effective Irish people who did not need a private school

sensibleken

parker kent wrote: »

Not to totally sidetrack the topic, but fees would not be a bad thing as long as they helped subsidise an improved grant/scholarship scheme.

Which ever way would be the most egalitarian way of doing it (based on merit that is, not wealth)

Holysock

Gyalist wrote: »

He went to school 40 minutes earlier than usual last Tuesday because a teacher offered to give them an extra Latin class. I've yet to hear of a state school teacher voluntarily giving so much of their time.

Just because you haven't heard of them doesn't mean they're not there. I went to a public secondary school and plenty of the teachers that I had ran extra classes in their own spare time. The maths teacher ran extra classes for an hour every tuesday for 6th year, revision classes on the easter holidays and revision classes in the two months running up to the leaving certificate every saturday morning. And it was the choice of the student to go to them or not. Dedicated teachers aren't solely in private schools.

Scuid Mhór

private schools might make the grades, but what do they mold children into?

Dudess

While I don't buy the "Private schools are better schools because you pay for them" argument one bit (although I've nothing against people sending their kids to one on the basis of it, as in the individual school, being a good school, convenient to get to, etc) I don't know whether things are as straightforward as the following:

biko wrote: »

If you're a bright kid where you attend school won't matter much.

Thing is, for many bright kids, being bright on its own isn't always enough. They need an educational environment that nurtures their intelligence. I went to a school, which, ok I'm not saying it was The Bronx High, but there was a real "couldn't care less about learning" culture there, which rubbed off on me. I was a mediocre student, whereas I had the ability to do well. I did get just about enough points for Arts because of encouragement at home, but had I studied harder, I'd have had other options too. And by the time university rolled around, I had little interest and ended up dropping out (but going back later). So consider a bright kid in an educational environment like my secondary school - or worse - and no encouragement at home, and who doesn't have the inclination to go it alone, it doesn't always follow that they'll achieve much academically.

TimeToShine

Kids who go to private school are spoonfed beyond belief. Understanding fundamental concepts and grinding stuff out for yourself isn't what they do, they just ask their teacher who they're paying 8k a year for.

College USUALLY puts these guys/girls back into place.

XxMCRxBabyxX

Dudess wrote: »

While I don't buy the "Private schools are better schools because you pay for them" argument one bit (although I've nothing against people sending their kids to one on the basis of it, as in the individual school, being a good school, convenient to get to, etc) I don't know whether things are as straightforward as the following:

Thing is, for many bright kids, being bright on its own isn't always enough. They need an educational environment that nurtures their intelligence. I went to a school, which, ok I'm not saying it was The Bronx High, but there was a real "couldn't care less about learning" culture there, which rubbed off on me. I was a mediocre student, whereas I had the ability to do well. I did get just about enough points for Arts because of encouragement at home, but had I studied harder, I'd have had other options too. And by the time university rolled around, I had little interest and ended up dropping out (but going back later). So consider a bright kid in an educational environment like my secondary school - or worse - and no encouragement at home, and who doesn't have the inclination to go it alone, it doesn't always follow that they'll achieve much academically.

This is why my brother ended up in private school. He was was always an intelligent kid but was just never able to apply himself in his old school so he was moved in third year. Best decision ever made for him, he has grown up, changed in such a good way and is doing so much better academically. Makes me wonder whether I should have moved with him!

I don't understand people's huge problem with private schools. Surely it is up to the individual parents as to whether they want to send their child there, and if they do, so what?

TimeToShine wrote: »

Kids who go to private school are spoonfed beyond belief. Understanding fundamental concepts and grinding stuff out for yourself isn't what they do, they just ask their teacher who they're paying 8k a year for.

College USUALLY puts these guys/girls back into place.

I would disagree. My brother is nothing like that. He doesn't expect everything to be done for him and actually likes learning on his own

There's nothing like a little bit of generalisation...

Ollchailin

Gyalist wrote: »

Last January when the vast majority of schools closed because of small amount of snow, my son's school opened on time and had the full schedule of classes before the Minister of Education, in his wisdom, ordered that all schools be closed. He went to school 40 minutes earlier than usual last Tuesday because a teacher offered to give them an extra Latin class. I've yet to hear of a state school teacher voluntarily giving so much of their time.

On Saturdays, depending on the season, he has a choice of tennis, cricket, hockey, rugby and other sports - unheard of in state schools. Parent/teacher meetings are held after 6 pm for the convenience of the parents and not the staff. Those mysterious Friday afternoon "staff meetings" that only seem to be held just before long holiday weekends don't happen at his school. He never misses a class because of in-service training or the school being used for elections, etc. This morning I went to play an early-morning squash game and when I arrived at the club at 7:30, there were already students from St. Mary's (not my son's school) there waiting for their PE teachers and tennis coaches to arrive. They played until 8:45 before heading off to start their classes. I'd love to hear of a state school that gives their students those opportunities.

