• New Patreon Tier and Early Access Content available. If you would like to support AVForums, we now have a new Patreon Tier which gives you access to selected news, reviews and articles before they are available to the public. Read more.

Public schools, whats the point of them?

la gran siete

Distinguished Member
I ask because i just read an article re Jodie Kidd once supermodel now turned polo player.An obviously posh totty with attitude, who left school with 1 GCSE at 15.Obviously not a bright spark then, so why did her parents and others in similar circumstances( eg Tara Tompkinson Palmer's ), waste all that money sending their academic underachievers to a fee paying school?? There are certain public schools one has to pass common entrance exam to enter and where only the brightest are allowed , but there also many others which need to be nationalised for they just produce dunces with posh accents and attitude.In fact i would nationalise the lot so that money NEVER becomes the main criteria for admission.These schools are nothing but elitist institutions which churn out individuals who quite clearly have never learnt to relate to the vast majority of the population, hence they form into tight cliques who invariably distance themselves from the rest of society and to which are accorded certain privileges denied to the rest .Toffs and Polo indeed!
 
Last edited:

Sonic67

Banned
People in the forces use them a lot as it means their children get a continous education while the forces are sending them around to different barracks.
 

Jakeh1969

Active Member
There was an interesting article in one of the newspapers (forget which day) last week which said that the cost per year of educating a child in the state system is £9100.

The average cost of sending a child to a private school is higher but not significantly so. I think the cost quoted was about £9400 but might be wrong on the actual figure. And because it's an average there will be public schools whose annual cost is less than the state cost.

Figures like these do support those proponents of the voucher system who think supplying a voucher to parents to use on a school of their choice will help to improve educational standards.

LGS - I went to a private school myself but didn't turn out a toff or elitist. Most of the kids at my school had parents who ran small businesses such as manufacturing firms, car dealerships and newsagents.
 
Last edited:

overkill

Distinguished Member
Good on em' I say. If we didn't have them, then the rich wouldn't get the one to one tutoring their inbred offspring need, and those that run our country, politically, economically, and socially would be even dumber than they are already! ;):D

*put tin hat on and waits for fall out*:devil:
 

Billo

Active Member
These schools are nothing but elitist institutions which churn out individuals who quite clearly have never learnt to relate to the vast majority of the population, hence they form into tight cliques

See, you hit the nail on the head there.
Those two you mention would no doubt be on the dole and living in some sink estate if it were not for some kind of education, so it should be argued that everyone should get the same treatment to ease all our problems. The public schools should not be brought down to 'our' level but the education system should be brought up to their standard.
 

Pecker

Distinguished Member
Like all schools and teachers you get good and bad.

One point to note - many public schools only publish raw pass rates (% of pupils obtaining 5 A*-Cs). As they almost all have some sort of entrance exam, and won't let pupils in who aren't bright enough, this is very misleading.

One of the ways to spot how good a school does is to check the CVA, which looks at the pupils' abilities on entry, then their GCSE results, and finds how much they've come on over the 5 years.

So, for example, they look at all the children in the country who scored English 4b, maths 4b, science 4c in their KS2 SATs and look at them again when they've sat their GCSEs, and work out an average GCSE points score. They do this for every possible combination of SATs results. Then they look at a school's entire intake, and work out what their points score should be, given the ability of pupils on entry. The CVA score is then published to say how the schools has done in bringing the pupils on. A score of 1,000 is average.

You can find out what your LA's schools CVAs are by doing a search here at the BBC site.

Guess what? Most public schools refuse to publish their CVA. I wonder why? Maybe it might reveal the fact that most get good results by only accepting bright pupils, and that they only bring pupils on around the same as everyone else.

Maybe.

Steve W
 

FunkyMunkey

Well-known Member
My parents sent me to private school, although I only recently found out why.

I was in state school, but the teachers started striking and I was only at school for 4 days a week, so they got fed up. I'm very grateful for the quality of education I received.
 

la gran siete

Distinguished Member

thing is one can get a perfectly good education at most state schools as well plus ones learns to relate to those who form the vast majority of the population as well.Whilst i accept the top institution such as Radleigh college Winchester college and the like have very good standards, I find it very strange that some parents should choose to send their less academically able kids to a fee paying school,particularly when they end up leaving with a paltry GCSE or two.It seems more a case of social oneupmanship than anything else.
 
Last edited:

GasDad

Remembered (1964-2012)
e BBC site.

Guess what? Most public schools refuse to publish their CVA. I wonder why? Maybe it might reveal the fact that most get good results by only accepting bright pupils, and that they only bring pupils on around the same as everyone else.

