nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Should Private Schools be Closed?

foggy_lad

Just heard a horrible story on the news about the sexual assault of a 13 year old boy in King's Hospital School in Palmerstown, It appears the boy was assaulted with a hockey stick by eight other students in a dormitory in the school last Thursday.

Is it time that these elitist boarding schools were shut down and students put into mainstream education instead?

If the school thought they could not report this serious assault for a week what other assaults are they covering up? It seems the Protestant religion and their schools are just as bad as the Roman Catholics when it comes to cover-ups. I wonder were the family asked to keep the assault quiet? have other assaults in the past been covered up?

http://www.broadsheet.ie/tag/kings-hospital/

The Garda and child and family agency Tusla are investigating an alleged incident at a major Dublin boarding school, following a claim that a 13-year-old boy was sexually assaulted in a dormitory with a hockey stick by eight other pupils.

The incident is alleged to have taken place late last Thursday night at the 450-year-old Church of Ireland-governed King’s Hospital secondary school in Palmerstown

However, it was not reported to the Garda, Tusla, or the Church of Ireland authorities until Tuesday.

… In February 2008, King’s Hospital and Swim Ireland agreed to pay substantial damages after a 10-year dispute to 13 female victims of convicted sex abuser Derry O’Rourke, who had been employed by the school as a swimming coach.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/boy-13-allegedly-sexually-assaulted-by-pupils-at-boarding-school-1.2888315

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

seamus

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.

Ultimately you and I know this is a pretty tenuous comparison.

The only inequality is in the funding of the school. The curriculum is the same, access to information is the same. There's a world of difference between, "I can't go to school" and "my school doesn't have a swimming pool".

I know you're Irish, but I wonder is your view of this a little tainted by living in the UK? Over there the whole class system is a "thing" and access to a lot of stuff is dependant on class. Even if you have the money, who you are and where you come from may block you.

In Ireland it's not. In general once you have the money to pay for something, you can have it. There's not a massive gulf between private and public schools and what comes out it. There are some areas of snobbery, but it's relatively quiet and hushed in corners. Anyone who suggested that a person was "better" because they went to King's Hospital or Blackrock College would be laughed out of the room.

Whereas in the UK, saying you went to Eton would be worn as a badge of honour.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

steddyeddy

I think people are confusing thinking a two tier education system is wrong (me) with wanting to close private schools (someone else).

If women were being discriminated against in STEM subjects then that is also wrong. The fact that I think it's wrong however, does not mean that I want to bring down male scientists.

I don't think there's a poster here who doesn't think the gap in educational quality is wrong.

steddyeddy

seamus wrote: »

Ultimately you and I know this is a pretty tenuous comparison.

The only inequality is in the funding of the school. The curriculum is the same, access to information is the same. There's a world of difference between, "I can't go to school" and "my school doesn't have a swimming pool".

I know you're Irish, but I wonder is your view of this a little tainted by living in the UK? Over there the whole class system is a "thing" and access to a lot of stuff is dependant on class. Even if you have the money, who you are and where you come from may block you.

In Ireland it's not. In general once you have the money to pay for something, you can have it. There's not a massive gulf between private and public schools and what comes out it. There are some areas of snobbery, but it's relatively quiet and hushed in corners. Anyone who suggested that a person was "better" because they went to King's Hospital or Blackrock College would be laughed out of the room.

Whereas in the UK, saying you went to Eton would be worn as a badge of honour.

Contrary to my posts I don't have an anti-private school view. I think private school classes gave me massive benefits and without the, I'm not sure if I would be where I am today.

The situation in the UK is different alright. Ireland is a fantastic country for social mobility IMHO.

steddyeddy

ted1 wrote: »

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

Saying I disagree with a two tier system is wanting to punish kids? I think the kids should toughen up if that offends them.

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

I agree.

[/QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]

Again I agree but there's ways to test intelligence if we move away from the simple memory tests the leaving cert offers.

maudgonner

steddyeddy wrote: »

I think people are confusing thinking a two tier education system is wrong (me) with wanting to close private schools (someone else).

If women were being discriminated against in STEM subjects then that is also wrong. The fact that I think it's wrong however, does not mean that I want to bring down male scientists.

