Private Fee-Paying Schools

K4t

Why do they deserve funding (€90million a year) from the State?

Surely it is immoral, especially in these 'R word' times!

I have to go eat my dinner but I'll leave you with this article and my trust that you will debate this topic tirelessly into the night.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2008/1201/1227910420330.html

p.s. In my opinion it's a disgrace. Can't wait for the Private health care system in another 10 years :rolleyes:

Fad

Think of a fee paying school as an expensive club, parents pay the membership, I go there instead of another school. My parents are paying for a school with better facilities, I get some better opportunities in the school I'm in.

My parents pay taxes, so my parents still pay my teachers salaries, if the state was to withdraw the funding from my school I think my parents should be entitled to some form of tax rebate or something as the state wouldn't have any part in my education.

PurpleFistMixer

Everyone pays taxes, taxes pay for teachers, everyone gets free education.

Some people for some bizarre reason pay extra money for something they're already getting for free.
Okay, slight exaggeration, I admit. They pay for better facilities, their children to mix with the "right" sort of crowd (LOLOLOLOL), and other such things.

Ardscoil Ris

K4t wrote: »

Why do they deserve funding (€90million a year) from the State?

Surely it is immoral, especially in these 'R word' times!

I have to go eat my dinner but I'll leave you with this article and my trust that you will debate this topic tirelessly into the night.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2008/1201/1227910420330.html

p.s. In my opinion it's a disgrace. Can't wait for the Private health care system in another 10 years :rolleyes:

Get over it.

I personally wouldn't go to a fee-paying/grind school. It all seems a bit too pretentious for my liking.

On an aside: I think there's far more merit in achieving a good Leaving Cert. in an "ordinary" school than there is in achieving one in a fee-paying/grind school; I'd be far prouder of myself doing it the traditional way, anyway.

the_syco

I think there's far more merit in achieving a good Leaving Cert. in an "ordinary" school than there is in achieving one in a fee-paying/grind school

Meh. Depends on the school, tbh. Some local schools leave a lot to be desired, thus the parents send the kids to a private school. In some cases, they're able to send the kids to an alternative school in the next town/village/area, but often they're not allowed, so they send their kids to a private school.

If the school your kid was going to go to was a run down piece of sh|t, where absenteeism was high, fail rates were high, and you had the money to send you kid to a school down the road which had an excellent success rate, and the kids enjoyed going to the school, which would you pick? True, many kids going to the fee paying schools are snobs sending their kids to become snobs, but the few people I've met who went to fee-paying schools were sound enough.

themont85

K4t wrote: »

Why do they deserve funding (€90million a year) from the State?

Surely it is immoral, especially in these 'R word' times!

I have to go eat my dinner but I'll leave you with this article and my trust that you will debate this topic tirelessly into the night.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2008/1201/1227910420330.html

p.s. In my opinion it's a disgrace. Can't wait for the Private health care system in another 10 years :rolleyes:

Actually of all the times for 'fee paying schools' this is a good time for the State's finances. The 90 million a year argument is complete bull tbh, fee paying schools save the State millions. As has been said Parents pay the taxes which pay for second levels schools , they choose to send their kids to fee paying schools which receive money for the payment of teachers with none of the extras. Effectively fee paying schools subsidise the 'free sector'.

The Irish Times education editor has a serious vendetta against these schools and always push it as do numpties such as the TUI. Their reasoning is entirely based on 'morals' as is the OP. It looks bad on paper, we're seperating the classes well that will only increase if you get rid of this payment.

In the last budget fee paying schools were ravaged by cuts but this was largely ignored because of disability going down, however, very little was focused on minorities such as Protestant educations going down.

The Irish private education system is fairly unique in that while no doubt their is privelage involved, it really pales in comparision to private schools in the States and other countries.

It would have several effects;
1)Fees in a lot of schools would be unaffordable to parents, they would climb significantly.
2)Certain schools would certaintly join the free scheme quashing the 'savings' of 100m proposed by the TUI. A high percentage of parents would not be able to afford these payments and would send their kids to the free schools again.
3)Of course a certain number of private schools will still exist which will become more and more elitist, thus quashing any argument that schools will become entirely integrated between classes.
4)I can see a number more grind schools such as the Institute popping up which themselves are already independent of any funding. These schools aren't actually that expensive in comparision with some current fee paying schools, however, they are far removed from the all encompasing education we aspire. This is because they are wholly acedemic with no sport, musicals ect involved. Again a certain percentage of parents would choose this likely for 5th and 6th year.

