Private school fees (merged)

emsywoo123

TBH, I am really surprised this thread is still running Very little talk of money saving, and marvellously it has been posted on very regularly! But do you think perhaps we have finished?!

Discodee

maybe we should go back to page one and correct all the mistakes

Seriously, a bit of intelligent debate is a good thing
And if we all agreed we'd be robots

Discodee

That said emsy i dont think money saving and private schools come under the same heading lol
Just the uniforms alone are twice the price of state school ones!

Lunar_Eclipse

Discodee wrote: »

Just the uniforms alone are twice the price of state school ones!

And the rest! Summer dresses run at about £30, versus £4 in Asda or £5 currently for top of the range fashion dresses at M&S.:D

At least these 'savings' help fund our Boden & GAP retail therapy. The alternative is expensive uniform plus even more expensive Abercrombie & goodness knows what gear!

Is it normal to finish off some classy Asda uniform with Russell & Bromley footwear? lol

maverickangel

setmefree2 wrote: »

Hi Tim,

For me Grammar schools feeling like educational apartheid. I'm not trying to use emotional words just for effect, that is how I honestly feel. I don't believe separating children is a good idea. For this reason I would not use a faith school either. So there you go - another can of worms opened.:o

Heh heh! I went to Grammar school, and as a child with dirt poor parents it was an opportunity which I would never have had unless the "apartheid" system had been in place. I am grateful to have been given the opportunity for an education which my parents couldn't have paid for.

I fail to see the problem with Grammar schools. Children are granted a place on ability, not background. Would you rather academically able children from impoverished backgrounds went to under achieving comprehensives so that parity of under achievement was ensured?

I see little value in knocking schools which take intelligent children who want to learn, regardless of background, enabling them to fulfil their potential.

Mado

maverickangel wrote: »

I fail to see the problem with Grammar schools. Children are granted a place on ability, not background. Would you rather academically able children from impoverished backgrounds went to under achieving comprehensives so that parity of under achievement was ensured?

I see little value in knocking schools which take intelligent children who want to learn, regardless of background, enabling them to fulfil their potential.

If the system indeed selected these children, it would be fine.
But pages of discussion will tell you that the vast majority of children are tutored to pass the exam.
Making the noble principle of grammar schools a farce.

maverickangel

Mado wrote: »

If the system indeed selected these children, it would be fine.
But pages of discussion will tell you that the vast majority of children are tutored to pass the exam.
Making the noble principle of grammar schools a farce.

Why is that a problem? I wasn't tutored to pass my 11+, but would certainly tutor my children, or pay to have them tutored, if I felt a Grammar school best suited their needs.

In this life you can always find the money for the things you think are most important.

sjaypink

unfortunately not everyone can :-)

maverickangel

sjaypink wrote: »

unfortunately not everyone can :-)

Well I disagree. I honestly think that if you are determined enough then you will find the money from somewhere. As I said before, there's always money for the things you think are most important in life.

sjaypink

i too find that i have always afforded what i think is best for myself & my kids.......... but i would not assume that everyone could......
and what about able kids whose parents do not hold the same aspirations as the child might? should any child be given less opportunity than another because of their parents wealth or commitment (lack of)?