Private School Funding

Zab

Milk & Honey wrote: »

far from it. I know a man who had two daughters in a private school. He had a tax free rental income of €200,000 per year.

And how was that?

Stark

Milk & Honey wrote: »

None. If the state schools aren't good enough for them they can pay for their own schools themselves. Schools are not about a refund of tax. Should taxpayers in wealthier areas have better roads since they pay more tax?

Should you have no roads if you pay towards the upkeep of the footpaths?

Should there be more Gardai allocated to areas where the per capita tax payment is highest?

Should Garda protection be removed if you invest in home security?

In many cases there are people whose children are in private schools who pay little or no tax. They take advantage of every tax dodge going with shares in nursing homes, holiday homes and BES schemes.

Most of the parents are middle class PAYE earners.

Zab

Milk & Honey

Zab wrote: »

And how was that?

He bought Section 23 apartments which gave him a tax write off. The rent paid for the loans on the apartments and he paid no tax on his other rents.

frozenfrozen

you could spend 60 quid a week if you were a regular smoker.. X 52 = 3120.. which is the price of sending a child to private school..

Ban money given to people as welfare payments being spent on cigarettes and drink and then all schools would be so good people wouldn't dream of going to a private school

Zab

Milk & Honey wrote: »

He bought Section 23 apartments which gave him a tax write off. The rent paid for the loans on the apartments and he paid no tax on his other rents.

Fair enough, section 23 is a heavy incentive, although I don't see how he can sustainably write off 200k per annum if he has other properties (i.e. he'd have to be continuously buying section 23 properties).

In any case, the vast majority of private school parents pay tax, mostly via PAYE, and I'm sure you're well aware of this so I don't know why we're discussing it. It is totally incorrect to say that "many" pay little or no tax.

Madam_X

If I had kids and was loaded, I wouldn't send them to a private school. There are perfectly good state schools - where there won't be elitism and snobbery and a lack of awareness of the wider world due to being in a bubble.
Much of the reason private school kids do well is because they also get grinds and attend those tuition centres, plus it is a rite of passage to go to university anyway among them. Same curriculum though with teachers who have the same training.
People can hold the above views without being jealous - if that's the defence people are going to keep throwing, well they're not very equipped to argue. Family members of mine went to private school and wouldn't repeat the same with their children.

steddyeddy

I’m going to have to echo Madam x's wonderful post and add my own points as well.

The taxes people at certain levels of society vary between socio economic group and that is perfectly true. I will be soon paying larger amounts of taxes than some sections of society as I will be in a middle class profession. I was born into a working class family though and if you looked at the figures they didn’t pay as much taxes as the amount I will be paying. Now despite the fact that I was quite an intelligent child the quality of the school I went to would be determined by how much money my parents (I should say parent as only my mother was the carer) made.
So in essence people are arguing that my mother who was in the unfortunate circumstance of having to raise me alone her son couldn’t avail of the same school of a child who was born into luckier circumstances. That’s what people’s arguments seem to be coming down to. They talk about the parents paying more taxes so they have the right to send a kid to a better school than a kid with poorer parents. They don’t seem to understand the most important person here is the kid.

A kid is either benefiting or not based on something totally out of his control i.e. his parent’s income.
No kid apart from those on a scholarship earned their way into private school. I don’t buy the “parents pay tax” bs either because the school a kid goes to a large degree determines the sort of life he has and the career he lands in. If it only benefitted the parents then fair enough but to base what sort of start a child has in life on his parent income is wrong.

Now this isn’t jealousy or bitterness because on my own intelligence and academic ability I have earned a scientific research post like I always wanted to do. Private school helped some kids who were no more intelligent than anyone else gain a place in college at the expense of someone else who could have been a lot more intelligent. When they get to college they are in the same boat as everyone else and they don’t shine brighter than anyone else. Leave private schools the way they are but colleges should be more wary of the entry one uses to get into college over someone else. Pay your way into college and you won’t appreciate it as much as some others.

steddyeddy

Zab wrote: »

Fair enough, section 23 is a heavy incentive, although I don't see how he can sustainably write off 200k per annum if he has other properties (i.e. he'd have to be continuously buying section 23 properties).

In any case, the vast majority of private school parents pay tax, mostly via PAYE, and I'm sure you're well aware of this so I don't know why we're discussing it. It is totally incorrect to say that "many" pay little or no tax.[/QUOTE]

Whats the kid do to warrent a place in a private school.

