Why do British royal children not go to state schools like the Scandanavian royals?

DaisyAnne

Glorianny

Just reading the provision in the RF children's new school. 9 hole golf course, swimming pool, cricket pitch and apparently they are introduced to polo- well they would be wouldn't they!
Just like your average state school!

... and?

Just a comment about the sort of "education" that money buys which apparently state educated children don't need. State playing fields have of course been sold off in many cases.

Glorianny

Just reading the provision in the RF children's new school. 9 hole golf course, swimming pool, cricket pitch and apparently they are introduced to polo- well they would be wouldn't they!
Just like your average state school!

... and?

Just reading the provision in the RF children's new school. 9 hole golf course, swimming pool, cricket pitch and apparently they are introduced to polo- well they would be wouldn't they!
Just like your average state school!

At my brother's last school, they kept pigs. They got them as weaners (thank you, Neil, on the Archers) and had to look after and grow them. They then sold them on and started the process all over again.

My last school didn't keep animals, but it did keep boys. To my knowledge, it had done so since 1854 (when it was a school for orphans and necessitous children). The school took fee-paying boarders and day pupils from 1862 to support the orphans. They were still doing this in my day and, as far as I am aware, currently. People often forget that not all independent schools are single-sex, although many are. And they forget the good they have done for centuries.

No one will convince me that this school did not serve all its pupils well. The English education system was built and changed over the centuries. It may not be possible to change it overnight in the way some aspire to. I hope it isn't. I would rather they did it well. But those who propose the total abolition of private education seem to forget
a) we have a democracy and
b) so often,"perfection", particularly when defined by a minority, is often the enemy of the good.

Mollygo

LMIC. Nothing contentious Daisy Anne, just
Long may it continue. It’s been an interesting thread.

I like that. Thank you for translating.

My opinion is a UK mammal.

?

This post is no weirder that the others on GN today.

LMIC also means Low to middle income country.

Quite appropriate, I think.

No. V I just asked your opinion. If you don’t have one, you don’t have to answer.

LMIC. Nothing contentious Daisy Anne, just
Long may it continue. It’s been an interesting thread.

Mollygo

No Grantanow, It has been a very useful and informative thread. We’ve expressed our justified concern about the inequalities in state education without being able to provide a totally equitable solution, which is really worrying.
We’ve truthfully said how unfair it is that private schools get charitable status, whilst state schools don’t.
NB I never really understood why our fundraising PTA could have charitable status when the whole purpose is to make a profit to benefit the school, but our non profit-making school could not.
The thread provided an opportunity for us to learn that all countries except Finland have fee paying schools-German ones subsidised by the state!?
To learn that in some poorer countries parents have to pay for any education.
Most importantly, the reference to the RF enabled us, if we wished, to have a dig at all those who choose to pay extra for private education and accuse them of not caring about other children.
Good thread. LMIC

Well said. We need to learn. We also need to accept (or alter, I suppose) the fact that we are a democratic country and that whatever someone's view, it needs a majority in power to put it into action. So those backing it will need to take people with them, not alienate them.

(What does LMIC stand for?)

Mollygo

Well you used the term loony, Volver. I find it rather rude and definitely unacceptable, but you obviously don’t.
Your Question- Yes, I should have said “what am I meant to infer”
My question-Are you the person referred to in the MN/GN post who likes to correct spelling and grammar?

Of course I too support the idea of universally excellent education.
In your opinion, does not accepting the alternative just mean;

1. Not sending your children to private school?
2.Or saying you think it’s wrong for private schools to exist and parents to have choice?

3. Or blaming it on whichever government is in power?

4. Or actively doing something to improve the status and provision of state education?

What the real world is really like? I don’t think there’s anyone on GN who doesn’t know that.

Badgering again Mollygo?

MayBee70

Mollygo

But Volver, you were the one who said,

Oh thank goodness for private schools. Where would the state sector be without them, and the selfless parents paying to make sure their kids get a llama while everybody else's has to wear woolly hats in the classroom.

I suppose now you’re going to claim it was irony or sarcasm or a joke-like saying you think being eaten by a crocodile is funny.

But it’s your choice and I won’t deny you the right to choose.

Who on GN hasn’t agreed that it would be good if all state schools were the same as the best ones, so that parents from all areas would not need to choose between state and private.

Who has come up with a workable idea of how that can happen?

How about the government giving state schools adequate funding for a start? Taking away the charitable status of public schools?

Careful MayBee, that sounds like a real and reasonable discussion

Well you used the term loony, Volver. I find it rather rude and definitely unacceptable, but you obviously don’t.
Your Question- Yes, I should have said “what am I meant to infer”
My question-Are you the person referred to in the MN/GN post who likes to correct spelling and grammar?

Of course I too support the idea of universally excellent education.
In your opinion, does not accepting the alternative just mean;

1. Not sending your children to private school?
2.Or saying you think it’s wrong for private schools to exist and parents to have choice?

3. Or blaming it on whichever government is in power?

4. Or actively doing something to improve the status and provision of state education?

What the real world is really like? I don’t think there’s anyone on GN who doesn’t know that.

So, which shall I answer first? Let's go with this.