Maybe.

Steve W

That is undoubtedly true. However it is also applies to 'good' comprehensives - they stay good by attracting the right kind of parents to move into the area, and become a kind self full filling prophesy.

We live in a largish market town, with two good comprehensives, however one school has a APR (catchment area) that includes outlying villages, the other parts of the nearby city.
The first one has great results, (78% A-C GCSE including Math & Eng etc), the other less good results (though still above national average) - but a much much higher improvement score.

Obviously like all parents would given the choice we send our children to the first school.
---------------


My oldest son, has now gone into the six form (having done his GCSE's at the local comphrensive) at a private school .

This came about because he was playing football and the books of a local league 1 football club. Staying with the football club would have meant him doing 1 or possibly 2 A levels at a local college in between training.

But fortunately, with the help of a scholarship, he has been able to attend a school with probably the best sports facilities in the country, play football at a high level and do 5 A levels. The school generally produces 1 or 2 boys a year, who go on to sign professional football contracts.

Staying within the state system would have meant basically choosing between the academic and the chance of a football career at 16, rather than keeping his options open.
 

Steven

Senior Moderator
Was this thread started because you wanted to be her dance partner on Strictly Come Dancing?
 

Dextur

Distinguished Member
I ask because i just read an article re Jodie Kidd once supermodel now turned polo player.An obviously posh totty with attitude, who left school with 1 GCSE at 15.Obviously not a bright spark then, so why did her parents and others in similar circumstances( eg Tara Tompkinson Palmer's ), waste all that money sending their academic underachievers to a fee paying school?? !

So your basis for questioning the existance of of pubic schools is that a model and a socialiate didn't achieve high grades ? Solid evidence LGS.

Aside from rather absurd reasoning, turns out JK seems to have done rather well for herself, perhaps her schooling added something to her character that superceded her academic abilities.
 

la gran siete

Distinguished Member
S, turns out JK seems to have done rather well for herself, perhaps her schooling added something to her character that superceded her academic abilities.

thats everything to do with her moneyed and HIGHLY privileged family background.Whether she has a good character or not,I wouldnt know.
 

DJT75

Distinguished Member
Left school with 1 GCSE taken & passed a year early to pursue a career as a supermodel which in turn has made her a multi-millionaire. Now 30 & semi-retired.....Wish I'd gone to Public School..
 

mrtbag

Well-known Member
Obviously not a bright spark then!

Maybe not in the sense of school qualifications, but she's gone onto be a racing driver, golfer, model & tv presenter. So she hasn't done too bad for herself.

I think some people just aren't the achedemic type. I certainly wasn't, but I've still ended up with a half decent job.
 

Bald Monkey

Distinguished Member
B*ll*cks! In my privately educated opinion. :D

I was at private school all my life, and yes you get people who you wonder how they ever managed to pass the entrance exam, you also get those who become almost insitutionalised. Just like state schools however you can't judge everyone by the worse examples. You also get bad private schools and good state schools.

I had many friends who didn't attend private school and I also certainly wasn't amonst the richest there. This IMHO kept me very grounded. My parents, particularly in the early days struggled to pay for the very expensive schools. Both me and my sister were deemed by experts to be very inteligent and they felt this gave us the best oportunity in life they could. And good on them. I had the opportunity due to natural ability and education to do pretty much anything I wanted. Yes in part they paid for this, but so what. Life isn't fair.

The schools we attended were never short of cash, never struggled from teachers strikes. They could offer better pay and poach the best teachers around, they had the best, most modern equipment avaliable. I remember them spending millions just on the drainage of the main playing fields. I was also surrounded by pupils who were commited to education. Some of who were of course on assited places, where their fee are paid in part or in whole by the school. There was not much stigmatism with being a high achiever. However there are some for whom the system perpetuates their superiority complex. It's not hard when you know you are in the top 10 percentile of the nation, and are often reminded of this. This is also the reason why so many people use these schools for recruitment from the forces to the not so secret services to large corporations. There is a far larger percentage of intelligent well educated people at these schools compared with a state school. On average. The results they achieve are usually higher for a reason.

The private schools I attended also taught you waht many might consider old fashioned values and behaviour. Simple things like maintaining a neat professional image. How to talk to people, treat others handle tyour self etc... Many of these traits are easy to spot and although not exclusive I think it's often easy to tell who has attended a private school. Thanks to this I've always felt confident in business situations from high ranking government officals to high flying executives of large multinationals. I know how to behave and how to relate to these people, as right or wrong many of them come from a similar background. In this way it is a bit like a club, and this is where the accusations of elitism may come from, but thats the world we live in. You can try and change it... personally I'll see it and try to take advantage of it ;)

I know people who have excelled in state schools and know some are better than others etc.. I'm not sure if I'd send my kids to private school (if I had some) or not.. Not sure I could afford it either :D but if I felt it was possible, and gave them the best chance in life then I would.