TwoTokeTommy

TwoTokeTommy wrote: »

You are correct there would be an increase cost to the state if private students turn public.. HOWEVER, you seem to be forgetting the savings to the State by ceasing payments to ALL teachers in private schools.

So, if some pupils move to public, so what? The State was already paying for all their teachers under the old system. Unless all private students turned public (which would never happen, a lot of millionaires still in Ireland) savings exist.

A fee charging school gets fewer teachers paid by the State than a free school. Also it doesn't get a capitation grant, and I'm pretty sure it doesn't get any money for capital works.

So if a fee charging school moves into the free sector, the State has to increase the number of teachers in the school and pay out capitation grants. So straight away there's an increase in costs for the taxpayer, and the State will also end up funding a building project in the school at some point.

What we don't know is the percentage of schools that would change. If all of the fee charging schools tough it out and keep charging, the State saves money. If enough schools change their status, the State loses money. Good gamble if it works - bit lousy if it fails, though.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

Private school helped some kids who were no more intelligent than anyone else gain a place in college at the expense of someone else who could have been a lot more intelligent. When they get to college they are in the same boat as everyone else and they don’t shine brighter than anyone else. Leave private schools the way they are but colleges should be more wary of the entry one uses to get into college over someone else. Pay your way into college and you won’t appreciate it as much as some others.

What does this mean?

steddyeddy

Ulysses1874 wrote: »

steddyeddy wrote: »

Private school helped some kids who were no more intelligent than anyone else gain a place in college at the expense of someone else who could have been a lot more intelligent. When they get to college they are in the same boat as everyone else and they don’t shine brighter than anyone else. Leave private schools the way they are but colleges should be more wary of the entry one uses to get into college over someone else. Pay your way into college and you won’t appreciate it as much as some others.

What does this mean?

I mean a lot of private school goers in my experience lack the academic ability to do well in college yet because of their assets they buy their way into college. Anything else you dont understand let me know and we can go through it together.

sombaht

steddyeddy wrote: »

they buy their way into college.

So if a student attending a non fee paying school pays for grinds in the final few week/months in the run up to the Leaving Cert or attends Christmas/Easter revision course in the many tuition centres around the country, are they also buying their way into college?

Cheers,
sombaht

CruelCoin

steddyeddy wrote: »

I mean a lot of private school goers in my experience lack the academic ability to do well in college yet because of their assets they buy their way into college. Anything else you dont understand let me know and we can go through it together.

Got proof for that?

Not heard/seen any "brown envelopes for college places" news pieces on this.

CruelCoin

steddyeddy wrote: »

Now this isn’t jealousy or bitterness because on my own intelligence and academic ability I have earned a scientific research post like I always wanted to do. Private school helped some kids who were no more intelligent than anyone else gain a place in college at the expense of someone else who could have been a lot more intelligent. When they get to college they are in the same boat as everyone else and they don’t shine brighter than anyone else. Leave private schools the way they are but colleges should be more wary of the entry one uses to get into college over someone else. Pay your way into college and you won’t appreciate it as much as some others.

You would suggest a "you're rich, you need 500 points to get in, you're poor, you need 400 points"?
How would you suggest colleges guard against people "buying" their way in?

Also, if the private school child did better with private schooling than without, why the fuss? Were i that parent i would be delighted by this! My child did better, great!

jackal

steddyeddy wrote: »

I mean a lot of private school goers in my experience lack the academic ability to do well in college yet because of their assets they buy their way into college. Anything else you dont understand let me know and we can go through it together.

How exactly do you buy your way into college? Is there shop where they sell CAO points that I don't know about? They all have to sit the same exams to get the points to get into a course. Can you give a concrete example because your posts sound like reverse snobbery.

steddyeddy wrote: »

So in essence people are arguing that my mother who was in the unfortunate circumstance of having to raise me alone her son couldn’t avail of the same school of a child who was born into luckier circumstances.

Yes, there were probably a lot of things that you or your mother could not avail of because of her circumstances. You were most likely deprived of sailing lessons, horse riding and Christmas in the Bahamas also. What's your point?

steddyeddy wrote: »

That’s what people’s arguments seem to be coming down to. They talk about the parents paying more taxes so they have the right to send a kid to a better school than a kid with poorer parents.