I don't think there's a poster here who doesn't think the gap in educational quality is wrong.

Where do you draw the line though? Should parents not be allowed to pay for grinds for their kids? They surely give an unfair advantage. How about buying additional textbooks & materials? How about bringing kids to see live productions of plays that are on the syllabus?

Parents already pay contributions to most public schools to provide extras, how is paying for additional teachers & facilities somehow more morally wrong than that?

SEPT 23 1989

Its not about the education its about the contacts

josha1

steddyeddy wrote: »

I think people are confusing thinking a two tier education system is wrong (me) with wanting to close private schools (someone else).

If women were being discriminated against in STEM subjects then that is also wrong. The fact that I think it's wrong however, does not mean that I want to bring down male scientists.

I don't think there's a poster here who doesn't think the gap in educational quality is wrong.

But you are anti-fee paying, and pro academic schools, based solely on 'intelligence'?

So all of this still applies to you,

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.

Fratton Fred

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If you were in a fee-charging school in Dublin it was a rugby school first and foremost.

My kid's school is fee paying and it's CofI (nominally).

There is no rugby played there at all.

ted1

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The state pays for some of the teachers the school hires some teachers directly do as to provide smaller classes/ support teachers or additional subjects.

dotsman

Augeo wrote: »

Seriously?

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

57%? Where is that figure coming from?

See below...

dotsman wrote: »

As Grayson has already stated, all religious schools are private. See here for more details...

Well, if it appears wrong to people with socialist leanings, then it's probably the best thing to do!.

the parents of those attending fee-paying schools are already paying for non-fee-paying schools. Often, many, many times over. Closing fee-paying schools would leave a massive shortfall in the education budget.

Of course they can be, and are, private, regardless of fees. Fees are often dispersed from the fee-paying private schools to the non-fee-paying private schools. But they are all private.

animaal

The Irish education system is ultimately a level playing field. The outcome depends entirely on an anonymous set of exams, the same for every student. The grades awarded depend entirely on the knowledge shown by the pupil, with no reference to contacts or societal position.

As to how the student obtains the knowledge - this will never be the same for everybody. Different people have different advantages and disadvantages. There are fee-paying schools, home schooling, foreign schools. Should we aim to eliminate all but the single weakest schooling method in the interests of "equality"?

Mary's dad is a scientist, and is willing to help his daughter with Physics. Is this inequal?
Pat's dad isn't a scientist, but has the funds to pay for Physics grinds. How about this?
Anne's mother is willing to pay extra for a school to provides extra supports in particular areas.

Some say there's no problem with fee paying schools once they get no state support. Why? The state subsidises public policing. If I live in an apartment block that has a private security guard, should I be denied service by the gardai?

The state should provide services to all citizens, particularly where those services are legally mandated (e.g. education). To prevent people from spending their (taxed) money to improve themselves is crazy.

nice_guy80

How many special needs kids are able to enroll at private schools?

immediately the children and staff there have an advantage because they don't have to make allowance for much lower abilities and pupils with special learning needs

nice_guy80

the private schools definitely shouldn't be getting the full cost of teaching staff covered by the state

they can then spend their tuition fees on hiring extra staff

josha1

nice_guy80 wrote: »

How many special needs kids are able to enroll at private schools?

immediately the children and staff there have an advantage because they don't have to make allowance for much lower abilities and pupils with special learning needs

Well I know of at least two private schools that have kids with learning disabilities including SEVERE dyslexia, as well as Asperger's, ADD/ADHD etc. They are all provided adequate care, mainly by staff not provided for by the state, but rather by the child's own parents, as well as the parent's of those without children with disabilities.

In addition, class segregation only occurs when it's in the best interests of the education of the child with the difficulty themselves, i.e. they would be better working in a small class.

nice_guy80 wrote: »

the private schools definitely shouldn't be getting the full cost of teaching staff covered by the state

they can then spend their tuition fees on hiring extra staff

They can and do spend their extra tuition fees on hiring extra staff. In fact the state pays for much more staff in public schools, with the likes of SEN teachers, coaches, career guidance etc provided for directly by parents in private schools.