It's fine to debate the merits of the school system, but you have to deal with the situation as it is, and currently just as it was in my time, there are many advantages to attending certain schools, both state and private and I think parents are right to try and pick what they feel is best.
 
Last edited:

shodan

Distinguished Member
So your basis for questioning the existance of of pubic schools is that a model and a socialiate didn't achieve high grades ? Solid evidence LGS.

Aside from rather absurd reasoning, turns out JK seems to have done rather well for herself, perhaps her schooling added something to her character that superceded her academic abilities.

LGS you seem to be making very broad generalisations about fee-paying schools

Left school with 1 GCSE taken & passed a year early to pursue a career as a supermodel which in turn has made her a multi-millionaire. Now 30 & semi-retired.....Wish I'd gone to Public School..

These echo my thoughts. I see it as, they are providing a service. The private schools will be better funded and better supplied than a state school. On that alone, if I could afford it I would send my boy to a private school.
You ask why parents would waste their money sending them to a private school if they aren't going to do well, but I think you are missing the point. I don't think a parent would think, my child isn't likely to do well at school so I won't bother giving them the best education I can get them. We want the best for our kids so we do what we can to get them that.
I went to a state school, one that wasn't considered to be very good. I didn't do particulary well but that was down to my failings and my attitude to it and not the teachers or the school.
I don't think you can reasonably condemn an entire system of schooling based on you reading one article on one person. Especially when that person made more money in her first 10 years of working than I'll ever make in my whole life!
 

DJT75

Distinguished Member
Maybe not in the sense of school qualifications, but she's gone onto be a racing driver, golfer, model & tv presenter. So she hasn't done too bad for herself.

I think some people just aren't the achedemic type. I certainly wasn't, but I've still ended up with a half decent job.

She left school before her GCSE's - who's to say she wouldn't have got 10 A's?
 

overkill

Distinguished Member
These echo my thoughts. I see it as, they are providing a service. The private schools will be better funded and better supplied than a state school. On that alone, if I could afford it I would send my boy to a private school.
You ask why parents would waste their money sending them to a private school if they aren't going to do well, but I think you are missing the point. I don't think a parent would think, my child isn't likely to do well at school so I won't bother giving them the best education I can get them. We want the best for our kids so we do what we can to get them that.
I went to a state school, one that wasn't considered to be very good. I didn't do particulary well but that was down to my failings and my attitude to it and not the teachers or the school.
I don't think you can reasonably condemn an entire system of schooling based on you reading one article on one person. Especially when that person made more money in her first 10 years of working than I'll ever make in my whole life!
This misses several points, not least that the OP said 'public school' not private. These are two entirely separate beasts.

Private schools are open to anyone who can afford it, and while yes, they do vet on an academic basis, although as we know (as teachers) that basis is
based on methodology that is deeply flawed, that is, as private institutions, their right.

Public schools however, are a very different kettle of fish. Simply by being able to 'afford it' or being 'academic' will not, by a million miles get you into a public school. The criteria is much more complex, and, whether certain people accept it or not, based on background as opposed to ability.

The other points on 'quality' are equally deceptive. Apparently they are, given the responses here, by and large well funded and well equipped? Well, that's an interesting proposition given that the private schools version of the head teachers association a few years ago were bemoaning their income, and asking for more govt aid to see them through, and I quote, 'lean times'.

Ah, I see you ask, govt aid. Yes, this another misnomer, that the private sector of education is entirely self funded. It isn't. We, as tax payers are asked to assist.

I have nothing against private education. It can be a real help to the numerous pupils who go there who need the lower teacher to pupil ratio to achieve. What I don't like is the never ending BS that due to being somehow, 'innately superior', it is 'better'. It isn't.

It has lower class sizes, picks off the best teachers, weeds out any likely failures, or ploughs time and resources in to them that state schools don't have to ensure they succeed, and if they still don't, they literally will grind you down trying. As such, if they cannot get good results by ruthless selection, and having the best of all Worlds, well................

Which is why the head teacher of one of our local primaries advised against sending our children to private/grammar unless we were really sure it was the right thing for them.

For some it is, for many it isn't.
 

overkill

Distinguished Member

The latest video from AVForums

Fidelity in Motion's David Mackenzie talks about his work on disc encoding & the future of Blu-ray
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom