Should Private Schools be Closed?

02-12-2016 10:01AM

dotsman wrote: »

..............
57% of students attend private schools..............

Seriously?

foggy_lad · 02-12-2016 10:59AM

Yes I meant fee paying schools and most boarding schools.

It seems strange that the 8 pupils involved in this attack were only suspended, surely it is in the schools interest to send a clear message by immediately expelling anyone involved in such behaviour regardless of their level of involvement?

steddyeddy · 02-12-2016 11:08AM

I don't believe they should be closed but I struggle to find a reason people should be divided based on wealth or gender.

However, I think we should bring the least performing schools up and genders(in STEM subjects) to match those at the top.

Bridge93 · 02-12-2016 11:32AM

steddyeddy wrote: »

I don't believe they should be closed but I struggle to find a reason people should be divided based on wealth or gender.

However, I think we should bring the least performing schools up and genders(in STEM subjects) to match those at the top.

So I assume you think everyone should drive a similar car, or live in a similar priced house, or go on the same holidays? How people choose to spend their own money is their own business. They provide a more rounded education due to the opportunities they offer outside the classroom.
The gender comment has some social reasoning I think I remember hearing. Students, guys in particular, work better when the other sex isn't there or something

Water John · 02-12-2016 11:43AM

The school cannot preempt the police investigation. More nonsense from you.
Sadly, the school delayed reporting assault, it seems.
Suspending, pending full investigation by police, is appropriate.

seamus · 02-12-2016 11:51AM

Nothing has changed really since this topic last came up.

To close private schools, or bring them into public ownership would result in a net cost to the exchequer. The state saves around €100m (IIRC) by having a small number of parents subsidise their child's education via private school.

The current public school system does not have the capacity to take the students currently being educated privately.

In ideal terms all education would be equal, the quality of all schools equal, and all schools free and public. However, even if the state were to absorb the cost of purchasing all private schools and making them into public schools, you cannot get around basic socio-economic factors;

1. Wealthier parents can still subsidise their child's education in other ways; patronage, philanthropy and extra-curricular activities
2. Schools in wealthier areas tend to get better results than schools in poorer areas because parents place a higher value on education
3. Schools that get better results attract better students and teachers. There's a feedback loop / downward spiral in that regard.

If the state was really serious about improving education it would look to model the Finnish system and create a much higher bar for both attaining and retaining a job as a secondary teacher. And it would double the amount of non-payroll funding currently going into schools.

Most parents would rather not pay large sums for their child to go to private school. They feel they need to if they want to obtain the best education. Remove that barrier and private schools will go out of business.

Shop40 · 02-12-2016 12:03PM

This is just shocking. I had this school on my list for my daughter as we live locally. Not anymore. What annoys me the embellishment that goes on on school websites e.g there's a housemaster supervising the dorms. Really? Where was he? Why have the child protection policy on the website to reassure parents if it's not enforced?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems obvious that there has been an attempted cover-up of the situation, and only when the story got out to the media was it officially reported. Disgusting! That poor boy, and his family who are no doubt living a long distance away depending on the powers that be to do the right thing.
The headmaster should be sacked, no question. Also what is wrong with these boys, that they think this behaviour is human?

steddyeddy · 02-12-2016 12:06PM

seamus wrote: »

Nothing has changed really since this topic last came up.

To close private schools, or bring them into public ownership would result in a net cost to the exchequer. The state saves around €100m (IIRC) by having a small number of parents subsidise their child's education via private school.

The current public school system does not have the capacity to take the students currently being educated privately.

In ideal terms all education would be equal, the quality of all schools equal, and all schools free and public. However, even if the state were to absorb the cost of purchasing all private schools and making them into public schools, you cannot get around basic socio-economic factors;

1. Wealthier parents can still subsidise their child's education in other ways; patronage, philanthropy and extra-curricular activities
2. Schools in wealthier areas tend to get better results than schools in poorer areas because parents place a higher value on education
3. Schools that get better results attract better students and teachers. There's a feedback loop / downward spiral in that regard.

If the state was really serious about improving education it would look to model the Finnish system and create a much higher bar for both attaining and retaining a job as a secondary teacher. And it would double the amount of non-payroll funding currently going into schools.

Most parents would rather not pay large sums for their child to go to private school. They feel they need to if they want to obtain the best education. Remove that barrier and private schools will go out of business.