Olishi4

ted1 wrote: »

The state pays for some of the teachers the school hires some teachers directly do as to provide smaller classes/ support teachers or additional subjects.

In my own experience, this was a huge disadvantage to me in my secondary school. We often had long periods where teachers were not available. I specifically remember my German (she moved home) and Art (he was very sick) teachers missing with no replacements for months. The same thing with my Biology teacher and when we did get a replacement, she refused to cover the honours section with us because there were only 4 students taking the honours paper so we just did it ourself without guidance.

Also there were a few students that would have made a small chemistry class. I had achieved an A in junior cert science but chemistry wasn't offered as a subject for leaving cert. I asked my registration teacher about it but they just told me "no chance, we haven't got a teacher for it'.

Just looked it up there and found this from around the same time of my leaving cert around the early 2000's.

https://www.esri.ie/news/who-chooses-science-subject-take-up-in-second-level-schools/

"Science subjects are not available to all students. The vast majority of schools provide biology for Leaving Certificate but a significant minority of schools do not provide Physics and Chemistry. These are mainly smaller schools and those serving more disadvantaged populations"

I hope these are not common themes in public schools who are lacking in resources now.

ted1

nice_guy80 wrote: »

How many special needs kids are able to enroll at private schools?

immediately the children and staff there have an advantage because they don't have to make allowance for much lower abilities and pupils with special learning needs

As many as want too.

Dint mix up what you think happens and what actually happens.

seamus

nice_guy80 wrote: »

the private schools definitely shouldn't be getting the full cost of teaching staff covered by the state

they can then spend their tuition fees on hiring extra staff

While this sounds like a reasonable and obvious solution, the problem is context and following that through.

So you take away tuition funding for private schools. What then? The schools have to fund tuition out of their own pockets. For simplicity's sake let's say the average class is 25 kids and the teachers get €50k per annum on average. So every child's tuition must increase by €2k per year. Throw in employer's PRSI, pensions, insurance, etc etc and you're talking €3k realistically.

For many schools this would represent a doubling of the tuition fee per child. Most parents with kids in private school are middle-class, 2-income families for whom the school fees represent a pretty big outgoing. A huge chunk of kids will have to go into the public system. Which means schools will actually have to increase their tuition even more to make up the shortfall. And more kids drop out, etc.

Eventually a balance would be met - a chunk of private schools would close and amalgamate, and a small cohort would keep going to private school @ a cost of €15k per annum.

Short-term pain, long-term gain, right? Well, aside from the public system struggling with the influx of students, you've created a new problem - small private schools with huge tuition fees will be in the privileged position of being able to offer private salaries and benefits to teachers which dwarf those on offer in the public sector. And they take all of the best teachers.

All you've really done then is make the two-tier problem even worse by widening the equality gap. The number of "haves" is less, but the gap between them and everyone else has widened massively.

At least in the present system the equality gap between private and public schools isn't huge.

ted1

nice_guy80 wrote: »

the private schools definitely shouldn't be getting the full cost of teaching staff covered by the state

they can then spend their tuition fees on hiring extra staff

Semi private schools already receive less funding than public schools.

Don't forget that there is no tax relief on school fees. So if the fees are 5k a the state is pulling in an extra 4.5k in taxes so it's costing the parent 9.5 k a year.

[Deleted User]

dotsman wrote: »

See below...

Voluntary secondary schools, or just "secondary schools", are owned and managed by religious communities or private organisations. The state funds 90% of teachers' salaries and 95% of other costs. Such schools cater for 57% of secondary pupils.

57% of schools are voluntary schools.
Of that some are private.

Annasopra

I find this discussion very strange. There was an alleged sexual assault on a young man with a hockey stick by eight other children and it's also suspected the whole thing was recorded.

I'm really shocked at what happened
I find if disgusting if true that the school did not contact Gardai or Tusla for 4 days.

I dont get at all why the reaction to such an incident is to have a debate on Education funding policy.

seamus

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I dont get at all why the reaction to such an incident is to have a debate on Education funding policy.

The insinuation is that the incident wasn't reported to the Gardai because a private wanted to protect its reputation.

The OP's assertion being that if it was a public school that wouldn't have happened, therefore should we get rid of private schools.

But you're right in that a discussion around funding policy seems moot when a public school is just as likely to cover up problems to protect its reputation.

[Deleted User]

Ah it was just a bit of banter

The Draugan

I'd rather send my kids to a private fee paying than community school , so no i wouldn't agree with it.

i wouldnt deny that there were some arseholes in school with me in the private school i went to , people got bullied , but that kind of thing happens everywhere and tbf the school always dealt with it well.

But i am 100% grateful i went there over the community schools where i'm from , they were rough as a badgers hole and lads who i knew were good enough to get good leaving certs didn't because of the environment they were in. Kids from bad family's with bad attitudes who's parents couldn't give a **** , were allowed disrupt classes waste teachers time etc. There was no streaming in those schools so weaker kids were left behind and stronger kids were held back. we were streamed i was never in the top stream but always in the second everyone in my class was at a similar level came from a similar background and ha similar goals so classes tended not to be disrupted.

I would rather my kids were in school with kids from a predominately similar middle class background with parents who care about their education and progression.

over 85% of my year went on to 3rd level , with well over 60% getting their fist choice, it was a record at the time but has been surpassed a number of times since my graduation 6 years ago.

Bridge93

nice_guy80 wrote: »

How many special needs kids are able to enroll at private schools?

immediately the children and staff there have an advantage because they don't have to make allowance for much lower abilities and pupils with special learning needs

In my year of 190 there were was at least 15 if not over 20 kids who required special teaching in core subjects. 4 were severely disabled
There isn't some special entry requirements. You only have to have the means to pay, it's not intelligence or disabilities with a few exceptions like Gonzaga who I think have an entrance exam. gaelscoils have next to no kids with learning difficulties due to the academic requirements. Are they exclusive?

The disparity in disabled kids you'll find is down to parents not wanting to spend large amounts of money on kids education if they perceive it'll be a bit of a 'waste'. Personal choice of parents again as many do sacrifice a lot for the fees and if they think it'll be an academic waste that's their call even if education is more than academivs

Annasopra

Deleted User wrote: »

Ah it was just a bit of banter

A videoed sexual assault with a hockey stick?

Zubeneschamali

animaal wrote: »

Some say there's no problem with fee paying schools once they get no state support. Why?

I am fine with my tax money funding education for kids whose parents can't afford to give them a private education. I think free education for all is good for all of society.

I am not fine with my tax money subsidizing education for the kids whose parents are wealthier than I am when poor kids can't avail of it. That's using state money to entrench privilege, not good for all of society.

If parents want to send their kids to a private school, well, OK, but not with my money. Likewise grinds, tutors, exam-prep courses etc.

Zubeneschamali

Bridge93 wrote: »

gaelscoils have next to no kids with learning difficulties due to the academic requirements. Are they exclusive?

Yes, horribly exclusive. No travellers, immigrants, asylum seekers, kids with learning difficulties... perfect for the "I'm not a racist, but..." crowd.

josha1

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I am fine with my tax money funding education for kids whose parents can't afford to give them a private education. I think free education for all is good for all of society.

I am not fine with my tax money subsidizing education for the kids whose parents are wealthier than I am when poor kids can't avail of it. That's using state money to entrench privilege, not good for all of society.

If parents want to send their kids to a private school, well, OK, but not with my money. Likewise grinds, tutors, exam-prep courses etc.

But private schools get around half the funding per child as state schools?
So really, parents of those in private schools are subsidising your child's education, as well as the rest of those attending public schools. Are you fine with parents in private schools getting a small percentage of what they put into the tax system for their own kids, or should they fully subsidise children of kids in public schools while reaping no reward?

Zubeneschamali

josha1 wrote: »

But private schools get around half the funding per child as state schools?

I am not trying to save the state money here. The way to do that is to abolish free education altogether.

I am saying that if my tax money is spent on it, then everyone gets to use it. If you want a school that keeps out the poors, pay for it yourself, don't ask me to.

If this new "free education" policy costs more because it is fair and free to all, well, of course it does.