Private schools

Chuchoter

I'm just wondering what everyones opinion is on this. We are permanently hearing people giving out that the government subsidizes private schools, but if these schools were to shut, the public system could not cope. Private schools really are a bit of a lifesaver for the education system. As well as this, what are your opinions on private schools in general? Do they breed elitism? Are they an unfair advantage etc? Are they actually worth the money? Because I'm in a private school and several of the local community colleges are known to be much better in terms of both academic and extra curricular activities.

strobe

Cray, or anyone else. Could you outline what exactly makes a school a private school? Is it just if you have to pay fees to attend?

wonderfulname

crayolastereo wrote: »

I'm just wondering what everyones opinion is on this. We are permanently hearing people giving out that the government subsidizes private schools, but if these schools were to shut, the public system could not cope. Private schools really are a bit of a lifesaver for the education system. As well as this, what are your opinions on private schools in general? Do they breed elitism? Are they an unfair advantage etc? Are they actually worth the money? Because I'm in a private school and several of the local community colleges are known to be much better in terms of both academic and extra curricular activities.

What people tend to forget whilst criticizing government subsiding of private schools is that they offer a service the government could not afford to do alone. Many private schools are run under the ethos of religious minorities. I myself went to a private boarding/day school run by one of these minorities, one with a following of some 1.5k. Students of the religion were given almost free board and education and came from all across the country. We insist that parents have a right to send their children to state schools of their religion, but in this case it would be completely unfeasible.

They do indeed breed elitism in that I know many people in my year were intolerably prejudice, but they do not give an unfair advantage. The only reason these schools have such a high feeder rate is because there is an assumption amongst the middle classes that everyone should go on to third level, it has nothing to do with the level of tuition.

wonderfulname

strobe wrote: »

Cray, or anyone else. Could you outline what exactly makes a school a private school? Is it just if you have to pay fees to attend?

They are just, to give them their proper term, fee-paying schools. That is the only difference. Of course this topic can also cover grind schools but that doesn't seem to me to be what crayolastereo is talking about.

rantyface

We can get rid of fee paying schools when a boy from Tallaght can attend Muckross!

Otherwise you'd end up with an even worse system where rich people living in posh areas have good local schools because they all donate and all the kids get grinds, and poor areas end up with terrible schools. This is the situation in many countries.

It's hundreds of thousands of euro cheaper to live on the Northside and go to a fee paying school than live on the Southside full stop.

Merod8

if its muckross in donnybrook it would be very strange if a boy from anywhere went there because its a girls school and its non fee paying

annainez

Really I think it doesn't matter what school you go to if you're lazy you're lazy and you're not going to work hard to do well.
On the other hand, if you work hard, you do well. Whether you pay fees or not.
Just my opinion.

rantyface

Merod8 wrote: »

if its muckross in donnybrook it would be very strange if a boy from anywhere went there because its a girls school and its non fee paying

The point is that even non fee paying schools are exclusive. Muckross can exclude students based on catchment area, and therefore on income because they are in by far the richest part of the country.

They can discriminate against poor people just as easily as a fee paying school, because you need to be really rich to live in the catchment area.

Muckross is the best English speaking non fee paying school in Ireland, for those who don't know.

wonderfulname

rantyface wrote: »

We can get rid of fee paying schools when a boy from Tallaght can attend Muckross!

Otherwise you'd end up with an even worse system where rich people living in posh areas have good local schools because they all donate and all the kids get grinds, and poor areas end up with terrible schools. This is the situation in many countries.

It's hundreds of thousands of euro cheaper to live on the Northside and go to a fee paying school than live on the Southside full stop.

Your confusing! But anyway i'll give a bash at responding, Muckross is a girls school by the way!

Private schools aren't necessarily any better. I went to both a fee paying school and one classified disadvantaged due to area and feeder rate and the latter was actually better in terms of tuition! It didn't have the manicured lawns or the multiple pitches but what do you really look for in a school? The only major difference in how the school was run was the ethos (see previous point), and diversity in this area is something that is necessary in our education system.

rantyface

annainez wrote: »

Really I think it doesn't matter what school you go to if you're lazy you're lazy and you're not going to work hard to do well.
On the other hand, if you work hard, you do well. Whether you pay fees or not.
Just my opinion.