It costs a lot but I choose to do what's best for him. I'm not prepared for him to be a guinea pig in someone's social-engineering experiment. I'll give him the best chances that I can afford although it would be ultimately up to him to make the most of the opportunities.

There is so much wrong with this post I don't even know where to start. If you haven't heard of state school teachers giving their spare time to their students then you must not be listening too hard. There are so many teachers who do this, including me and most of my colleagues. In fact, I have taught in private and state schools, and whether the students were paying to be there or not was irrelevant to me. Just because their parents might have been able to afford to send them there, I wasn't going to treat them any differently than I would a student in a state school. You earn your right to extra help through your good behaviour and manners in class, not through your ability to pay for it.

As regards the sports- you fail to mention that for the most part, the coaches that come on a Saturday to do sports are paid by the school (albeit via the fees you pay) and are not actually volunteers. It is much easier for a private school to provide sports on a Saturday when they can pay someone to do that. Thousands of state school students also pay for activities every Saturday too- they just do them outside of their schools.

I completely respect a parent's decision to send their child to a private school if they feel it is the best for them. But to generalise state schools as not being as dedicated or to describe them as "a social experiment" is nothing short of ignorant. However, I do applaud your interest in your son's education, and this is what will ultimately lead him to achieve in life, not the school itself.

Finally, on the original topic- I'd say most of the most successful Irish musicians and actors were in state schools, although I'm open to correction on that.

Dudess

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

I don't understand people's huge problem with private schools. Surely it is up to the individual parents as to whether they want to send their child there, and if they do, so what?

I don't have a problem with parents who send their kids to a private school for the right reason (it being a good school). It's the view that any private school = automatically better because it's private, and state schools = automatically sub-standard, that I disagree with. It depends on the individual school, private or state.

Ollchailin

Dudess wrote: »

I don't have a problem with parents who send their kids to a private school for the right reason (it being a good school). It's the view that any private school = automatically better because it's private, and state schools = automatically sub-standard, that I disagree with. It depends on the individual school, private or state.

+ 1000000000000000000000

That plus support from parents will lead to a successful student. It takes a very exceptional student to succeed without parental support. And by support I mean a parent who is able to admit when their child has done wrong, not one who backs them up no matter what. A parent who isn't blinkered by the memory of the little cutie in the high chair at home when their child gets in trouble, or blinkered by the memory of a teacher they never liked leading to them to dislike all teachers. A parent who, when their child does wrong, tries their best to help their child get out of that behaviour with encouragement and positivity. And a parent who sees that there is more to education than just books. Cheesy and all as it may seem, that's what works.

XxMCRxBabyxX

Dudess wrote: »

I don't have a problem with parents who send their kids to a private school for the right reason (it being a good school). It's the view that any private school = automatically better because it's private, and state schools = automatically sub-standard, that I disagree with. It depends on the individual school, private or state.

That I completely understand! I would feel the same way!

But that view is kind of taken from both sides in one way. There are of course those 'snobs' to give them a name that think that anything less than Private education is too good for their little darlings. But there are also those on the other side (who generally can't afford private education) that take this huge standpoint against it as if everyone who goes to these schools are just stupid little rich kids who get by life on daddy's money, and that private education is this big problem in society.

I just don't understand either viewpoint! (and I know I didn't really word them very well, I hope got my point across though!) Every school has it's characteristics that causes a parent to send their children there. There are public schools that have higher standards than private schools, it really is as simple as it depending on the school, not how money you are paying!

Ollchailin

Dudess wrote: »

I don't have a problem with parents who send their kids to a private school for the right reason (it being a good school). It's the view that any private school = automatically better because it's private, and state schools = automatically sub-standard, that I disagree with. It depends on the individual school, private or state.

+ 1000000000000000000000

That plus support from parents will lead to a successful student. It takes a very exceptional student to succeed without parental support. And by support I mean a parent who is able to admit when their child has done wrong, not one who backs them up no matter what. A parent who isn't blinkered by the memory of the little cutie in the high chair at home when their child gets in trouble, or blinkered by the memory of a teacher they never liked leading to them to dislike all teachers. A parent who, when their child does wrong, tries their best to help their child get out of that behaviour with encouragement and positivity. And a parent who sees that there is more to education than books. Cheesy and all as it may seem, that's what works.

i_love_toast

in my opinion kids who go to public schools get on better.

1) Its down to the kids own ability and how much he wants to do well in school.

2) In public schools (well mine anyways) you in with a mix of everyone from all different classes, walks of life and races. Its better to mix with everyone and get on with everyone from all walks of life instead of being inside your private school bubble.

3) Most people from the local area go to the public school and therefore the kid generally has more friends and better friends from the area instead of getting two buses to the other side of the city to the private school where his main friends will come from all over and not just the local area. In my area private school kids generally knew f*ck all people from their local area.

4) Mates of mine that went onto private school just got this horrible stuck up manor about them and it changed them for good. Public school people are more down to earth imo. That said however in college some of the soundest lads and ladies in my class went to private school so suppose comes down to the individual.

TimeToShine

What year of college are you in? I've met these people who go to private schools but they seem a little too nice if you know what I mean, not really friend material more like acquaintances...just my opinion anyway

up for anything

orourkeda wrote: »

Perhaps I'm just cynical about these things and this is probably an extreme example: say you have two people competing for one job, one has a degree from Trinity College and the other has a qualification from a college with a perceived lesser reputation. Are you saying that this will count for nothing.

yeahme wrote: »

in a face to face interview, it wouldnt matter, personality comes out then, and before that it would be work experience etc....

coconut5 wrote: »

I never even considered that it made the slightest bit of difference. Interviews are all about getting the right person for the job. Many of them have an aptitude test and so on. Going to Trinity won't help you there.

orourkeda wrote: »

In an ideal world this would be the case.

We dont live in an ideal world and the best person doesnt always get the job. You've got to ask why this is?

You've got to get an interview first. I worked in a legal firm in London where I was told to bin the CVs that came in from people that hadn't gone to Cambridge or Oxford. It didn't matter how good their degrees were, if they hadn't gone to Oxbridge their CVs didn't get read. The home address was also taken into account. I lived in both Nottinghill (before it was a good address) and Knightsbridge. I got offered more and better jobs when I lived in Knightsbridge regardless of the fact that I was was an Irish import rather than a product of the locality I lived in.

XxMCRxBabyxX

up for anything wrote: »

You've got to get an interview first. I worked in a legal firm in London where I was told to bin the CVs that came in from people that hadn't gone to Cambridge or Oxford. It didn't matter how good their degrees were, if they hadn't gone to Oxbridge their CVs didn't get read. The home address was also taken into account. I lived in both Nottinghill (before it was a good address) and Knightsbridge. I got offered more and better jobs when I lived in Knightsbridge regardless of the fact that I was was an Irish import rather than a product of the locality I lived in.

Out of curiosity was the firm a particularly prestigious one?

You're not raising my hopes for when I'm applying for law firms btw!

up for anything

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

Out of curiosity was the firm a particularly prestigious one?

You're not raising my hopes for when I'm applying for law firms btw!

It was a while back. It wasn't one of the top few but probably not too far behind. If you've been to Trinity you'll be ok.

BotFly

Going to private school gives you a good grounding in life.
Start as a noob - take it up the ass.
Progress to middle management - Take it up the ass from above, take out your frustrations on those below you.
Reach the top - **** people in the ass.

Play rugby and you enjoy it all while getting to feel the balls of people from another company.

XxMCRxBabyxX

up for anything wrote: »

It was a while back. It wasn't one of the top few but probably not too far behind. If you've been to Trinity you'll be ok.

NUI Maynooth, will only be the second or third year (depending on if I end up on erasmus or a traineeship next year) to actually graduates with an NUIM Law degree

TimeToShine

Maynooth? Big UHOH

Firefox11

faceman wrote: »

I'm sending my kid to a private school if I can afford it. Private schools don't tolerate poor performing teachers, public schools do. Its nothing to do with snobbery, it's to do with giving your kids the best opportunities you can

I had a private education and I had plenty of crap teachers during my time.

XxMCRxBabyxX

TimeToShine wrote: »

Maynooth? Big UHOH

That makes me feel so much better...

TimeToShine

Only messing

stovelid

Pace2008 wrote: »

I'd have to agree with Biko; I think the cream will usually rise to the top, especially since most LC subjects can be easily self-taught by someone with a strong academic inclination.

I reckon it's the more average students who'd either make it or break it depending on environment.

I should point out that I'm essentially against private schools and was just saying that the thesis of ability conquering all is beset by environmental factors, and more specifically pupils in deprived areas.

Obviously I wouldn't completely rule out any option (fees, grinds) if it meant helping my kids but I'm confident that positive home influence and a decent public school will suffice. For me, getting your kids on is the priority but I find the idea of luxury versions of universal services like education and health being open to those who can pay a depressing thought.

I have the same conundrum with health care: I fervently believe in equal care for all (and would be prepared to pay high taxes for that) but I have health insurance because I won't sacrifice my family on the altar of my beliefs in the current system.

At the end of the day though, I'm confident that a decent public school and home encouragement (not pressure) will suffice to realize my children's potential.

And obviously the notion of sending children to the 'right' school to meet the 'right' people is deeply repugnant to me.