What will emerge is this imo. We will have a free system costing us more than it does currently but on the flip side we will have a smaller fee paying sector, however, this sector will be far more solid and elisitst than its previous incarnation. This will have one more effect which should worry the left wing TUI more than anything else; it will create a far bigger private teacher sector.

As of now very few teachers are employed in the private sector(barring grinds), there are some in places like the Institute(not regular fee paying schools but grind ones). The new private sector will need more teachers taken out of the current pay scale and into theirs. They will cherry pick the very best, which will diminish our free system greatly and create a two tier teaching sector.

The only way to address the 'immoral' nature of our education system i believe would be for the Government to not only bring in far reaching legeslation but probably change the constitution to prohibit any private sector teaching of second level students.

melekalikimaka

This old chestnut again.

Chips on their shoulders versus lexus in the drive

Unregistered.

Their funding should be withdrawn, and it should be used to increase the public schools facilities, reduce class sizes etc... to bring them up to be on par with private schools.

The private schools will have to put up their price, but who cares? - Who then will pay more to go to a school which which will be no better facilitated than a public schools? The really wealthy might - but who cares?!

The public schools would be the main beneficiary, who's gonna argue with that?

themont85

Unregistered. wrote: »

Their funding should be withdrawn, and it should be used to increase the public schools facilities, reduce class sizes etc... to bring them up to be on par with private schools.

The private schools will have to put up their price, but who cares? - Who then will pay more to go to a school which which will be no better facilitated than a public schools? The really wealthy might - but who cares?!

The public schools would be the main beneficiary, who's gonna argue with that?

This magical 100 million will not go to helping public schools. I gurantee you if they removed this payment it would mean less parents could afford this fee paying education and some would turn to the free sector thus reducing this 100m figure.

Public schools will not benefit at all.

teckoda

private schools are overrated in my opinion. Ones ability to study or even lack therefor, does not magically change through a private school anyway. To an extent you have no choice but to improve, but I guess thats what gives private schools an edge.

I do not think that such funding should be allocated to the likes of private schools who rake in the dosh like.

Fad

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

I personally wouldn't go to a fee-paying/grind school. It all seems a bit too pretentious for my liking.

To be fair, its unlikely you had a huge element of personal choice when it came to 2nd level, parents really make the decision. Also when you start on a secondary school in 1st year, its unlikely you'd be particularly aware of what being pretentious is, so you're talking out of your hat there :pac:

Unregistered. wrote: »

Their funding should be withdrawn, and it should be used to increase the public schools facilities, reduce class sizes etc... to bring them up to be on par with private schools.

The private schools will have to put up their price, but who cares? - Who then will pay more to go to a school which which will be no better facilitated than a public schools? The really wealthy might - but who cares?!

The public schools would be the main beneficiary, who's gonna argue with that?

If the fee's go up, parents wont be able to pay, they join free education or they demand a tax break, either way the public system would suffer.

Unregistered.

Fad wrote: »

If the fee's go up, parents wont be able to pay, they join free education or they demand a tax break, either way the public system would suffer.

So what if they won't be able to pay - there would be no point in paying! As i have indicated, they could be re-entering into better equipped public system, on par with the private schools. (provided the money is allocated correctly.

whadabouchasir

themont85 wrote: »

Actually of all the times for 'fee paying schools' this is a good time for the State's finances. The 90 million a year argument is complete bull tbh, fee paying schools save the State millions. .

Only someone from blackrock would say that! Thare is also a debate about this on the thread about points inflation.

Fad

Unregistered. wrote: »

So what if they won't be able to pay - there would be no point in paying! As i have indicated, they could be re-entering into better equipped public system, on par with the private schools. (provided the money is allocated correctly.

They wouldnt be going into better equpped schools because all the people who would be going to a Private would be going public instead. So all the pressure they're alleviating now would fall back onto to the Public, meaning there'd be no improvement at all. Remember change doesnt exactly happen overnight when it comes to schools.

Unregistered.