Not true at all!

My Mam's school can't offer any higher level subjects because the standards are so low. Most people can't even read when they come in. She teaches higher level after hours to anyone who needs it. Most of class time is taken up resolving fights and discipline issues. They get very little work done. Nobody has ever gone into medicine or anything from her school, although lots have tried!

wonderfulname

rantyface wrote: »

Muckross is the best English speaking non fee paying school in Ireland, for those who don't know.

by what standard?

rantyface

wonderfulname wrote: »

Your confusing! But anyway i'll give a bash at responding, Muckross is a girls school by the way!

I know. the point is that the non fee paying school Muckross can exclude based on gender and where you live. Only girls from the richest part of the country may attend. It does not matter if there are formal fees or not. As long as schools can discriminate like that, some schools are going to be better than others and some students are going to have massive educational advantages.

I left my local school and went to a fee paying school. I got more points than the best student in my local school, and I know a lot of them were cleverer and harder working than me, they just had to put up with crap all day in class. The teachers' jobs there were just to keep order, not teach.

rantyface

wonderfulname wrote: »

by what standard?

By that "how many go to university" standard. It varies from year to year, but they are consistently in the top 10.
(I know it's not a good measure of how good a school is because in some schools if everyone finishes the junior cert that is a massive acheivement on behalf of the staff and students.)

The main problem people have with fee paying schools is that the students supposedly have an advantage getting to college. But fee paying school are not the only way to get a massive advantage. Gaelscoils also have an advantage because only dedicated parents who had some education themselves will be able to help with homework etc. They are overwhelmingly middle class, but not fee paying. Schools in fancy areas have an advantage because the parents are more likely educated and ambitious, which rubs off on the children.

wonderfulname

rantyface wrote: »

I know. the point is that the non fee paying school Muckross can exclude based on gender and where you live. Only girls from the richest part of the country may attend. It does not matter if there are formal fees or not. As long as schools can discriminate like that, some schools are going to be better than others and some students are going to have massive educational advantages.

I left my local school and went to a fee paying school. I got more points than the best student in my local school, and I know a lot of them were cleverer and harder working than me, they just had to put up with crap all day in class. The teachers' jobs there were just to keep order, not teach.

Muckross has quite a large catchment area, technically you can get in from bray and I wouldn't be inclined to call that rich..

Schools only accepting one sex are not discriminating, and solely teaching girls is not going to increase the schools standard.

Equally I can say I went to a fee paying school and got a crap leaving, I had to move to a state school in a disadvantaged area to repeat, I know I did better this year. Our personal anecdotes don't tell the whole story.

wonderfulname

rantyface wrote: »

By that "how many go to university" standard..

Already addressed feeder rates they are not the true measure of a school.

johnmcdnl

rantyface wrote: »

Not true at all!

My Mam's school can't offer any higher level subjects because the standards are so low. Most people can't even read when they come in. She teaches higher level after hours to anyone who needs it. Most of class time is taken up resolving fights and discipline issues. They get very little work done. Nobody has ever gone into medicine or anything from her school, although lots have tried!

yes - there are a few really really bad schools in the country... but in most cases there's 2-3 schools in the area anyways so students have an option to go to another public school that's much better.. we all know the "bad" schools and anyone that has any intention of doing well at all will know to avoid these schools... yes i know technically the point your making is probably true but in reality there's a lot of easier options than private school...



... also those mentioning about having the right to go to a religious school of any denominsation... where does Irish law have a bill that says that the governemt must provide you with a school with a certain religious ethos... are you sure it's not something like the right to go to a school of any ethos..... I can't see how the law would say that you must be provided with the school of that religion... so therefore a private school some act as a private school should... it should cover it's own costs just like any other company has to... because that's all a private school is at the end of a day - a company that provides a educational service to the people...

wonderfulname

johnmcdnl wrote: »

... also those mentioning about having the right to go to a religious school of any denominsation... where does Irish law have a bill that says that the governemt must provide you with a school with a certain religious ethos... are you sure it's not something like the right to go to a school of any ethos..... I can't see how the law would say that you must be provided with the school of that religion... so therefore a private school some act as a private school should... it should cover it's own costs just like any other company has to... because that's all a private school is at the end of a day - a company that provides a educational service to the people...

It stems from the constitution:

The State acknowledges that the primary and natural educator of the child is the Family and guarantees to respect the inalienable right and duty of parents to provide, according to their means, for the religious and moral, intellectual, physical and social education of their children.

It is indeed that everyone should have the right to be taught with regards to their religious belief, not that the state has to provide the service.

But that wasn't the point I was trying to make, if the government did not subsidize private schools they would simply have to close down, people would not be able to afford the fees. Then theres the headache of what to do with those pesky non-catholics wanting their rights... build a school for 10 people in a town who want to be taught under their own ethos? How about the one or two that live an hour away? do you now have to provide accommodation? or a bus? the subsidization of fee paying schools is a cheaper option.

johnmcdnl

wonderfulname wrote: »

It stems from the constitution: It is indeed that everyone should have the right to be taught with regards to their religious belief, not that the state has to provide the service.

But that wasn't the point I was trying to make, if the government did not subsidize private schools they would simply have to close down, people would not be able to afford the fees. Then theres the headache of what to do with those pesky non-catholics wanting their rights... build a school for 10 people in a town who want to be taught under their own ethos? How about the one or two that live an hour away? do you now have to provide accommodation? or a bus? the subsidization of fee paying schools is a cheaper option.

pay more for the fees.. simple as that...

no one is making you go to the fee paying school... it's a free country and if you want this priviledge you should either be willing to pay for it or take what's being offered to everyone else..

it's highly unfair on the ordinary tax payer to have to pay to subsidise these schools seeing as we already have to pay for the education of the other 99% of students who accept what's given to them...
why should we have to burden the tax for those that want their "non religious" school... students aren't obliged in the relihous schools to actually partake in any religous activity as they are usually allowed to go to a study class or something doing religion class or during the school mass etc etc

wonderfulname

johnmcdnl wrote: »

pay more for the fees.. simple as that...

no one is making you go to the fee paying school... it's a free country and if you want this priviledge you should either be willing to pay for it or take what's being offered to everyone else..

it's highly unfair on the ordinary tax payer to have to pay to subsidise these schools seeing as we already have to pay for the education of the other 99% of students who accept what's given to them...
why should we have to burden the tax for those that want their "non religious" school... students aren't obliged in the relihous schools to actually partake in any religous activity as they are usually allowed to go to a study class or something doing religion class or during the school mass etc etc

Your missing the point if people can't afford the fees then the schools won't be able to function for the few people who attend for their religious values, by the way in the majority of cases this is free for them or heavily subsidized by their religious group. If the school closes down the government not only pays the full price for these students to be educated but also the price of facilitating their religion. I'm not stating an opinion here its fact, and what is being offered to everyone else is RC, given that the majority of the country is RC it makes sense, but the constitution is the constitution and the service has to be provided somewhere for everyone else. Also a schools ethos dictates far more than RE just to say.

Private schools are a good deal for the tax payer!

Oh and stop with the yous, I'm long out of private education and I was also a scholarship kid, my family wouldn't have been able to afford it either. Its also not a privilege its a right, enshrined in the constitution as I think I may have mentioned a few times..

Truley

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in the case of private schools, I dont think it's just a case of state pays the teachers/funds the school, the school charges fees and then makes a profit. Private schools such as minoirty religious schools don't get some of the same benefits that a state funded school would get and so they charge a fee in light of their different ethos. Or in other cases they want to provide more than what the state funds (better sports equipment, boarding facilities etc) and charge for the extras. So the taxpayer is paying for their education like with any other school, the fees cover the extras. Am I right in saying that?

Chuchoter

Truley wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in the case of private schools, I dont think it's just a case of state pays the teachers/funds the school, the school charges fees and then makes a profit. Private schools such as minoirty religious schools don't get some of the same benefits that a state funded school would get and so they charge a fee in light of their different ethos. Or in other cases they want to provide more than what the state funds (better sports equipment, boarding facilities etc) and charge for the extras. So the taxpayer is paying for their education like with any other school, the fees cover the extras. Am I right in saying that?

I honestly don't know. In my school, which is fee paying, we worked out that the school makes about 3 million a year from fees. I know a lot of this goes to renting the land from the religious order that runs it. The government pays for a certain amount of teachers and beyond that the school pays for it. But then when you ask them why do we never go on any trips when the local vec goes on loads, they'll say its because of cuts or unions or something. What happens to the rest of the money I'll never know, because the facilities are fairly crap.

@jphnnymcdnl: Its not really a case of pay more for the fees, if the fees got too high, people would have no choice but to leave. There would then be a massive influx of students into already crowded schools. It would be more expensive to the taxpayer,and everyones quality of education would suffer.

wonderfulname

Truley wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in the case of private schools, I dont think it's just a case of state pays the teachers/funds the school, the school charges fees and then makes a profit. Private schools such as minoirty religious schools don't get some of the same benefits that a state funded school would get and so they charge a fee in light of their different ethos. Or in other cases they want to provide more than what the state funds (better sports equipment, boarding facilities etc) and charge for the extras. So the taxpayer is paying for their education like with any other school, the fees cover the extras. Am I right in saying that?

The state pays the teachers and provides some of the equipment necessary, the fee goes towards a mix of extras such as mentioned but also towards necessities and day to day expenditure. And schools of minority religions are not for profit, your mixing them up with monstrosities like the institute of education.. thats a whole different ball game, now they are purely for profit and don't give a rats arse about anything other that money.

Crayolastereo, 3million is nothing, the state pays about 250,000 to service the average public school classroom for a year, have to say though it is a pretty large income for a school, are you somewhere massive like kilkenny or over-the-top like columbas?

looksee

Every child is entitled to an education, and the government pays a certain amount for that. If parents then want to spend money (after they have paid taxes etc which pay for education) on what they perceive to be better education for their children, then that is their right, but the private school would get that basic amount.

OK, some people can't afford to spend that extra, some don't want to because they feel the public system is fine, thats just the way it is. We could not affort to send our children to private school but they did just fine at (very) ordinary schools. (one doing a Phd at the moment, one doing a masters).

People are entitled to spend their money however it suits them, whether its private healthcare, exotic holidays, whatever.

Truley

wonderfulname wrote: »

The state pays the teachers and provides some of the equipment necessary, the fee goes towards a mix of extras such as mentioned but also towards necessities and day to day expenditure. And schools of minority religions are not for profit, your mixing them up with monstrosities like the institute of education.. thats a whole different ball game, now they are purely for profit and don't give a rats arse about anything other that money.

I was thinking of the local protestant school in my area. It charges a fee of about 2k a year, pretty basic for a private school. The school itself is very average, it wouldn't be considered a 'better' school in terms of academics or extra curricular facilities. I think the extra cost seems to be for students to have the 'privlege' of attending a school with a protestant ethos. I think the fees cover this aspect of the school, I know it definately doesn't make a profit anyway.

seven-iron

If it wasnt for private schools the country would be in awful state. Who would run our hospitals and schools and big corporations that employ people with lessor educations, in order words they give everyone a chance. There the glue and foundation on which Ireland and England are built.

Het-Field

wonderfulname wrote: »

Muckross has quite a large catchment area, technically you can get in from bray and I wouldn't be inclined to call that rich..

Schools only accepting one sex are not discriminating, and solely teaching girls is not going to increase the schools standard.

Equally I can say I went to a fee paying school and got a crap leaving, I had to move to a state school in a disadvantaged area to repeat, I know I did better this year. Our personal anecdotes don't tell the whole story.

You would be amazed at the wealth of the people in Muckross. I have often wondered about the selection procedures used to select entrants to the school. I get the impression it is far more exclusive then the average community school.

wonderfulname

Truley wrote: »

I was thinking of the local protestant school in my area. It charges a fee of about 2k a year, pretty basic for a private school. The school itself is very average, it wouldn't be considered a 'better' school in terms of academics or extra curricular facilities. I think the extra cost seems to be for students to have the 'privlege' of attending a school with a protestant ethos. I think the fees cover this aspect of the school, I know it definately doesn't make a profit anyway.

I'm not saying this is definitely the case but assuming you mean CoI, I believe the church heavily subsides that fee for CoI students, so I'd imagine that school gets very little from parents, but a lump sum from the church, and I can well imagine they have huge input into how this is spent..

Aside from that there is expenses in fee paying schools that don't exist in public ones, certain members of staff for example, or that the fees tend to be inclusive of things like school/sports trips and sometimes the option of lunch (e350 when i left school..) amongst other things, these don't make a school any better but they do cost a bit.

