Fee Paying Schools

Cheeky_gal

No

May be posting a contraversial post here but this is due to experience, I attended two schools (one public, one private) and IMO public schools are better. The education however isn't, and I would have thought this was obvious enough as parents are paying for the "education" at the end of the day, although education can be better in a private school, attending a public school i think is more the "norm". I found that in the Private school I attended the students were extremely stuck up and daddy was buying them cars at 16 so they could drive at 17! Whereas in the public school I attended the people were so much more down-to-earth and light hearted, friendlier...etc.

Dudess

If it was the Atari Jaguar school.

Sonnenblumen wrote:

Dudess - why not go and talk nicely to your uncle, ask him to give you a reading lesson and then you might be better equipped to do some research. Come back when you have found something useful.

Wo... Slow down there. You and others are claiming that the standard of education in private schools is higher than that in public schools. Now I wonder to myself, how can that be, when the teachers who qualify in this country all receive the same training. And yes, there are those teachers who trained abroad and may have gone through a better training system, but they're not specifically selected by private schools.
God, I thought I'd been clear. Must be my damned public school education...

Terry

Undecided

|Cookies wrote: »

Can i point and laugh at you aswel ?

Indeed you can.

I'm not infallible.

Ruen

Undecided

|Cookies wrote: »

what? do you think i lived in the school 24/7 or something?

I don't know where you lived actually, and if you didnt live there you would've had to leave every day when classes were finished.

c0rk3r

No

|Cookies wrote: »

it makes me sick to see guys who are barley 17, in 07 cars driving into the school

This really sums everything up nicely. Moan moan, whinge whinge. Why is this kid driving a flash car at 17 while i have to work my ass of to barely afford this mirca.

The only reason he got into the course is because he spent 5000euro. Its an unfair advantage. Well yes... but what do you want to do? revert back to a communist style educational system. Give me a break.

We are not all equal and lifes not fair. Dont let it eat you up. Just try and overcome it

Dudess

Undecided

Dudess wrote: »

Must be my damned public school edumacation...

Fix-a-ma-fied.

@ most of the rest..............SNOBS!

That is all.

Cheeky_gal

No

c0rk3r wrote: »

This really sums everything up nicely. Moan moan, whinge whinge. Why is this kid driving a flash car at 17 while i have to work my ass of to barely afford this mirca.

The only reason he got into the course is because he spent 5000euro. Its an unfair advantage. Well yes... but what do you want to do? revert back to a communist style educational system. Give me a break.

We are not all equal and lifes not fair. Dont let it eat you up. Just try and overcome it

eeeeh I think you missed her point....and at that her point was very justified IMO as many would agree. It is wrong parenting to hand your child a car at 16 when you cant even drive, wheres the appreciation, the independence, the reward?!? Anyways this has gone off topic...the point is everyones entitled to their own opinion so...

Also the student didn't pay 5 grand to get into the private school, it came from the parent's wallet...

indough

No

Dudess wrote: »

Yeah, for some reason I quoted myself, meaning to quote you. Then I just couldn't be arsed quoting you, but I was referring to the grammar thingy. Weird isn't it, considering teachers in private schools RECEIVE BETTER TRAINING :rolleyes:

In fairness though, they may receive the same training, but some people respond to that training better than others.

Personally i'd send my kids (if I had any) to private school if I knew it wouldn't break the bank. I wouldn't get caught up about it if I couldn't afford it though.

WoollyRedHat

|Cookies wrote: »

i must agree with the part about parents buying cars etc..it makes me sick to see guys who are barley 17, in 07 cars driving into the school, when its about a 10/20 min walk to their houses :mad:

oh and btw, Cheers for the infraction Terry:)

I'd agree with you there. This is the kind of garbage we need to cut back, driving when it's a 10/20 minute walk. That isn't good for the environment and the reason it happens among school goers is mainly to show off their nice car that their parents bought them. I see little point of driving when it's a 10/20 min walk, people do it. I understand when it's longer but in this case...

dotsman

No

Dudess wrote: »

'99 eh? Bet I know a rake of your mates (even though I was two years ahead of you). Ah, Cork's so bloomin' small.

nesf wrote: »

Ditto.

Ah yes, the class of '99...our popularity knows no bounds:D

nesf wrote: »

Putting a kid who is poor academically into a school that focuses strongly on academics is just not a good idea.

I agree with you there. But in Pres (and most fee-paying schools as far as I know), there were entrance exams (although some guys came into the school after first year, and some of them were not the sharpest knives in the drawer;)). Also, I think by the age of 10/11 it will be apparent with most kids whether they are academic or not. But yes, there might have been a few who otherwise would have been better off not going down the academically focused road.
Note: there are a few who (successfully) ended up in media/art/music, but they went down the road of getting degrees in said areas, so I think they weren't disadvantaged so much by going to Pres.

Cheeky_gal wrote: »

I found that in the Private school I attended the students were extremely stuck up and daddy was buying them cars at 16 so they could drive at 17! Whereas in the public school I attended the people were so much more down-to-earth and light hearted, friendlier...etc.

Maybe times have changed since I left, but there was only 3 guys in my year who had their own car (2 ol' bangers and one pretty nice SUV). A good few had access to mom/dad's car but I don't see a big problem with that. As regards being stuck up, there's only about 5 or 6 (out of 120) from my year who I would have described as true snobs (and 3 or 4 who I would have described as scumbags - 2 of whom were also the snobs!), but nobody really liked any of them:D

As I mentioned before, I'm still great friends with many of my former class mates and have lots of friends from different backgrounds (and shock-horror - even public shools;)). I certainly wouldn't describe myself or my former classmates as unfriendly or snobby. In fact, I would precisely use the words "down-to-earth and light hearted, friendlier" to describe the vast majority.

I guess, in the end, it depends on the school in question.

Oh, and a final note. I think people need to differentiate between regular fee-paying schools and "grind schools" (Bruce/Hewitt etc), because there is a huge difference between the two (there is some non-academic focus in regular fee-paying schools, as well as the education being slightly broader than just learn this off by heart and regurgitate in June).

dame

If it was the Atari Jaguar school.

Sonnenblumen wrote: »

Your analysis is flawed very flawed. Your assertion that all teachers in this country are trained in the same way and to the same standard is also incorrect.
Your assertion that schools in disadvantage areas are doing well would be good news but I doubt it is true. In fact many schools are under pressure trying to provide places and for the last few years the DOE has been firefighting a gross capital underspend from previous years.

Did I say categorically that schools in disadvantaged areas are "doing well"? No, I pointed out that class sizes there will be as small, or smaller, than the classes your fee-paying school will provide.

I have sufficient knowledge of private and state to know without knowing every single school that the Private school offers superior facilities in a superior environment.

Actually I attended the local secondary school and we had the entire range of subjects available to us. We also had an excellent (optional) Transition Year and afterwards had the options of the regular (academic) Leaving Cert, Leaving Cert Vocational Program or Leaving Cert Applied. The school had fantastic facilities; numerous pitches, a large well-equipped gym, plenty of new science labs, workshops for all the practical subjects, technical drawing labs, large art room, home economics rooms, fabulous tiered music room with plenty of instruments and amps etc, computer rooms, school canteen, school bookshop, etc. You name it, we had it. That was a large secondary school in a small town in a rural area. I was the type of student who would have excelled academically whatever school I attended (luckily for my parents ), but the school and standards of teaching were excellent. There are as many engineers, doctors, optometrists, vets, nurses, teachers, dentists coming out of that school as there are plumbers, farmers, business people, electricians and carpenters. The difference was that we all had a completely free choice of what we wanted to study and what type of Leaving Cert we did. How can that be a bad thing?

On the other hand, I have two cousins who attended Balckrock College. Neither excelled academically and their excuse was that if you weren't into and good at rugby, then the school didn't care about you or how you did.

Your poor choice of terms to identify pupils from either type reflects a prejudicial attitude and underlined by your insulting comments.

What poor choice of terms? You're clutching at straws here man. Your attitude underlines what a lot of people think is wrong with (some) of the products of a fee-paying education. I may be prejudiced but you are even more prejudiced. You see, I would consider sending my child to a fee-paying school if there was definitely a better choice of subjects, or if the school was nearer to where I lived,things like that, but you are simply convinced that you would never send your children to a non-fee-paying school. No matter what evidence gets presented, you will never change your mind. That's the difference you see. I will look at all the schools in the area and choose based on what I see, whereas you will probably just pick the most expensive fee-paying school you can (because the more they charge the better they must be) and dump your child in there expecting results.

