Do private schools have a place in society?

steddyeddy

Superbus wrote: »

Too busy at 11 on a Sunday night, despite having already replied a few minutes earlier?

Grand so.

Im working on a project. I have lab practicals next week. I want to write a long reply to do your queries justice.

SChique00

Lads, the fact is that the Irish educational system, public or private is pretty crappy, and the ignorant people who don't understand or have attempted to understand the differences between private and public education (which are, may I say, as undetectable as the differences between private and public healthcare) decided to make it into a topical issue on TV3, to boost ratings from the working classes, slander (mostly middle-class) fee-paying parents and make them all out to be capitalist pigs. Stirring the sh!t, in other words... WHEN THEY COULD'VE BEEN GIVING OUT ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT. They're the real enemy here....

cloud493

I hated private school personally. Would never send my kids there. But its the parents choice and all that.

SChique00

cloud493 wrote: »

I hated private school personally. Would never send my kids there. But its the parents choice and all that.

Precisely - if you can afford it, and you believe it'll give your kids a more secure future, then why not?

anitaca

SChique00 wrote: »

Lads, the fact is that the Irish educational system, public or private is pretty crappy, and the ignorant people who don't understand or have attempted to understand the differences between private and public education (which are, may I say, as undetectable as the differences between private and public healthcare) decided to make it into a topical issue on TV3, to boost ratings from the working classes, slander (mostly middle-class) fee-paying parents and make them all out to be capitalist pigs. Stirring the sh!t, in other words... WHEN THEY COULD'VE BEEN GIVING OUT ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT. They're the real enemy here....

What program and date was this?

Duggys Housemate

SChique00 wrote: »

Lads, the fact is that the Irish educational system, public or private is pretty crappy, and the ignorant people who don't understand or have attempted to understand the differences between private and public education (which are, may I say, as undetectable as the differences between private and public healthcare) decided to make it into a topical issue on TV3, to boost ratings from the working classes, slander (mostly middle-class) fee-paying parents and make them all out to be capitalist pigs. Stirring the sh!t, in other words... WHEN THEY COULD'VE BEEN GIVING OUT ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT. They're the real enemy here....

You needed a few more full stops in there.

SChique00

anitaca wrote: »

What program and date was this?

It was a featured "issue" on Midweek, the TV3 version of Primetime - a few weeks ago, maybe late February/early March?

steddyeddy

Superbus wrote: »

At no point in the thread however, despite having more than 60 posts in it, have you addressed the valid reasons as to why state funding of these schools is actually a good thing, such as mine here or Finlay's just above this. I really want to hear your take on it.

Right sorry about the delay. Before I start I want to reiterate my opinions in regard to private schools as mentioned in an earlier post.

All kids in my opinion have the right to a good education in my opinion and I want as much as possible done to even up the playing field. I dont see how kids should suffer based on their parents lifestyle.

As I stated before I dont think all kids who go to private schools are rich, spoilt or any other derogatory word.
I dont think all private schools are the same. Thats why I mentioned private as oppossed to fee paying.

As regards jealousy Im a postgraduate in biochemistry I have job options to work at most of the top pharmaceutical industries. Im not bragging but I am not nor will not be short of money. I just dont like the idea of my kids benifiting more than other kids because of that.

My problem is the tax payer funding some private schools I dont want to remove all private shcools.

Particularly important there is that I think that some fee paying shcools promote eltitisim more than others. I dont think private schools are inherintly wrong but some promote eltitisim. Before funding a private school certain criteria should be met. Certain schools like gonzaga and others have policies that give priority of admission which extends to grandchildren of people who have attended that college so money isnt the only factor.


I started the thread in response to a study commisioned by the OECD. Link to the article here.

Some of the parts that are important to me are as follows:

STUDENTS IN fee-paying schools are two years ahead of their counterparts in vocational schools in literacy skills, according to a study which underlines the two-tier nature of Irish education.

I understand giving your kids the best start in life but having a two year difference in literacy skills is not acceptable. State funding should be increased for public schools and decreased for fee paying schools.

