How soon before the next step to privatising the state schools?

The answer to the last question is quite simple.
The UK government can create money if it has a will.
OR
Taxes (think how much the parents would be saving).

Growstuff
Yes, the government can create money. Yes they could put it into education. Yes it could be targeted at schools in poorer areas (EPA as they used to be called). That would certainly benefit the pupils displaced by the influx of ex PSC, but they could do that anyway.
If I’m misunderstanding then I’m sorry.
Do parents who send their children to private schools not already pay taxes?
Do private school parents have a say in where there taxes are spent?
Are you suggesting that as a reward for not having to pay school fees to send their children to school where they want to send them, they should pay more taxes and have a say in where those taxes are spent?

Can't they all just do what Scotland does?

Have, like, "schools"?

growstuff

PS. I'd go further. Any child with committed parents and small class sizes will do relatively well. They don't have to be very bright.

I have definite experience of this. I worked as a nanny for a titled couple in London when I first left school (terrible comprehensive). The oldest child was a complete dunderhead. Lovely boy but very Tim nice but dim. He had an eye wateringly expensive education, backed up by a lot of private tutoring and managed a mid-range uni degree. If he'd been working-class, he'd have been condemned to a life unemployed after an under funded state education.

Mollygo

Growstuff
Yes, the government can create money. Yes they could put it into education. Yes it could be targeted at schools in poorer areas (EPA as they used to be called). That would certainly benefit the pupils displaced by the influx of ex PSC, but they could do that anyway.
If I’m misunderstanding then I’m sorry.
Do parents who send their children to private schools not already pay taxes?
Do private school parents have a say in where there taxes are spent?
Are you suggesting that as a reward for not having to pay school fees to send their children to school where they want to send them, they should pay more taxes and have a say in where those taxes are spent?

What I'm saying is that those who spend money on private school fees could spend their money contributing to the education of all children. Of course, they wouldn't like it! They're not really in favour of sharing.

In any case, although I'd love to see private schools disappear, it won't happen and I'm not going to stress about them. I'm more concerned about the money intended for schools which is ending up in private providers' pockets.

volver

Can't they all just do what Scotland does?

Have, like, "schools"?

You mean like · 1. Fettes College · 2. Merchiston Castle School · 3. St George's School for Girls (Edinburgh) · 4. Edinburgh Academy · 5. Stewart's Melville ...

Ys, those; all in Edinburgh where the percentage of pupils attending fee paying schools is about twice the Scottish national average? I could be wrong about that, please correct me if I am. Edinburgh is another country; they do things differently there.

Most of us just get/got on with attending "schools"

Mollygo

volver

Can't they all just do what Scotland does?

Have, like, "schools"?

You mean like · 1. Fettes College · 2. Merchiston Castle School · 3. St George's School for Girls (Edinburgh) · 4. Edinburgh Academy · 5. Stewart's Melville ...

You forgot Gordonstoun, Mollygo
And about 95 others, spread right across Scotland!

Wales, however, has just 28, no academies and no grammar schools.

The oldest child was a complete dunderhead. Lovely boy but very Tim nice but dim. He had an eye wateringly expensive education, backed up by a lot of private tutoring and managed a mid-range uni degree. he'd been working-class, he'd have been condemned to a life unemployed after an under funded state education

Are you saying, then, that only those people who have a degree are employable?
And that Tims are dim? ?

Luckygirl3
These trusts top slice the money that governments allocate to schools and use it to pay their CEOs, accountants and lawyers. They line their pockets at the expense of the children's education. This government has set things up so that profits can be made from state schools. It is a disgrace. I completely agree. I’ve worked in 2 schools like this. In one, the children were treated like prisoners. Lined up. Shouted at. Made to vomit into sick bags in the classroom, rather than letting them go home when ill and affect absence figures. (This is not my fevered imagination. It happened in MY class 3 times in the 3 months I worked there.) It was tantamount to child abuse.

growstuff
Don't assume that all private schools produce good results. Some of them are unspeakably bad, but at least children don't have to mix with the oiks. Yup. I know of three children who go to schools like this. Very underwhelming achievement.

