Fee Paying Schools

thefinalstage

Hedge Schools FTW

mloc wrote: »

How is being born into a well off family all that much different, in terms of life advantage, from being born with great athletic ability, great learning ability or simply born without serious mental or physical abnormality?

If you accept the premise that private and public schools are educationally neither better nor worse than each other in general, then your argument that how well someone does in life is affected by the existence of private schools is lacking.

You really are a bit...slow aren't you?

The education can be better or worse in both public and private schools depending on where you go thats been established. The separation between the classes that exists due to private schools existing is whats causing the ruckus. Since we established that the educational standards are the same why not go public and save yourself some cash on what is the same education and fund something else? Or perhaps you like the separatism?

newestUser

JC 2K3 wrote: »

I have no problems with the current capitalist system, I just think that there should be a limit to the advantages that a child should get depending on their parents financial status.(How well someone does in life should be determined by the work they put into it, not by luckily being born into a well off family.)

Life Isn't Fair, Deal With It?

thefinalstage

Hedge Schools FTW

newestUser wrote: »

Life Isn't Fair, Deal With It?

Pfft! Worthless cop out opinions from a pleb. Try to rise above your status and solve a problem not live with it.

Spyral

Undecided

newestUser wrote: »

Life Isn't Fair, Deal With It?

Life is very fair actually, its only other people who make it unfair for those with less power than them

On topic, education should be the same accross the board.
The leaving cert is more well rounded than say A levels but its basically a memory test except perhaps engineering or music.

melekalikimaka

No

thelastangryman wrote: »

You really are a bit...slow aren't you?

The education can be better or worse in both public and private schools depending on where you go thats been established. The separation between the classes that exists due to private schools existing is whats causing the ruckus. Since we established that the educational standards are the same why not go public and save yourself some cash on what is the same education and fund something else? Or perhaps you like the separatism?

good god

open your eyes and lose the chip

newestUser

thelastangryman wrote: »

Pfft! Worthless cop out opinions from a pleb. Try to rise above your status and solve a problem not live with it.

Worthless cop out/glib depressing truth?

I didn't have any answers to the socioeconomic imbalances in our society that I could post up. Sorry.

newestUser

Spyral wrote: »

Life is very fair actually, its only other people who make it unfair for those with less power than them

How do you propose to eliminate all forms of social advantage, so everyone has equal opportunity?

thefinalstage

Hedge Schools FTW

melekalikimaka wrote: »

good god

open your eyes and lose the chip

Pfft try and comment on the post.

newestUser wrote: »

Worthless cop out/glib depressing truth?

I didn't have any answers to the socioeconomic imbalances in our society that I could post up. Sorry.

Your previous post was indeed worthless and its to bad your not even willing to try. You could have cracked it.

newestUser

thelastangryman wrote: »

Your previous post was indeed worthless and its to bad your not even willing to try. You could have cracked it.

Yeah shucks my bad. Oh well, where's that Sudoku?

HollyB

No

Timans wrote: »

The sad fact of the matter is that as one fee paying service is banished, another comes into play.

Fee Paying Uni's GONE. Fee Paying Secondary Schools IN.

Naturally. If a parent doesn't have to worry about saving for university fees, they can use the money for their child's secondary school education.

Timans wrote: »

It would be different if these schools didn't do everything in their power to get the best teachers available.

A state school cannot compete with the wage offers offered by fee paying schools. This essentially takes away from state schools which I think, is people's main gripe with the fee paying system.

I was under the impression that the State paid the salaries of most of the teachers in fee-paying schools, so presumably they would be paid the standard rate. Are there figures for the average salaries of teachers in public schools -v- teachers in fee-paying schools?

Perhaps some teachers in fee-paying schools prefer to teach there because of the environment and working conditions.

thefinalstage

Hedge Schools FTW

HollyB wrote: »

I was under the impression that the State paid the salaries of most of the teachers in fee-paying schools, so presumably they would be paid the standard rate. Are there figures for the average salaries of teachers in public schools -v- teachers in fee-paying schools?

