Schooliform

[BoldonLad]

70% above the average of the top ten percent of earners seems like a reasonable description of wealthy.

View attachment 4612

I must know a lot of "wealthy" people. I will have to tell them next time I see them. They will be surprised.

 

[newfhouse]

I must know a lot of "wealthy" people. I will have to tell them next time I see them. They will be surprised.

Bless.

 

[Fab Foodie]

Blimey. You’re putting words into my mouth here, Fabbers. All I asked for was some fairness by way of recognition that treating private schools as charities, thereby giving parents an unjustified discount, is wrong.

It’s true that I’d like to see state school pupils have all of the educational and social advantages of the private sector but as I said earlier, half the point for many parents is the exclusivity.

Regarding my ‘brighter’ comment, I think it’s generally true. Private schools, at least at senior level, have entrance exams and of course the handful of bursary places are specifically aimed at poaching the cleverest from the local comprehensive.

APOLS! Had already stated that I also would like to see the charitable status removed. I think we're mostly on the same page.
Regarding 'brighter', they may be in the upper centile, but there are an awful lot of kids that get the same or better results from state-schools than those in Private - that suggests that despite the selection process (in which most are hot-housed) that kids at private schools don't necessarily go there brighter than many at state schools.

Agree the exclusivity thing is a major factor in outcomes post A-Levels....

 

[Ian H]

The context of this was the notion that these private school people can 'mentor' state school teachers.

A friend is a teacher, was absolutely committed to teaching "real kids" at a largish comp on two sites. Always stressed, not helped by management problems. School panicking over OFSTED inspection. Offered a post at a grant-aided grammar school. Agonised over whether to take it, was persuaded on the grounds that the stress was seriously obvious and worried everyone (nearly backtracked). After over 20 years of increasing stress, needed a break to avoid burn-out. New job: just made head of dept, kids all well-behaved, management supportive, hours fewer, pay better. Sunny disposition returned because the job is so much easier.

 

[theclaud]

Which is why some schools are pushing really high standards of dress

But Multz. They are run by colossal perverts called Miss Snuffy.

 

[icowden]

You went to a private school, and so do your children.
I'm not sure I'd come to you if I wanted to inform myself about state schools.

You're right. The fact that both of my kids went to state primary, I taught music in a state primary for about 5 years, my mum was a teacher in state schools, my BiL was a teacher in state secondary and my wife is a deputy head teacher in a state primary are probably of no consequence at all.

Equally, private schools exclude the most challenged and challenging sectors of society. Their staff aren't confronted in the morning with children whose parent(s) have sent them out shoplifting to help fund their drug habits, children whose parents have to work 3 jobs in order to make ends meet, etc etc etc.

True. Private schools tend to be dealing more with children who have mental health issues, emotional and behavioural difficulties which benefit from small class sizes etc. They do of course have the luxury of excluding children if they need to.

Are you seriously going to tell me private school teachers somehow instinctively have the skills to deal with these children

Are you seriously going to tell me that teachers in state primary and secondary schools have some sort of ninja therapy training to deal with these children?

<spoiler> They don't </spoiler>

Usually issues around child protection will be dealt with by the senior leadership team ,as will EHCPs, additional support etc. Just like in Private Schools. What they usually spend a lot of time doing is trying to deal with and accommodate children who have been given an inappropriate educational placement and have been insufficiently dealt with by the massively underfunded education system which lacks Educational Psychologists. Additionally a lot of schools spent a lot of time dealing with incompetent social workers due to the underfunded social services.

 

[icowden]

70% above the average of the top ten percent of earners seems like a reasonable description of wealthy.

That's because you fail to take into account where people live, and the fact that some places are a lot more expensive to live than other places.

 

[icowden]

The context of this was the notion that these private school people can 'mentor' state school teachers.

It's common for Private Schools to do community outreach and partner with maintained schools, share facilities etc. Some public schools (particularly ones like the Kings Schools that are now heading for 500 years old) recognise that they should be giving back. Kings is still one of the few public schools that offers fully funded scholarships for example.

 

[multitool]

You're right. The fact that both of my kids went to state primary, I taught music in a state primary for about 5 years, my mum was a teacher in state schools, my BiL was a teacher in state secondary and my wife is a deputy head teacher in a state primary are probably of no consequence at all.

I'm seeing two "was" and no secondary. We aren't talking about primary. And your experience as a visiting music teacher is barely relevant to anything. You might as well be telling me you were the dinner lady.

Are you seriously going to tell me that teachers in state primary and secondary schools have some sort of ninja therapy training to deal with these children?