Monica
Why do you all have these terrible inferiority complexes about private schools. How is it an inferiority complex to care about ALL children and not just those who have parents with money? If anything, it’s callousness from those who don’t care about working class children.

Callistemon21

Mollygo

volver

Can't they all just do what Scotland does?

Have, like, "schools"?

You mean like · 1. Fettes College · 2. Merchiston Castle School · 3. St George's School for Girls (Edinburgh) · 4. Edinburgh Academy · 5. Stewart's Melville ...

You forgot Gordonstoun, Mollygo
And about 95 others, spread right across Scotland!

Wales, however, has just 28, no academies and no grammar schools.

The oldest child was a complete dunderhead. Lovely boy but very Tim nice but dim. He had an eye wateringly expensive education, backed up by a lot of private tutoring and managed a mid-range uni degree. he'd been working-class, he'd have been condemned to a life unemployed after an under funded state education

Are you saying, then, that only those people who have a degree are employable?
And that Tims are dim? ?

Nope. I'm saying that if he had been working class there would have been little chance of even basic literacy, let alone university. I met many, equally nice, children like him in state education.

Tim nice but dim was an upper class Harry Enfield character. Upper class stereotype.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=NC0IJQ_s7No

Scotland doesn't have grammar schools - well one, I believe. There are no academies or especially selective schools or all the rest of it. We just have schools. They offer free education to all. And mostly they stream pupils based on ability, not on the sharpness of their parents' elbows or how much money they have.

Seems sensible to me.

We have private schools for those who think little Tarquin or little Arabella is a cut above the other children.

Tim nice but dim was an upper class Harry Enfield character. Upper class stereotype
I remember, Gagajo but posters have been castigated for using a certain a certain female name as a stereotype. I resolved not to use the name Kevin to describe teenagers (difficult when they behave like Harry Enfield's Kevin, so apt.)

little Tarquin or little Arabella

Here we go again!
Stereotyping!

Losing the argument.

volver

Scotland doesn't have grammar schools - well one, I believe. There are no academies or especially selective schools or all the rest of it. We just have schools. They offer free education to all. And mostly they stream pupils based on ability, not on the sharpness of their parents' elbows or how much money they have.

Seems sensible to me.

We have private schools for those who think little Tarquin or little Arabella is a cut above the other children.

Just saying "Losing the argument" doesn't mean in fact I am losing the argument .

My point, which has been lost in no part due to me, is that there is a part of the UK where schools are not subject to all sorts of experiments and private enterprise. I know that the Scottish education system has its problems at the moment but making parents "fight" for a place they have been told that their children need is not one of those problems.

Gagajo If he'd been working-class, he'd have been condemned to a life unemployed after an under funded state education.

Why? Over the last two years we have had an extension built, kitchen refitted and currently have some guys in the garden doing landscaping work and laying a patio. As do almost any school leavers in most parts of the country

All the people who have done this work have been pleasant sensible lads, who I doubt would be university material, but they have good jobs, providing a good living.

Unemployment is currently as low as it has been for some time. Of course there are unemployment black spots and industries which are reducing staff, not employing them, but most education leavers, regardless of level, get jobs, and stay employed.

And while the number of people living in poverty is too many and the variation in incomes is too wide. The fact remains that the majority of households in this country have an adequate income.

Government statistics show that 80% of households have an income in excess of £20,000, 60% have incomes in excess of £30,000, 40% in excess of £40,000. www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/bulletins/householddisposableincomeandinequality/financialyearending2021

It is the same with university education. When I went to university in the early 1960s, well less than 10% went to university. Now it is 50%. When that proportion of school leavers go to university, there are going to be a lot of mediocre students getting to university from all kinds of schools, because the whole basis of university education has changed. More school leavers now go to university than did O levels in 1960, when only 20% of children went to grammar schools and outside grammar schools, opportunitities for secondary modern and technical school children to take O levels were few and far between.

All the people who have done this work have been pleasant sensible lads, who I doubt would be university material, but they have good jobs, providing a good living

They may well be earning far in excess of anyone with a degree in a stressful job eg teaching, nursing too.

Try finding a handyman, someone to do basic landscaping work and they are like gold dust and can therefore charge accordingly.

So none of you are in the least bit concerned about discussing the death of state schools and half of you want communism.

That's going to be great for the children.

DaisyAnne

So none of you are in the least bit concerned about discussing the death of state schools and half of you want communism.

That's going to be great for the children.

What on earth are you on about?

You're the only one obsessed with communism.

So it's okay that state schools are often underperforming M0nica. We don't have to worry about opportunities missed because they can come along and build your extension. Seriously?

Unemployment figures do not show those who have given up seeking work, the employed working but in poverty, nor does it show if the "employed" are part-time or full-time. I don't think you can extrapolate the numbers who are actually jobless.

growstuff

DaisyAnne

So none of you are in the least bit concerned about discussing the death of state schools and half of you want communism.

That's going to be great for the children.

What on earth are you on about?

You're the only one obsessed with communism.

I'm not. But people who think they can stop others spending their money on education for their children worry me as that is communism. There is no capitalist country that does that.

Callistemon21

^All the people who have done this work have been pleasant sensible lads, who I doubt would be university material, but they have good jobs, providing a good living^

They may well be earning far in excess of anyone with a degree in a stressful job eg teaching, nursing too.

Try finding a handyman, someone to do basic landscaping work and they are like gold dust and can therefore charge accordingly.

Are you seriously suggesting that children from working class families should be shunted into doing manual jobs and not be given the opportunity to study something more "academic" or creative, if that's what they want?

How many pupils from Eton do you think go on to be plumbers or carpenters? Why do you think their parents might be disappointed if that's what they did?

How many people from manual jobs have real power in this country? Or do you think that's not their role?

PS. Should females be encouraged to become plumbers and carpenters? Whenever this argument is mentioned, why is it always about stereotypical male jobs? What about the girls?

DaisyAnne

growstuff

DaisyAnne

So none of you are in the least bit concerned about discussing the death of state schools and half of you want communism.

That's going to be great for the children.

What on earth are you on about?

You're the only one obsessed with communism.

I'm not. But people who think they can stop others spending their money on education for their children worry me as that is communism. There is no capitalist country that does that.

Good grief! It's not communism! I think you're being a tad paranoid.

PS. Germany and Finland have very few private schools. Do you think all Germans and Finns are communists?

Don't go there growstuff ?

So it's okay that state schools are often underperforming - define underperforming.

Every child should have the opportunity to pursue the education and career they choose. The brainiest can be manual labourers if they wish; and the least brainy can aspire to academia if they wish.

If part of the funding for schools was not going into the pockets of canny entrepreneurs who run academy trusts, then state education would improve.

But, as always with education, we need to define what constitutes success - is it just exam results? And we need to be clear what education is for.

Mollygo

So the government bans private schools-and anything else people see as unfair.

Private school parents might well welcome not having to pay school fees. They’d simply move their children to the ‘best’ or what would soon become ‘the best’ state schools. They wouldn’t suddenly move their children to schools in poorer areas would they?
What would happen to those schools?
What about the children who currently would go there, when their places are taken by these ex private school children?
Would they then go to ‘improve’ the next school down the list and the schools in poorer areas would still be poorer.
Where would the extra funding for schools come from if private school parents are already paying into the system through taxes as well as paying school fees?

This isn’t painting the most positive picture of private school parents - basically colonising the best schools for themselves ?. OTOH, it proves the point that they would improve the likelihood of state schools improving if the sharp-elbowed and/or well-connected had to use them.

I’m not sure what is covered by ‘anything else people see as unfair’. We are talking about schools.