'State paid €530m to private schools in last five years'.

jimi_t2 · 15-05-2011 06:02PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

Duffy the Vampire Slayer wrote: »

Gene Kerrigan brought this up in an article a few weeks ago. He points out that many schools have discriminatory entry policies, such as Gonzaga College which refuses to accept students from north of the Liffey. Is this based on anything other than elitism and snobbery?

The fact that they'd be poaching from the catchment areas of other private Jesuit secondary schools like Belvedere College, located in Dublin 1, comes into play. Its not a hard and fast rule either; I attended Gonzaga and there were two people based on the northside in my year. The ratio in the Junior Cycle is also higher than 18:1 in any case.

I'd no prior ''dynastic'' connection with the school and everyone was interviewed; sons of old boys, brothers etc... and subject to an academic examination (which I believe has now been abolished).

I also liked the article someone published to try and prove the link between the ''old boys club'' and Dail Eireann

FIANNA Fail accounts for the country's highest number of privately-educated TDs, with one in every seven deputies having attended a fee-paying school.
Excluding the two seats left vacant by the departures of Charlie McCreevy and John Bruton . . . both of whom were educated at fee-paying schools . . . 18 of the 164 sitting TDs before Friday's by-elections attended private second-level institutions.
Leaving aside yesterday's election results, 11 Fianna Fail TDs . . . roughly one in seven . . . and three Fine Gael TDs . . . roughly one in 10 . . .attended fee-paying schools.

86% of Fianna Fail TDs attended public schools
90% of Fine Gael TDS attended public schools
89% of ALL TDs attended public schools

byhookorbycrook · 15-05-2011 06:08PM

Speaking of policies:

"Please note that the Wesley College Preparatory Class is not funded by the Department of Education and Science. The Department provides no support for Preparatory Class Pupils with Special Needs. "

Hmmmm,smacks of "go elsewhere and don't bring down our stats in the Times top schools thingy"

jimi_t2 · 15-05-2011 06:11PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Speaking of policies:

"Please note that the Wesley College Preparatory Class is not funded by the Department of Education and Science. The Department provides no support for Preparatory Class Pupils with Special Needs. "

Hmmmm,smacks of "go elsewhere and don't bring down our stats in the Times top schools thingy"

It's a primary school, so there wouldn't be any stats.

dotsman · 15-05-2011 06:27PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

Bambi wrote: »

lol, you think that trade unionists and TD's bankrupted this country?

Em, yes. Where have you been for the past 10 years?

dotsman · 15-05-2011 06:37PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Wouldn't that mean only 1.5% of students are in fee paying schools? Doesn't sound too far out of the ballpark, and would certainly not overwhelm the system if fee paying schools had to close.

So what's the big deal?

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Whatever the case, no institution in receipt of public funds should be allowed to apply discriminatory entry policies. End of.

Careful now. You've just stated that you are completely against gaelscoil bharra getting 1 cent of public funding. Not a very popular decision (although I may* agree with it, but not for the same reasons as you).

I would want to know more before I make up my mind, but at the moment, am leaning towards no public funding for them.

steddyeddy · 15-05-2011 06:53PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

The debates as to wheter private schools should have been state funded in the first place and wheter we should continue to fund them are two seperate issues with seperate consequences imo.

maglite · 15-05-2011 07:04PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

The parents of children that go to these private schools pay tax too, arguably more than average.

They pay into a tax pool and some of that is set aside for education, I see no reason why they cant add to it if they wish.

Aldito · 15-05-2011 07:25PM

Well private schools produce the cream of the crop who are going to attract investment to Ireland.

Perhaps even more money should be invested into private schools instead of wasting money on children who are in all likelihood going to end up in jail.

philologos · 15-05-2011 07:31PM

It should be reduced significantly and more money should be invested in deprived schools

Aldito - why can't we invest more in public schools so that more students in general have this skill?

maglite · 15-05-2011 07:32PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

Or reconstruct the whole system, I would propose reforming 3rd level to fund it like Masters, those courses the county need get subsidized, you have to pay full what for others.

Now reinvest the savings into the primary and secondary systems.

Aldito · 15-05-2011 07:44PM

philologos wrote: »

Aldito - why can't we invest more in public schools so that more students in general have this skill?

Well if you were in a public school it's less likely that you possess natural intelligence, due to being born to a poor family.