I have every confidence that my investment in my children's eduction is well spent and gladly. For what it is worth, your attitude re-affirms this longheld view.

Good for you. Spend your money on whatever you like, just don't expect that your child will absolutely be better off there than anywhere else because they won't.

Where's this attitude thing coming from? My parents were far from poor (I was one of those leaving certs driving my own car to school ). I think attending the local secondary school rather than being carted off into the city to a fee-paying school probably kept my head level and showed me the value of hard work. It doesn't matter what your back-ground is, if you work hard you can be whomever you want to be.

I never said that money=morals or no money=no morals. What I did say was that parents with money were more likely to use money to provide a better education for their children.

Really? It was definitely implied;

Sonnenblumen wrote:

Twisted logic, I never said that any child deserves to suffer. If the parents fail the child who's to blame? One's with money or those with no morals?
This country like England has for too long made it too possible for irresponsible people to have children. It is the Welfare State syndrome gone wrong, dreadfully wrong and children suffer as a result.

arbeitsscheuer

dame wrote: »

On the other hand, I have two cousins who attended Balckrock College. Neither excelled academically and their excuse was that if you weren't into and good at rugby, then the school didn't care about you or how you did.

I would just like to back this up with my own (albeit equally anecdotal) experience of studying in King's Hospital. However, I left KH for Ashfield College (another private school) which was way better academically (and indeed socially, oddly enough). *Shrugs* The best school for a student is the one which makes the student feel most comfortable in his/her environment; I hated KH, so my grades (and for that matter, mental health) suffered. I loved Ashfield, and I did awesomely.

Sinfonia

If it was the Atari Jaguar school.

dame wrote:

On the other hand, I have two cousins who attended Balckrock College. Neither excelled academically and their excuse was that if you weren't into and good at rugby, then the school didn't care about you or how you did.

Not really true.
From personal experience: Although I was involved in the music side of things, and my grades etc. were reasonably good, the principal didn't know me at all in 6th year.
The year heads, especially a certain one or two knew everybody, and the majority of the teachers definitely cared about you and how you did.
My only real gripe is with the principal, and one or two of the teachers, and in terms of them I would agree with your statement, dame.

Time Magazine

If it was the Atari Jaguar school.

Dudess wrote: »

Weird isn't it, considering teachers in private schools RECEIVE BETTER TRAINING :rolleyes:

Often they do. Second-level teachers are primarily B.A.'s who get the H.Dip. I have no evidence to back this up, but anecdotally a greater number of people who have gone beyond bachelors level teach in private schools.

And so others know, private schools often pay less than public schools. My sister is a teacher hitting 30 and, certainly a few years ago anyway, would have earned less in King's Hospital than the school she teaches in.

EdgarAllenPoo

No

I wish I went to a fee paying school. Then I could have achieved the same results (in fairness I probably would have done better seeing as I did the leaving outside school) but also been picked on for not being as rich as the other kids;)

In all seriousness the likelihood of me having children is slim (since I can't stand them) but I'd happily put money towards sending my nephew to one because like it or not people from those schools tend to do better careerwise.

pretty*monster

Hedge Schools FTW

I went to a public school and got over 500 points in the lc.

But regardless of results I would never send my children to a private school because I think children need to mix with people of different classes and backgrounds. An awful lot of private school goers even if they're not actually snobs are shockingly ignorant about what life is like for people whose parent's don't earn enough money as their parents.

Sonnenblumen

No

dame wrote: »

Did I say categorically that schools in disadvantaged areas are "doing well"? No, I pointed out that class sizes there will be as small, or smaller, than the classes your fee-paying school will provide.