It also finds that students from fee-paying schools are drawn from the most advantaged strata of Irish society – despite claims these schools have students from all backgrounds.

I know that not everyone who goes to private comes from an elite background but the study finds that students in these schools come from the most advantaged strata of Irish society.

Responding to the report last night Teacher’s Union of Ireland General Secretary John MacGabhann said it was now time for the State to stop providing “a turbo boost to the already privileged.’’

The teachers union have a problem with state funding this also.

The OECD study analyses the 2009 OECD/Pisa rankings on literacy among Irish teenagers.
Ireland was ranked 17th in the OECD on literacy, down from fifth in 2000, the sharpest drop experienced by any developed nation.

We have an terrible literacy ranking now as the fact above shows. We need to put more money into public shcools and less into private. The public is a system which serves the majority of the people in Ireland so thats where we need to focus.

The use of these sibling policies is specifically criticised in the new report. It says they play a key role in helping private schools draw students from the better-off section of society. “On average, schools that exercised this preference had a student enrolment with a socioeconomic score that was . . . higher than schools that did not.”

Some schools such as gonzaga actually has a policy to give place priority to grandchildren and children of former students. This should not be state funded.

Dr Jude Cosgrove, of the Educational Research Centre at St Patrick’s College, Drumcondra, Dublin, which oversees Pisa in Ireland, says the findings show pupils in fee-paying schools do better because their students are the most advantaged. “Clearly, achievement differences between school types in Ireland are related to the socioeconomic background of their students,” she said.

The findings show these students do well because of their social background and not the private school. The theory is if you withold state funding those students will do aswell. The study found that most of those students come from an advantaged background so most should be able to afford the increase in fees.

XxMCRxBabyxX

steddyeddy wrote: »

Particularly important there is that I think that some fee paying shcools promote eltitisim more than others. I dont think private schools are inherintly wrong but some promote eltitisim. Before funding a private school certain criteria should be met. Certain schools like gonzaga and others have policies that give priority of admission which extends to grandchildren of people who have attended that college so money isnt the only factor.

Can you give an example of this promoting elitism (and not re admissions policies which I'm gonna deal with further down)

steddyeddy wrote: »

I understand giving your kids the best start in life but having a two year difference in literacy skills is not acceptable. State funding should be increased for public schools and decreased for fee paying schools.

Surely what you need to do is tackle the issue and not take the money from somewhere else when it is not their fault?

steddyeddy wrote: »

Some schools such as gonzaga actually has a policy to give place priority to grandchildren and children of former students. This should not be state funded.

Are you going to take away state funding to every school in the country that has an admissions policy? You seemed to have ignored me when I made this point before. Nearly every school in the country, public and private, has a similar admissions policy where family members of students/former students get priority. There has even been cases about them (of which the schools won)

steddyeddy wrote: »

The findings show these students do well because of their social background and not the private school. The theory is if you withold state funding those students will do aswell. The study found that most of those students come from an advantaged background so most should be able to afford the increase in fees.

I really don't know how you expect most people to afford fees when it has been pointed out many times that most private school parents nowadays already have to sacrifice to pay for their child's education?

prinz

Why don't you ask Richard Boyd Barrett? :pac: One time student of fee paying, rugby playing Dublin 4 elitist cronyist school...

beans

Of course they do. But so do doggy-groomers and wardrobe-managers, so you just have to assert that society is f*cked and that if you have a child in a school that ANYONE else knows about, then you're not being careful enough. :eek:

golden lane

steddyeddy wrote: »

I dont think they do. Im not talking about the cost to the system, I think they promote elitisim, cronyisim and a false sense of entitlement in this society. It gives an unfair advantage to people who usually already are lucky enough to not be born into poverty. I dont get why one persons education should be more important than anothers.

private schools should exist for the most important reason...........choice...

steddyeddy

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

Can you give an example of this promoting elitism (and not re admissions policies which I'm gonna deal with further down)

The OECD study says the students they have are drawn from the most advantaged areas of society. Recruiting from one socioeconomic group is elitisim.