It's sort of like planting a tree in a desert, and one in an oasis beside it. The oasis tree will sprout to glory while the desert tree will grow to nothing.

Why waste investment on something that will not yield returns?

philologos · 15-05-2011 07:46PM

It should be reduced significantly and more money should be invested in deprived schools

I suspect there are plenty of naturally intelligent people who are poor and have never been given the opportunity. Wealth does not mean intelligence.

steddyeddy · 15-05-2011 08:02PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

Aldito wrote: »

Well private schools produce the cream of the crop who are going to attract investment to Ireland.

Perhaps even more money should be invested into private schools instead of wasting money on children who are in likeliness going to end up in jail.

Its the lack of investment, encouragement and the infusion of beleif in a child that makes it harder for a child to reach his full potential imo and as you say in extreme cases end up in jail. Im not being sarcastic but there is no basis for people who have money and those who dont having differing levels of potential.

Ickle Magoo · 15-05-2011 08:11PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

philologos wrote: »

I've told you already that I believe that entry requirements on the basis of adherence, baptism certs, etc should be removed. This doesn't weaken my current argument as far as I would see it.

But these schools still aim at advantaging one particular demographic at the expense of all others. Why should such a school get public funding if all is to be equal? What is the difference between a rich parent and a rich patron that makes public funding that benefits one abhorrent and the other perfectly acceptable?

byhookorbycrook · 15-05-2011 08:19PM

Aldito wrote: »

Well if you were in a public school it's less likely that you possess natural intelligence, due to being born to a poor family.

It's sort of like planting a tree in a desert, and one in an oasis beside it. The oasis tree will sprout to glory while the desert tree will grow to nothing.

Why waste investment on something that will not yield returns?

Presume you understand what intelligence actually is?Are you familar with the work of Howard Gardner?

philologos · 15-05-2011 08:24PM

It should be reduced significantly and more money should be invested in deprived schools

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

But these schools still aim at advantaging one particular demographic at the expense of all others. Why should such a school get public funding if all is to be equal? What is the difference between a rich parent and a rich patron that makes public funding that benefits one abhorrent and the other perfectly acceptable?

If you're referring to entry standards on the basis of baptism certificates I think that's wrong and it should be changed. That's all I need to say about it surely?

steddyeddy · 15-05-2011 08:32PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

But these schools still aim at advantaging one particular demographic at the expense of all others. Why should such a school get public funding if all is to be equal? What is the difference between a rich parent and a rich patron that makes public funding that benefits one abhorrent and the other perfectly acceptable?

Thats it. It wouldnt make sense that children have different traits based on their standing within an artificial situation like wealth ect. If a person from a poor background won the lotto would his/her kids undergo some sort of genetic change in intelligence as a result or would their academic success be a reulst of encouragment and envoiroment of like minded people?

steddyeddy · 15-05-2011 08:35PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

philologos wrote: »

If you're referring to entry standards on the basis of baptism certificates I think that's wrong and it should be changed. That's all I need to say about it surely?

Well a child has as much say in his parents wealth and status as he does on his own baptisim although both have no effect on intelligence.

philologos · 15-05-2011 08:39PM

It should be reduced significantly and more money should be invested in deprived schools

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well a child has as much say in his parents wealth and status as he does on his own baptisim although both have no effect on intelligence.

Agreed*. No problem there.

* In the case of infant baptism only. Some churches baptise as teenagers or adults.

steddyeddy · 15-05-2011 08:52PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

"Give me a dozen healthy infants, well formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in and I'll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select-doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant, chief, and yes even beggar-man and theif, regardless of his talents, perchants, tendencies, abilities vocations and race of his ancestors."

J.Watson

This is my truth I simply dont belive that people from one demographic are of different intelligence. The premise makes no sense to me whatsoever and can only be explained in terms or perceptions or ancient ingrained prejudices and not accurate understanding of how a child reaches potential. If I took a child from a rich background and placed the child into a background of people who because of lack of wealth underachieved, the child would follow the pattern of his new envoiroment.

So whatever the arguement about private schools whatever their arguement It boils down to them selecting children who will achieve their full potential irregardless of their actual potential but selected based on the demographic they happen to be born in.

Ickle Magoo · 15-05-2011 08:58PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

philologos wrote: »

If you're referring to entry standards on the basis of baptism certificates I think that's wrong and it should be changed. That's all I need to say about it surely?