Glorianny Sat 27-Aug-22 18:00:20
Joseanne Sat 27-Aug-22 18:35:46
MayBee70 Sun 28-Aug-22 11:09:22

You seem to want us to provide a totally costed plan which will universally solve every issue currently faced by education in England and are not engaging in any discussion that might only give part of the solution. You are ignoring suggestions and only badgering people to give you the full thing.

You keep referring to yourself and whoever else you include as loony lefties? Why do that? What is it meant to infer?
(Question first - do you mean "imply"?)

I’m sure that there is a word for this and maybe if I’d been to fee-paying school I’d know what it was. But I’m using derogatory language to imply that others might think that those of us who support universally excellent education, and don’t just accept the alternative, are in some way deluded left wingers who will never accept what the real world is like.

Do you really see yourself as having mental health issues which affect your judgement? If so I truly sympathise, but I neither have, nor would ever suggest it.
For you to say that is pathetically beneath contempt, but equally, not unexpected.

To which totally equitable solutions which have been proposed and ignored are you referring?
Who has shown me how all state schools can be provided with fields for example?
Where has it shown that inspiring teachers ? can always provide outstanding results in schools with fluid populations or EPA.

You keep referring to yourself and whoever else you include as loony lefties?
Why do that? What is it meant to infer?
Do you really see yourself as having mental health issues which affect your judgement? If so I truly sympathise, but I neither have, nor would ever suggest it.

Mollygo

No Grantanow, It has been a very useful and informative thread. We’ve expressed our justified concern about the inequalities in state education without being able to provide a totally equitable solution, which is really worrying.
We’ve truthfully said how unfair it is that private schools get charitable status, whilst state schools don’t.
NB I never really understood why our fundraising PTA could have charitable status when the whole purpose is to make a profit to benefit the school, but our non profit-making school could not.
The thread provided an opportunity for us to learn that all countries except Finland have fee paying schools-German ones subsidised by the state!?
To learn that in some poorer countries parents have to pay for any education.
Most importantly, the reference to the RF enabled us, if we wished, to have a dig at all those who choose to pay extra for private education and accuse them of not caring about other children.
Good thread. LMIC

What a lovely balanced summary, with no digs at people who disagree with the poster. (sarcasm emoji)

Totally equitable solutions proposed, and ignored. Why? Because they are too extreme? Or to make a point about us looney lefties?

We'll never know...

Good post Mollygo, I think you've said it all.

The royal bit? I'd like it to be remembered that George, Charlotte and Louis are innocent young children like any other young children. I just hope their every move, every school result, every sporting fixture etc is not going to be minutely reported and criticised in the context of the type of school they attend. Actually if at all.

No Grantanow, It has been a very useful and informative thread. We’ve expressed our justified concern about the inequalities in state education without being able to provide a totally equitable solution, which is really worrying.
We’ve truthfully said how unfair it is that private schools get charitable status, whilst state schools don’t.
NB I never really understood why our fundraising PTA could have charitable status when the whole purpose is to make a profit to benefit the school, but our non profit-making school could not.
The thread provided an opportunity for us to learn that all countries except Finland have fee paying schools-German ones subsidised by the state!?
To learn that in some poorer countries parents have to pay for any education.
Most importantly, the reference to the RF enabled us, if we wished, to have a dig at all those who choose to pay extra for private education and accuse them of not caring about other children.
Good thread. LMIC

Grantanow
Yes probably

Gosh. This is a long thread. Do the Royals provide a dead cat diversion from all the things we ought to be concerned about?

Book

Glorianny

Mollygo

Miss, Miss, can I bring my pet crocodile into school next week, please Miss? She's called Carmen and she's very cuddly.

Same as Calvin’s dad offering to bring his huge anaconda in for the children to experience. It’s quite safe-it’s just been fed!

We used to have a lady who brought snakes into school for the children to look at and handle. No poisonous ones but one or two you had to watch if they started curling around something (or body)

Good old David Walliams

Mollygo

Miss, Miss, can I bring my pet crocodile into school next week, please Miss? She's called Carmen and she's very cuddly.

Same as Calvin’s dad offering to bring his huge anaconda in for the children to experience. It’s quite safe-it’s just been fed!

We used to have a lady who brought snakes into school for the children to look at and handle. No poisonous ones but one or two you had to watch if they started curling around something (or body)

But parents of other pupils fear measures to keep the royals safe will disrupt the relaxed vibe.
And do these here parents actually know what the extra security entails? The whole point about security is that nobody else knows what is being provided. I could only give a few suggestions earlier in this thread and I have quite good knowledge of the subject. Parents are not given any information on this issue.

Mollygo

But Volver, you were the one who said,

Oh thank goodness for private schools. Where would the state sector be without them, and the selfless parents paying to make sure their kids get a llama while everybody else's has to wear woolly hats in the classroom.

I suppose now you’re going to claim it was irony or sarcasm or a joke-like saying you think being eaten by a crocodile is funny.

But it’s your choice and I won’t deny you the right to choose.

Who on GN hasn’t agreed that it would be good if all state schools were the same as the best ones, so that parents from all areas would not need to choose between state and private.

Who has come up with a workable idea of how that can happen?

How about the government giving state schools adequate funding for a start? Taking away the charitable status of public schools?

Oh yes, of course.

What a jolly jape.

Denying children an equal education? Let's not blow it all out of proportion chaps.