Surely what you need to do is tackle the issue and not take the money from somewhere else when it is not their fault?

Their doing alright for money. As the report said the students are mostly drawn from the most advantaged in society. Withdrawing funding from some of these schools wont affect them at all. Gonzaga or st.gerards are not struggling for money like a lot of schools are. The students from the advantaged backgrounds will do alright regardless. If I did alright why cant they?

Are you going to take away state funding to every school in the country that has an admissions policy? You seemed to have ignored me when I made this point before. Nearly every school in the country, public and private, has a similar admissions policy where family members of students/former students get priority. There has even been cases about them (of which the schools won)

Most secondary schools have a siblings and sons policy. Very rarely do they have a grandsons policy like gonzaga has. Also the fact that they are different to public schools by a large measure. They provide a better teacher student ratio and charge fees. By using this policy they are ensuring they are getting students from the same socioeconmic background again and again.

I really don't know how you expect most people to afford fees when it has been pointed out many times that most private school parents nowadays already have to sacrifice to pay for their child's education?

My cousin attended private school through massive sacrifices by his parents. Some posters here attended private schools and came from modest backgrounds but thats not the reality and the facts the OECD are stating that most of the students in private schools come from advantaged backgrounds. You keep saying that most are from modest backgrounds but you havent shown me studies that come to the same conclusion.

steddyeddy

golden lane wrote: »

private schools should exist for the most important reason...........choice...

Yes they should exist but I disagree with state funding of these schools.

Milk & Honey

steddyeddy wrote: »

Yes they should exist but I disagree with state funding of these schools.

It would be a good idea to put VAT on the fees as well. At least some contribution to society would be obtained from private education.

XxMCRxBabyxX

steddyeddy wrote: »

The OECD study says the students they have are drawn from the most advantaged areas of society. Recruiting from one socioeconomic group is elitisim.



Their doing alright for money. As the report said the students are mostly drawn from the most advantaged in society. Withdrawing funding from some of these schools wont affect them at all. Gonzaga or st.gerards are not struggling for money like a lot of schools are. The students from the advantaged backgrounds will do alright regardless. If I did alright why cant they?



Most secondary schools have a siblings and sons policy. Very rarely do they have a grandsons policy like gonzaga has. Also the fact that they are different to public schools by a large measure. They provide a better teacher student ratio and charge fees. By using this policy they are ensuring they are getting students from the same socioeconmic background again and again.




My cousin attended private school through massive sacrifices by his parents. Some posters here attended private schools and came from modest backgrounds but thats not the reality and the facts the OECD are stating that most of the students in private schools come from advantaged backgrounds. You keep saying that most are from modest backgrounds but you havent shown me studies that come to the same conclusion.

By any chance have you read the actual studies or just the biased article ?

steddyeddy

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

By any chance have you read the actual studies or just the biased article ?

Sorry how is it a baised article. It states the findings of the study. Can you back up your ascertaion that most members of private schools come from modest backgrounds. During the recession private school enrollment went up.

According to this study by the OECD 95% of students go to public schools. So 5% are from fee paying schools. 5% of people in Ireland are wealthy enough to afford an increase in private school fees.

XxMCRxBabyxX

steddyeddy wrote: »

Sorry how is it a baised article. It states the findings of the study. Can you back up your ascertaion that most members of private schools come from modest backgrounds. During the recession private school enrollment went up.

According to this study by the OECD 95% of students go to public schools. So 5% are from fee paying schools. 5% of people in Ireland are wealthy enough to afford an increase in private school fees.

It has not use one positive statistic from the report about private schooling (which is also a different report from the one that yoou have linked. In particular the report does not mention OECD's findings that the schools themselves are not the issue.

Also you are forgetting one major thing. If we cut state funding to private schools all we do is widen the economic gap between public and private which according to your interpretation will only bring the private schools higher in the rankings and public schools lower.

steddyeddy

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

It has not use one positive statistic from the report about private schooling (which is also a different report from the one that yoou have linked. In particular the report does not mention OECD's findings that the schools themselves are not the issue.

