Insane private school fees.

evolving_doors

slow day in irish times today... same old rabble rousing lazy journalism discussing elite schools in the UK in terms of ireland...

cloud493

Who runs the non-denominational schools?

nelly17

Armelodie wrote: »

Could we first acknowledge that there are NO state run schools in ireland...

If you want state run schools then you are talking about getting rid of religious orders on Boards of Management and their ownership of some schools.

Do the govt. want to take the running of schools in charge at a time when they are going the opposite way of farming everything out... hse,nra,rehab,nct,irish water,board gais,esb... the hell they do

Did Ruri Quinn not kick that off allready? I seem to remember him saying that this was going to be done on a phased basis. I know hes gone now so it may never happen

evolving_doors

nelly17 wrote: »

Did Ruri Quinn not kick that off allready? I seem to remember him saying that this was going to be done on a phased basis. I know hes gone now so it may never happen

Dont mind that s%%%te talk from RQ. What exactly did he do? Let people vent in an online consultation process.... whatever was the upshot of that? In a filingcabinet somewhere at best..

Same as RQ sorted out the school uniform issue.. by doing what.. oh wait another survey..and what was the upshot of that? who cares...

but yet hes taglined with the words "reforming minister" for ever more. All about the optics.

coffee_cake

The Finland lads are the one who refuse to give any support to bright children or children who are a bit more advanced in any way so I wouldn't be holding them up as an ideal

Shakespeare's Sister

steddyeddy wrote: »

I do have a chip on my shoulder. I can't help it. I went to a crap school won a scholarship and eventually a Irish research council PhD grant and now liaise with students from disadvantaged communities. They are just as intelligent as people born to parents able to afford a good school yet they have the odds stacked against them. It results in students with no interest in science (for example) getting into science over a student who loves it.

So did I, but my parents were aware of the importance of education and instilling it in us from the very start, so I still got into university.
As others have said, the home is the most important foundation for education, but you are totally focused on whether a school is private or state - and you've been making some rather ridiculous and unfair accusations of people (particularly Candie) simply stating the existence of private schools isn't a slight against those who can't afford them. It isn't an implicit statement either that things are better with private schools. I think most people would prefer if everyone's educational opportunities were all on a level playing-field, but when you say we should strive to make it so, what do you suggest we do? What are you doing?

Coming from a home where education is valued, not growing up in a disenfranchised area where there is an overall culture of rejecting education... these are such important factors too. Plenty of people who go to state schools do absolutely fine education-wise and wing it to university. Not all state schools are in disadvantaged areas - why aren't you talking about those particular state schools in terms of people from disadvantaged areas missing out? E.g. my cousin used to win all those maths competition dealies - he went to a state school. His sister got a first-class honours degree in chemistry - she went to the same sh-t school I went to. Neither of them are Good Will Hunting type cases - they're from a family/community that values education, they just went to state schools. And I could list numerous other such examples.

I have certain reservations about... not so much private schools in and of themselves, but attitudes of some (I emphasise some) people who send their children there (e.g. for elitism reasons only) but in terms of education opportunities, there's a much bigger picture than just whether the school is private or state.
Anyone can go on to third-level - even people from crap schools in areas with problems; there is no policy to stop them from doing so. What stops a lot of them though is the lack of valuing education by their families/communities. This isn't the fault of private schools.

steddyeddy

S's sister I mentioned that parents and the individual play and important role. I don't know how many more times I should say it? It's fair to say though that six years of one's life spent in school will have a major impact on your education. If not then why send your kids private at all? Candie clarified her position that all children deserve the same education irrespective of parental income so we have no disagreement. It is fair to say though that some people with better off parents think that the education you receive should be linked to the income of the family you were randomly born into.

osarusan

Armelodie wrote: »

what do you mean better teachers? They all do the same HDip and go to the same colleges!

I can't see why you'd bring it up other than to argue that, because they've all gone through the same training, they must all be the same as teachers, but that would be a very simplistic and silly argument.

Shakespeare's Sister

steddyeddy wrote: »

It's fair to say though that six years of one's life spent in school will have a major impact on your education. If not then why send your kids private at all?