Fad wrote: »

They wouldnt be going into better equpped schools because all the people who would be going to a Private would be going public instead. So all the pressure they're alleviating now would fall back onto to the Public, meaning there'd be no improvement at all. Remember change doesnt exactly happen overnight when it comes to schools.

"all the pressure" would ya stop. Tell me, what's the figure for those attending fee-paying schools???

Fad

Unregistered. wrote: »

"all the pressure" would ya stop. Tell me, what's the figure for those attending fee-paying schools???

Ive no idea, but I'd say its quite high, especially in Dublin.

Fad

Then what are the numbers of teachers being paid in these schools, you act as if that hundreds of millions are going to them!

Unregistered.

Fad wrote: »

Then what are the numbers of teachers being paid in these schools, you act as if that hundreds of millions are going to them!

Errr, no actually quite the opposite. I'd advise you go do a bit of research before you go shouting about claims like "all the pressure they're alleviating". And while you're at it, find out how many of the teachers in these schools are paid by the state. Then you might change you attitude.

Fad

Unregistered. wrote: »

Errr, no actually quite the opposite. I'd advise you go do a bit of research before you go shouting about claims like "all the pressure they're alleviating". And while you're at it, find out how many of the teachers in these schools are paid by the state. Then you might change you attitude.

You dont seem to know yourself!

I dont pretend to know the figures but they do take a fair bit of pressure of the public system (as someone quite correctly stated earlier in this thread). In south Dublin I'd say there's a few thousand students in Private schools, if they were to all flood back into the public system, that'd put a fair bit of pressure on to the existing system.

Piste

The parents that send their children to private schools are paying tax just like the parents who send their kids to public schools. Often a lot more tax because these parents tend to be wealthier.

The tax all goes for the same purpose. The DoE provides a certain number of teachers and provides for certain facilities, why shouldn't parents have a choice of putting more money into a school which their taxes have already gone towards in order to provide better facilities or more teachers than the DoE does?

efb

Because it creates an inequality on children that don't choose their socioeconomic background, they're born into it.

K4t

the_syco wrote: »

If the school your kid was going to go to was a run down piece of sh|t, where absenteeism was high, fail rates were high, and you had the money to send you kid to a school down the road which had an excellent success rate, and the kids enjoyed going to the school, which would you pick?

And the parents who can't afford to send their children private? Their kids just continue to suffer in the "run down piece of sh|t"".
Instead, the money which is spent on the private school should be diverted to the public school. Crazy eh? :rolleyes:

Fad wrote: »

You dont seem to know yourself!

I dont pretend to know the figures but they do take a fair bit of pressure of the public system (as someone quite correctly stated earlier in this thread). In south Dublin I'd say there's a few thousand students in Private schools, if they were to all flood back into the public system, that'd put a fair bit of pressure on to the existing system.

I imagine that the majority of children going to private schools are from well off backgrounds so I'd doubt they'd stop going private.

Piste

efb wrote: »

Because it creates an inequality on children that don't choose their socioeconomic background, they're born into it.

But that's clearly not the fault of the fee-paying parents, it's the government's fault. If there were no fee-paying schools I can't see how it'd have a positive effect on people born into a lower socio-economic background.

K4t

Piste wrote: »

The parents that send their children to private schools are paying tax just like the parents who send their kids to public schools. Often a lot more tax because these parents tend to be wealthier.

The tax all goes for the same purpose. The DoE provides a certain number of teachers and provides for certain facilities, why shouldn't parents have a choice of putting more money into a school which their taxes have already gone towards in order to provide better facilities or more teachers than the DoE does?

That's rubbish imo. My parents pay slightly more in taxes than my best friend, does that mean I get extra attention from the teacher? :rolleyes:

The fact is, if these people want their children in private education, they should be paying for it themselves. It's not as if they cannot afford it.

K4t

Piste wrote: »

But that's clearly not the fault of the fee-paying parents, it's the government's fault. If there were no fee-paying schools I can't see how it'd have a positive effect on people born into a lower socio-economic background.

They might see some of that €90million. It mightn't seem a lot to you but to us lower class it does

Piste

But they are paying for it themselves, through taxes and extra money. The parents pay taxes so their children have every right to the same standard of education as another child in a non-fee paying school. BUT, these parents can also afford to pay for extra teachers, classes and facilities. These "extras" cos the state NOTHING, they're the parents' money. They should be allowed spend their money as they wish.