Also you are forgetting one major thing. If we cut state funding to private schools all we do is widen the economic gap between public and private which according to your interpretation will only bring the private schools higher in the rankings and public schools lower.

Actually I think the gap will remain the same. I simply dont believe the large majority of private schoolers are drawn from the average of society. How would It change things and the number of people who attend if we withdraw funds?

steddyeddy

http://www.schooldays.ie/education-news-item/Fee-paying-students-lead-the-way-in-reading-skills-801339089

Another article documenting the same study.

XxMCRxBabyxX

steddyeddy wrote: »

Actually I think the gap will remain the same. I simply dont believe the large majority of private schoolers are drawn from the average of society. How would It change things and the number of people who attend if we withdraw funds?

It will mean that a lot of parents will not be able to afford to send their children to private school widening the socio-economic gap. You may not believe it but it will happen. Only the absolute richest will be able to send their children to these schools then. You need to take into account what "advantaged" actually means in these studies.

This may be of interest to you.

XxMCRxBabyxX

steddyeddy wrote: »

http://www.schooldays.ie/education-news-item/Fee-paying-students-lead-the-way-in-reading-skills-801339089

Another article documenting the same study.

That article pretty much just plagarised the IT article

steddyeddy

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

It will mean that a lot of parents will not be able to afford to send their children to private school widening the socio-economic gap. You may not believe it but it will happen. Only the absolute richest will be able to send their children to these schools then. You need to take into account what "advantaged" actually means in these studies.

This may be of interest to you.

I actually dont believe private schools are better than public schools so thanks for the article. I think that these students do better because they come from an advantaged background and most importantly have an instilled expectation of college. You say people couldnt afford it if they withdrew state funding but people who need a help in education cant afford it now. There is already a huge gap between the education of fee paying a public school.

As others have stated previously that just because some cant afford it that doesnt mean all cant. According to the article I sent you 5% of people go to fee paying shcools. I think more than 5% of people can afford private schools. I think the rich would send their kids there no question.

XxMCRxBabyxX

steddyeddy wrote: »

I actually dont believe private schools are better than public schools so thanks for the article. I think that these students do better because they come from an advantaged background and most importantly have an instilled expectation of college. You say people couldnt afford it if they withdrew state funding but people who need a help in education cant afford it now. There is already a huge gap between the education of fee paying a public school.

As others have stated previously that just because some cant afford it that doesnt mean all cant. According to the article I sent you 5% of people go to fee paying shcools. I think more than 5% of people can afford private schools. I think the rich would send their kids there no question.

All your arguments lately appear to be claiming otherwise.

steddyeddy you have based everything on your opinion but yet won't listen to others who are explaining the reality of it to you.

Ok so 5% of people go to fee paying schools, factor in that some of those students will be from other countries (you get a lot of international students in these schools) and that most "rich" people are those who are older and have built up their wealth and their children will have finished schooling and you have a smaller number to deal with.

I still don't understand why you aren't focusing on educating the more disadvantaged to want to go to college. That would be a much more effective thing to do because pumping money into disadvantaged schools will help nothing when the children still have no interest in getting an education.

You're focusing on the wrong thing. Your problem here isn't really to do with money, it's education.

steddyeddy

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

All your arguments lately appear to be claiming otherwise.

steddyeddy you have based everything on your opinion but yet won't listen to others who are explaining the reality of it to you.

Ok so 5% of people go to fee paying schools, factor in that some of those students will be from other countries (you get a lot of international students in these schools) and that most "rich" people are those who are older and have built up their wealth and their children will have finished schooling and you have a smaller number to deal with.

I still don't understand why you aren't focusing on educating the more disadvantaged to want to go to college. That would be a much more effective thing to do because pumping money into disadvantaged schools will help nothing when the children still have no interest in getting an education.

You're focusing on the wrong thing. Your problem here isn't really to do with money, it's education.

You have offered your opinion I have offered mine. You say that private school recruits from a modest background thats opinion not a fact. Your misrepresenting your opinion as the reality.

As I said theres people who cant afford private school at the moment do you think thats a bad thing? If not then how would it be a bad thing if those from slightly better off circumstances couldnt afford it?

