Do we judge people by their class

It was an easier choice for lefties like us, here in Australia, sending them to a catholic school, because catholic schools are very mainstream, and only some are expensive. But yes, it shows that you have given some thought and money to their education, as have the parents of the other kids at the school.

I too would have loved a good grammar school like the one I went to at Heckmondwike, but grammar schools are ultra expensive fee-paying places here. Too elitist and expensive for my taste.

As for the expensive cars - they are round most schools here, as cars and other status symbols seem to matter to many folks, but we were lucky in that our lads could walk to school - about 10 minutes.

Joan I do agree with everything you've said - at the risk of upsetting any anti private school posters, the one thing that I think private schools often have over the State sector is rabid parental monitoring. And no, I'm not saying that parents of children in the State sector don't care but I think paying for an education focuses the parental mind wonderfully on 'return on investment. The child too, is surrounded by mostly aspirational friends. I'm sure in the major Public schools it's also about contacts in later life.

Many people on here were lucky enough to go to good Grammar schools, myself included. I wanted no less for my children and they have all done well but never would they consider themselves above anyone else or superior in any way, rather that they were very lucky to have the opportunities they did. Had there been a good State school available, I would have saved a great deal of money. It does amuse me, very close to where I live, there is a very good primary and a boys prep school - it's the primary that clogs up the road with new reg 4x4s.

In the end, I think it is the parents and the upbringing that helps the children in their future, regardless of income.

We never had much money even though we always worked, but we had enough to do the best we could for our 2 sons. Our local state school was appalling, so we applied to the local catholic primary school, being open about the fact we were not catholic. The fees were low, the school was small, and the ethos seemed excellent. They went on to the catholic co-ed high school:-

www.spcc.qld.edu.au/services.php?id=59&category=about

It all worked, the lads did well, and got their uni degrees etc. One teaches now at the same high school.

BUT, I think the fact we were not well off helped rather than hindered. They learned that they could not have everything they wanted - someone had to work hard to get things. They had to do their share of housework - all 4 or us shared it - because both of us parents worked. They saw how hard it was for their Dad in his working life,without any academic qualifications at the time (we both went to university later, when they were grown up). I suppose we had a 'middle class' (for want of a better term) attitude, without the financial comfort to go with it. We analysed things , discussed the news, discussed the world, as we sat around the meal table. We expected respect from them, and good manners. (THAT was an uphill struggle sometimes) They knew that although their choice of subjects was theirs, going to university was a given.

So - perhaps 'class' is just an attitude.

Indeed Elegran.. as only about 7%-10% of kids are in private schools that is a huge number at state schools.

Exactly, nanaej, assuming that state schools only produce ignorant louts is snobbery and ignorance.

...or even excellent state schools..some better than some private schools...
sorry I can't let it go.

Agreed!

Succinctly (and correctly, IMO) summarised as always, Elegran

I don't think anyone on gransnet was complaining about people choosing to spend their own money on education, what I take out of this thread is that people dislike it when it is assumed that private education automatically makes children into intrinsically better people than those who went to bog-standard state schools.

Or that whatever our financial position we are largely ruled by a minority who went not only to private schools but to top-price public schools, and have no concept of life without the cushion of a large bank balance and an old-boys network of contacts.

Yes cheelu I made the right decision, the money that paid the school fees was borrowed and was not just a case of doing without luxuries to pay the bill.

Yes Ana we remortgaged to send our son for vocational training in London when he was 16, it was expensive but we thought it was worth it.

And let's not forget that a lot of parents actually borrow the money, or remortgage their house, to send their children to private schools. So they may have to work longer hours or years to repay such loans, but they consider it a worthwhile 'sacrifice'.

nellie I put my meaning of sacrifice on earlier, it was from the dictionary. We all understand that there are many people who can't make 'sacrifices' for their children's education but there are some who do, that doesn't mean they are not 'sacrifices'.

It is just like everything in life, if you have the money you can choose. Even if you don't you still make decisions about how you spend what money you have. I heard a girl on the radio the other day saying she earned £1600 per month and paid £700 a month on rent. She seemed to think she was hard done by because she didn't get any 'benefits'. So much is down to perception. She didn't live in London so presumably could have found a cheaper place to rent if she chose to.

Why is it that no one makes a comment if you buy an expensive house, car or spend a lot on holidays but some think it is wrong to spend that money on your children's education? They only get one chance and if a parent can find the money and choose to spend it that way there is nothing wrong with that IMO.