K4t wrote: »

They might see some of that €90million. It mightn't seem a lot to you but to us lower class it does

I'm in a public school actually.

It's unlikely they'd see part of that €90 million, most of it would go to either building new schools or expanding existing ones so the students who now can't afford to go to private schools (seeing as they would no longer be government-funded) have to go to a public one.

Also it's completely unfair to suggest that parent's tax money should not go to their child's education just because they could afford to send them to a private school.

K4t

Piste wrote: »

But they are paying for it themselves, through taxes and extra money. The parents pay taxes so their children have every right to the same standard of education as another child in a non-fee paying school. BUT, these parents can also afford to pay for extra teachers, classes and facilities. These "extras" cos the state NOTHING, they're the parents' money. They should be allowed spend their money as they wish.

Fyi: Everybody pays taxes, not just the parents of private school kids.

By all means let them spend their money as they wish. Just don't give them my money so their children can gain an unfair advantage over me.

SarcasticFairy

K4t wrote: »

They might see some of that €90million. It mightn't seem a lot to you but to us lower class it does

But if the private schools were made public surely money would have to be spread more thinly over more schools, seeing as the Government would now be funding the public schools and then the now public-private schools (if that makes sense...)? They would be seeing less money, rather than some of the €90million?

Piste

They're not being "Given" money so their kids an have an unfair advantage over you, they're giving money themselves. The DoE money goes for the exact same purposes as it does for public schools, the fancy things you see in private schools are provided by parents, not the state.

K4t

Piste wrote: »

They're not being "Given" money so their kids an have an unfair advantage over you, they're giving money themselves. The DoE money goes for the exact same purposes as it does for public schools, the fancy things you see in private schools are provided by parents, not the state.

I think €90m would go a long way.

The fact is that the State shouldn't be funding private education at all. If you can't see that then it's your loss.

Piste

The state isn't funding private education, parents are. The state provides the same basic amount for everyone, parents just top this up, and if they can afford to they should be allowed to.

K4t

SarcasticFairy wrote: »

But if the private schools were made public surely money would have to be spread more thinly over more schools, seeing as the Government would now be funding the public schools and then the now public-private schools (if that makes sense...)? They would be seeing less money, rather than some of the €90million?

Yes, but what I'm saying is that private schools don't deserve any money at all. If they go public then give them the money, as much as they need to get up to the average standard. It will cost less to the Government in the long run than paying them millions every year.

If they remain private, give them nothing and let the parents pay everything. They can afford it.

SarcasticFairy

Piste wrote: »

It's unlikely they'd see part of that €90 million, most of it would go to either building new schools or expanding existing ones so the students who now can't afford to go to private schools (seeing as they would no longer be government-funded) have to go to a public one.

Also it's completely unfair to suggest that parent's tax money should not go to their child's education just because they could afford to send them to a private school.

SarcasticFairy wrote: »

But if the private schools were made public surely money would have to be spread more thinly over more schools, seeing as the Government would now be funding the public schools and then the now public-private schools (if that makes sense...)? They would be seeing less money, rather than some of the €90million?

Oh sorry, I took it up wrong. The private schools are staying private but they're not getting funding. Gotcha

I'd have to agree with Piste here. The private school fees only go towards extra things, not the basic stuff public schools get. That €90million has nothing to do with public schools. The parents of private school students still pay tax, and chances are they're contributing more tax if they can afford a place in a private school, and so have every right to have some of that go towards their childs education.

Piste

K4t wrote: »

Yes, but what I'm saying is that private schools don't deserve any money at all. If they go public then give them the money, as much as they need to get up to the average standard. It will cost less to the Government in the long run than paying them millions every year.

If they remain private, give them nothing and let the parents pay everything. They can afford it.

Not all parents could afford the major increase in fees there would be if all government funding were cut. Also the government wouldn't be any better off for it, they'd be giving them the same amount as private schools as they did as public schools. Private schools get no extra government money.

K4t

SarcasticFairy wrote: »

Oh sorry, I took it up wrong. The private schools are staying private but they're not getting funding. Gotcha

I'd have to agree with Piste here. The private school fees only go towards extra things, not the basic stuff public schools get. That €90million has nothing to do with public schools. The parents of private school students still pay tax, and chances are they're contributing more tax if they can afford a place in a private school, and so have every right to have some of that go towards their childs education.

