TGR
Well-Known Member
johnnytapia said:Relatively recently I was asked to contribute to a short item NewsRound were doing. They came to my school and interviewed the children. It centred around “aspiration” and the news that Cameron and Gove had said not enough children have high aspirations and that the state sector didn’t imbue enough of the “we can get to Oxbridge” mentality as seen in the upper echelons. I was subsequently interviewed and asked for my opinion. To paraphrase what I said then:
The absolute vast majority of teachers in state schools want the very best for the children they teach. We teach them that, with the right application, hard work and ambition, they can be successful. We strive to get the very best out of them. But, and this is the crucial part - when these children finish High School and begin to apply to colleges and then to Universities, they suddenly come up against the brick wall known as the harsh world of reality. It’s a reality where money buys you success. One begets the other. Breaking that cycle can be done - but it’s an absolutely mind-bogglingly low % of working class children that get into these places. And it’s nothing to do with state aspiration or lack thereof.
Children at private schools don’t receive better teaching. Utter nonsense. What they do have are classrooms of enthused, attentive, well-fed, well looked after fellow pupils. Almost none of them will have special needs -educational or otherwise. Almost all will come from a household with two, employed parents. These same parents in most cases will know the system - they’ll know where to get tutors, they’ll know where and how to get in touch with the people at the universities.
It’s abhorrent that we have so few state pupils going on to Russell Group Universities - but the blame lies squarely, not at the feet of the state sector - we teach EVERYONE, regardless of ability, language, social status (this is something the private sector never does, never would and never could ) but at the feet of governments of all hues. Virtually all new MPs tread the same weary, well known politcial path - PPE at Oxbridge, intern for a while and hey presto, you have your seat. Gone are the days of miners, doctors, lawyers, businessmen coming into the system. And so, the political world sees that change would damage the status quo - trkeys and Christmas and all that.
Don’t fall for the myth that were it not for a bit more of “stiff upper lip” in state schooled children, things would change. State school kids, especially those from the poorest backgrounds, cope with things well-heeeled kids would flinch within seconds at. Seconds.
It all comes down to one thing - money. It buys you success. There are examples of people bucking that trend, but, by and large, money talks, bullshit walks.
A good post JT - not entirely accurate but not far off to be fair.
There are plenty of one parent families at independent schools - trust me on that one.
Hardly any (if any) special need kids on that one you are 100% correct.
The Russell Group of universities is far from elite. I really do mean far from elite (the Ivy League is Oxford, Cambridge, UCL, Durham etc) I know kids who have recently got in Russell Group uni's to study law with A-level results of B,B & C - hardly the brightest and the best by any stretch of the imagination.
Money does not buy you success - far from it. I admit what it does buy is opportunity. However the work and the graft still has to be put in by the students to get the A* results and grasp that opportunity. Most independent schools do not use Excel as an exam board they use others that mark more stringently so it is not a direct or fair comparison when measuring results head to head.
You bang on on with how respective governments have used education as a political football at the direct expense of the education of the children and that is criminal without a doubt.