Private school fees (merged)

Tim_L

I put "sink" in quotes throughout because I don't believe there is any absolute rule for judging a school. I don't accept that there is anything in the bricks and mortar of a school that makes it a bad school, or necessarily in the children who go to it, or necessarily in the teachers and other staff.

But unless you are living on a completely different planet, you have to accept that there are very poorly performing schools in this country, and that certain schools in the state sector are viewed as being better and attract many more applicants. In Brighton, there are 2 out of about 9 schools which are in this category, a couple in the middle viewed as being on the slide, and others viewed as "sink" schools, which means they have a very poor record of achievement and are associated with various social problems. It may well be that from a relative point of view the schools improve the lives of many of the children who go to them, so might be viewed in some senses as successful, but they may very well fail children with different aspirations. The system is crap, not necessarily the schools.

You'll do very well to find anything I've written that's remotely disparaging about any child in any school. I fail to see why you have to engage in silly and exagerated rhetoric (for example "apartheid") and attempting to paint this as me being disparaging, when clearly nothing of the sort is going on.

Actually all I've advocated is a system of streaming so that appropriate resources are applied according to ability, and to suggest that efforts are concentrated on fixing what is wrong with education rather than attacking people who have made different choices.

Lunar_Eclipse

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

No surprise I suppose - but that'll be a yes - I would turn it down. Like another poster said not even if you paid me a million quid.

Even though it could be the worst thing you ever did (or didn't do) for your children?

(I'm not saying that it would be, but just that it could be.)

Mado

Lunar_Eclipse wrote: »

As a parent, I am expected to read with them daily. Which I accept, although I think it is unjust.

Why????
They are your children.
Cherish the time. It will soon be gone.

The school are trying to help out those who have abdicated their responsabilities. It is by accepting this as the norm that the levelling at the bottom occurs.

BTW, I am one of those parent volunteers who listen to children reading.
The teachers listens to my kids weekly for the reception one, and about monthly for the other 2.
I don't find it unjust.

Tim_L

And just to be clear, I wasn't referring to all State Comps as "sink" schools which would clearly be ridiculous.

sjaypink

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

:rotfl: Nothing would surprise me sjaypink.... no idea though Maybe they are anti private - Grammar schools.

no the same person is on one post sayin they are in receipt of IS, housing & council tax benefit, then on here talking about their choice to privately educate. i would consider myself to be a fairlly open minded person (live & let live) but i have to admit i am left slightly unsettled by this....

emsywoo123

sjaypink wrote: »

no the same person is on one post sayin they are in receipt of IS, housing & council tax benefit, then on here talking about their choice to privately educate. i would consider myself to be a fairlly open minded person (live & let live) but i have to admit i am left slightly unsettled by this....

Unsettled how exactly?:rolleyes:

Rikki

sjaypink wrote: »

no the same person is on one post sayin they are in receipt of IS, housing & council tax benefit, then on here talking about their choice to privately educate. i would consider myself to be a fairlly open minded person (live & let live) but i have to admit i am left slightly unsettled by this....

What if there is a trust fund set up for the children's education by grandparents? This is very common in private schools.

Lunar_Eclipse

Mado wrote: »

Why????
They are your children.
Cherish the time. It will soon be gone.

I don't mean that reading with my children is unjust. And I have absolutely no issue with it at all, otherwise I wouldn't have had children.:)

I meant that IMO the system is unjust and I used this by way of a small example.

All children (should) have an equal right to teacher time, regardless of their ability. In my schools the parental support is not vastly different, otherwise I agree that the schools try to balance this out. But where this home support is roughly equal, I simply think that time spent with pupils should also be roughly equal, but the activities done with them should be tailored. Otherwise the system actually gives more advantage to the least able (NOT the least supported at home). Imagine how the brightest children could come on with such focus? So IMO, a less able child does not have more right/deserve more time with the teacher.

Interestingly, I have noticed that the brightest children get the least help at home. Partly because they don't need it and partly because the parents are (can be?) more relaxed about how they are doing in school. Those performing least well seem to be tutored and on programmes such as Kumon. Again, this is only from the two schools that I know inside out. And a fairly good area admittedly.

In the big scheme of things I know it is a small 'complaint'. But fundamentally it speaks volumes about the flaws in the system.

I am a parent helper too. Except I don't do reading.

sjaypink

emsywoo123 wrote: »

Unsettled how exactly?:rolleyes:

have only skimmed through these posts, i am not making personal remarks or jumping to conclusions, just writing on my gut feeling; so here goes

im sure many hard working, low earning families may find it unjust that whilst struggling to meet their own rent payments etc., their taxes are part being spent on paying someone elses living expenses who in turn, is somehow funding private education.
if we are to refer to previous posts and stereotypes, you would imagine there could well be some bitterness in working hard, whilst your kids attend the local 'sink' school, whilst down the road a child is getting the 'benefit' of private education whilst the tax payer foots the rest of the bills.

after working with many very, very deprived people and their families i would personally prefer government money be spent improving all our lives (communities, education....) rather than subsidising a family who can already afford private school fees.

emsywoo123

sjaypink wrote: »

have only skimmed through these posts, i am not making personal remarks or jumping to conclusions, just writing on my gut feeling; so here goes

im sure many hard working, low earning families may find it unjust that whilst struggling to meet their own rent payments etc., their taxes are part being spent on paying someone elses living expenses who in turn, is somehow funding private education.
if we are to refer to previous posts and stereotypes, you would imagine there could well be some bitterness in working hard, whilst your kids attend the local 'sink' school, whilst down the road a child is getting the 'benefit' of private education whilst the tax payer foots the rest of the bills.

after working with many very, very deprived people and their families i would personally prefer government money be spent improving all our lives (communities, education....) rather than subsidising a family who can already afford private school fees.

Just before I go further, I just want to clarify that you are not "making personal remarks or jumping to conclusions?":rolleyes: