware the Denmark has one of the highest taxation rates in the world? Income taxes can be 56%. And then VAT at 25%. He's still paying a lot for his Children's education. Just indirectly.

Perhaps they've only just realized they are socialists.

michaels

I know the laffer curve means higher tax rates won't bring in more revenue and yet sometimes I still think they are desirable. It is worrying that a large proportion of 'opinion formers' in our society are so detached from how the 93% of people who have not attended private school live.

CLAPTON

whilst I have to say they are good for a laugh
I take the view that it's their money to spend
whether he is good at his job or not is between him and his employer/clients
lots of us have silly priorities and one man's essential is another man's luxury

it's neither necessary nor practical to walk in some-one's shoes to understand their situation.

Generali

michaels wrote: »

I know the laffer curve means higher tax rates won't bring in more revenue and yet sometimes I still think they are desirable. It is worrying that a large proportion of 'opinion formers' in our society are so detached from how the 93% of people who have not attended private school live.

To be fair, I don't think this pair are opinion formers and TBH I've found that most very rich people thay go out and earn a living are pretty gounded. I don't have to have a stroke to be able to have empathy with and sympathy for someone that has.