Private sector 'to loan teachers'

Discussion in 'Diamond Lil's' started by slim, May 26, 2007.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Neither I nor any member of my family have ever attended a public school. So why am I so incensed when I read this article. Does it really matter that these schools enjoy charitable status? There are far worse organisations than public schools enjoying this privilege including some very dodgy charities.
    The parents of children attending public schools are paying twice for their children's education once to the public sector and once to the government sector. In taking their children out of the government run education system they are helping the system.
    Keep the systems completely separate.
  2. Forced Poaching perhaps?
    I must admit that I haven't a clue how the whole "Charitable Status" thing works, I just thought Public Schools were paid for by the parents and that was that. If they are classed as a charity, then I agree that they SHOULD be giving something to the community, but i'm not sure what exactly. Don't like the idea of the government forcing schools to loan teachers to state schools one bit. Seems to me that the state should be looking at the root of the teaching shortage, not just nicking teachers if/when it suits. It shouldn't matter if that teacher is teaching Fractions or Ferengi, if there is a shortage at state school level, then THAT is what needs redressing in my opinion.
    If I have two cars and some chav git up the road doesn't have one, are the government going to force me to "loan" one of my cars to Mr C.Hav when he needs it? Bit simplistic I know but same principle I think.
  3. But Lamri the private sector are giving something to the community. Every child taught privately is one less which needs to be taught by the state system. As an aside teachers in the private sector do not have to be qualified to the same level as those in the public sector.
    I like your thoughts on cars though, perhaps some of the chavs who have two cars can give a worker in the low paid sector one of them, sorry now I'm being completely stupid, the chavs car is probably not taxed insured or MOTd.
  4. Good points Slim, but the fact that a child being in a public school is not therefore taking a place in a state school really can't be seen as a "service to the community" can it?
    These places as you know, are paid for by the parent(s), so it could be argued that the service to the community is actually being carried out by the parents and not the public school itself.
    Maybe something more helpful like use of computer facilities etc would be better suited. I don't pretend to have the answer but I just don't like the idea of teachers being forced to work in an environment that they have chosen not to.
  5. Lamri these days the private sector is educating more from the working class section of the community than ever before. There are frequently articles telling of mothers going to work solely to pay school fees. If the charitable status is lost then these fees will have to be increased by 17.5% (current VAT rate). This will result in many parents not being able to afford the fees and their kids having to re-enter the state system. This will put a burden on the state. My family have always been educated in the state system, this does not mean that I feel others should not be free to choose to go private.
    Similarly with private healthcare.
  6. I'm not disagreeing with you Slim, I just think that there must be some other way for the government to be appeased rather than using privately employed teaching staff to alleviate a recruitment/retention problem in the state sector. Its just another cop out by the government really, isn't it?
  7. Out of curiosity do the famous Public Schools, Eton, Winchester, Roedean, Durham etc have charitable status??

  8. I think that staff retention is the fault of this and previous governments removing discipline from schools. This discipline is maintained in the public sector. If I were a tutor in the private sector I would not be chuffed to be informed that I also had to teach chavs. Perhaps the private sector should have a say in which pupils they choose to teach.
  9. Which seems to make the assumption that private teachers are better than public ones; likely to ruffle a few feathers that one!
    Isn't it really about time we simply had schools, not private ones, nor religious orientated ones, just infant, middle and senior schools that all children irrespective of their background attended.
    This state/private business seems to me a legacy of the class system that should have been irradicated donkeys ago.
  10. This would seriously eradicate a parents choice of educational establishments. For some it is preferable to have their children educated in then private section. taken to extremes we could say the private sector should not exist for the following:
    1 Medical care
    2 Dental care
    3 Golf Clubs
    4 Sports centres
    And innumerable other things.
  11. I sort of agree with that Sussex, as long as streaming for ability was kept alive and kicking!
    The only thing that grates with me would be the loss of the right of a parent to choose, if in a position to do so.
  12. It was banned about a few years ago that all parents should be issued with educational vouters that were equal to a years taxation spent on a childs education, a parent could then ether chose to use the money in the state sector or top it up and go private.