Because people believe it's where they will receive the best possible education. I really don't see what's wrong with that. I totally see something wrong with just sending them there for elitism reasons but that isn't always the case - e.g. my brothers went to a fee-paying school purely because it was the best school in the area academically. They were trying to get into another school initially (a state school) but couldn't get in because it was a closed shop (so schools don't have to be private to be closed shops!) so the fee-paying school was the second option.

Candie clarified her position that all children deserve the same education irrespective of parental income so we have no disagreement.

And she never indicated otherwise - you did some incredible putting of words in her mouth though.

It is fair to say though that some people with better off parents think that the education you receive should be linked to the income of the family you were randomly born into.

Yes, there is elitist idiocy out there - not disputing that.
But what you were saying is that the existence of private schools at all is a "fuq you" to people born into families unable to send them to private school, and an obstacle to the latter people advancing in education.
It just reminds me of the rock keeping the tigers away in The Simpsons. If private schools were removed, people in disenfranchised communities, from families who don't value education, would still have those obstacles in their way.

Shakespeare's Sister

osarusan wrote: »

I can't see why you'd bring it up other than to argue that, because they've all gone through the same training, they must all be the same as teachers, but that would be a very simplistic and silly argument.

Think they're just saying teachers in private schools aren't any more qualified than teachers in public schools, which is true - there's a notion that teachers in private schools are better than those in public schools... why would they be? They get the same training. A teacher who is naturally excellent in addition to their training - can be found in any school.

osarusan

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

Think they're just saying teachers in private schools aren't any more qualified than teachers in public schools, which is true - there's a notion that teachers in private schools are better than those in public schools... why would they be? They get the same training. A teacher who is naturally excellent in addition to their training - can be found in any school.

This bit:

what do you mean better teachers?

makes me think their point was a little stronger than that.

To argue that some teachers are better than others doesn't mean subscribing to the notion you mentioned.

Shakespeare's Sister

An academically-geared environment will make teachers do their best I'm sure, so in that sense teachers in private schools (and good state schools) are likely to be of a higher calibre. It's a case of the school shaping the teacher rather than vice versa I reckon.
A teacher in a school environment where education isn't valued is likely to have their talents hampered somewhat. I saw it in my own school - teachers who had just given up, but weren't necessarily bad teachers, and who would have thrived in a less disruptive environment.
That's not to say some teachers just do not make the cut, or that some teachers can't still be excellent in schools with a lot of disruptive elements.

evolving_doors

osarusan wrote: »

I can't see why you'd bring it up other than to argue that, because they've all gone through the same training, they must all be the same as teachers, but that would be a very simplistic and silly argument.

he subsequently qualified the phrase ' better teachers ' to mean the environment is better to teach in

evolving_doors

cloud493 wrote: »

Who runs the non-denominational schools?

there are no non-denominational schools... multi-denominational yes...theres a subtle difference.

cloud493

Whatever, who runs them?

steddyeddy

But the bad ones can get fired (or not get their contract renewed) in fee paying school.

evolving_doors

cloud493 wrote: »

Whatever, who runs them?

Board of management from the community/school

not the state/govt./dept. of ed whatever..

Although you could have a politician on the BOM too

mariaalice

steddyeddy wrote: »

But the bad ones can get fired (or not get their contract renewed) in fee paying school.

That's not true in Ireland unless they are on a private contract, what does happen is that teachers in private schools and good state schools get moulded( not sure if that is the right word ) in teaching in a different way, you are far more likely to put on extra classes before exam time if its appreciated and if pupils turn up, more importantly nearly every teacher in the school will be doing the same, its a subtle pressure to go the extra mile all the time.

If you talk to teacher about this they will sight things like pupils in the 'good' schools ( state and fee paying ) tiding up classrooms and putting chairs back etc, with little or no prompting verses being told its the cleaner job! good schools will have an esprit de corps in other words the pupils will be happy to represent their school in debating or sports or what ever and will be proud that their school has won and so on. All those thighs although they have noting to do with actual academic teaching produce better academic results.

cloud493

Aye, like I said thats environment. Doesn't necessarily reflect teaching ability.
I mean I've been to both a state run comprehensive and a boarding school (in England) and I thought the state run school was far better, even with the teachers. Obviously that could just be one school, but in the fee paying school I thought the teachers were very meh, the resources lacking, and the whole place lacking any sort of impetus. Where as the state run school was a lot better.

