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

Its education, the thing that governs your whole life, not a nice dress you can buy if you can afford it.
That's not totally true.
Back to the revered NCDS survey, because we were followed throughout adulthood it was found that inspite of the odds, children who have had a disadvantaged upbringing and a poor or patchy education can and DO overcome this and turn into high flyers in their own fields.
Not everything is measured by exam results and academic achievement thank goodness.

Callistemon21

volver

Well segregating education according to your ability to pay certainly isn't the answer.

Let's take it to an extreme then:
Everyone should earn the same amount
Everyone should live in exactly the same type of home
We should all wear tunic style suits of the same colour
No-one should own a better car than anyone else
In fact, the state should issue everyone with a bike.

You are spectacularly missing the point, are you doing it on purpose?

Its education, the thing that governs your whole life, not a nice dress you can buy if you can afford it.

I'm sorry, that's just funny.

Universal education and no favouritism is "totalitarianism".

???

volver

Well segregating education according to your ability to pay certainly isn't the answer.

Let's take it to an extreme then:
Everyone should earn the same amount
Everyone should live in exactly the same type of home
We should all wear tunic style suits of the same colour
No-one should own a better car than anyone else
In fact, the state should issue everyone with a bike.

I'd be signally bad at it anyway, because the fee paying schools and grammars would be gone in a flash, and you'd all be severely miffed

Really?

I wouldn't be severely miffed but I would question why your rather extreme views should be imposed on the majority.

Why do you think I'd be severely miffed?
Just because I believe in choice?

I believe in democracy not totalitarianism.

Well segregating education according to your ability to pay certainly isn't the answer.

if every child is educated in the state system then you retain a group of parents who are likely to be deeply invested in their children's education.

I can't believe I read that!

There are millions of children in state education whose parents are invested in making sure their children receive a good education.
Just because they cannot or do not wish to pay does not mean they are not interested.

Much of my knowledge, not assumptions, stems from the NCDS which I have been part of since birth. There was a conclusive publication (circa 1970) called, Born to Fail, which revealed the extent of child poverty in Britain and growing up poor. I can't remember all the details but disadvantaged children were more likely to have been born prematurely, less likely to have been immunised, more likely to miss school because of illness, more likely to be accidentally injured at home etc. The study went far beyond our education, taking into account our backgrounds and going back into our parents' lives.
Another study was conducted 40 years after we were born on identical lines and sadly it found that inequalities today are now greater than the ones that existed when we were children.
How can we give every child a happy, healthy, successful and fulfilling life? No one seems to have the answers.

Callistemon21

^In my opinion, removing private schools would cause the powers that be to concentrate on improving the facilities available for education of every child, not just the ones with money^

How would this be achieved?

There wouldn't necessarily be any more money in the education pot but there would be two-thirds of a million more children to be educated in the state sector.
Would the state provide boarding facilities for those pupils who need to board?

For goodness sake, how many times? People have been over this many times on this thread. I'm not posting it again.

Oh and in case anybody is confused, I'm not the education secretary and I don't have to have detailed plans for what I think is the right thing to do. I'd be signally bad at it anyway, because the fee paying schools and grammars would be gone in a flash, and you'd all be severely miffed.

Callistemon I don't know if they still exist, but I have certainly visited state boarding schools. They had a proportion of children whose parents were on overseas postings.

Mollygo if every child is educated in the state system then you retain a group of parents who are likely to be deeply invested in their children's education. When state schools are the norm and have a complete cross-section of society everyone is working in the same direction, rather than a mishmash of academies, independent, free schools etc.
Here in France the state system serves the vast majority of children with some Catholic schools where parents pay a small amount each term and religion is permitted. It is not a perfect system but it is consistent.
I too started my career in EPA (takes me back a bit) and taught in challenging schools with disadvantaged groups. I agree that there are certainly no quick wins.
Later on I was lucky enough to observe lessons in hundreds of schools and share the good practice that I saw. In one LA the comprehensives were so good that very few parents chose to go out of the system.
I do understand why some people want to find alternative schools for their children and how others move house to achieve the same ends. Nowhere is perfect. But I hold on to the belief that if there is one consistent system then people will work together to make it better.

In my opinion, removing private schools would cause the powers that be to concentrate on improving the facilities available for education of every child, not just the ones with money

How would this be achieved?

There wouldn't necessarily be any more money in the education pot but there would be two-thirds of a million more children to be educated in the state sector.
Would the state provide boarding facilities for those pupils who need to board?

I think it’s wrong to expect removing fee-paying schools to solve every problem that exists with education. In my opinion, removing private schools would cause the powers that be to concentrate on improving the facilities available for education of every child, not just the ones with money. Of course making all education state-run wouldn’t solve every problem there is, and it would be fatuous to expect it would directly improve the problems encountered when teaching travellers children intermittently (for example). It wouldn’t stop some pupils playing truant. It wouldn’t stop bullying. It wouldn’t stop bad weather or the war in Ukraine either, because it’s not meant to. You can’t criticise a change for not doing something it was never intended to do.

High expectations are fundamental
Mamie, you are absolutely right. When I taught in a Liverpool EPA, the teachers, pupils and parents all had high aspirations which was reflected in the outcomes.
I was obviously therefore, an inspirational teacher.
It didn’t make every cohort ideal, or guarantee excellent results every year, even though the inspirational teachers were still there doing their best.
Teaching further north, in a school where children came and went according to their parents’ movements (travellers) and varying financial situations was disruptive for all children and affected this inspirational teacher’s ability to achieve the best for all pupils, not just the fluid attenders, even though my high expectations and those of some children and parents were still there.

How would removing private schools change those situations?

volver

DaisyAnne

volver

Joseanne

moreknowledgeable than others
I think you're right on that one DaisyAnne that posters can't really know much about independent schools unless they have attended one, sent their kids to one or actually worked in one. Even then, each school is different by its very nature independent and it is impossible to generalise. There is a misconception that private schools are like Eton, that they turn out Rees Moggs, that they are full of rich families, that they don't care about any other children, that the snooty parents sound off about state schools, that the kids are spoilt blinkered brats with no idea about the real world etc. etc. All that is very far from the truth.
But of course everyone is entitled to their opinions.

I personally have no delusions that private schools are like Eton and that they are full of Rees Moggs, what an odd thing to say. The closest fee paying school to me is in the middle of a city, and I can off hand think of two sets of parents I know who sent their kids there. One set because they "knew" that their children wouldn't get the advantages in life they thought they deserved if they went to the local secondary.

Perhaps its a fee-paying school thing that ex-headmistresses think they know all about everybody else and make assumptions about them. ??

Why do you feel the need to keep attacking people personally rather or as well as discussing the points in posts?

Are you like this with the people you meet in RL? I would be genuinely interested in what makes you like this.

Reported again.

I don't think you like me DaisyAnne

You have to do it, don't you. Out of 10 words, eight of them are a personal dig.

I don't like or dislike you; I don't know you. You are right, however, if you think that I don't enjoy constant personal attacks. Who would? I am quite happy to discuss different views and don't think people morally inferior - as you suggested you did at one point - if they don't hold the same views as I do.

That is partly true Joseanne , but it does not mean that schools and teachers cannot improve the educational opportunities of their pupils.
As an LA inspector I was lucky enough to work with some outstanding schools and inspirational teachers who were making a real difference to the lives of the children. Outstanding teaching does not just enhance the status quo, it uses a range of strategies, planning, teaching styles and assessment to allow the pupils to make progress that is far far better than expected.
If people think that all children from disadvantaged backgrounds cannot improve their life chances, then there is no point in education. High expectations are fundamental.
These schools, headteachers and teachers were inspirational in the most difficult of circumstances. I was proud to be able to work with them and I will never stop defending the brilliant teachers of the state system in the UK.
The conditions imposed on them by these Conservative governments are a disgrace.

GrannyGravy13

Our children were educated in both the State sector and the private sector, as were myself and my siblings (here and abroad) so I think I am knowledgeable about both sectors.

I still have links with our local primary, senior and private school.

I do not expect to change anyones views and I respect them, I would like the same curtesy to be afforded to my views.

It's interesting to see how many people on here found a hybrid system suited them and/or their children GrannyGravy. I have to admit I could have done with fewer schools overall, though. That was not the fault of any school system, just the view that children could be carted around with service parents

I think you and I both Mollygo understand that the results of any school are largely determined by the nature of their pupil intake.
Equality does not exist in society, in the world in general.

GrannyGravy13

Our children were educated in both the State sector and the private sector, as were myself and my siblings (here and abroad) so I think I am knowledgeable about both sectors.

I still have links with our local primary, senior and private school.

I do not expect to change anyones views and I respect them, I would like the same curtesy to be afforded to my views.

Some people think that fee-paying education is a right, and the people shouldn't be told how to spend their own money.

Some people get very defensive when anybody criticises one of the sources of inequality in this country and say that something should be done about it.

Some people think that being able to pay for a better education is an abomination.

Many people, including me, have said how understandable it is that people in the UK today feel they have to pay for education because the State system has been ignored.

We have different ideas and we all need to learn to accept that some people will have fundamental issues with what we think is perfectly OK.

So far, it seems that every country in the UK and all those mentioned on here apart from Finland has fee-paying schools.
In South Sudan where they introduced a free primary education policy in 2017, some parents make the choice to send their children to Uganda to be educated. Others are struggling to pay fees just so their children can attend school.
At least here, all children are entitled to free education, paid for from taxation, even though some parents choose to pay for private education.
Is there equality in state education? There is never equality when money comes into it. It was much harder teaching in a school with a high % of children from unstable homes where they moved around a lot, than in my current school.
Is it all equally good? Good education depends on good teaching, good facilities, good buildings, sufficient equipment, parent support and children’s behaviour. A ‘poor’ in any of those categories can affect the outcome.
Just read about the reported north/south divide in exam results. Are all N schools poor? Are all S schools better?
Do I think removing choice from those who can afford it, whether in education, housing, holidays or even electrical devices, would make it better for those who can’t afford the choice? Convince me?

DaisyAnne

volver

Joseanne

moreknowledgeable than others
I think you're right on that one DaisyAnne that posters can't really know much about independent schools unless they have attended one, sent their kids to one or actually worked in one. Even then, each school is different by its very nature independent and it is impossible to generalise. There is a misconception that private schools are like Eton, that they turn out Rees Moggs, that they are full of rich families, that they don't care about any other children, that the snooty parents sound off about state schools, that the kids are spoilt blinkered brats with no idea about the real world etc. etc. All that is very far from the truth.
But of course everyone is entitled to their opinions.

I personally have no delusions that private schools are like Eton and that they are full of Rees Moggs, what an odd thing to say. The closest fee paying school to me is in the middle of a city, and I can off hand think of two sets of parents I know who sent their kids there. One set because they "knew" that their children wouldn't get the advantages in life they thought they deserved if they went to the local secondary.

Perhaps its a fee-paying school thing that ex-headmistresses think they know all about everybody else and make assumptions about them. ??

Why do you feel the need to keep attacking people personally rather or as well as discussing the points in posts?

Are you like this with the people you meet in RL? I would be genuinely interested in what makes you like this.

Reported again.

I don't think you like me DaisyAnne

Our children were educated in both the State sector and the private sector, as were myself and my siblings (here and abroad) so I think I am knowledgeable about both sectors.

I still have links with our local primary, senior and private school.

I do not expect to change anyones views and I respect them, I would like the same curtesy to be afforded to my views.

*some not dome

Yes, I did wonder that DaisyAnne too.

Posters can criticise the government of the day, the funding, the curriculum, traditions, archaic systems etc etc but once it turns into ridicule of innocent children I have to say my bit. Then of course for dome reason it escalates into personal insults.

volver

Joseanne

moreknowledgeable than others
I think you're right on that one DaisyAnne that posters can't really know much about independent schools unless they have attended one, sent their kids to one or actually worked in one. Even then, each school is different by its very nature independent and it is impossible to generalise. There is a misconception that private schools are like Eton, that they turn out Rees Moggs, that they are full of rich families, that they don't care about any other children, that the snooty parents sound off about state schools, that the kids are spoilt blinkered brats with no idea about the real world etc. etc. All that is very far from the truth.
But of course everyone is entitled to their opinions.

I personally have no delusions that private schools are like Eton and that they are full of Rees Moggs, what an odd thing to say. The closest fee paying school to me is in the middle of a city, and I can off hand think of two sets of parents I know who sent their kids there. One set because they "knew" that their children wouldn't get the advantages in life they thought they deserved if they went to the local secondary.

Perhaps its a fee-paying school thing that ex-headmistresses think they know all about everybody else and make assumptions about them. ??

Why do you feel the need to keep attacking people personally rather or as well as discussing the points in posts?

Are you like this with the people you meet in RL? I would be genuinely interested in what makes you like this.