Labour Policy to Abolish Private Schools

[Outrider]

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/sep/22/labour-delegates-vote-in-favour-of-abolishing-private-schools

Good grief, how many times can they shoot themselves in the foot...

The failure to appreciate that Eton/Harrow/Winchester is not the same as 'Private Schools'; the implicit admission in this that private school education is fundamentally better, but that they'd rather impose a cult of mediocrity; the failure in any way to address the link between established dynasties of embedded privilege and public influence; the complete absence of any reference to these self-same 'privileged elites' in the likes of KPMG, EY, PWC.

I'm not sure what Labour thinks this will achieve - closing the schools will not in any way stop the old-boy's network, and closing private schools will push a huge number of extra students in the public sector schools whilst also reducing the overall quality of education in the country.  The truly established will fall back on tutors, making them an even more highly-prized resource, taking more teachers out of the pool and increasing the price-point at which people can step up to private education, making it the domain of an even smaller, even more privileged elite.

I can see that addressing the intake of students by individual universities could be monitored, although I'm not entirely sure that at least some of them wouldn't opt out of government payments and go entirely private - and I'm not sure an attempt to outlaw private education itself would stand up in court.

As to the suggestion that the assets and endowments of the private institutions could be nationalised, that's just ridiculous - you'd struggle to do that with the infrastructure of formerly nationalised industries that have been privatised, but to think you can just seize private funds is nonsense.

O.

[SusanDoris]

Good grief, how many times can they shoot themselves in the foot...

How any sane politician can get to the stage where s/he has  been elected as an MP and still think the fee-paying schools (of various kinds) could be abolished is completely barmy. It is living totally in cloud  cuckoo land. It is desperate to think such MPs have so little understanding of anything to do with education - very sad actually.

[Harrowby Hall]

I think that the wholesale closure of private schools is just dog whistle politics.

What I do consider justifiable, however, would be the acceptance that private schools are businesses and should be treated as such. Fees should be be subject to VAT and fee-paying schools should not be permitted to register as charities.

[Nearly Sane]

Agree with much on this thread, and just to add this will easily be portrayed as hypocritical.

[Walter]

I've heard Jeremy Corbin is competing in this years One Man and His Dog competition .
That's what I call dog whistle politics !

[jeremyp]

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/sep/22/labour-delegates-vote-in-favour-of-abolishing-private-schools

Good grief, how many times can they shoot themselves in the foot...

The failure to appreciate that Eton/Harrow/Winchester is not the same as 'Private Schools'; the implicit admission in this that private school education is fundamentally better, but that they'd rather impose a cult of mediocrity; the failure in any way to address the link between established dynasties of embedded privilege and public influence; the complete absence of any reference to these self-same 'privileged elites' in the likes of KPMG, EY, PWC.

I'm not sure what Labour thinks this will achieve - closing the schools will not in any way stop the old-boy's network, and closing private schools will push a huge number of extra students in the public sector schools whilst also reducing the overall quality of education in the country.  The truly established will fall back on tutors, making them an even more highly-prized resource, taking more teachers out of the pool and increasing the price-point at which people can step up to private education, making it the domain of an even smaller, even more privileged elite.

I can see that addressing the intake of students by individual universities could be monitored, although I'm not entirely sure that at least some of them wouldn't opt out of government payments and go entirely private - and I'm not sure an attempt to outlaw private education itself would stand up in court.

As to the suggestion that the assets and endowments of the private institutions could be nationalised, that's just ridiculous - you'd struggle to do that with the infrastructure of formerly nationalised industries that have been privatised, but to think you can just seize private funds is nonsense.

O.

Oh shit. I saw that in the Torygraph and just assumed they were trying to smear Labour.

It's a ridiculous idea.

[Outrider]

What I do consider justifiable, however, would be the acceptance that private schools are businesses and should be treated as such. Fees should be be subject to VAT and fee-paying schools should not be permitted to register as charities.

They are engaged in the education of youth, and are non-profit organisations.  In what way is that not a charitable endeavour?  Is it any less 'for the general good' than, say, medical research funding?  Medical research is massive business, after all.  Or religious institutions?

O.

