Should Private Schools be Closed?

Jawgap · 07-12-2016 09:25PM

The Talking Bread wrote: »

Again, you are focusing on the social background aspect here. People from less advantageous areas/family vackgrounds will attend less advantageous schools. In a comparative sense, people from more advantageous backgrounds will have better parental support generally, financially and motivationally (not in a strict sense of course, but generally) and their chances of academically applying themselves are increased substantially. The atendees of private schools generally come from such backgrounds due to finances available.

Therefore when you do a comparative analysis, the ratio of high achievers will be in the private schools. If there were students who came from more working class or impoverished backgrounds or a less stable family background, they would, most likely, bring down the "success rate"

I went to a public school with many variants of social backgrounds. If I was to do a quick account of the high succeeders, there would be a disparity between those who come from less wealthy, stable families and those who cae from financially supportive stable backgrounds.

Same level playing field re entry, same schooling, different results. Again this isn't a strict analysis but its fairly good reasoning.

No, it's the usual argument from private school apologists.....saying it's association not causation.

There is simply no equality of access and that is institutionalised, and it's multiplicative - the system accelerates the gap, it doesn't provide the means for kids to recover that deficit.

And to be honest that's fine......parents should be free to educate their kids as they see fit.....but the system should promote equality, education is too important for there not to be equality of access and equality of opportunity......if we're going to have private schools then they should be private, if they are going to draw on the public purse then every and any kid should have the opportunity to attend independent of their parents means.

foggy_lad · 07-12-2016 10:01PM

Jawgap wrote: »

We had a 'wait room' - it was the one you waited outside to be called in for a few oul' slaps of the leather for some specified indiscretion.....:D

Ooh La De Effin Da, that was some fancy school you went to where they had a waiting room for the daily slaps. All we had was a hard wooden "poor bastards bench" outside the executioners head's office:)

Glenster · 07-12-2016 10:13PM

its simple, fees weed out benefits kids.

benefits kids are distracting.

kids who go to fee schools arent as distracted, do better in exams.

QED

Jawgap · 07-12-2016 10:19PM

Glenster wrote: »

its simple, fees weed out benefits kids.

benefits kids are distracting.

kids who go to fee schools arent as distracted, do better in exams.

QED

Kids who go to fee schools benefit from the public purse (to the tune of about €100m per year) and are just as much benefit kids as the rest of us, just the mode of benefit disbursement is different.

If they truly want to be free of the 'shackles' of benefits then they and their schools should stop sponging off the State and stand on their own two feet

07-12-2016 10:29PM

Glenster wrote: »

The Talking Bread wrote: »

So how will the "poorer" students get by then? You give out about a handful of private schools in existence but when push comes to shove you want to abolish free education!

You are a mass of contradictions.

Could you clarify the system you want.

And what about grind schools etc.

Maybe their parents should get a job and provide for their kids.

Maybe their parents have trouble getting decent jobs because they didn't have access to decent education?
Bit of a catch-22 there, isn't it?

REXER · 07-12-2016 10:35PM

Mena wrote: »

How the hell is this a reason to close private schools? Serious logic fail.

Foggy thinking!

Glenster · 07-12-2016 10:51PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Maybe their parents have trouble getting decent jobs because they didn't have access to decent education?
Bit of a catch-22 there, isn't it?

Maybe they had trouble getting to interviews for good jobs because daddy didnt buy them a merc on their 17th?

Your point?

Jawgap · 07-12-2016 10:56PM

Glenster wrote: »

Maybe they had trouble getting to interviews for good jobs because daddy didnt buy them a merc on their 17th?

Your point?

Mercs are cars for old farts.....

.....it's beamers they get for their 17th

.....or maybe they had trouble getting interviews for good jobs because of the network effects of private school alumni.

Again, it's an efficient system - I picked my business school for my MBA using the alumni network effect as a factor - but only if your on the inside......it just perpetuates exclusion and inequality.

railer201 · 08-12-2016 12:01AM

It would be interesting to find out the benefit of attending King's Hospital as opposed to Mount Temple Comprehensive for example. Mount Temple was formerly fee-paying when it was Mountjoy School and would have been regarded as being in the same league as KH in many respects - Rugby playing and Church of Ireland too.

Fee-paying can just be an indicator of how a school is funded and as we can see there are a quite a few hybrids around, a mixture of both fee-paying and state funded. How private is that really ?

Personally I think there's a lot of snobbery attached to attending so called prestigious secondary schools and I could go chapter and verse on the very mediocre prestigious one I attended. Third level education is way more important and the likes of KH and others in the same league are thankfully not the only route.

steddyeddy · 08-12-2016 01:31AM

The Talking Bread wrote: »

No, because public schools aren't afforded such amenities. It doesn't mean students won't prosper academically or learn to swim. It is far from the be all and end all having such resources available. They are merely attractions and benefits of paying high fees.

The fact is the backgrounds these kids come from play a major part in academic . Having a weights room and swimming pool doesn't mean a damn thing if your parents don't motivate you or you aren't able to apply yourself academically.

The way SteddyEddy was going on was that once you enter the domain of attending a public school your chances to succeed academically decrease significantly.

Of course, having better disciplinary mechanisms in place and more motivated and monitored teachers over you helps but it is not the be all and end all if you can't apply yourself either.

Sorry but if you enter the top schools in the country your chances do increase significantly.

steddyeddy · 08-12-2016 01:34AM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Maybe their parents have trouble getting decent jobs because they didn't have access to decent education?
Bit of a catch-22 there, isn't it?

A catch 22 a surprising number of people don't understand.

Another paradox. Private schools make no difference to a student's education. Therefore I will pay tens of thousands for child to go to one. Then I will claim it didn't make a difference.

steddyeddy · 08-12-2016 12:35PM

osarusan wrote: »

Eddy, if you are in favour of a meritocracy and don't want to see any child rewarded or punished for the wealth or lack thereof of their parents, are you not concerned that grammar schools with a quota for underprivileged children could actually exclude certain children even though they score higher than other students (who are underprivileged) on an entrance exam?

No I don't believe in quotas but I find the arguments against grammar school disingenuous. Labour politician Shami Chakrabarti disagrees with grammar schools because they introduce selection in schools, yet she seen fit to send her child to an 18k a year private school. Hypocrisy at its finest.

Permabear · 08-12-2016 02:11PM

This post has been deleted.

steddyeddy · 08-12-2016 02:55PM

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I know. I remember Boris Johnson's brother, Jo talking about the excellenet state sector when he was asked "would you put your kids in one?" to silence.

The Talking Bread · 08-12-2016 04:13PM

There is a hypocrisy here but you also have to consider whilst they are lobbying for the people they represent the service is still there. Her kid I'd just one in a small pond while she is speaking on behalf of an ocean of kids. She has a voice and she is articulate in getting her message across. She also had an extremely wealthy husband worth millions so I assume he had a big say in the child's education route.
She does come across genuine in a lot of points she says on the issue.

Just need to consider that "somewhat"

The Talking Bread · 08-12-2016 04:14PM

Oh and 99% of politicians are hypocrites in some way or form! It's anot incurable disease!

steddyeddy · 08-12-2016 05:38PM

The Talking Bread wrote: »

There is a hypocrisy here but you also have to consider whilst they are lobbying for the people they represent the service is still there. Her kid I'd just one in a small pond while she is speaking on behalf of an ocean of kids. She has a voice and she is articulate in getting her message across. She also had an extremely wealthy husband worth millions so I assume he had a big say in the child's education route.
She does come across genuine in a lot of points she says on the issue.

Just need to consider that "somewhat"

Fair enough but she obviously doesn't think that selection is a bad thing and considered a fee paying choice the better school.

764dak · 12-12-2016 08:15PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

They are fully entitled to the same benefits by enrolling in a free school.

They want that, plus extra tuition and services, plus gatekeeping to keep out the poor and undesirables.

It is unfair, it perpetuates and worsens class differences, it ghettoizes the free system. It undermines the whole point of free tax-funded education.

Should parents who send their children to private school be exempt from paying education tax?

Del.Monte · 12-12-2016 08:18PM

What's education tax?

steddyeddy · 12-12-2016 08:26PM

I really hate the saving the state money arguement and who pays what tax ect.

joe40 · 12-12-2016 08:39PM

I haven't read all the posts so apologies if this has been mentioned earlier, but as far as I know teacher salaries in private schools are still paid by dept of education. (if I'm wrong let me know) therefore they are not really private schools. If rich people want to send their kids to a private school where their fees pay for the tuition then that is their perogative but I find it galling that the taxpayer I.e me and you pick up part of the tab.

nice_guy80 · 12-12-2016 10:22PM

joe40 wrote: »

I haven't read all the posts so apologies if this has been mentioned earlier, but as far as I know teacher salaries in private schools are still paid by dept of education. (if I'm wrong let me know) therefore they are not really private schools. If rich people want to send their kids to a private school where their fees pay for the tuition then that is their perogative but I find it galling that the taxpayer I.e me and you pick up part of the tab.

BINGO!

toysforboyz · 12-12-2016 10:26PM

Kids are kids, rich or poor, boarding school or public, there is bullies everywhere, some are unlucky in life to meet them, others are lucky to be one step ahead of them. Bullies want others to feel as bad as them, hence, the bullying. No excuse for it, whasoever.

Boarding schools are like any other school in this country. Shut them all down?... (sarcasm)

Stasi 2.0 · 13-12-2016 12:06AM

Water John wrote: »

I suspect the OP really meant, fee paying schools.

But all schools in Ireland are fee paying.

Some schools just call it a "voluntary" contribution

steddyeddy · 13-12-2016 12:14AM

764dak wrote: »

Should parents who send their children to private school be exempt from paying education tax?

How about stop talking about the parent. It's the child that benefits or loses out depending on the school.

BoatMad · 14-12-2016 08:31AM

joe40 wrote: »

I haven't read all the posts so apologies if this has been mentioned earlier, but as far as I know teacher salaries in private schools are still paid by dept of education. (if I'm wrong let me know) therefore they are not really private schools. If rich people want to send their kids to a private school where their fees pay for the tuition then that is their perogative but I find it galling that the taxpayer I.e me and you pick up part of the tab.

private schools by and large have a quota of state funded teachers, and typically will have a number of privately funded teachers as well.

in effect all a private school is in ireland, is a school where the parents in essence pay more of a top-up then in other secondary schools . there is no issue in supporting that school with state teacher salaries , after all the schooling system would have to accommodate those pupils anyway somewhere in the system and the state would have to employ those teachers anyway to teach them. There is no evidence that private schools are at the top of the educational tree anyway, but just like private healthcare, Ireland has allowed its citizens too spend their money to benefits themselves. I see no ideological issue here

nice_guy80 · 14-12-2016 08:56AM

Stasi 2.0 wrote: »

But all schools in Ireland are fee paying.

Some schools just call it a "voluntary" contribution

big difference between asking for €100 and charging €5000

VinLieger · 14-12-2016 10:52AM

joe40 wrote: »

I haven't read all the posts so apologies if this has been mentioned earlier, but as far as I know teacher salaries in private schools are still paid by dept of education. (if I'm wrong let me know) therefore they are not really private schools. If rich people want to send their kids to a private school where their fees pay for the tuition then that is their perogative but I find it galling that the taxpayer I.e me and you pick up part of the tab.

Why? Every child under the constitution of this country has a right to education paid for buy the state? These parents are choosing to subsidise that education themselves with money they earned.

Since you haven't read the thread you might have missed the fact that every child in private education costs the state half of what a child in public does so these parents are effectively subsidising the states costs of educating their children. Now if you want to go down the road of if they can afford to pay then they should pay the full amount we need to look into refunding these parents the equivalent taxes that would otherwise have gone to educating their children because simply if you dont want to pay for their kids education why should they have to pay for yours?

Also can you tell me where the money will come from to pay for all the parents who cant afford the full costs of private school and now need to go back to the public system will come from?

Now also a clarification on your point about teachers in private education. It depends on the specific school but each private school has a mixture of department paid teachers and privately paid teachers. This is part of where the exorbitant fees go to to hire in some cases better teachers and to also reduce class sizes resulting in a better classroom experience for the child which has proven to affect how well children do in school.

steddyeddy · 14-12-2016 12:26PM

I don't think taking away state funding or closing them down is the solution. The problem is convincing people that a solution is needed in the fist place. Many people erroneously see the achievement of grades as independent of the school environment and cite factors such as wealth and parental influence. While these play a part the school you go to, i.e where you get your education affects the education you get. In other news ice is cold.

As Sally Ride, first American woman in space said:

For whatever reason, I didn't succumb to the stereotype that science wasn't for girls. I got encouragement from my parents. I never ran into a teacher or a counselor who told me that science was for boys. A lot of my friends did

We see the same sort of thing from some people today. University isn't for people of a certain class, they'd be more suited to apprenticeships ect. In Sally's case her friends were told that science wasn't for girls, they believed it and it reinforced the belief that science wasn't for girls.

Class-ism is now the last refuge of these types of people.

steddyeddy · 14-12-2016 12:28PM

BoatMad wrote: »

private schools by and large have a quota of state funded teachers, and typically will have a number of privately funded teachers as well.

in effect all a private school is in ireland, is a school where the parents in essence pay more of a top-up then in other secondary schools . there is no issue in supporting that school with state teacher salaries , after all the schooling system would have to accommodate those pupils anyway somewhere in the system and the state would have to employ those teachers anyway to teach them. There is no evidence that private schools are at the top of the educational tree anyway, but just like private healthcare, Ireland has allowed its citizens too spend their money to benefits themselves. I see no ideological issue here

There's plenty of evidence to that effect. You're more likely to get into university in Ireland if you went to a private school. You're also more likely to get into university if you switch from a public to a private school.

Should Private Schools be Closed?

Comments