You are steadfastly clinging onto the idea that I am only referring to entry levels...we are talking about the funding for teachers and resources. Giving public funding to a school that wishes to aim it's resources and teaching at one particular demographic is no fairer than any other wishing to do likewise - whether that demographic be economic, religious or gender based. If all funding was cut from schools which aim to benefit a single demographic and given over to schools in areas than most required them and were offering a fair and equal emphasis on all the children that attended then that would be the "fairest" option using the very same argument against public funding in fee paying schools.

Suggesting funding should be cut from one privately owned establishment aiming to benefit a single demographic in favour of paying more into other establishments that do exactly the same is more self-serving than fair, let's be honest.

philologos · 15-05-2011 09:03PM

It should be reduced significantly and more money should be invested in deprived schools

Be more specific and or blunt Ickle Magoo, it will help

If you're saying that funding for faith schools only benefit for one demographic you'd be mistaken as the State provides faith schools for a variety of different faith groups. (The primary school I went to had kids from Anglican, Catholic, Pentecostal / Evangelical, Presbyterian, Methodist, Muslim, and non-believing backgrounds yet it was a faith school in addition to these demographics there was a Sikh and a Jew in my secondary school which was privately funded) It will also be providing secular schools on a larger scale which I'm happy to see. It's about the equal provision of schools to satisfy all in the community as far as it is practicable. We are a society where believers and non-believers exist together and that's why there is / will be choice.

private for the purposes of this discussion so far has meant fee paying I.E open only to those who can pay.
public for the purposes of this discussion so far has meant open to all.
It doesn't matter a pick who is running the school on an administrative level.

WhiteRussian · 15-05-2011 09:40PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

dlofnep wrote: »

I'm pointing out that while these well equipped schools receive funding, the likes of Gaelscoil Bharra have spent 15 years in roach infested, leaking prefabs. Cop the **** on.

This is your argument;
Premise: Ghaelscoil Bharra has shoddy facilities.
Premise: Private schools receive state money.
Conclusion: Take away private school's money and give to Ghaelscoil Bharra, or other schools that need it.

That is a flawed way to conclude what you have concluded. Your simple argument structure means that, for you, this is a simple 'take from the (perceived) rich and give to the poor'. You don't take into account the sacrifices parents might have to make to send their kids to a private school. Propaganda is your specialty baby.

Ickle Magoo · 15-05-2011 09:42PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

philologos,

If we are talking about educational elitism then the administration and demographical aims and objectives of the school in question very much matter a pick. I don't know how much more blunt and obvious I can be that will render you unable to side-step the points I'm making...namely: one particular faith school has no wider an aim of demographic than one fee paying school - I'm astonished you think the forced attendance of those from other faiths and none entirely due to the lack of alternative somehow negates the reason why schools with differing ethos and objectives exist. The bottom line is, celebrating one elitist educational establishment while deriding another which is also elitist but just in a manner we are less accepting of is just hypocritically looking out for ones own interests while ironically scorning others doing exactly the same.

The ONLY fair system is a state school system that provides equal status and education for ALL pupils in attendance regardless of faith, race or gender and anyone wanting educational elitism, whether religious, monetary or anything else, can fund themselves - or, much as we have currently, everyone gets funding depending on the numbers of students that attend and the parents are asked to make up the short-fall. The idea that some schools should be allowed to remain within public funding despite being elitist yet it's grossly unfair or undemocratic for another is a nonsense - as is the oft-trotted out claim that every town and village - sorry, the STATE - can afford a muslim school, a catholic school, an ET, etc, etc for every area which desires one.

Elitism has always been a position of the privileged and in terms of state education it should be an even playing field - for EVERYONE. Enough of this ridiculous state-sponsored elitism when it suits.

delito · 15-05-2011 09:42PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

I clicked the wrong option, yes instead of no.

philologos · 15-05-2011 09:46PM

It should be reduced significantly and more money should be invested in deprived schools

Ickle Magoo - Faith schools are open to everyone. At the moment they are allowed to discriminate on entry. I think this shouldn't be the case, but they are open to the public and they benefit more than just one demographic. Secular schools are the same, open to everyone, and don't benefit just one demographic. One school is better suited to parents who want their children to spend some time thinking about the beliefs that they would desire their children to know more about and the other is suited to parents who don't want this.