[ippy]

Another one of those areas where I think there are very good arguments on either side, apparently Finland has one of the highest educational standards in Europe and private schooling is against their law there.

I've heard most of the arguments for and against private education I no longer know what's the right answer there's so much I agree with on either side of this subject.

I'm not trying to avoid arguing on this one I really don't know the answer.

Regards, ippy.

[Outrider]

Another one of those areas where I think there are very good arguments on either side, apparently Finland has one of the highest educational standards in Europe and private schooling is against their law there.

I've heard most of the arguments for and against private education I no longer know what's the right answer there's so much I agree with on either side of this subject.

I'm not trying to avoid arguing on this one I really don't know the answer.

Regards, ippy.

Finland's system, whereby the public sector schools are so well run and provided that there is not enough practical benefit in private schooling to make it worth anyone's while is an answer, but I strongly suspect that the UK electorate would balk at paying those kind of taxes.

O.

[ippy]

Finland's system, whereby the public sector schools are so well run and provided that there is not enough practical benefit in private schooling to make it worth anyone's while is an answer, but I strongly suspect that the UK electorate would balk at paying those kind of taxes.

O.

I think you may well be right about the taxes but it's still an example or an alternative, it does seem such a shame that there isn't  equality of  opportunity for all in education here and no I don't have the ideal answer either.

Regards ippy.

[Christine]

As long as people who have the money can opt out of public education and health services they will continue to not care very much if either or both are inadequately funded. 

The story says that Labour want to "integrate" private schools into the state sector, not close them.  Good for them. 

This could also help to resolve the problem of so-called schools teaching religious dogma and not much else to children whose entire lives are likely to be blighted by it.

Labour politicians who send their children to private schools (or take advantage of private health care) should have to explain their hypocrisy.  Their children will already have some advantages just because their parents are who they are.   
 
Educating children from different backgrounds together is, in my view, a good thing.  Finland is a good example to try to follow, even if it takes a long time, and integration with other policies, to achieve.   

[Roses]

I don't think private schools should be abolished, people should have an absolute right to pay for their children's education if they so wish, which saves the State from forking out for them. My secondary school education was at the private Ladies College in my home island, admittedly it was reminiscent of Harry Potter's Hogwarts. Private schools should be inspected on a regular basis, at the school's expense.

[Udayana]

...
The story says that Labour want to "integrate" private schools into the state sector, not close them.  Good for them. 
...

I can't see how this can work. The problem is teacher pay - either people are willing to pay teachers enough to ensure a good education for all children or they are not. Most are not, so there will always be private schools or tutors.

[Outrider]

As long as people who have the money can opt out of public education and health services they will continue to not care very much if either or both are inadequately funded.

I've opted my children out of state education, and I care deeply about both of those.  One of the reasons that I've opted my children out of state education is because I'm disappointed in the standards they achieve.

The story says that Labour want to "integrate" private schools into the state sector, not close them.  Good for them.

They want to 'integrate' the facilities - they do not want to integrate any of the various traditions, exceptional extra-curricular suites, nursery through to A-level continuums.  It's not integration, it's assimilation.

This could also help to resolve the problem of so-called schools teaching religious dogma and not much else to children whose entire lives are likely to be blighted by it.

No it won't, Free Schools can set their own religious curricula - indeed, one of the factors that's guided me against putting my children into the local education system is the fact that our local state school is an explicitly Christian indoctrination station.

Labour politicians who send their children to private schools (or take advantage of private health care) should have to explain their hypocrisy.

Arguably, yes, although the argument 'if my local school system was well-funded and adequate I'd send my children to it' is pretty persuasive so long as they're passing legislation and budgets to change that fact.

Their children will already have some advantages just because their parents are who they are.

Yes, however wanting a decent education for you children can be wanting it for its own sake; the fact that some children will not get it does not mean that you're necessarily seeking advantage, even though you can't claim that you don't know it's an effect.
 

Educating children from different backgrounds together is, in my view, a good thing.

Agreed. The problem is that lumping children together in order to aim at mediocrity doesn't do wonders for any of them.

Finland is a good example to try to follow, even if it takes a long time, and integration with other policies, to achieve.

Agreed.

O.

[Outrider]

I can't see how this can work. The problem is teacher pay - either people are willing to pay teachers enough to ensure a good education for all children or they are not. Most are not, so there will always be private schools or tutors.