    Having been dignosed with dislexica 2 years after leaving a state school ( were I was writtern off as thick and a trouble maker), I really fear for my LO's education and would rather send her private, although I know this is no garntee she will be anymore successful in life at least I would be happy that I'd done the best I could to give her a good start
  13. My eldest has a home tutor every Monday, my youngest goes to the local Dyslexia school every Tuesday evening. We pay (quite a lot) for both of those but I don't see them as choices to be honest. Educational Vouchers would help us loads in our situation I think, what with it being only me at work :)
  14. chieftiff

    chieftiff War Hero Moderator

    Alan Johnson is typical of our current trend in ministers, he looks for a quick fix to problems without the wider view, blinkers firmly on!

    Private schools do have better teachers than state schools, if you consider a better teacher to be better qualified academically. Private schools can afford to be more choosy, they pay slightly better wages with some additional perks but longer working hours. Teachers in this sector do not need to hold QTS (qualified teacher status) however most have good careers behind them. The private sector tends to attract more academically qualified teachers, PhD not being unusual.

    The problem here is that private schools tend not to attract the social problems that come hand in hand with state schools, teachers in this sector are less equipped to cope with these problems as their experience is limited. This is a generalisation I appreciate but nevertheless is somewhere close to the truth. State school teachers are under a great deal of pressure to deliver via quota, whereas private sector schools can get by on their reputation, this gives them more flexibility to deliver their courses how they want to. Longer school hours, typically 9-5, 6 days a week with evening support in "prep" as opposed to 9-3.30, 5 days a week with help from Mum mean the students benefit greatly, combine this with typical class sizes of 15 as opposed to 30 and it's not hard to see why private schools perform better.

    What this idiot is proposing is to bring private schools down to the level of state schools by robbing them of their advantages, the man is a short sighted media attending moron! Look at the state school system, deal with the social problems, deal with teachers pay and deal with the current system of measuring by quota, stop forcing state schools to teach according to political whim and you may solve these problems.

    Don't bring a better system down to the level of of a poorer one by threat and blackmail.
  15. Not sure about all private schools, but I am aware that many do take non/reduced fee paying students based on ability and parental income. The number generally being linked the amount of profit they make that is not reinvested in the school.
  16. Parental choice? This could be the one thing that has put the mockers on our education system, these people getting involved with everything.
    :roll: :roll:
  17. Education is always an emotive subject as we saw with the Tories comments on Grammar schools. Private education has always been a target of the left as much as part of their class war as anything else. When some one is parting with a shed load of cash to educate little Johnny/Jeanie then they are going to do their best to ensure that their kids do go to school and do their home work etc and that the school does the job they are being paid for. One of the fundamentals of the success of private education is the parental committment.

    It is equally noticeable that schools in areas where average parental income is above average that the education standards in tax funded education is also better. Up here we have had parental choice in state education for many years now and this has had a marked impact, poor performing schools get smaller and better schools get bigger, and ultimately LEAs have to do something about it. The situation in England where parents had little or no choice in schools masked poor performance and has allowed poor headmasters to escape public scutiny until it has been too late.

    As to the original point should fee paying schools be supported by the government either through the charity scheme or some other one, clearly as a tax payer the answer is yes, I think we as taxpayers get excellent value from the system and if it did not exist in this form or a similar one we would have to pay more tax. As for the toffs kids getting a leg up through daddies cash, what ever system we have they will get a leg up from daddies cash because daddy has the cash and will spend it on their little darlins to ensure they do get a leg up, that's life.
  18. The only concern that I have with private education is that it opens doors regardless of the educational qualifications of the individual. This used to happen in the RN where more than a few officers seemed to have gained their commissions purely because they had attended a good school. I have been assures by many on RR that this is no longer the case. The civil service is another of those employers recruiting ex public school boys. And finally parliament, how many of our MPs attended public schools?
    However I believe state and private education should be available but when school finishes the fact that someone attended Eton Or Harrow should not give them an unfair advantage over another who has similar qualifications but was educated in the state system.
  19. I think, even in your day very few actually gotn past the AIB just because of who daddy was, or what school they had been too. If they did they did not get through BRNC without shaping up and fitting the mould. I agree there were some pratts about, but as I have said before there were prats represented at every level in the RN then and I suspect now as well.

    I am not sure that there are many jobs left where Eton or Harrow on the CV is a real help, in fact for some I suspect it would be a hindrance. The real benefic of a private education is that the kid that would get 2 A levels at a comprehensive will get 3 or 4 at a good public school. Universities are in general not influenced by what school ratrher how well you will do, public school pupils who fail and drop out as they used to do are not good news in getting funding these days.

Share This Page