HavingCrack

wonderfulname wrote: »

The state pays the teachers and provides some of the equipment necessary, the fee goes towards a mix of extras such as mentioned but also towards necessities and day to day expenditure. And schools of minority religions are not for profit, your mixing them up with monstrosities like the institute of education.. thats a whole different ball game, now they are purely for profit and don't give a rats arse about anything other that money.

To be honest the Institute and other grind schools are the only ones that I would call 'private schools' in the truest sense of the word seeing as they recieve no funding from the government and are esentially run as companies. Calling it a monstrosity is also unfair-it is only catering to the way the Leaving Certificate is set up in this country and fair play to them. Unlike fee paying schools such as Terenure College or CBC Cork they use their income to pay for excellent teachers and excellent academic facilites and and don't get the government to pay for the teachers whiel they use their fees to construct rugby stadiums (certain school located in Blackrock). If you want to be a private school become wholy private with no government funding or otherwise stick to the public system.

As far as I'm concerned all public schools should be non denominational and if a parent is seriosu enough about their religion they would instruct their children in it with the aid of an imama, rabbi, priest, druid whatever without the help of a school. If they still want to send their chidlren to a religious school they shoudl pay for it but the state should not be funding religous schools.

seven-iron wrote: »

If it wasnt for private schools the country would be in awful state. Who would run our hospitals and schools and big corporations that employ people with lessor educations, in order words they give everyone a chance. There the glue and foundation on which Ireland and England are built.

I really hope you're being sarcastic.

wonderfulname

Het-Field wrote: »

You would be amazed at the wealth of the people in Muckross. I have often wondered about the selection procedures used to select entrants to the school. I get the impression it is far more exclusive then the average community school.

I said technically :P they don't go by geography they go by accent...

HavingCrack

Het-Field wrote: »

You would be amazed at the wealth of the people in Muckross. I have often wondered about the selection procedures used to select entrants to the school. I get the impression it is far more exclusive then the average community school.

It really isn't. I know quite a few girls who went there and they were from Ringsend, Glasnevin, Drumcondra, Terenure, Bray, Loughlinstown, Stillorgan, Churchtown and Tallaght-quite a wide socio-economic spread. I get the impression that Muckross selects based on intelligence( eg entrance exams) rather than on the right address.

wonderfulname

HavingCrack wrote: »

As far as I'm concerned all public schools should be non denominational and if a parent is seriosu enough about their religion they would instruct their children in it with the aid of an imama, rabbi, priest, druid whatever without the help of a school. If they still want to send their chidlren to a religious school they shoudl pay for it but the state should not be funding religous schools..

To be honest that would be the best solution, religion should be kept out of schools altogether then fee paying schools could run privately for the self proclaimed elites who currently keep them going. If no school were religious the constitution could be taken to mean you have the right to instruct your child in whatever religion you chose yourself and not expect someone else to do it.

Although with regards to all religious schools being private, I find it hard to see the RCC putting their own funds into education to the extent the protestant churches do..

And yes I hope the troll was being sarcastic too.

seven-iron

Well I know theres a precedent for successful people coming from private schools. Particularly blackrock marys and terenure college. But lots of people who come from the likes of templeogue, tallaght and the country people do relatively well and have a good standard of living.

there is also a perception that people who come from public schools have a poor standard of eduction but its not bad. sure that why they made IT's so people with sub standard educations can improve their skills so they can become employable

Chuchoter

wonderfulname wrote: »

The state pays the teachers and provides some of the equipment necessary, the fee goes towards a mix of extras such as mentioned but also towards necessities and day to day expenditure. And schools of minority religions are not for profit, your mixing them up with monstrosities like the institute of education.. thats a whole different ball game, now they are purely for profit and don't give a rats arse about anything other that money.

Crayolastereo, 3million is nothing, the state pays about 250,000 to service the average public school classroom for a year, have to say though it is a pretty large income for a school, are you somewhere massive like kilkenny or over-the-top like columbas?

No its actually pretty small, its 600 people. 3mil is a fair amount for 600 people, but the only facility thats good is a hockey pitch. We never have anyone going out with really good points either.

HavingCrack

wonderfulname wrote: »

To be honest that would be the best solution, religion should be kept out of schools altogether then fee paying schools could run privately for the self proclaimed elites who currently keep them going. If no school were religious the constitution could be taken to mean you have the right to instruct your child in whatever religion you chose yourself and not expect someone else to do it.

Although with regards to all religious schools being private, I find it hard to see the RCC putting their own funds into education to the extent the protestant churches do..

And yes I hope the troll was being sarcastic too.

In the UK and the United States the Catholic Church has run private schools quite successfully actually and there is large waiting lists to get in. However I don't actually know how the teachers are paid in these countires so I can't say is it a fair comparison.

His posts in other threads seem to be relatively intelligent so I presume he's being a troll.

seven-iron wrote: »

Well I know theres a precedent for successful people coming from private schools. Particularly blackrock marys and terenure college. But lots of people who come from the likes of templeogue, tallaght and the country people do relatively well and have a good standard of living.

there is also a perception that people who come from public schools have a poor standard of eduction but its not bad. sure that why they made IT's so people with sub standard educations can improve their skills so they can become employable

Terenure College actually has a very low rate of its students making it to universities while Blackrock College and St. Marys College send about half of their students to IT's according to that Irish Times league table so you should do better research for you trolling.

goose2005

johnmcdnl wrote: »

yes - there are a few really really bad schools in the country... but in most cases there's 2-3 schools in the area anyways so students have an option to go to another public school that's much better.. we all know the "bad" schools and anyone that has any intention of doing well at all will know to avoid these schools... yes i know technically the point your making is probably true but in reality there's a lot of easier options than private school...

Not if they come from a family with no tradition of education or decent work. If 10% of Ballyfermot go to college compared to 90% of Dundrum, it's hardly because of genetic inferiority.

Eliot Rosewater

When it comes to fee-paying schools I think people often confuse causation and correlation. Because students do better it is assumed that that is a direct result of the school. However, in my opinion, the kind of parents who would send their kids to a private school are generally interested in their child's education, and having such supportive and interested parenting will help the child do better.

An oft cited reason for children doing better in fee-paying schools is that they feel a responsibility to do well given that their parents are paying money for them. I think it's a viable enough reason, and, once again, it's not based on the actual quality of the school.

In reality, is there much of a difference in quality? I've talked to people in private schools and they complain of the same things that were prevalent in my old public school, such as poor teachers. Having done applied maths in a grind school under a teacher who also taught in a fee-paying school, I know that there are some brilliant teachers in the private system, but are all of them so?

crayolastereo wrote: »

No its actually pretty small, its 600 people. 3mil is a fair amount for 600 people, but the only facility thats good is a hockey pitch. We never have anyone going out with really good points either.

As a rule I wouldn't try and gauge how much a business making on the basis of how much they charge. There is a plethora of costs associated with running a business, from the obvious (such as tax) to the not so obvious (having to call an expensive electrician every now and then).

This past year my mother has been trying to operate a business so I've first hand experience of all the niggly costs. For example, she charges €30 or €40 for an hour Reiki session, which seems a lot, but there's so many things like mortgages and utilities to be accounted for.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

rantyface

wonderfulname wrote: »

Equally I can say I went to a fee paying school and got a crap leaving, I had to move to a state school in a disadvantaged area to repeat, I know I did better this year. Our personal anecdotes don't tell the whole story.

Everyone knows that students in private schools, gaelscoils and schools in posh areas do better, on average, than those in average schools. That is not a personal anecdote. You may be the exception, but having gone to a private school you must know that 450+ points is the norm.

The year I did my LC the average CAO points were under 300, to put that into perspective. That means just about passing most subjects, and as you know that requires a very poor standard of English, maths, languages, history, geography, science, music or whatever you study. You could effectively know nothing and pass those exams.

There is obviously massive inequality in the system.

silverharp

rantyface wrote: »

Everyone knows that students in private schools, gaelscoils and schools in posh areas do better, on average, than those in average schools. That is not a personal anecdote. You may be the exception, but having gone to a private school you must know that 450+ points is the norm.

The year I did my LC the average CAO points were under 300, to put that into perspective. That means just about passing most subjects, and as you know that requires a very poor standard of English, maths, languages, history, geography, science, music or whatever you study. You could effectively know nothing and pass those exams.

There is obviously massive inequality in the system.

I think you are mixing issues together here. I went to a private school and out of a year of 90 that was streamed 30 were in the pass classes which means most of them were not headed straight for Trinity or UCD. There was nothing special about the teaching and we had our fair share of teachers that would have been got rid had they not been unsackable.

Apart from the usual curve of kids ability the more important causal factors are the attitudes of the parents and peer pressure of wider family , friends and neighbours. If a school is failing badly its more likey down to the fact that the parents dont care or there is an anti education bias in the community. Your guess is as good as mine how you get these people to switch off their Sky box and start reading books!

Fuinseog

crayolastereo wrote: »

I'm just wondering what everyones opinion is on this. We are permanently hearing people giving out that the government subsidizes private schools, but if these schools were to shut, the public system could not cope. Private schools really are a bit of a lifesaver for the education system. As well as this, what are your opinions on private schools in general? Do they breed elitism? Are they an unfair advantage etc? Are they actually worth the money? Because I'm in a private school and several of the local community colleges are known to be much better in terms of both academic and extra curricular activities.

it depends on the school. some impart values, others are just places for rich kids who think and know they can do as they please.
places like the Rock get a lot of bad press but they also collect thousands for charity.

Fuinseog

annainez wrote: »

Really I think it doesn't matter what school you go to if you're lazy you're lazy and you're not going to work hard to do well.
QUOTE]

in a private school this person does well because mommy and daddy pay a lot of money so no matter what he will get better grades. they will not be pleased with the school if he does not get good grades.

there are private schools for the nouveau riche and for old money. the latter are more pleasant to deal with while the former are just a bunch of cream crackers that rich under the boom.

Eliot Rosewater

Fuinseog wrote: »

...others are just places for rich kids...

Fuinseog wrote: »

in a private school this person does well because mommy and daddy pay a lot of money...

A major problem with discussing private education, and privatisation as a whole, is this kind of pointless rhetoric that seeks to convince solely by eliciting an emotional response in those reading towards those who are better off financially.

Fuinseog

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

A major problem with discussing private education, and privatisation as a whole, is this kind of pointless rhetoric that seeks to convince solely by eliciting an emotional response in those reading towards those who are better off financially.

as I mentioned there is old money and new money and their offspring behave accordingly.
as another poster pointed out 'normal' schools are sometimes better than private ones.

Fuinseog

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

When it comes to fee-paying schools I think people often confuse causation and correlation. Because students do better it is assumed that that is a direct result of the school. However, in my opinion, the kind of parents who would send their kids to a private school are generally interested in their child's education, and having such supportive and interested parenting will help the child do better.
In reality, is there much of a difference in quality? I've talked to people in private schools and they complain of the same things that were prevalent in my old public school, such as poor teachers. Having done applied maths in a grind school under a teacher who also taught in a fee-paying school, I know that there are some brilliant teachers in the private system, but are all of them so?

true, parents who send their offspring to private schools are interetsed in their education, sometimes too much so. These 'helicopter parents' hinder their child's development.

parents also send their offspring to priavte schools because many offer full creche facilities until 9pm, including an evening meal, while regular schools tend to close at 6pm.

teachers in private schools are not necessarily better. they are under more pressure to get better grades.
many private schools are not in the slightest bit academic. Rubgy (Gaelic being too common) is very often the be all and end all. anyone from the rock will tell you that.

DeVore

I went to Belvedere in the 80's. I sat an entrance exam with 600 other boys for 60 places. I didnt have family there, my father didnt go there or anything like that. We werent rich. I got a place in the top stream and my father was given the "opportunity" to pay a chunk of dosh for me to attend, which he did. Before that I was dawdling through public school, bored out of my mind and completely unchallenged.

I think thats the right way to do it. Everyone in my class went on to Uni, 5 got scholarships to Unis in the states for 5 years with all costs paid and there was a total of 137 A's in the leaving cert in the class.

I'm sorry if your kid is thick but if mine isnt, I want him/her educated to his/her limit and as much as I can afford.

DeV.