Nanado, after many years as a teacher and adviser, I was an LEA primary inspector with an additional specialism in ICT across the Key Stages and a primary Ofsted inspector, with 80 odd inspections over more than 10 years. I am talking about the evidence of my own eyes, Key Stage results, intensive data analysis, and hundreds of lesson observations. I think the literacy and numeracy strategies made a huge difference along with lots of other initiatives from the primary strategy, Key Stage 3 strategy, NGfL etc etc
I agree that some initiatives were less successful, but compared with practice when I started teaching in the early seventies, it was light years ahead. I really don't think schools could have done all that without the pump priming of strategies, advisory teachers, training initiatives and the money that came with it.

Yes, we had to sell the private yacht nelliem

Elegran You have hit the nail on the head there!

movedalot harrigran
There seems a big difference here in how you and I define what constitutes a "sacrifice."

I take it as read that the "essentials" for a reasonable lifestyle are the basic things in life, such as good shelter, food, clothing and heating etc the upkeep of these and paying essential taxes and bills etc.

If after providing these for one's family there is some money left over, one can then "choose" whether to have a new television or an expensive holiday or new furniture depending on how much spare money is left in the pot.

To me a "sacrifice" would be turning "essentials" such as heating off in the winter so you have enough money to pay for food.
It would not include "non essentials" such as "having to choose" between a private education or a private yacht.

Those, who after providing the essentials, have enough spare money to afford private education are making "choices" about what they spend their spare money on I have no objection to that.

Most people in the UK will never be able to earn enough money to even begin to afford school fees. They do not have any real choice on what to spend their money on without "sacrificing" the welfare of their children which is not an option.

PS I don't think there's any unpleasantness just a frank exchange of opinions and a little banter.

Yes, I did see enormous changes in primary practice, but not all of it could be classed as 'improvement'!! Over the 30 years I actually worked in schools as opposed to the years I worked with schools I saw much good practice, and am not convinced that interference by successive governments was responsible for any of it. Rather the improvements I witnessed were led by good Headteachers and good teachers.
mamie what criteria are you using for this re primary schools? Key Stage SATs results perhaps?
I was working across the board with primary and secondary schools and was responsible for the introduction of the National Numeracy Strategy into primary schools across the LEA.
What was your position on the LEA and Ofsted inspectorate?

The trouble with our feelings about education rather than any other profession or business is that we have all experienced it ourselves and through out children so we all feel we know about it. Our experience however will always only cover a small area, even if we have worked it the sector. I am sure if we were discussing any other 'business' feelings would not be so strong.

Someone seemed to think that this post had become a bit unpleasant but I don't think so, I think we have all just been giving our opinions and not minded if others differ. I think I usually pick up on any unpleasantness.

I worry that Academies are just opportunities for extreme religious groups to inflict their mad ideas on children.

Nanado, these were the years I was working as an LEA and Ofsted inspector. I am in no doubt whatsoever that standards had risen, especially in primary schools.
I agree that Key Stage 4 still had some less than satisfactory courses, but I see that as a problem with exam boards, not schools. Were you working in school improvement in secondary schools? I think you would have seen enormous changes in primary practice, especially literacy and numeracy.

PS good point crimson

JessM of course there are inferior private schools, just as there are inferior state schools. You cannot guarantee grade As, there is nothing to be ashamed off with grade B, and I expect these are just predicted grades, not actual grades. This is not always about academic achievement, it's about developing a life-long learner who is confident 'in their own skin'.
I would challenge your view that things changed for the better in the Blaire years. This was the time I was working for the LEA. Yes, I agree at lot of money was thrown at education, but I doubt the box ticking that was endemic in education at the time actually improved standards. There was a lot of shenanigans going on where exam results used as guide lines (such as 5 passes as C+) were used eg one notorious ICT qualification counted as 3 GCSE
More recent changes where passes had to include Maths and English are better indicators.
Academies are NOT the universal answers. Teachers' pay and conditions have gone out the window if they work for an academy so it's only a matter of time before these implode under the strain. And yes, it's all about removing power from LEAs as these were institutions that tried to uphold standards and ethics in education and support for schools and their staff.

Can people now afford to pay for private education and then help their children financially through university as well? I'm so glad my two had a University Education when it was still within the [financial] reach of working class people. I know they don't have to pay it all back straight away but I wanted mine to not start their adult life with the millstone that is the equivalent of a small mortgage round their necks.

You are right Elegran, I am under quite alot of stress right now trying to help my son as he has gone back to Education but it is soooo stressful because he needs soo much!!!Its taking its toll now and the stress is actually effecting me now. So you are right there is only so much a person can give...