We have pooled thoughts on the NHS, how about education?

Education funded from taxes is The priority because from liberally educated people comes health service, housing, public transport, social welfare, criminal justice, sustainable land use, art, civil engineering , scientific advance, and equal distribution of needed goods.

Publicly funded education is crippled when laws makers are mostly all educated and indoctrinated by expensive privately funded schools. So schools like Eton, Winchester, and Harrow if they are to stay must be absorbed into the public sector.

Would you want those toffs to be absorbed ? I wouldn’t.

Why not nanna8. I’m curious not dismissing your comment

Caleo - I ageee with you in being concerned our Westminster government remains dominated by men educated and emotionally damaged in the public school system. I’d definitely remove charitable status. I don’t want to contribute to people who want their children in an elitist system.
I agree with the OP about the impact of schools of the devastation of public services

It will take a Labour government 20 years in office to sort out properly, just as the NHS will.
On the fence about taking away charitable status as it could cause even more numbers of kids going to state schools.
Schools acting as food banks won’t go on forever when times are better it will cease.

Yes, it will take time. Charitable status could not be removed at a stroke either.
Meanwhile, I wondered about parents not on benefits being required to pay £50 per child per term towards school running costs (state schools). To be deducted with council tax and returned direct to the school. Could make a significant difference to schools and be 'visible' to parents, who would of course object to begin with though per child per school day it's very modest.

I would say parents generally are asked to contribute at least 10 pound a week in one way or another excluding meals.

I didn't realise it was that much Galaxy. The £50 (maybe not enough, then) should do away with these constant wearing requests. To be used there and then for the benefit of current pupils, not saved towards long term projects, wh shld be funded differently.

I couldn't possibly agree with your proposal winterwhite. So a family with 2 children would be forking out an extra £300 per term, or £600 per year, getting even larger for people with 3 or 4 children. The admin costs for the local council to re-allocate the sums to the appropriate schools would be fairly high I'd have thought. A family just above the level for benefits could find themselves far worse off than their neighbour who qualified for a tiny, but qualifying benefit.

*£900 per year!

The current requests are of course voluntary but there is generally something every week, whether its Christmas fair, school photo, trips, etc. I am not criticising this particularly but it all adds up. It's an issue in primary schools rather than secondary.

There is an insidious and creeping division in education. The arts, sports, learning a musical instrument are being denied to many state educated children in a system decided by politicians educated in the independent sector. Cancelling the farcical charitable status would be a start.

Galaxy

I would say parents generally are asked to contribute at least 10 pound a week in one way or another excluding meals.

Yup. It's constant. To be fair, I don't begrudge it. My DGSs school is worth every penny.

nanna8

Would you want those toffs to be absorbed ? I wouldn’t.

They pay their taxes just like you and me, and never really complain when they then pay thousands extra to give their children the best that they can afford. Maybe we need to see the standards the "Toffs" can achieve to know what we want for everyone.
If public schools were closed all those children would have to be absorbed into the state system which is strained as it is.
Yes I was a teacher and yes I privately educated my children from the age of 11 so they would not be in classes where chairs were being thrown around and children showing no respect for teachers.
It is still going on I have heard of children so disturbed by classroom behaviour they are complaining at home.
Do we bring everyone down to the lowest denominator or do we try with more funding to take the state system up to private standards?
I was brought up as a socialist but was not prepared to see my children suffer. That's what I worked for, to pay their fees. Though I still paid my taxes for all the State educated children. as well.

School education should be totally free at the point of delivery just as the NHS was intended to be and should not be eroded by cutting out music, the arts, etc., or asking for 'voluntary' donations. If the 'public' schools (some of the lesser ones would not be worth retaining) could be absorbed into the State system so much the better. Teaching needs to become a prestigious profession as it once was. School should be given back to local authorities to manage and any commercial arrangements revoked.

While some people can send their children to better schools there will not be a desire for all children to have the best education possible. That’s my argument against private schools. My grandsons school has gone from being excellent to substandard in just a few years. You only get one chance when it comes to your education and it shouldn’t be Russian roulette as to whether you happen to find yourself in a good school at that moment in time.

I think we need to decide what we want education to be for. Is it to fit people for the workplace, or is it to produce rounded individuals who are able to think critically, understand how society, politics and the media operate and be able to contribute to the cultural life of the UK one way or another? If the former, should employers have to contribute to the cost of getting trained/educated staff? If the latter, should the costs come from general taxation, rather than directly from students?

Do we want to prioritise academic subjects over practical/technical ones, should it be the other way round, or can we work towards a system where people study a mixture, eg classics, maths and health and social studies, with each of those given equal status?

Should schools be places where children learn about things like citizenship, or are taught values that may or may not be those of their parents, or should they concentrate on curriculum subjects and leave parenting to parents? What about religion? Should schools be allowed to embed that into their teaching, or should it be separate, and also left to parents?