The Irish state run secondary school was better than both of them, in fact

Gyalist

Armelodie wrote: »

there are no non-denominational schools... multi-denominational yes...theres a subtle difference.

My son's primary school and secondary school were both non-denominational.

Geuze

Gyalist wrote: »

My son's primary school and secondary school were both non-denominational.

There aren't any non-denominational primary schools in Ireland.

See here:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=80104037

Gyalist

Geuze wrote: »

There aren't any non-denominational primary schools in Ireland.

See here:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=80104037

That's not correct. His former primary school, Rathgar Junior School is non-denominational.

Geuze

http://rathgarjuniorschool.ie/index.php/2013-06-10-11-35-39/school-ethos

Their ethos says they are non-denominational, yes.

Although the school was founded by a religion.

I suspect it is one of very, very few non-denominational schools in Ireland.

Also note that it outside the State financing system, unlike many fee-paying schools.

Geuze

Also, the school ethos mentions religion and God on many occasions.

Is that truly secular?

shruikan2553

Non denominational schools can exist but they won't receive state funding as far as I know. Multi denominational is often mistake as non.

Egginacup

cloud493 wrote: »

I was just watching one of the re-runs of harrow a very british school on sky 1, and they happened to mention the annual school fees are £30,000 a year :eek:
Thats insanity,
I don't think I'd send my kid there, even if I could afford it. I mean the school looks good for sure, but they don't seem particularly friendly, they exist, as they themselves state, in a bubble of privilege and are isolated from the regular community, cant be good for them once they're done with the school, and... I just wouldn't. Its insane. Even if the facilities are that good.

How about you guys?

Well, if you're making £300,000 a week then £30k is pocket change...half a day's pay to send Tarquin and Percival to the good old boy's network where they will be someone's fag for a couple of years before having their own bitch in their senior year. After that it's off to Oxbridge to "read" something useless and abysmal and squander another 30 to 60k of your cash each year on booze, weekends away and the odd abortion for some poor misfortune who they got up the duff while they were slumming.

Junior cabinet post after that where their scams with expenses, bribes and tax jiggery-pokery schemes will recoup for the family in spades the loot that you threw at Eton/Harrow.

shruikan2553

Egginacup wrote: »

Well, if you're making £300,000 a week then £30k is pocket change...half a day's pay to send Tarquin and Percival to the good old boy's network where they will be someone's fag for a couple of years before having their own bitch in their senior year. After that it's off to Oxbridge to "read" something useless and abysmal and squander another 30 to 60k of your cash each year on booze, weekends away and the odd abortion for some poor misfortune who they got up the duff while they were slumming.

Junior cabinet post after that where their scams with expenses, bribes and tax jiggery-pokery schemes will recoup for the family in spades the loot that you threw at Eton/Harrow.

And we have a winner, eddy looks like an american republican compared to this.

Gyalist

Geuze wrote: »

Also, the school ethos mentions religion and God on many occasions.

Is that truly secular?

Non-denominational ≠ secular. It has a Quaker ethos and no real religious indoctrination.

His secondary school, Sandford Park, is non-denominational as well, though there is a vaguely Church of Ireland vibe about it.

mariaalice

People in Galway city must think this is all nuts there are no fee paying schools in the traditional sense in Galway and they manage just fine.

evolving_doors

Gyalist wrote: »

Non-denominational ≠ secular. It has a Quaker ethos and no real religious indoctrination.

His secondary school, Sandford Park, is non-denominational as well, though there is a vaguely Church of Ireland vibe about it.

point noted... although as I responded earlier to the question..
who runs the school?
A. the board of management
not the state..
hence.. there are NO state run schools in Ireland (as far as I know!).

So maybe we should be more concerned about 'taxpayers money' funding ALL the private/voluntary schools in Ireland which are not state run..(which is ALL schools afaik).