Perhaps some teachers in fee-paying schools prefer to teach there because of the environment and working conditions.

Thats true the government does pay most of the teachers wages. The school may add on a bonus. Environment and working conditions? Explain please.

Requiem4adream

thelastangryman wrote: »

Thats true the government does pay most of the teachers wages. The school may add on a bonus. Environment and working conditions? Explain please.

I think she means less riff-raff like us / the common folk and probably better facilities on the premises.

HollyB

No

newestUser wrote: »

How do you propose to eliminate all forms of social advantage, so everyone has equal opportunity?

I don't think that it would actually be possible.

People are different. Put a group of children into a public school, in the same class, with the same teacher giving them the same amount of time and attention and you will find that some of those children will do better than others. The same input from the educational system is yielding different results.

Some of the children may be more intelligent than others and therefore, they will have an inborn advantage, and some may have below average intelligence and therefore be set at a disadvantage, but that will not be the only reason for the differences in performance. While these children are, on the surface being given equal opportunity, if you scratch the surface, you'll find that this is not the case.

Some of the children may have parents who take a keen interest in their education and who will help them with their homework, read with them, take them to museums, etc. Other children may have parents who do not have the time and/or inclination to do the same, so the first group of children would have an advantage over the second group.

Some of the children may be only children, or members of a small family. Others may have many siblings, with whom they will have to compete for parental time and attention. In some cases, they may have to help look after younger siblings, which can interfere with their studies, a disadvantage that other children may not share.

Money isn't the only form of advantage.

thefinalstage

Hedge Schools FTW

HollyB wrote: »

I don't think that it would actually be possible.

People are different. Put a group of children into a public school, in the same class, with the same teacher giving them the same amount of time and attention and you will find that some of those children will do better than others. The same input from the educational system is yielding different results.

Some of the children may be more intelligent than others and therefore, they will have an inborn advantage, and some may have below average intelligence and therefore be set at a disadvantage, but that will not be the only reason for the differences in performance. While these children are, on the surface being given equal opportunity, if you scratch the surface, you'll find that this is not the case.

Some of the children may have parents who take a keen interest in their education and who will help them with their homework, read with them, take them to museums, etc. Other children may have parents who do not have the time and/or inclination to do the same, so the first group of children would have an advantage over the second group.

Some of the children may be only children, or members of a small family. Others may have many siblings, with whom they will have to compete for parental time and attention. In some cases, they may have to help look after younger siblings, which can interfere with their studies, a disadvantage that other children may not share.

Money isn't the only form of advantage.

However money would allow a child to have every stimuli you mentioned above also intelligence can be influenced by outside sources not just genetics. The museums for example.

HollyB

No

thelastangryman wrote: »

Thats true the government does pay most of the teachers wages. The school may add on a bonus. Environment and working conditions? Explain please.

What's the school like?
What are the pupils like?
Are teachers treated with respect?
If a pupil is disruptive or misbehaves, what kind of recourse does the teacher have?
What facilities are available to the teachers? To the students?
What are their working hours?
What additional duties are teachers expected to perform?
What kind of class size will they be dealing with?
And so on.

thefinalstage

Hedge Schools FTW

HollyB wrote: »

What's the school like?
What are the pupils like?
Are teachers treated with respect?
If a pupil is disruptive or misbehaves, what kind of recourse does the teacher have?
What facilities are available to the teachers? To the students?
What are their working hours?
What additional duties are teachers expected to perform?
What kind of class size will they be dealing with?
And so on.

Interesting and you think that children are generally better behaved in private schools?

HollyB

No

thelastangryman wrote: »

However money would allow a child to have every stimuli you mentioned above also intelligence can be influenced by outside sources not just genetics. The museums for example.

You believe that it is only wealthy parents who will take an interest in their child's education and help them with homework, etc, and that they will all automatically do so? Or that parents from poorer backgrounds are all going to have large families?