I don't think the cost to the state should be an issue. When I lived in Tanzania only 5% of girls went onto secondary school. The state often complained the cost to correct things would be too high. So as regard education I don't think the cost matters.

I agree 100% on the Finnish attitude towards teachers.

nice_guy80 · 02-12-2016 12:15PM

Bridge93 wrote: »

It's amazing you can stay on your feet as long as you do with a chip that big on your shoulder. Most of this is bitter stereotyping.

Fee paying schools save the state money. Of this there is no doubt. You can deal in hypotheticals and what ifs if they all closed but as it is now fee paying schools save the state money.
You feel those who send their kids to fee schools should have to pay full price. As an extension so you feel their taxes should be funding others education while getting no benefit for their own kids. As citizens of the state they are entitled to a portion of the fruits of the tax system. 100% of fee paying parents pay taxes. 100% of those who don't pay tax send kids to public schools. There has to be some fairness in state funding of fee paying schools.
There are many many excellent non fee schools. Colaiste Eoin as a Gaelscoil however being top is an outlier. The majority of schools below it are fee paying despite being a tiny proportion of the schools on the island. Gaelscoils also are not typical given the kids have to be very competent in Irish. This naturally means a more academically intelligent child is likely to get through the entry tests.
Who are you to say fee paying schools aren't value for money? How people spend their own money is their business and they may take great value from it. Despite the proven higher academics they provide opportunities and facilities far beyond academics. If parents value that that's there call, not yours
Not going to bother with the sailing classes comments as it's a childish dig.
The last paragraph is embarrassing, get a grip of yourself. I'm surprised you cant identify why there may be artefacts of the English schooling system present in schools that were opened when Ireland was under British rule. Or maybe you just want them to change their traditions and methods of operation to suit yourself.
The school I was in didn't 'promote' English sports, it offered all kinds of sports to the kids. You sound like a relic from a bygone era of the GAA, as if playing English sports is bad. Nearly every school in the country has a football team, are they all 'promoting' English sports if they don't also have a GAA team?
I spent 11 years in non fee education and 3 in fee paying and loved both equally. But this bitterness and disregard for the truth about fee schools from some is astounding.

most schools in rural areas don't have soccer teams or rugby teams
primary and secondary

VinLieger · 02-12-2016 12:23PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

I don't think the cost to the state should be an issue. When I lived in Tanzania only 5% of girls went onto secondary school. The state often complained the cost to correct things would be too high. So as regard education I don't think the cost matters.

I agree 100% on the Finnish attitude towards teachers.

The cost has to be considered though as right now its simply not possible for every student in private education to be allocated for in public schools. To do so would require not only the doubling of the amount it costs to educate every private student publicly but the costs of buying all the schools required and paying all the extra teachers. The numbers stack up very quickly

steddyeddy · 02-12-2016 12:29PM

Bridge93 wrote: »

So I assume you think everyone should drive a similar car, or live in a similar priced house, or go on the same holidays? How people choose to spend their own money is their own business. They provide a more rounded education due to the opportunities they offer outside the classroom.
The gender comment has some social reasoning I think I remember hearing. Students, guys in particular, work better when the other sex isn't there or something

No I don't, I'm a big believer in merit. People who work harder should do better and smarter people who're smarter should go further. I don't believe in unearned head starts based on gender, race or social class.

ted1 · 02-12-2016 12:30PM

Shop40 wrote: »

This is just shocking. I had this school on my list for my daughter as we live locally. Not anymore. What annoys me the embellishment that goes on on school websites e.g there's a housemaster supervising the dorms. Really? Where was he? Why have the child protection policy on the website to reassure parents if it's not enforced?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems obvious that there has been an attempted cover-up of the situation, and only when the story got out to the media was it officially reported. Disgusting! That poor boy, and his family who are no doubt living a long distance away depending on the powers that be to do the right thing.
The headmaster should be sacked, no question. Also what is wrong with these boys, that they think this behaviour is human?

The same school was involved in the swim coach scandal and paid out 6 figure sums to several students.

VinLieger · 02-12-2016 12:31PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

No I don't, I'm a big believer in merit. People who work harder should do better and smarter people who're smarter should go further. I don't believe in unearned head starts based on gender, race or social class.