My problem with the current arrangment is:

A: paying tax payers money to schools which are in no need of money (not all of them)
B: I think withdraw these funds the schools will do just aswell.

I dont see a problem with withdrawing the funds.

quietsailor

@steddyeddy,

you ask for facts yet you don't seem to be willing to hear other people's and are content to present your opinion as fact.


I'm quoting from; Danny Pfeffermann, Victoria Landsman, Are private schools better than public schools? Appraisal for Ireland by methods for observational studies, The Annals of Applied Statistics. Volume 5, Number 3 (2011), 1726-1751.

In observational studies the assignment of units to treatments is not under control.
Consequently, the estimation and comparison of treatment effects based on the
empirical distribution of the responses can be biased since the units exposed to the
various treatments could differ in important unknown pretreatment characteristics,
which are related to the response. An important example studied in this article is the question of whether private schools offer better quality of education than public
schools. In order to address this question we use data collected in the year 2000 by OECD for the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Focusing for illustration on scores in mathematics of 15-years old pupils in Ireland, we find that the raw average score of pupils in private schools is higher than of pupils in public schools. However, application of a newly proposed method for observational studies suggests that the less able pupils tend to enroll in public schools, such that their lower scores is not necessarily an indication of bad quality of the public schools. Indeed, when comparing the average score in the two types of schools after adjusting for the enrollment effects, we find quite surprisingly that public schools perform better on average. This outcome is supported by the methods of instrumental variables and latent variables, commonly used by econometricians for analyzing and evaluating social programs.

Two things I want to say to you;
1. The review of student standards (above in bold) actually SAYS that the public schools are better in Maths than private ones. On your estimation should we be taking money from the public school Maths courses as they are doing better and giving it to the private ones - that would be fair according to you - do you want to comment on that?

2. Colleges have created special programmes and there is advanced funding available for people from "disadvantaged backgrounds" to go to college. Yet since free fees were introduced (to get "poor" people to go to college) none of these iniatives have created an increased trend of people from the lower socio-economic areas going to college - THEY DON'T WANT TO GO - so why should I and my nephew, niece, my future children. This leads back to the point that people in private schools do well because their peers want to do well, it has very little to do with funding.

sorry if I rambled a bit, i'm tired and not entirely sure my point will come across clearly

golden lane

steddyeddy wrote: »

You have offered your opinion I have offered mine. You say that private school recruits from a modest background thats opinion not a fact. Your misrepresenting your opinion as the reality.

As I said theres people who cant afford private school at the moment do you think thats a bad thing? If not then how would it be a bad thing if those from slightly better off circumstances couldnt afford it?

My problem with the current arrangment is:

A: paying tax payers money to schools which are in no need of money (not all of them)
B: I think withdraw these funds the schools will do just aswell.

I dont see a problem with withdrawing the funds.

all children should get the same amount of funding from the government.......if their parents pay exrtra,,,,,that is their choice.....no discrimination.......too much of that already..

Milk & Honey

golden lane wrote: »

all children should get the same amount of funding from the government.......if their parents pay exrtra,,,,,that is their choice.....no discrimination.......too much of that already..

I put it this way. The state should make the same amount of funded education available to all children. If some don't want to avail of it and get their own, they are more than welcome to do so and pay for it themselves.

Chucky the tree

Milk & Honey wrote: »

I put it this way. The state should make the same amount of funded education available to all children. If some don't want to avail of it and get their own, they are more than welcome to do so and pay for it themselves.

The problem is the State currenlty can't afford to do that.

LH Pathe

Society has no place in a private school.

Get in. See what I.. D'oh, cleared off the line -_-

Milk & Honey

Chucky the tree wrote: »

The problem is the State currenlty can't afford to do that.

The state can of course afford it. the state already spends the same amount of money on each schoolchild. It will save money by not spending on some of them.

Jo King

I think Childrens Allowance should be stopped in respect of any child in private school. there is no need for the state to subsidise wealthy families. From what I hear from local private schools a lot of the fees are not being paid. Around 20% are not paying up. Why should this nonsense be tolerated?

Chucky the tree

Milk & Honey wrote: »

The state can of course afford it. the state already spends the same amount of money on each schoolchild. It will save money by not spending on some of them.

That's if every parents decides to keep their children in private school when the price goes up. If they don't and want to move them to public school then it will cost the Government a lot of money.

Milk & Honey

Chucky the tree wrote: »

That's if every parents decides to keep their children in private school when the price goes up. If they don't and want to move them to public school then it will cost the Government a lot of money.

That is a myth. 90 % of the cost of education to the state is teacher salaries which the state is already paying for in respect of private schools. If pupils move from private to state schools the teachers will naturally move with them at no extra cost to the state. Outside of Dublin the only significant private schools are a few boarding schools. A few extra pupils returning to their home areas to be educated would not cost the state anything. In Dublin there is plenty of room in the existing state system to take additional numbers.

Jo King

Chucky the tree wrote: »

That's if every parents decides to keep their children in private school when the price goes up. If they don't and want to move them to public school then it will cost the Government a lot of money.

Where did this nonsense start? All the parents who avail of private school are piggybacking on the state funding for schoolchildren. All that is proposed is that the piggybacking stops. How does that cost more money?

mloc

Jo King wrote: »

Where did this nonsense start? All the parents who avail of private school are piggybacking on the state funding for schoolchildren. All that is proposed is that the piggybacking stops. How does that cost more money?

Two things

1) You're failing to see the effect that changing the funding dynamic has on school populations

2) They're not piggybacking. They are contributing as much, if not more, than non-private school parents towards to state education fund.

Chucky the tree

Milk & Honey wrote: »

That is a myth. 90 % of the cost of education to the state is teacher salaries which the state is already paying for in respect of private schools. If pupils move from private to state schools the teachers will naturally move with them at no extra cost to the state. Outside of Dublin the only significant private schools are a few boarding schools. A few extra pupils returning to their home areas to be educated would not cost the state anything. In Dublin there is plenty of room in the existing state system to take additional numbers.

It's not a myth. It costs the Government nearly twice as much to educate a child in a public school than a private one. Either the class sizes will increase significantly or else new schools will need to be built.

Kosseegan

Chucky the tree wrote: »

It's not a myth. It costs the Government nearly twice as much to educate a child in a public school than a private one.

What is your source for that figure?

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Either the class sizes will increase significantly or else new schools will need to be built.

If the teachers salaries for private schools were no longer to be funded by the state, enrolments in private schools would drop considerably. Some of them would close, some would turn into public schools and some would continue with a reduced enrolment. Most would also have to reduce their staff. In most cases their buildings would be far to big for their new reduced needs. They would have to vacate their building. The state would simply buy them for a small price. It would be more than offset by no longer paying teachers salaries.

rab!dmonkey

Kosseegan wrote: »

What is your source for that figure?




If the teachers salaries for private schools were no longer to be funded by the state, enrolments in private schools would drop considerably. Some of them would close, some would turn into public schools and some would continue with a reduced enrolment. Most would also have to reduce their staff. In most cases their buildings would be far to big for their new reduced needs. They would have to vacate their building. The state would simply buy them for a small price. It would be more than offset by no longer paying teachers salaries.

So you're proposing a net reduction in teachers while increasing the number of students in public schools?

Chucky the tree

Kosseegan wrote: »

What is your source for that figure?



If the teachers salaries for private schools were no longer to be funded by the state, enrolments in private schools would drop considerably. Some of them would close, some would turn into public schools and some would continue with a reduced enrolment. Most would also have to reduce their staff. In most cases their buildings would be far to big for their new reduced needs. They would have to vacate their building. The state would simply buy them for a small price. It would be more than offset by no longer paying teachers salaries.

It was on frontline awhile ago. A report by PWC found it costs the state €8k for a pupil in public school and €4k in private school. As you said, enrolments would drop considerable so students would need to move into current ones or new ones acquired. I'm really not sure how small a price they would be bought for, a number of them are in very good locations that would probably be quite attractive investments for people. Then you'd now have the Government who would now be charge of the yearly up-keep of them all. Also the state would still be paying their salaries, teachers wouldn't be let go they would simply be re-deployed. To me this seems like what the breakdown of costs for the state would be

Private:
Salaries of teachers

Public
purchase of school
Salaries of teachers
maintenance
regular bills
equipment
support staff

Milk & Honey

Chucky the tree wrote: »

It was on frontline awhile ago. A report by PWC found it costs the state €8k for a pupil in public school and €4k in private school. As you said, enrolments would drop considerable so students would need to move into current ones or new ones acquired. I'm really not sure how small a price they would be bought for, a number of them are in very good locations that would probably be quite attractive investments for people. Then you'd now have the Government who would now be charge of the yearly up-keep of them all. Also the state would still be paying their salaries, teachers wouldn't be let go they would simply be re-deployed. To me this seems like what the breakdown of costs for the state would be

Private:
Salaries of teachers

Public
purchase of school
Salaries of teachers
maintenance
regular bills
equipment
support staff

there are about 10 times as many in public school as private. the savings on not subsidising the private would create more than enough resources for the public system to handle the increased numbers.

Chucky the tree

Milk & Honey wrote: »

there are about 10 times as many in public school as private. the savings on not subsidising the private would create more than enough resources for the public system to handle the increased numbers.

It doesn't matter how public school there are. No point in having lots of public schools in Kerry with lots of room when the majority of private schools are located in Dublin. The big question is can the Public schools based near the private ones handle a large increase in pupil numbers within a year, very hard to know really. Considering it costs twice as much for a public school kid as a private school one I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion it would be cheaper.

ascanbe

Do private schools have a 'place in society'?
Yes.
Do Ireland's state-subsidised, quasi-private schools have a 'place in society'?
No.

Ninap

There are legitimate arguments around equity, but abolishing private schools (or removing the so- called 'state subsidy') would increase the overall cost to the state of providing education. Essentially the direct contribution by parents would be gone. It would be the same if private health insurance was banned; the state's healthcare bill would rise (which is why the Govt plans instead to introduce compulsory health insurance, with reductions for those on low incomes).

Milk & Honey

Ninap wrote: »

There are legitimate arguments around equity, but abolishing private schools (or removing the so- called 'state subsidy') would increase the overall cost to the state of providing education. Essentially the direct contribution by parents would be gone. It would be the same if private health insurance was banned; the state's healthcare bill would rise (which is why the Govt plans instead to introduce compulsory health insurance, with reductions for those on low incomes).

The direct contribution by parents is only for extras. They would still do it anyway if the children were in public schools.

Chucky the tree

Milk & Honey wrote: »

The direct contribution by parents is only for extras. They would still do it anyway if the children were in public schools.

lol, so they'd donate lots of money to help improve the equipment in school while very few other parents would bother paying? They'd want to be minted for that.

Milk & Honey

Chucky the tree wrote: »

lol, so they'd donate lots of money to help improve the equipment in school while very few other parents would bother paying? They'd want to be minted for that.

They won't be paying any fees so they can well afford it.

Fratton Fred

I am opposed to the principle of privately funded schools because i believe that all children should be provided with the best standard of education possible regardless of their background.

When the day comes that this applies, then i will happily send my children to a normal state school. as it hasn't yet arrived, I will be sending my daughter to a private school.

I don't earn a fortune, but I am comfortable. the school costs will result in a lot of sacrifices for us, but only material ones. giving your kids the best education you can is the best thing you can do for them so rather than drive around in a 4x4 and go to Florida every year and do my Christmas shopping in New York, which a lot of people seem to think is the norm, I will be spending that money on school fees.

Chucky the tree

Milk & Honey wrote: »

They won't be paying any fees so they can well afford it.

Difference is they probably won't want too and they certainly won't be able to afford it either.

steddyeddy

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Difference is they probably won't want too and they certainly won't be able to afford it either.

A lot of people cant currently afford hence my problem with funding the development of a two tier system.