HollyB

No

thelastangryman wrote: »

Interesting and you think that children are generally better behaved in private schools?

Depends on the school itself, and the question of what level of recourse is available with regard to a pupil who does not behave comes into play - if, for example, it is easier for a fee-paying school to suspend or expel a student who is badly behaved.

As I understand it, it can be extremely difficult for public schools to expel pupils, so if it is easier for a fee-paying school to do so then they may be better able to weed out the worst of the trouble-makers.

thefinalstage

Hedge Schools FTW

HollyB wrote: »

You believe that it is only wealthy parents who will take an interest in their child's education and help them with homework, etc, and that they will all automatically do so? Or that parents from poorer backgrounds are all going to have large families?

When did I say either of these things? I said that money would provide these advantages. Simply put a parent with more money will on average have more free time thus allowing them to spend more time with their children.

HollyB wrote: »

Depends on the school itself, and the question of what level of recourse is available with regard to a pupil who does not behave comes into play - if, for example, it is easier for a fee-paying school to suspend or expel a student who is badly behaved.

As I understand it, it can be extremely difficult for public schools to expel pupils, so if it is easier for a fee-paying school to do so then they may be better able to weed out the worst of the trouble-makers.

In other words yes.

JC 2K3

Undecided

In the interest of not wanting to repeat the same argument that's been done already over the last 20 or so pages, I suggest a mod lock this thread and that HollyB and the rest of the new posters on this thread read the whole thing if they are interested in reading how the argument went.

HollyB

No

thelastangryman wrote: »

Simply put a parent with more money will on average have more free time thus allowing them to spend more time with their children.

What if the parent with more money is working long hours and the parent with less does not work, either because they are unemployed or because they decided not to work in order to be a full-time parent?

In that case, I would say that the latter would have more time to help their child with homework, take them to museums, etc.

Leon11

dotsman wrote: »

Pres boy as well:D
For me, had I gone to another school (with, say, a worse reputation) I might still be where I am today, but there is also the chance that the friends I would have maid in said school would not have been as academic/ambitious and may have "dragged" me down to their level.
!

I think that reflects quite poorly on a person if they allow their potential to be altered by others.

thefinalstage

Hedge Schools FTW

dotsman wrote:

For me, had I gone to another school (with, say, a worse reputation) I might still be where I am today, but there is also the chance that the friends I would have maid in said school would not have been as academic/ambitious and may have "dragged" me down to their level.

They didn't teach English did they?

Sonnenblumen

No

JC 2K3 wrote: »

In the interest of not wanting to repeat the same argument that's been done already over the last 20 or so pages, I suggest a mod lock this thread and that HollyB and the rest of the new posters on this thread read the whole thing if they are interested in reading how the argument went.

In the interest of free speech why not take a Busman's Holiday. See you next year.

Goodluck2me

No

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Schools aren't currently allowed only admit only intelligent children to schools, is this a violation of parents' constitutional rights?

Well this is effectively happening in Universities with the points system, people with similar intelligence are grouped together, its a positive thing imo.

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Parents should be fully entitled to educate their children as they wish, but not to set up a private school which excludes on the basis of wealth. Private schools should have a proper reason to exist such as a religious ethos. Children should have to fit the requirements for such a school to be admitted and parents should have to pay fees only if it is within their means to do so. Most private schools which exist now function as institutions which segregate different social classes of children, and that, as I have exhaustively stated, is my sole problem with them.

Firstly, if you have worked hard all of your life caught a few breaks and made some money, why shouldn`t you be at an advantage over someone who spent their life on the dole etc and did little to promote themselves, its competely fair in many cases that money separates people as they`ve often worked hard to obtain it (true that in many cases of old money this doesnt count).

Secondly, why is religious ethos a valid reason to segregate people, surely that has a similar effect to segregating through wealth, as they are more unlikely to socialise with the people in other religions.

