Danny Williams Loses AGAIN - Worst One Yet

[dookus]

I went to, in order, a very good private school as a kid, a crap private school for my GCSEs, and a state college for my A levels. The whole spectrum! I come from a single parent family; we could afford the first school because my younger brother was/is a genius and my mum agreed to pay for the fees over some ridiculously long period of time. She worked at the second school which meant my brother and I could go for about 2 grand a year with free accommodation and food.

Easily the best education I got was at the good private school, chiefly because their ethos was so ambitious. The classes were small and not separated by ability. They didn't shit themselves worrying about things like whether the kids harboured racist attitudes, whether the classes were sufficiently interactive or whether they were using technology enough. Instead they gave us a lot of hard work, had faith that with enough encouragement and haranguing we'd be able to do it, and gave extra help where it was required. By 7 we were doing twice-yearly exams, writing essays, had started on algebra and science experiments and played plenty of sport. Out of the class of 14, 3 of us went on to Oxford or Cambridge and most kids went on to uni. Pretty much any educational advantage I can claim comes from having been to that school.

The crap private school was rubbish. Its business model seemed to consist of charging foreign students (mostly from Germany or Hong Kong; later mainland China, Nigeria and Russia) and taking in kids who'd been held back a year for various learning disabilities. With the exception of a few teachers, most seemed to be ancient jobbers who'd long since figured out a routine to get through the school year. The exam results were considerably worse than the state college I later went to and comparable to the average comprehensives in the area, only costing way more money. It wasn't a rough school per se, but there were enough fights and injuries over the course of the year to keep my teenage self on my toes. The best thing I can say about it is that I got to play a lot of sport and I met a lot of people from all over the world. Not that I know any of them any more.

The state college was somewhere in the middle. It had a lot of funding (West Cornwall being poorer then, I guess they were trying to get us all out of the county to somewhere with jobs) and a lot of resources (Fast Internet! In 2000!) and my results were a lot better there than they had been at the crap private school. The classes were much bigger and you had to motivate yourself much more but the teaching was far more structured and coherent than the meandering mess I'd experienced before. I know far more people from that college than from my previous schools.

The class thing is a bit overplayed, although you're obviously aware of it as a kid to some degree. The other kids have expensive holidays and play instruments and that, and you just, uh, go to school. I got some amount of shit from the more hoity-toity kids, and it was definitely more trying when I got into my teens and continued to dress from charity shops while everyone else was discovering shit designer clothes and aftershave that smells like window cleaner, but that's hardly class warfare. When I got to the state college I didn't particularly feel like I'd moved to another planet, and I don't recall taking too much shit for being 'posh' for having been in private education till I was 16.

In conclusion: private education works best if it's a) very good and b) you're very young. Otherwise, the difference is not much worth speaking of.

[palooka]

I went to, in order, a very good private school as a kid, a crap private school for my GCSEs, and a state college for my A levels. The whole spectrum! I come from a single parent family; we could afford the first school because my younger brother was/is a genius and my mum agreed to pay for the fees over some ridiculously long period of time. She worked at the second school which meant my brother and I could go for about 2 grand a year with free accommodation and food.

Easily the best education I got was at the good private school, chiefly because their ethos was so ambitious. The classes were small and not separated by ability. They didn't shit themselves worrying about things like whether the kids harboured racist attitudes, whether the classes were sufficiently interactive or whether they were using technology enough. Instead they gave us a lot of hard work, had faith that with enough encouragement and haranguing we'd be able to do it, and gave extra help where it was required. By 7 we were doing twice-yearly exams, writing essays, had started on algebra and science experiments and played plenty of sport. Out of the class of 14, 3 of us went on to Oxford or Cambridge and most kids went on to uni. Pretty much any educational advantage I can claim comes from having been to that school.

The crap private school was rubbish. Its business model seemed to consist of charging foreign students (mostly from Germany or Hong Kong; later mainland China, Nigeria and Russia) and taking in kids who'd been held back a year for various learning disabilities. With the exception of a few teachers, most seemed to be ancient jobbers who'd long since figured out a routine to get through the school year. The exam results were considerably worse than the state college I later went to and comparable to the average comprehensives in the area, only costing way more money. It wasn't a rough school per se, but there were enough fights and injuries over the course of the year to keep my teenage self on my toes. The best thing I can say about it is that I got to play a lot of sport and I met a lot of people from all over the world. Not that I know any of them any more.

The state college was somewhere in the middle. It had a lot of funding (West Cornwall being poorer then, I guess they were trying to get us all out of the county to somewhere with jobs) and a lot of resources (Fast Internet! In 2000!) and my results were a lot better there than they had been at the crap private school. The classes were much bigger and you had to motivate yourself much more but the teaching was far more structured and coherent than the meandering mess I'd experienced before. I know far more people from that college than from my previous schools.

The class thing is a bit overplayed, although you're obviously aware of it as a kid to some degree. The other kids have expensive holidays and play instruments and that, and you just, uh, go to school. I got some amount of shit from the more hoity-toity kids, and it was definitely more trying when I got into my teens and continued to dress from charity shops while everyone else was discovering shit designer clothes and aftershave that smells like window cleaner, but that's hardly class warfare. When I got to the state college I didn't particularly feel like I'd moved to another planet, and I don't recall taking too much shit for being 'posh' for having been in private education till I was 16.

In conclusion: private education works best if it's a) very good and b) you're very young. Otherwise, the difference is not much worth speaking of.

Really interesting stuff, which illustrates the highly variable nature of private education. However, your conclusions do not flow logically from your discussion. It would, for example, be fairly easy for any school to be highly successful - state-run or private - if it received the same level of funding and was allowed to be as selective as the top public schools.

Either way, I went through the stste system (from beginning to end) and I would consider myself as well educated as anyone from the private sector - in fact, far more so than most.[/quote]

Education is more than exam results.

[dookus]

Really interesting stuff, which illustrates the highly variable nature of private education. However, your conclusions do not flow logically from your discussion. It would, for example, be fairly easy for any school to be highly successful - state-run or private - if it received the same level of funding and was allowed to be as selective as the top public schools.

Either way, I went through the stste system (from beginning to end) and I would consider myself as well educated as anyone from the private sector - in fact, far more so than most.

I may have summed that up too fast. The greatness of the first school I went to wasn't completely a product of its funding - it had plenty of money, of course, but the facilities for sports and computing were significantly worse than the state college - or being selective, because it wasn't.

I would put it down more to a) its attitude that we didn't have to be carefully levelled the whole way through or protected from having to learn and do difficult things and b) small class sizes , which is of course *is* something that you need money and good teachers to pull off.

[palooka]

Really interesting stuff, which illustrates the highly variable nature of private education. However, your conclusions do not flow logically from your discussion. It would, for example, be fairly easy for any school to be highly successful - state-run or private - if it received the same level of funding and was allowed to be as selective as the top public schools.

Either way, I went through the stste system (from beginning to end) and I would consider myself as well educated as anyone from the private sector - in fact, far more so than most.

I may have summed that up too fast. The greatness of the first school I went to wasn't completely a product of its funding - it had plenty of money, of course, but the facilities for sports and computing were significantly worse than the state college - or being selective, because it wasn't.

I would put it down more to a) its attitude that we didn't have to be carefully levelled the whole way through or protected from having to learn and do difficult things and b) small class sizes , which is of course *is* something that you need money and good teachers to pull off.

We have to be careful that we're not comparing pears and apples. The Uk and US systems are very different and are not such an hot potatoe.

[dookus]

I don't know about the US system,to be fair, outside of its being more generalised than ours even up to degree level

[palooka]

Fee-paying schools are selective both in the UK and the USA, although the level of selectivity varies. At the bottom end, selectivity is based simply on the ability to pay. At the top end there are various other hurdles to get over too.

St Hughs (Oxford) is in the newspapers today for discriminating against prospective post grad students who haven't the funding to live independantly.

[dookus]

Oh, I see - I meant there were no academic tests to get in, the selectivity was based on ability to pay (or negotiate, like my mum) and the fees went up depending what year you were in. I seem to remember a lot of kids coming for the first few years and leaving at 7, when the fees started to shoot up.

[palooka]

Oh, I see - I meant there were no academic tests to get in, the selectivity was based on ability to pay (or negotiate, like my mum) and the fees went up depending what year you were in. I seem to remember a lot of kids coming for the first few years and leaving at 7, when the fees started to shoot up.

Hope your mum is pleased with the cost of your English Grammar classes

(Bitchy and chippy I know :( )

[dookus]

Oh, I see - I meant there were no academic tests to get in, the selectivity was based on ability to pay (or negotiate, like my mum) and the fees went up depending what year you were in. I seem to remember a lot of kids coming for the first few years and leaving at 7, when the fees started to shoot up.

Hope your mum is pleased with the cost of your English Grammar classes

(Bitchy and chippy I know :( )

What's wrong with that? You can drop the preposition "on" after 'depending' in colloquial English, and 'you' is a sort of general pronoun

[palooka]

Fee-paying schools are selective both in the UK and the USA, although the level of selectivity varies. At the bottom end, selectivity is based simply on the ability to pay. At the top end there are various other hurdles to get over too.

St Hughs (Oxford) is in the newspapers today for discriminating against prospective post grad students who haven't the funding to live independantly.

As I am sure you know, The Oxbridge system is dominated by privilege and closely intertwined with the fee-paying sector. In fact, the English education system is rife with division and snobbery.

Doesn't it start (and is perpetuated) with fee paying prep and secondary schools? How can we complain about the exclusivity of University education if the very best and enjoyable basic education is out of bounds for 90% of the populace?

[palooka]

Oh, I see - I meant there were no academic tests to get in, the selectivity was based on ability to pay (or negotiate, like my mum) and the fees went up depending what year you were in. I seem to remember a lot of kids coming for the first few years and leaving at 7, when the fees started to shoot up.

Hope your mum is pleased with the cost of your English Grammar classes

(Bitchy and chippy I know :( )

What's wrong with that? You can drop the preposition "on" after 'depending' in colloquial English, and 'you' is a sort of general pronoun

I had a basic education and don't pretend to be any great shakes and always imagined that a person would 'say'; 'depending which year you were in'; not; 'depending what year year you were in'. I'm not sure what a preposition is. Just 'sounded' wrong to me.

[dookus]

Yeah, "which" is more natural than "what" in that context, although either is technically correct. "Which" indicates a narrower selection of possibilities, "what" is used for broader ranges.

ie "I don't know what to do" vs "I don't know which to choose"

[dookus]

I don't want to see fee-paying schools abolished, I would like to see state schools get better so that there's less need for them. We live in a competitive world where education is fundamental to the economic success of a country and thereby the material comfort of the people who live in it; China, Japan and South Korea's success in large part comes from the emphasis their cultures place upon education. Getting rid of the best schools on the grounds of fairness just means everybody has a lower standard of education, and in addition the state schools no longer have a higher level of education to work towards. And fornicate me, getting rid of grammar schools was a horrendous idea.

[Superheavy]

For what it's worth, I went to a fairly poor state comp all the way through to sixth form college. I was very rough raw but somehow fluked my way into Oxford. Once I got there I came on absolutely loads and graduated with a first class degree in law in 2003.

My cultural awareness and general knowledge was - and still is - very poor compared to my peers who went to fee paying schools and I would not have had a hope in hell's chance of getting on the University Challenge team. That's where private school makes the difference - all the oppotunities these kids get to learn and experience things, learn languages, travel abroad, etc. It's just worlds apart from the typical state school.

My own kids will be very middle class and I need to decide whether I compound that by sending the poor sods to a poncy school. One thing I definitely plan to do is send them down to the local boxing gym - at least that should "keep them honest".

[dookus]

For what it's worth, I went to a fairly poor state comp all the way through to sixth form college. I was very rough raw but somehow fluked my way into Oxford. Once I got there I came on absolutely loads and graduated with a first class degree in law in 2003.

My cultural awareness and general knowledge was - and still is - very poor compared to my peers who went to fee paying schools and I would not have had a hope in hell's chance of getting on the University Challenge team. That's where private school makes the difference - all the oppotunities these kids get to learn and experience things, learn languages, travel abroad, etc. It's just worlds apart from the typical state school.

My own kids will be very middle class and I need to decide whether I compound that by sending the poor sods to a poncy school. One thing I definitely plan to do is send them down to the local boxing gym - at least that should "keep them honest".

My kids will be far more middle class than I was growing up (if you can say I fit any class at all, really) and they too will be going down the local boxing gym. Hopefully they'll be better at it than I was..

[JLP]

The buggery at public school is what takes some getting used to but once you understand why it's happening - an introduction to social hierarchy and the forging of a common bond that will last a lifetime - it's actually an awfully good caper.

[dookus]

They didn't go in for that at mine, JLP, where did you go?

[JLP]

They didn't go in for that at mine, JLP, where did you go?

Wherever the fag-master told me.

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

For what it's worth, I went to a fairly poor state comp all the way through to sixth form college. I was very rough raw but somehow fluked my way into Oxford. Once I got there I came on absolutely loads and graduated with a first class degree in law in 2003.

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

For what it's worth, I went to a fairly poor state comp all the way through to sixth form college. I was very rough raw but somehow fluked my way into Oxford. Once I got there I came on absolutely loads and graduated with a first class degree in law in 2003.

How do you fluke your way into Oxford? I have also heard people say they 'blagged' a first class
degree - there is nothing wrong in saying you worked hard to get the chance to go to Oxford.
No-one blags their way into Oxford, and no - the kind of people who 'blag' their way into those
kinds of institutions exist in films - like Templeton Peck in the 'A' team with his immense charm and natural wit. It is like someone saying they 'blagged' their way through Sandhurst or blagged their way into a job with Merrill Lynch or wherever. I don't think so...

[Final round]

..

[dookus]

Let me explain. Firstly, they have always 'creamed off' a lot of the wealthy and privileged as well as some of the brighter working-class kids by offering free or subsidised scholarships to the less well off. The net result is that the state sector is disadvantaged and its intake is relatively poorer.

The intake being poorer doesn't mean they can't be taught better.

Secondly, private schools deflect money from mainstream education. If all those fees were used to drive up the overall funding levels of our state schools (which, incidentally, are amongst the lowest in western Europe) then the whole system would be better off.

How do they deflect money from mainstream education? Every parent who sends their kid to an independent school is already paying the taxes that would have been used for the kid's education at a state school on top of the fees for their actual education. Statistically we don't come out that badly - we spend significantly more on schools than Germany or Spain, about the same as France, and well over the EU average - http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... statistics

One of the reasons why England has never really punched its weight educationally is its narrow focus on the elite rather than trying to raise overall standards.

We were still top 5 worldwide on the standardised tests for our overall level of education until the 2000s; we've plummeted a long way since then. We've never been Finland, but then nobody else in Europe is.

Incidentally, I went to a state grammar school and hated it - it was full of ridiculous pretentious nonsense and old-fashioned, stuffy, self-important pompous teachers.

Alright, but would you have enjoyed a comprehensive any more, or achieved a better level of education at one? There are far worse things than pretentiousness in education. I didn't enjoy much of school, but I can certainly appreciate its importance in my life.

[Final round]

And if I got my way, Final Round, all those privileged children would be mixing in with everybody else, improving the social mix and working alongside kids from all sorts of backgrounds. The fees paid by the rich would be ploughed back into the state system, and Mr National Coach would be working in a mainstream school if wanted a job too because his current one wouldn't exist.

'Those privileged children ' If I'd known you'd come back with a shitty chip on your shoulder as big as the rock of gilbraltor reply I wouldn't have fvcking bothered filling you in.

[palooka]

Do you think that you are paying for your kids to be hindered/disadvantaged?

[el_grande_mauro_mina]

If I could pay for my future childrens education then I would. I wouldn't wish my primary and
secondary education on anyone. Not only is the teaching substandard but they instill into you
from a very young age you will amount to nothing. It might be different nowadays but I still
think a private education is the best thing for your kids if you can afford it. As someone said
previous - the school where I went was just a conveyor belt for factories and the armed forces.