I would not be the least bit surprised if part of that money is going towards extra facilities etc.
Anyway, I've said enough. Later.

johnk123

Relax people! :pac:

I go to a private school which my parents choose to pay for and they do so for certain reasons. As explained by my principal, every school has X number of teachers whose salaries are paid for by the state, but in our school, a certain percentage of our fees go towards providing extra teachers to keep class sizes down. (at least i think thats how it was explained to me!)

Also, they pay fee's for my brother and i so we can enjoy our time in school. Fantastic facilities, unbelievable choice of sports etc(Mainly Rugby in most case), great class morale and good atmosphere between teachers and students. Sure our teachers even say it too us. Like some of the horror stories you hear that they have experienced in recent years sounded like scenes from a prison, nevermind a school!

And i DO think that private school should receive funding from the DoE. Our parents pay taxes like everyone else, so why shouldn't we be entitled to get something back? If they didn't fund our private schools, it'd be like my parents were paying the fees for pupils in a public schools on top of my fees.

Piste

I'm in a public school but by the souns of it it's just like yours, though the only reason we have good facilities is because the parents paid for them, though it was entirely voluntary.

SarcasticFairy

K4t wrote: »

I would not be the least bit surprised if part of that money is going towards extra facilities etc.
Anyway, I've said enough. Later.

Who so sceptical?
I go to a DEIS school, so my school is one of the worse off in the country, and yet, I do not see why the parents of private school students should have to pay (somewhat) for me to go to school. They are only paying for the extras. Do you really think the Government are going to fund anything they don't have to? The roof started to fall off in two of the classrooms and the Government said it wasn't bad enough to give us money to fix it - clearly they will get out of whatever they can!

--paul--

Here relax i go to a private school and it's a kip,would much rather have gone to a public school as the ones in my area are far better than my private school,the idea that you should take away funding from private school is ridiculous though,the funding they recieve from fees are a fraction of their total funds so if it were to happen then private schools would simply turn public or close,so it wont and could never happen,end of.

Blisterman

efb wrote: »

Because it creates an inequality on children that don't choose their socioeconomic background, they're born into it.

Possibly so, but there would be a much worse division between private and public schools, were private schools to cost in the 10s of thousands, like in England. There, only the richest of the rich, can afford it.
I went to a private school in Dublin, and there were quite a few people from modest backgrounds, whose parents made serious sacrifices to keep them there. It wasn't just rich kids.

themont85

K4t wrote: »

I think €90m would go a long way.

The fact is that the State shouldn't be funding private education at all. If you can't see that then it's your loss.

Socially and financially your argument is flawed. Read my OP post on it.

The 90 million 'savings' would turn into a cost for the government, they would have to build new schools. I think its 8% go to fee paying schools. At least 3-4% would go to the free sector. Not all parents who send their kids to fee paying schools are loaded. I'll admit i attended a fee paying school. What i can tell you is that we all weren't loaded. Yes in my year we had lads dads who were high up in various companies, barristors ect but we also had teachers, plumbers sons aswell. I'll admit we didn't have what could be as classed as 'poor' people but we had as normal people as you'd get anywhere. Certain parents really save to send their kids to these schools, it can for the ethos(such as Protestant ones for rural areas) ect. They pay taxes, their children are entitled to free 2nd level, why aren't they entitled to a little of the tax going to their kids? They save the State money. TBH i dunno if my parents would have sent me to a fee paying school if it was completely 'private' in the strictest sense of the word, the fees would have being nearly double i reckon, out of reach to most. I would have gone to the 'free sector' and thus become a bigger burden for the State.

I have already discussed other repurcussions such as a two tier teaching sector and a greater number of grind schools(no all round education there).

Socially your theory is flawed on many levels. Number 1, everybody is born to different classes and parents wealth so automatically we are already advantaged or disadvantaged in life for many things including education from a young age which the Govt doesn't cater for. Number 2, your proposal will create a far more elitist private sector where by only the very very rich could afford. These schools would be miles better than their free counterparts(far far more than currently), with better teachers ect. These kids would be a hell of a lot more advantaged than current fee paying ones are.

TBH this argument is a load of drivel which is driven by numpties such as the TUI. It looks terrible on paper 'OMG look at those rich kids taking 90m of our money, omg thats terrible look at disabled facilities' blah blah blah. Its a smokescreen. Fee paying sector was hit hardest by the budget cuts technically which is fair to an extent because these parents can afford smaller increases in fees, however, there are a lot of small religously ethosed schools which were hit hard and this is hardly fair. The new Minister of Education didn't even fumble the question when he was asked recently, he catagorically said 'No', he knows the savings it makes.

You'll grow out of your socialist nirvanna when you get older mate

Edit; fair play to Brian Hayes actually, he isn't taking the easy road in opposition of saying 'oh its a disgrace', he's looking at the situation logically.

Fad

K4t wrote: »

I imagine that the majority of children going to private schools are from well off backgrounds so I'd doubt they'd stop going private.

You kinda leave out the middle class (A social group I'm fairly happy to be a part of), my parents work hard, and they made sacrifices to send me to a decent school in my area, which I appreciate, if the school was jack up fees, they wouldnt be able to pay them, so I'd have to leave, and getting a place in another school wouldnt exactly be easy.......

Piste wrote: »

I'm in a public school actually.

And its alot nicer than mine

The one exception to the rule:P

Davidius

We should abolish private schools. If parents really want the best of the best for their kids they can make voluntary contributions. Thus a perfect world is born!

(Impractical idealism for the win!)

whadabouchasir

My argument is that if you can afford to send your children to a fee paying school then you should not deprive other schools in disadvantaged areas of funding that they would otherwise from the Government. Also on the point of ordinary people leaving fee paying scools if grants were abolished thus increasing the pessure on public schools is ridiculous. Fee paying schools would not be able to increase their fees that much because if they did then no-one would go to them. As a result of this the standard of education would not be that much higher and so the whole education system would be more balanced.I would also like to ask anyone going to a fee paying school the question, ihave any students in your year dropped out before the leaving and are on the dole? Because I know several.So don't try and justify this plea for funding because an area with 17% unemployment needs it more!

themont85

whadabouchasir wrote: »

My argument is that if you can afford to send your children to a fee paying school then you should not deprive other schools in disadvantaged areas of funding that they would otherwise from the Government.

How are they 'depriving' kids in disadvanted areas money, they are giving them extra because they aren't choosing to go through the free sector thus freeing up money the government has to spend in disadvantaged areas. Your argument is pants.

whadabouchasir wrote: »

Also on the point of ordinary people leaving fee paying scools if grants were abolished thus increasing the pessure on public schools is ridiculous. Fee paying schools would not be able to increase their fees that much because if they did then no-one would go to them.

Once again flawed. Fee paying schools would have to up their fees in order to maintain their levels and their student body. If they don't then spending would have to to be slashed on things which fee paying schools currently spend on like facilities and sports. Numbers attending these schools would definately reduce as why the hell would parents spend their money on it? Another consequence would be more grind schools like the institute whilst we would have more in the free sector.

whadabouchasir wrote: »

As a result of this the standard of education would not be that much higher and so the whole education system would be more balanced.

No it wouldn't we would have a far more elitist private sector like in the US and more grind schools. The standards in public schools would go down therefore increasing the current gap.

whadabouchasir wrote: »

I would also like to ask anyone going to a fee paying school the question, ihave any students in your year dropped out before the leaving and are on the dole? Because I know several.So don't try and justify this plea for funding because an area with 17% unemployment needs it more!

How is this relevant at all? In my year one guy dropped out iirc for an apprentiship out of about 85 during my whole time there everybody, barring 2 lads went to 3rd level, 1 repeated and the other one was a waster, to answer your question.

This thread isn't about the merits of fee paying schools. But if you want to know why parents send their kids there, there are several reason such as religous ethos, sports, facilities, family traditition, quality of education. Waiting lists for these schools are very high, so parents send their kids for a reason.

Whilst I have plenty of sympathy for an area with 17% unemplyment, on the flip side our second level free scheme is very good and we have affordable 3rd level. The reasons these areas have such bad rates in mainly because of sustained poverty which should be helped, however, bad attitudes from parents towards education and badly run schools are a problem too. I wouldn't blame fee paying schools or their parents for this.

whadabouchasir

Currently the government gives the same funding to private schools as schools in the most disadvantaged areas so even though you have sympathy for them you're not doing anything about it. The only way forward is to give more to those who need it more and less to thosewho need it less, this may cost more in the short term but in the long term results would be a more balanced educational system.

themont85

whadabouchasir wrote: »

Currently the government gives the same funding to private schools as schools in the most disadvantaged areas so even though you have sympathy for them you're not doing anything about it. The only way forward is to give more to those who need it more and less to thosewho need it less, this may cost more in the short term but in the long term results would be a more balanced educational system.

The Government does not give the same funding, that is a lie with no fact behind it. The government pays for in fee paying schools for one teacher for every 20 students, that is it basically. They pay for all the other capital costs, running costs in free schools on top of teachers salaries.

There will be a much bigger gap than before. Read my other posts. There are several consequences. Have you ever been to America? There they have a smaller private sector but much more elitist and a massive gap between the free high school sector and their private schools, far bigger than here.

This would have negative long term and short term consequences; free sector costs more thus perhaps reducing the governments ability to pay extra in disadvantaged areas, bigger gap in education, more grind schools, 2 tier teaching sector ect. Read my other posts im not bothered elaborating further on them.

Your proposal wouldn't help disadvantaged schools it would weaken them.

The only way for us to have a balanced system is to weaken good schools currently. Why not just make the bad ones and bad parents better?

Actually there's another option. Lets change the constitution! Parents won't have the freedom of choice as what to do for their child. A wholly State run system. Sounds like communism to me tbh.

whadabouchasir

themont85 wrote: »

. Why not just make the bad ones and bad parents better?

.

Giving extra money to public schools would improve them, it's the only way, also socialism has many advantages but of course the well off don't want to listen.And no I have never been to America reason:money. Don't just assume that just because you can go to America everyone can and also the vast majority of parents in deprived areas have far more problems todeal with , so don't fr a minute suggest that they are bad parents.People don'tchoose to be poor so don't think less of them for it.

SarcasticFairy

whadabouchasir wrote: »

My argument is that if you can afford to send your children to a fee paying school then you should not deprive other schools in disadvantaged areas of funding that they would otherwise from the Government. Also on the point of ordinary people leaving fee paying scools if grants were abolished thus increasing the pessure on public schools is ridiculous. Fee paying schools would not be able to increase their fees that much because if they did then no-one would go to them. As a result of this the standard of education would not be that much higher and so the whole education system would be more balanced.I would also like to ask anyone going to a fee paying school the question, ihave any students in your year dropped out before the leaving and are on the dole? Because I know several.So don't try and justify this plea for funding because an area with 17% unemployment needs it more!

But if the standard of education was on a par, what exactly (besides maybe decent sports equipment) is the benefit of sending your child to a private school? This would no doubt cause an influx of private school students into public schools, putting a strain on both the schools involved and the resources available.

themont85

whadabouchasir wrote: »

Giving extra money to public schools would improve them, it's the only way, also socialism has many advantages but of course the well off don't want to listen.And no I have never been to America reason:money. Don't just assume that just because you can go to America everyone can and also the vast majority of parents in deprived areas have far more problems todeal with , so don't fr a minute suggest that they are bad parents.People don'tchoose to be poor so don't think less of them for it.

Of course it would, but there would be no extra money to give them, more cuts would have to be made. Can you not see that? I read the CAO thread and it seems you want to be a doctor. Well i thought doctors are supposed to look at the consequences when treating a patient. I'll make the analagy because it seems you are completely ignoring the consequences. All you are saying essentially is this. Okay stop the payment, give the money to the disadvantaged. Then you are saying okay it will hurt in the short term but in the long term it will be more 'balanced'. No it won't. Then you are saying all that will help is more money, well no **** sherlock but your method won't get anymore. You seem to have a blinkered prejudice against these schools and areas such as Blackrock as illustrated in your OP on this topic. Chip on your shoulder eh?

Unfortunately bad parenting does come into this in a way. Many don't put the value in education that they should. They allow their kids go truent, then maybe leave school at 16 with no qualifications to work in the likes of Tesco. This happens. Drugs, alcohal are a problem and have to be helped. However, on another note the free sector isn't bad at all, its bad attitudes and other social problems which help ruin it.