It's a completely separate topic to the question of fee-paying schools. The Government should support the desires of parents in respect to education in so far as it is practicable, and it is practicable to have both secular and faith schools in a society with both believers and unbelievers in it. The fairest system is compromise. Have both faith and secular schools according to where they are demanded. I think if Ruairí Quinn thinks along the same lines of the British system the Irish education system will turn out much better.

I have as little desire as possible for Richard Dawkins types to restrict the level of choice in the education system as I would if the RCC or if any other religious institution insisted on restricting the level of choice in the education system.

Ickle Magoo · 15-05-2011 09:55PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

They benefit more than one demographic by shoving them into another room while they carry on with their elitist education? Sure.

So it's okay to restrict the educational choices when it suits? As I say, self serving hypocrisy. Either all parents get a choice and public funds are given to all those choices, or they don't...

philologos · 15-05-2011 09:57PM

It should be reduced significantly and more money should be invested in deprived schools

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

So it's okay to restrict the educational choices when it suits? As I say, self serving hypocrisy.

I don't see why the State system cannot provide all the choice necessary so that all children can have it rather than those simply with the money to do so. That would be broadening the choice.

I don't see how that is self serving. I think that every child should have access to the best education rather than just middle to upper classes that can afford it.

In fact we need to be giving people in the lower classes the means to succeed also. I probably would hold similar thinking in respect to health. Shouldn't we try to improve all the hospitals to ensure good healthcare for all rather than those who can afford private hospitals?

Ickle Magoo · 15-05-2011 10:15PM

No, it's not fair: the subsidy should be ended and the money invested in state schools

philologos wrote: »

I don't see why the State system cannot provide all the choice necessary so that all children can have it rather than those simply with the money to do so. That would be broadening the choice.

All choices - except for those who provide the most tax and are willing to pay extra for their child's education above and beyond the parental contributions that most parents are liable for?

So, as long as the choice you want is there, to hell with the choices you aren't bothered about? And you...

philologos wrote: »

...don't see how that is self serving. I think that every child should have access to the best education rather than just middle to upper classes that can afford it.

I do to - what we disagree on is where public funding should be given and why one elitist establishment merits public funding in the name of choice while another doesn't - and it's the defence only of the elitism you wish to protect that makes it self-serving.

philologos wrote: »

In fact we need to be giving people in the lower classes the means to succeed also.

Agreed, so lets stop publicly funding any school that is not based on wholly equal and inclusive policy, curriculum and ethos so public funds can be directed towards those most in need in the most economic manner. :cool:

philologos wrote: »

I probably would hold similar thinking in respect to health. Shouldn't we try to improve all the hospitals to ensure good healthcare for all rather than those who can afford private hospitals?

Ireland currently has a rather odd tiered health system which really does no favours to public health care...regardless, much like fee-paying education those that pay their private health care premiums also pay their taxes. If people wish to pay their share into the public coffers, why should they be prevented from paying more to get the level of service others are prepared to provide? Is that not choice?

philologos · 15-05-2011 10:27PM

It should be reduced significantly and more money should be invested in deprived schools

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

All choices - except for those who provide the most tax and are willing to pay extra for their child's education above and beyond the parental contributions that most parents are liable for?

What about the children from families who can't or don't earn as much?

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

So, as long as the choice you want is there, to hell with the choices you aren't bothered about? And you...

Not at all. The choice to go to a faith school or a secular school is there (and hopefully will be there) for all irrespective of wealth.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I do to - what we disagree on is where public funding should be given and why one elitist establishment merits public funding in the name of choice while another doesn't - and it's the defence only of the elitism you wish to protect that makes it self-serving.

Public faith schools aren't elitist.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Agreed, so lets stop publicly funding any school that is not based on wholly equal and inclusive policy, curriculum and ethos so public funds can be directed towards those most in need in the most economic manner. :cool:

Faith schools can be equal and inclusive.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Ireland currently has a rather odd tiered health system which really does no favours to public health care...regardless, much like fee-paying education those that pay their private health care premiums also pay their taxes. If people wish to pay their share into the public coffers, why should they be prevented from paying more to get the level of service others are prepared to provide? Is that not choice?

I personally disagree here. We should aim to serve all people in the health system to high standards rather than those who are wealthy enough.

'State paid €530m to private schools in last five years'.

Comments