My wife works in education, our children are privately educated. It's an anecdote, perhaps, but it's one that I've heard repeated: it's not about what the teacher's are paid, it's about the quality of parent, and the influence they put on their children when they're paying for the education.  You get fewer of the disruptive elements that don't appreciate school or schooling, both amongst the pupils and the parents.

In my (again, admittedly limited) experience, private school teachers aren't paid significantly better than state school teachers, particularly below the senior leadership team level - they get better candidates because the working conditions and the pupils and parents they have to deal with mean that they get to pick from the crop.

O.

[Walter]

My wife works in education, our children are privately educated. It's an anecdote, perhaps, but it's one that I've heard repeated: it's not about what the teacher's are paid, it's about the quality of parent, and the influence they put on their children when they're paying for the education.  You get fewer of the disruptive elements that don't appreciate school or schooling, both amongst the pupils and the parents.

In my (again, admittedly limited) experience, private school teachers aren't paid significantly better than state school teachers, particularly below the senior leadership team level - they get better candidates because the working conditions and the pupils and parents they have to deal with mean that they get to pick from the crop.



O.

Outrider
I can concur with your sentiments . My youngest girl was at private school for 6 years where she grew and flourished becoming  deputy head girl and a confident young woman
She told me the learning environment was excellent being shown respect by the teachers and kids who wanted to learn
(When money is involved attitudes are different!)

[Roses]

My husband has worked mainly in state schools, but did five years in a private school early on in his teaching career, his pay wasn't any better there than in the state sector.

[Udayana]

My wife works in education, our children are privately educated. It's an anecdote, perhaps, but it's one that I've heard repeated: it's not about what the teacher's are paid, it's about the quality of parent, and the influence they put on their children when they're paying for the education.  You get fewer of the disruptive elements that don't appreciate school or schooling, both amongst the pupils and the parents.

In my (again, admittedly limited) experience, private school teachers aren't paid significantly better than state school teachers, particularly below the senior leadership team level - they get better candidates because the working conditions and the pupils and parents they have to deal with mean that they get to pick from the crop.

O.

Obviously there are many factors that affect the level of success of any school or individual pupil but at a gross level we can roll up working conditions, facilities and other benefits as aspects of teacher pay.  The school environment and teachers that can be attracted to work in it ultimately boil down to money: directly affecting class sizes and the attention paid to each child.

To some extent these conditions can be replicated using selection but we've mostly done away with grammars. Anyway, a
school able to provide that environment and teaching quality on state funding would soon find that only well off parents would be able to live near enough to send their children there!

[Walter]

My husband has worked mainly in state schools, but did five years in a private school early on in his teaching career, his pay wasn't any better there than in the state sector.

yes, there seems to be a misconception about this however the working conditions can be a lot better !

[Udayana]

...
She told me the learning environment was excellent being shown respect by the teachers and kids who wanted to learn
(When money is involved attitudes are different!)

This is true. Maybe state schools should also charge significant fees?

[Robbie]

State schools are forever asking parents for money, they're so under funded. It's quite hard for parents who have two or three children and have to fork out on a regular basis.

I care very much about state education but if I had young children I would consider private education, depending on where I lived and what the schools in the area were like. Didn't have to with my two, they went to a grammar school as did I, my sis and cousin. We were at a private school up until eleven.

Most parents do the best they can for their children at the time even if fee paying goes somewhat against the grain.

(Liam Gallagher is on The One Show, I just turned it on it's nearly over. He's singing, what a surprise)

[Walter]

Robbie , I just saw Liam Galagher it was embarrassingly poor
You didn't miss much

[Robbie]

Not that bad. Wasn't he singing a song from his Rock n Roll tour show?

[Walter]

Not that bad. Wasn't he singing a song from his Rock n Roll tour show?

i think he's had his day now and should have some self respect and PACK IT IN
Erm ? Yes he was , I think !
I certainly wouldn't pay money to see him , mind you I wouldn't pay money to see anyone (being a Yorkshire man and all) 😂😱😤

[Walter]

Btw Robbie , I've had to turn my TV off to save power until that prog on BBC2 at 9😡