Ive had this exact same argument with you before but its simply impossible to stop people subsidising their childs education if they have the means to do so, removing private education as an option will mean these parents simply use grinds etc

steddyeddy · 02-12-2016 12:32PM

VinLieger wrote: »

The cost has to be considered though as right now its simply not possible for every student in private education to be allocated for in public schools. To do so would require not only the doubling of the amount it costs to educate every private student publicly but the costs of buying all the schools required and paying all the extra teachers. The numbers stack up very quickly

I actually think tax should be raised to do so. I think making it easier to sack bad teachers is something private schools have the public do not. It should be easy to implement.

osarusan · 02-12-2016 12:33PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

I don't believe in unearned head starts based on gender, race or social class.

Private school could be an 'earned' head start though.

Smart person works hard and makes money, can afford to sends kid to private school.

Does that child have an earned or unearned head start*?

(*assuming for the purposes of discussion that the private school is in fact a better choice, which is not always the case)

steddyeddy · 02-12-2016 12:33PM

VinLieger wrote: »

Ive had this exact same argument with you before but its simply impossible to stop people subsidising their childs education if they have the means to do so, removing private education as an option will mean these parents simply use grinds etc

I don't think we should remove private education but I think we should recognise the inequality a two-tier system perpetrates.

VinLieger · 02-12-2016 12:34PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

I actually think tax should be raised to do so. I think making it easier to sack bad teachers is something private schools have the public do not. It should be easy to implement.

I agree that teacher tenure and protections around bad teachers by unions is a serious issue, but not all private school teachers are paid by the school i think it ends up being around 50% are publicly paid although I can't say for certain

ted1 · 02-12-2016 12:35PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

I don't think we should remove private education but I think we should recognise the inequality a two-tier system perpetrates.

That's life, until we switch to a socialist or communist system then it's always going to be the case.

Get over it.

steddyeddy · 02-12-2016 12:37PM

osarusan wrote: »

Private school could be an 'earned' head start though.

Smart person works hard and makes money, can afford to sends kid to private school.

Does that child have an earned or unearned head start (assuming for the purposes of discussion that the private school is in fact a better choice, which is not always the case)?

Let's start with your second statement. Most of the time it was a better choice. It was a better choice for me when I was enrolled in a science summer school for private school kids. It changed everything for me.

The first statement is a bit black and white for me.

What usually happens is person works hard, can or cannot afford to send kids to better school or escape deprived area, child has less advantages in life, works hard and the cycle continues.

No the child does not earn the head start unless he/she is more academically gifted.

osarusan · 02-12-2016 12:40PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

No the child does not earn the head start unless he/she is more academically gifted.

Has the parent, through their hard work, earned the right to give their child a headstart?

steddyeddy · 02-12-2016 12:41PM

ted1 wrote: »

That's life, until we switch to a socialist or communist system then it's always going to be the case.

Get over it.

Well Ted I'm actually a big supporter of grammar schools. I'm currently based in the UK and support a local campaign for a modified grammar shcool system. The biggest opponents? People who have benefited or send their kids to private school. They complain that academic selection benefits those more academically gifted. My advice? Get over it.

steddyeddy · 02-12-2016 12:45PM

osarusan wrote: »

Has the parent, through their hard work, earned the right to give their child a headstart?

Is it right to give a child a better education based on the gender, income or race of the child's parent? No. Is it right to give a child a better start because of his or her intelligence? Yes.

steddyeddy · 02-12-2016 12:46PM

I'm not getting into the private schools argument again but I'll say that grammar schools are the way to go. They favor selection by academic ability.

osarusan · 02-12-2016 12:48PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well Ted I'm actually a big supporter of grammar schools. I'm currently based in the UK and support a local campaign for a modified grammar shcool system. The biggest opponents? People who have benefited or send their kids to private school. They complain that academic selection benefits those more academically gifted. My advice? Get over it.

Probably worth a read for you:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/sep/23/theresa-mays-grammar-school-claims-disproved-by-new-study

Grammar schools do not improve the exam results of bright students beyond what they would have achieved at a good comprehensive, while more grammars would widen the attainment gap between rich and poor, a study has found.
The analysis of GCSE performance in selective state schools, carried out by the Education Policy Institute, concluded: “We find no evidence to suggest that overall educational standards in England would be improved by creating additional grammar schools.”

Report's key findings here: http://epi.org.uk/report/grammar-schools-social-mobility/

full report here:http://epi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Grammar-schools-and-social-mobility_.pdf

ted1 · 02-12-2016 12:54PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Is it right to give a child a better education based on the gender, income or race of the child's parent? No. Is it right to give a child a better start because of his or her intelligence? Yes.