Actually I attended the local secondary school and we had the entire range of subjects available to us. We also had an excellent (optional) Transition Year and afterwards had the options of the regular (academic) Leaving Cert, Leaving Cert Vocational Program or Leaving Cert Applied. The school had fantastic facilities; numerous pitches, a large well-equipped gym, plenty of new science labs, workshops for all the practical subjects, technical drawing labs, large art room, home economics rooms, fabulous tiered music room with plenty of instruments and amps etc, computer rooms, school canteen, school bookshop, etc. You name it, we had it. That was a large secondary school in a small town in a rural area. I was the type of student who would have excelled academically whatever school I attended (luckily for my parents ), but the school and standards of teaching were excellent. There are as many engineers, doctors, optometrists, vets, nurses, teachers, dentists coming out of that school as there are plumbers, farmers, business people, electricians and carpenters. The difference was that we all had a completely free choice of what we wanted to study and what type of Leaving Cert we did. How can that be a bad thing?

On the other hand, I have two cousins who attended Balckrock College. Neither excelled academically and their excuse was that if you weren't into and good at rugby, then the school didn't care about you or how you did.


What poor choice of terms? You're clutching at straws here man. Your attitude underlines what a lot of people think is wrong with (some) of the products of a fee-paying education. I may be prejudiced but you are even more prejudiced. You see, I would consider sending my child to a fee-paying school if there was definitely a better choice of subjects, or if the school was nearer to where I lived,things like that, but you are simply convinced that you would never send your children to a non-fee-paying school. No matter what evidence gets presented, you will never change your mind. That's the difference you see. I will look at all the schools in the area and choose based on what I see, whereas you will probably just pick the most expensive fee-paying school you can (because the more they charge the better they must be) and dump your child in there expecting results.


Good for you. Spend your money on whatever you like, just don't expect that your child will absolutely be better off there than anywhere else because they won't.

Where's this attitude thing coming from? My parents were far from poor (I was one of those leaving certs driving my own car to school ). I think attending the local secondary school rather than being carted off into the city to a fee-paying school probably kept my head level and showed me the value of hard work. It doesn't matter what your back-ground is, if you work hard you can be whomever you want to be.


Really? It was definitely implied;

What's the root cause of your hurt? Under recognition? Your comments are all over the place and I'd suggest you go off and put your great educational experiences to better use and stop deliberately or foolishly misrepresenting my opinions.

Listen here, if your two cousins flunked in Blackrock, it's not going to register on the opinion scale and it will not affect the broader opinion either. I mean a big school isn't built overnight and most certainly not on the shoulders of two pupils.

You know nothing about me so are not in a position to say what is right. I did not grow up in a rural area, and just because it might be underpopulated and offered wider choices in the local school is not the template for 'this school is better than that school' etc.

I'm living in a large urban environment and yes I've made choices, and yes I'm happy. Unfortunately I do not have to travel far to see the positives of private schooling or the dereliction that can afflict public schools.

The societal challenges are potentially dragging this country down slowly and I'd certainly do everything within my powers to protect my children from the unsavoury elements.

nesf

Undecided

dotsman wrote: »

I guess, in the end, it depends on the school in question.

Honestly, I've never heard much bad stuff said about Pres or any of the other private schools in Cork. Most of the vitrol is directed at Blackrock etc. I guess it could be down to Cork being small enough that the networking advantage gained in going to a private school isn't as big versus say what would be the case in Dublin.

Dudess

If it was the Atari Jaguar school.

c0rk3r wrote: »

This really sums everything up nicely. Moan moan, whinge whinge. Why is this kid driving a flash car at 17 while i have to work my ass of to barely afford this mirca.

The only reason he got into the course is because he spent 5000euro. Its an unfair advantage. Well yes... but what do you want to do? revert back to a communist style educational system. Give me a break.

We are not all equal and lifes not fair. Dont let it eat you up. Just try and overcome it

The post you're responding to is by a person who is advocating private schooling - they even said "€6,000 fees kept the scum out" when referring to the school to which they went.

Actually, what are Pres fees?

Binomate

No

You get a better education in the fee paying schools and there are generally better facilities. On average, the students in fee paying private schools do better in the Leaving Cert than the Public Schools. I can't back this up with anything factual, but it's probably true because I went to a Private School and Public Schools suck balls.

Dudess

If it was the Atari Jaguar school.

Binomate wrote:

I can't back this up with anything factual, but it's probably true because I went to a Private School and Public Schools suck balls.

God, what a trolltastic comment.