No. I'm saying they are confronted with these children and have to develop skills of which private school teachers will have no need. I'm going to suggest that these soft skills are probably what makes the difference between a good and a bad teacher.

Usually issues around child protection will be dealt with by the senior leadership team ,as will EHCPs, additional support etc.

These are not the "issues" to which I am referring. Schools have designated safeguarding staff but these are not necessarily teachers. Only the head of safeguarding will be senior, because that carries the legal responsibilities.

The "issues" are dealt with by teaching staff because they have to cope with how the "issues" translate into behaviour.

Just like in Private Schools. What they usually spend a lot of time doing is trying to deal with and accommodate children who have been given an inappropriate educational placement and have been insufficiently dealt with by the massively underfunded education system which lacks Educational Psychologists. Additionally a lot of schools spent a lot of time dealing with incompetent social workers due to the underfunded social services.

True

 

[multitool]

But Multz. They are run by colossal perverts called Miss Snuffy.

No they aren't. Only one school is run by a weirdo self-publicising twit called Miss Snuffy.

Her school was founded by a bunch of utter cùnts, and she has used it as a platform to try and gain celebrity, by using it as a culture war weapon. It didn't work out well for her because she isn't sharp enough (resigned from Chair of Social Mobility Commision).

But that doesn't mean it is a bad school, and it doesn't mean she is wrong about everything. Some of what she says is true; that there is a "soft bigotry of low-expectations" in state education.

Again, I want my children's school to push the local public school into being the place that supplies the plumbers, delivery van drivers etc etc. That isn't going to happen by allowing kids to pîss about.

In broader terms, the privileged minority class is never going to willingly hand over their privilege to the rest of us. It has to be taken from them, aggressively.

 

[newfhouse]

That's because you fail to take into account where people live, and the fact that some places are a lot more expensive to live than other places.

Not this entitled bullshït again, please. If your take home pay is well north of £5,000 a month you’re wealthy. If you choose to spend a big chunk of your income living in a nice Surrey commuter town and borrowing against the future value of your house to pay school fees, you’re doing so because your wealth has allowed it. Good luck with all that, but stop pretending it isn’t wealthy.

 

[icowden]

If you choose to spend a big chunk of your income living in a nice Surrey commuter town and borrowing against the future value of your house to pay school fees, you’re doing so because your wealth has allowed it. Good luck with all that, but stop pretending it isn’t wealthy.

I "chose" to live in a Surrey commuter town because that was where I could afford to get a flat with my wife and still be close to where her parents live. We chose to sell that flat when it became too small and get a small house. We chose to sell that house and get a slightly bigger house. in the meantime we have got better jobs and our salaries have increased. My take home pay is not even close to 5k a month. We now still live here because it's where our friends are, and where our children go to school. House equity has paid for child one, and my wife's entire salary goes on child two.

If I was wealthy I'd have a new bathroom and a new front door at least to show for it. Around here I am not wealthy. I'm about average. As I keep having to point out to you - wealth is relative and is not just about earning money.

 

[icowden]

I'm seeing two "was" and no secondary. We aren't talking about primary. And your experience as a visiting music teacher is barely relevant to anything. You might as well be telling me you were the dinner lady.

That's because you never read my posts properly.

No. I'm saying they are confronted with these children and have to develop skills of which private school teachers will have no need. I'm going to suggest that these soft skills are probably what makes the difference between a good and a bad teacher.

I'm going to suggest that you have no knowledge of the Education system and are talking rowlocks.

 

[BoldonLad]

Not this entitled bullshït again, please. If your take home pay is well north of £5,000 a month you’re wealthy. If you choose to spend a big chunk of your income living in a nice Surrey commuter town and borrowing against the future value of your house to pay school fees, you’re doing so because your wealth has allowed it. Good luck with all that, but stop pretending it isn’t wealthy.

This is not the figure you quoted in your original "wealthy" assertion, it is also qualified with the words "take home pay", "well north of" and "month". That post seems to have disappeared, glitch in the forum software perhaps?

 

[newfhouse]

My take home pay is not even close to 5k a month.

Just a guess based on your objection to £100,000 salary being wealthy.

If I was wealthy I'd have a new bathroom and a new front door at least to show for it.

Oh, the horror. How do you survive?

Around here I am not wealthy. I'm about average.

I bet some residents of Burwood Park look at their neighbours and think their own houses are only average too. It’s like second division footballers thinking they’re only averagely skilled when compared with the local pub team they’re blessed with ability.

As I keep having to point out to you - wealth is relative and is not just about earning money.

Amen to that.