HavingCrack

DeVore wrote: »

I went to Belvedere in the 80's. I sat an entrance exam with 600 other boys for 60 places. I didnt have family there, my father didnt go there or anything like that. We werent rich. I got a place in the top stream and my father was given the "opportunity" to pay a chunk of dosh for me to attend, which he did. Before that I was dawdling through public school, bored out of my mind and completely unchallenged.

I think thats the right way to do it. Everyone in my class went on to Uni, 5 got scholarships to Unis in the states for 5 years with all costs paid and there was a total of 137 A's in the leaving cert in the class.

I'm sorry if your kid is thick but if mine isnt, I want him/her educated to his/her limit and as much as I can afford.

DeV.

I don't have a problem with anyone attending private school at all to be honest, I just object to the state funding them by paying the teachers etc.

Wibbs

Why shouldnt the state fund centres of excellence? I would say it behoves them to do so, as it behoves parents who have the drive to look for a better educational environment for their kids. I know its not a popular notion, but so long as kids of all backgrounds have the chance to be sorted on merit I really don't see the issue. It has to be driven on merit more though. Then again you can lead a horse to water... so the rich kids wont usually make it if they're dense. I was schooled privately and the majority of the ones who came out on top in later life weren't the silver spoon types.

DeVore wrote:

I'm sorry if your kid is thick but if mine isnt, I want him/her educated to his/her limit and as much as I can afford.

+1 I would add that I would want him/her to be educated in a way that suits them. Private schooling would be but one avenue for that. The less academic kid, or the less sporty kid may not find their feet in such a place. Having been in one since the age of 6 through to 17, I do recall many who went on to greater things who only blossomed after they left that environment. Of course that happens in all schools. I would say that even for the outliers there was a certain confidence that went along with that kind of environment.

HavingCrack

Wibbs wrote: »

Why shouldnt the state fund centres of excellence? I would say it behoves them to do so, as it behoves parents who have the drive to look for a better educational environment for their kids. I know its not a popular notion, but so long as kids of all backgrounds have the chance to be sorted on merit I really don't see the issue. It has to be driven on merit more though. Then again you can lead a horse to water... so the rich kids wont usually make it if they're dense. I was schooled privately and the majority of the ones who came out on top in later life weren't the silver spoon types.

Because we pay enough taxes in this fecking country not to be funding hockey pitches and swimming pools for little johnny from Ailesbury Road. I agree there should be centres of excellence for education eg the Institute of Education where I attended-a proper private school withotu state assistence. Perhaps somethign alogn the lines of the Grammar School/Comprehensive mehtod used in the Uk would be fairer if you want to divide children on merit.

Simply put an awful lot of incredibly bright children will never have the opportunities to attend these exclusive private schools so the state should not be funding them. I'm sure if you have the necessary drive you may eventually make it in life but if you're born into a family of 8 livign on a council house with both parents in low paid jobs I can't see your chances of attending private school as very high can you??
If there is a method of creating some form of state run centres of exellency I'd be happy to hear your suggestions.

Wibbs

HavingCrack wrote: »

Because we pay enough taxes in this fecking country not to be funding hockey pitches and swimming pools for little johnny from Ailesbury Road. I agree there should be centres of excellence for education eg the Institute of Education where I attended-a proper private school withotu state assistence.

As did I but your parents had to stump up the serious cash for you to do so, state help or not. Unless the IoE has gotten significantly more charitable over the intervening years.

Perhaps somethign alogn the lines of the Grammar School/Comprehensive mehtod used in the Uk would be fairer if you want to divide children on merit.

I would agree.

rantyface

HavingCrack wrote: »

Because we pay enough taxes in this fecking country not to be funding hockey pitches and swimming pools for little johnny from Ailesbury Road. I agree there should be centres of excellence for education eg the Institute of Education where I attended-a proper private school withotu state assistence.

The state pays for a teacher for every 18 pupils. The exact same as it would be paying if they were in the public system. It doesn't pay for the hockey pitches, the fees do.

Incidentally, I thought all the fees my parents paid were wasted on hockey pitches and nice paint jobs. They didn't aid our education at all. The only reason the school was good was because there were interviews to get in and generally the parents were good and the students were ambitious.

Fuinseog

protestants have to attend priavte school as there are no public schools with a protestant ethos. the state was trying to take away the grant these kids need which is unconstitutional an contrary to popular belief not all protestants in the republic are well heeled.