First of all, the education thing: the teachers receive the same training as those who teach in public schools. And wealthier kids can afford to attend grind schools outside school hours. Going on to third level is just the domain of the middle-class anyway. I'm certainly not exempt - I'm middle-class and there just wasn't any question of me not going on to third level (although I did drop out, but I went back as a mature student).
Secondly, the facilities thing: I only know Cork schools and I can think of several public schools there with excellent facilities. The only fee-paying girls school in Cork city is about to collapse and has no facilities; Christians, a private boys school, isn't bad but no great shakes when it comes to facilities.

indough

No

Dudess wrote: »

Not necessarily true. First of all, the education thing: the teachers receive the same training as those who teach in public schools. And wealthier kids can afford to attend grind schools outside school hours.

Of course they receive the same training as their peers, but that doesn't stop them from being better at applying their training.

Dudess

If it was the Atari Jaguar school.

Why on earth would it make a difference whether they're in a private or public school? Surely there are incentives in either case for them to make a special effort in their vocation?
And, as others have pointed out, some private schools pay less to teachers than the state would, therefore it seems like there's a good chance only the dregs of the teaching profession would be appointed.

indough

No

Noone provided proof that some private schools pay less though AFAIK

Binomate

No

Dudess wrote: »

I only know Cork schools and I can think of several public schools there with excellent facilities. The only fee-paying girls school in Cork city is about to collapse and has no facilities.

Dublin is all that matters.

Dudess

If it was the Atari Jaguar school.

Good, well-argued, well-thought-out point.

dame

If it was the Atari Jaguar school.

Sonnenblumen wrote: »

What's the root cause of your hurt? Under recognition? Your comments are all over the place and I'd suggest you go off and put your great educational experiences to better use and stop deliberately or foolishly misrepresenting my opinions.

Listen here, if your two cousins flunked in Blackrock, it's not going to register on the opinion scale and it will not affect the broader opinion either. I mean a big school isn't built overnight and most certainly not on the shoulders of two pupils.

You know nothing about me so are not in a position to say what is right. I did not grow up in a rural area, and just because it might be underpopulated and offered wider choices in the local school is not the template for 'this school is better than that school' etc.

I'm living in a large urban environment and yes I've made choices, and yes I'm happy. Unfortunately I do not have to travel far to see the positives of private schooling or the dereliction that can afflict public schools.

The societal challenges are potentially dragging this country down slowly and I'd certainly do everything within my powers to protect my children from the unsavoury elements.

Firstly, they didn't "flunk" as you so inelegantly put it, they simply failed to live up to the 500+ points expected of their fee-paying education.

Secondly, I am not trying to tell you that in your particular circumstances you are definitely wrong, nor that all public schools are better equipped than private schools. I'm meerly pointing out that the reverse is not always the case either and a private education is not necessarily better, as you insist that it is. When there is a choice of schools (as most people have), then all should be weighed up, not whittled down immediately to only the fee-paying options. However, thank you for illustrating, once again, your prejudices and abhorrance you hold for most of the people of this country. You, Sonnenblumen, are a snob.

Time Magazine

If it was the Atari Jaguar school.

indough wrote: »

Noone provided proof that some private schools pay less though AFAIK

What, do you want to see pay slips?

cson

Undecided

Thus far, according to the poll, most people would send their children to fee paying schools. Not exactly the answer I was hoping for, the real world isn't so romantic any more.

Which brings me to my next question; Bearing in mind that the majority of these fee paying schools aren't mixed, do you actually get a better education (not leaving certificate result) than a community school for example? Personally I don't believe so, I think I wouldn't be myself as I am had I not gone to a community school.

MikeHoncho

No

I will send my children to private school yes. Some of the comments in this thread about sending kids to a public school so as "not to give them an unfair advantage" and "so they mix with a wider range of people" are complete bollicks and come from people who obviously have no experience of private schools. I went to a private school and it is still as much down to the child as the teacher. Some people got 600 points some people got 150 points but it was down to the individual. Also there was a very diverse range of people, races and classes. What my school had over others in the area was the facilities for sports, music, art etc. And that is why my parents were willing to pay fees and why I will be willing to pay fees in the future. Everyone has the right to a basic education and if you are willing to pay for the extra bits then why the **** shouldnt you.