Should higher education be available to everyone who can benefit from it? If so, who pays? Should there be repayable fees, and should they be linked to salaries? If so, what about people who get a degree but don't get a taxable job? Would it be fair to expect payback in the form of community service? Should someone earning more pay higher fees to encourage people to take up lower paid professions, or would that discourage effort? If someone doesn't take up a university place and starts work younger, should there be some sort of compensation, such as a more generous tax allowance? Should it be compulsory to stay in education to a higher age than at present, or at least until a certain level of attainment has been reached, whether academically, practically or in some other way that prepares for citizenship?

I think we need to know the answers to questions like these before we can decide on policies and funding.

I think Yammy offers a very fair assessment of the situation. At the risk of being a lone wolf on this thread, I would say that if people could recognise at least some of the successful practices and benefits in private schools without resorting to resentment and criticism, then there might be a few models worth copying. I'm not necessarily talking about class sizes and resources which go without saying, but for the younger children doing away with constant assessment thus removing stress and feelings of failure. Added to that, expecting high levels of discipline and a common working ethos where achievement is celebrated and confidence instilled in pupils.
In no way do I criticise or look down on staff in the state system, the teachers are some of the finest, but they need to be allowed more autonomy in their teaching and they need to feel valued.

Yes I was a teacher and yes I privately educated my children from the age of 11 so they would not be in classes where chairs were being thrown around and children showing no respect for teachers
As a secondary teacher for 35+ years I find that so offensive. I worked in all sorts of secondary schools in different areas, I never heard of a chair being thrown.

A few years ago I had a tour of the school I used to go to. In my day it was a girls' grammar, now of course it's a co ed comprehensive. I was afraid that it would be a shadow of its former self, but it was a revelation. So many subjects being studied, so much good work being done and the students who showed us round were intelligent and attractive. There are some good state schools out there.

When my two were at school the thing that struck me was that if they held a parents meeting to discuss changes to school policy most of the parents just agreed with anything that was suggested because the Governors knew best! One of the local vets had his children at the school because he disagreed with private education and he usually had something to say, but many of the educated people who might have questioned some of the proposals had their children at private schools. My neighbour's son boarded at one of our private schools because they were providing help with his dyslexia. When he came home at the weekends his main interest seemed to be telling us about all his new possessions and how much they had cost. He certainly wasn't very impressed by anything we had.

Chardy
It’s great if you never heard of chairs being thrown- I haven’t either, at the local secondary schools near us.
What about throwing cutlery with the excuse given, “But Miss I wasn’t aiming at you!”
I

Rosie you seem to have doubled the sum I suggested, but never mind that point has passed.
What I find so wrong about private education is the concept of some parents buying advantages for their children over those with whom in later life they will have to compete. And I think along with that goes a self-justifying exaggeration of the drawbacks of the state system.
With little prospect of change there, wouldn’t it be better to concentrate on ensuring that our state schools are funded to be nthe best possible for all the children who attend them? Is this a stated govt priority?

We should get rid of academies for a start. Some of the policies being implemented for behaviour and uniforms are practically barbaric.
We need to bring back Sure Start too.

Yammy

nanna8

Would you want those toffs to be absorbed ? I wouldn’t.

They pay their taxes just like you and me, and never really complain when they then pay thousands extra to give their children the best that they can afford. Maybe we need to see the standards the "Toffs" can achieve to know what we want for everyone.
If public schools were closed all those children would have to be absorbed into the state system which is strained as it is.
Yes I was a teacher and yes I privately educated my children from the age of 11 so they would not be in classes where chairs were being thrown around and children showing no respect for teachers.
It is still going on I have heard of children so disturbed by classroom behaviour they are complaining at home.
Do we bring everyone down to the lowest denominator or do we try with more funding to take the state system up to private standards?
I was brought up as a socialist but was not prepared to see my children suffer. That's what I worked for, to pay their fees. Though I still paid my taxes for all the State educated children. as well.

We, our children, GC, GGC attend-ed fee based religious schools. Remove the charitable tax status, use those funds in state education. Don't add more students to state education, makes no sense financially.

winterwhite

Rosie you seem to have doubled the sum I suggested, but never mind that point has passed.
What I find so wrong about private education is the concept of some parents buying advantages for their children over those with whom in later life they will have to compete. And I think along with that goes a self-justifying exaggeration of the drawbacks of the state system.
With little prospect of change there, wouldn’t it be better to concentrate on ensuring that our state schools are funded to be nthe best possible for all the children who attend them? Is this a stated govt priority?

I'm sorry, you're absolutely correct, I was playing with different numbers of children in a family and totally messed up my figures! In any event I still wouldn't condone any per child levy, education especially for under 19 years old has to be free at the point of use.

Parents with the wherewithal will often buy advantage for their children. Some parents whose children attend state schools then go on to pay for private tuition after school and in the holidays. I see advertisements all the time for private tutors in virtually every subject. Often these children are already advantaged by attending the better schools in their area. The need is to bring the poorest schools up to the level of the best ones, and that requires determination to value every child. Funding is but a part of the answer.