Do you want the less intelligent kids to start school a few years ahead of the others so they catch up? Perhaps start the intelligent kids later.

How do you judge intelligence ? Good grades? I've seen plenty of people with great grades fail after they leave the education system while people with mediocre results thrive after they leave the education system.

steddyeddy · 02-12-2016 12:59PM

osarusan wrote: »

Probably worth a read for you:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/sep/23/theresa-mays-grammar-school-claims-disproved-by-new-study

Read already but the study was based on current grammar schools in the UK. Not the proposed system. Since grammar schools were abolished social mobility and entrance of disadvantaged students into Oxbridge has decreased.

steddyeddy · 02-12-2016 01:00PM

ted1 wrote: »

Do you want the less intelligent kids to start school a few years ahead if the others do they catch up? Perhaps start the intelligent kids later.

How do you judge intelligence ? Good grades? I've seen plenty of people with great grades fail after they leave the education system while people with mediocre results thrive after they leave the education system.

Why must every kid have the same educational outcome? Surely a more intelligent, academically gifted child should be rewarded and not punished?

ted1 · 02-12-2016 01:05PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Why must every kid have the same educational outcome? Surely a more intelligent, academically gifted child should be rewarded and not punished?

But you want to punish kids who's parents take an interest in their well being and are willing to invest in their education.

Schooling isn't just about academics. Kids need a rounded education.

Good grades doesn't necessarily mean they are intelligent. It just means they can repeat what they heard in class and maybe don't actually understand what us actually happening.

josha1 · 02-12-2016 01:11PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Let's start with your second statement. Most of the time it was a better choice. It was a better choice for me when I was enrolled in a science summer school for private school kids. It changed everything for me.

The first statement is a bit black and white for me.

What usually happens is person works hard, can or cannot afford to send kids to better school or escape deprived area, child has less advantages in life, works hard and the cycle continues.

No the child does not earn the head start unless he/she is more academically gifted.

Your school of thought seems to have 2 different opinions on it
1) Stop paying tax for private schools. So parents who pay tax to the state that pay for part of their own child's education, as well as subsidising public school students should have no benefit. You can't really say anything about equality if this is your opinion.
2) Close private schools to massively increase both upfront and ongoing costs for the state, resulting in lower standards for both sets of students.

I don't know whether it was you or another that said private schools can remove teachers more easily. In reality most core teachers are paid for by the state in both schools. They cannot therefore decide that a teacher isn't good enough, but rather keep them there for as long as the teacher desires either teaching kids poorly or else doing menial work. Private schools do employ lots of other staff at the direct cost of parents, and can remove these staff, but these are generally not for the core subjects anyway.

Whether or not the system whereby teachers practically can't be fired in both sets of schools is a different conversation. Having teachers completely results orientated is clearly not the way to go, but neither is the current system.

Only in places like IOE, Yeats college can any teacher be removed for not getting x a1's, since they are businesses, and not private schools. No one there is employed by the state.

I think that you're stereotyping the typical private school parent by the way, on top of everything else. The vast majority of them have 2 parents that work full time long hours, and have done all their lives. If they do so, and manage after all their work to pay ~6 grand a year for their kid to go to a private school, why shouldn't they be able. In the majority of cases, parents make huge sacrifices to put their kids in the school that they desire.

Re academia, you seem to think that private schools=academic schools, and that 'intelligent' people should go there (for free), and intelligent people only. By extension, you're stating that we should all aspire to become the next Einstein, rather than becoming well rounded individuals. Parents who save, while paying extortionate taxes to subsidise public school students shouldn't be able to send their kids to the school that they want, because their kids are simply not smart enough to go there. This will simply result in a situation like they have in the Uk, where kids are not only pushed to learn off reams of information and study from dark to dawn for the JC and LC, but also before entering secondary schools, akin to the P11 which they eventually replaced.

Lastly, I'd like to note that a fair amount of private schools offer not only financial help for parents in financial difficulty, but also offer scholarships for things including but not limited to social background, academic ability, drama, sporting ability etc. Although I don't know if that would be of much concern to you, considering only academic ability apparently matters.

osarusan · 02-12-2016 01:16PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Read already but the study was based on current grammar schools in the UK. Not the proposed system.

The proposed system includes quotas for disadvantaged students, doesn't it?

That wouldn't really easily reconcile with the idea of it being decided on academic merit.

Could we have a situation where academically brighter students are losing out as a quota has to be met?

Should Private Schools be Closed?

Comments