Thirdly, you argue that if you go to private schools you are segregating communities, then likewise if you went to public schools you wouldnt get the chance to meet people with money, i.e. vice-verse, the only solution would be to have everyone out in the same types of schools. People are different and have different needs, what makes you think the public system can deal with/afford to deal with these varied problems?

thelastangryman wrote: »

Interesting and you think that children are generally better behaved in private schools?

IzzyWizzy

Firstly, if you have worked hard all of your life caught a few breaks and made some money, why shouldn`t you be at an advantage over someone who spent their life on the dole etc and did little to promote themselves, its competely fair in many cases that money separates people as they`ve often worked hard to obtain it (true that in many cases of old money this doesnt count).

Yeah but it's not the children who have earned this money, it's the parents. A big problem I have with fee paying schools is the attitude of certain people who think they are somehow superior to others because their parents could afford to send them to private school. My boyfriend's sister is like that. She doesn't seem to realise it's not HER money and that she's no more deserving of a private education than anyone else. I went to a selective grammar school, which was unfair in some ways, but at least the pupils themselves deserved to be there from working hard and academic ability. At least that way, children from poor families have a chance to go to a high achieving school with good facilities - it seems that in Dublin, you have to pay for that.

HollyB

No

goodluck2me wrote: »

Well this is effectively happening in Universities with the points system, people with similar intelligence are grouped together, its a positive thing imo.

Excellent point. Does anyone seriously see someone who failed their Leaving Cert successfully taking a claim against a university on the grounds that they discriminated against them by only taking people with more than 500 points on a certain course?

goodluck2me wrote: »

Firstly, if you have worked hard all of your life caught a few breaks and made some money, why shouldn`t you be at an advantage over someone who spent their life on the dole etc and did little to promote themselves, its competely fair in many cases that money separates people as they`ve often worked hard to obtain it (true that in many cases of old money this doesnt count).

Taking that a step further, why shouldn't you be allowed to let your children benefit from your work and success, whether by providing them with added advantages in childhood and their school years, or by leaving them money when you die?

Dudess

If it was the Atari Jaguar school.

Nothing wrong with a person sending their kids to a private school that's convenient to where they live - provided it's because they've done research into it and have concluded that it's superior to the local public school in terms of facilities and its academic record, not because it'll "keep them away from the knackers" (not all public schools are like Jobstown Community School because not all areas are like Jobstown) or because "it's private, therefore it breeds a better class of people" or because "it's private, therefore it will automatically have better facilities etc" as that is not necessarily true.

HollyB

No

Dudess wrote: »

Nothing wrong with a person sending their kids to a private school that's convenient to where they live - provided it's because they've done research into it and have concluded that it's superior to the local public school in terms of facilities and its academic record, not because it'll "keep them away from the knackers" (not all public schools are like Jobstown Community School because not all areas are like Jobstown) or because "it's private, therefore it breeds a better class of people" or because "it's private, therefore it will automatically have better facilities etc" as that is not necessarily true.

As long as the decision is made because the parent believes that their child is going to get a better education in the fee-paying school, I wouldn't have a problem with it - even if the pupils in the particular fee-paying school played a part in the decision.

I don't know or care what the PC line is, but a disruptive or troublesome pupil is going to affect the teacher's ability to teach the children who actually do want to learn. I imagine that all or most of us have had them in our classes at some point or another - the kid who insists on disrupting classes and creating so much trouble that the teacher has to spend more time trying to keep them under control than in teaching the course material.

Public schools can have an awful time if they want to expel a pupil, so this sets them at a disadvantage through no fault of their own. They could also find themselves in legal hot water if they tried to prevent a child who had a bad disciplinary record from enrolling in the first place. Too often, the rights of the troublemaker seem to trump the rights of the other children, not to mention those of the teachers.

The pupils in a particular school can affect a child's experience there, so I wouldn't fault anyone who wanted to ensure that their child went to a school where there was a good academic attitude and a minimum of troublemakers, whether that school was public or fee-paying.

Conor108

Undecided

Jaysus If I were Taoiseach I'd just nationalize all schools and bring them all up to fee-paying school level. But like they'd be public. God im tired