No, people are saying that they have the right to PAY THE MONEY THEY HAVE EARNED to send their kid to the school of their choice.

steddyeddy wrote: »

I don’t buy the “parents pay tax” bs either because the school a kid goes to a large degree determines the sort of life he has and the career he lands in.

Is this something you have any proof of or is it just a "feeling". I would say a childs socio economic background has a hell of a lot more influence than what school he goes to.

steddyeddy wrote: »

Private school helped some kids who were no more intelligent than anyone else gain a place in college at the expense of someone else who could have been a lot more intelligent. When they get to college they are in the same boat as everyone else and they don’t shine brighter than anyone else.

Again, can you explain how these children cheated the Leaving Cert to get places "at the expense of someone else who could have been a lot more intelligent", whatever that means.

steddyeddy

Guys I will answer the sensible questions. I am quite busy at the moment so I want to give a decent answer.

Zab

You guys are changing the subject from "should they get funding?" to "do you like them?" or "would you send your children there?".

Regarding what the kid did to deserve the place, nothing obviously. You're arguing that it's unfair that some are born well off and same aren't, and of course you're totally correct but it's beyond the scope of this conversation. We live a a capitalist society with socialist leanings, and given that you aren't currently looking for a revolution we should be looking for answers within that society.

Snobbery and elitism exists in private schools, that much is obvious. Of course, that doesn't mean your child will succumb to it if you send them there, any more than they'd become a junkie if you send them to a public school. They're all kids, of course, and kids have a tendency to be dicks.

Also, eddy, I think you've misrepresented things. The kids benefit from the state depending on which school they go to, not what their parent's wealth is. If they get sent to private school they benefit less from the state, not more as you imply.

I also agree that somebody getting 400 points in a private school isn't necessarily as good as somebody getting 380 in a much worse off school, but I see this as a failure in the admissions policies of the universities and of the leaving certificate itself. It isn't the schools fault, from their point of view they've achieved well. Trying to somehow blame the school for being too good academically is clearly ridiculous.

Jo King

private schools should be abolished. They are all about greed. Pure naked unadulterated greed. The bankers who ruined this country went to private schools. People in private schools are not satisfied with living in reasonable comfort. They have to live in a mansion and drive massive vehicles and holiday in glamour spots several times a year. They can only do this by getting into sheltered professions and businesses and screwing poor people. That is what they are taught to do in private schools. That is what the parents want when enrol their children in those schools.
Why should the state tolerate these parasites?

steddyeddy

sombaht wrote: »

So if a student attending a non fee paying school pays for grinds in the final few week/months in the run up to the Leaving Cert or attends Christmas/Easter revision course in the many tuition centres around the country, are they also buying their way into college?

Cheers,
sombaht

Theres a large order of magnitude between paying for your son/daughter to have a smaller pupil to teacher ratio and paying for a few grinds towards the end of the year.

Your welcome
Eddy

steddyeddy

CruelCoin wrote: »

Got proof for that?

Not heard/seen any "brown envelopes for college places" news pieces on this.

Im sure you havent neither have I. Using money to provide extra services doesnt always require brown envelopes.

blacklilly

Jo King wrote: »

private schools should be abolished. They are all about greed. Pure naked unadulterated greed. The bankers who ruined this country went to private schools. People in private schools are not satisfied with living in reasonable comfort. They have to live in a mansion and drive massive vehicles and holiday in glamour spots several times a year. They can only do this by getting into sheltered professions and businesses and screwing poor people. That is what they are taught to do in private schools. That is what the parents want when enrol their children in those schools.
Why should the state tolerate these parasites?

How many people do you personally know that went to private schools cause I'll let you into a bit of information.
I know hundreds, I was sent to a private school as was my brother, we come from a working class background. Our parents have never been the flashy types and we are both very grounded people.
We do not aspire to live in the lap of luxury and we work incredibly hard for what we have. Just because we were sent to private schools does not automatically mean we were handed everything. The people with whom I was schooled with come from varying backgrounds, yes some are very wealthy and some are flashy, however I guarantee you they are just as many wealthy children educated in public schools.
I take great offence with the opinion that all privately educated people are from money hungry backgrounds and are selfish, elitist knobs. Take your generalisations and re evaluate your opinions.

steddyeddy

CruelCoin wrote: »

You would suggest a "you're rich, you need 500 points to get in, you're poor, you need 400 points"?
How would you suggest colleges guard against people "buying" their way in?

Thanks for asking. The solution is on the way. Dr Patrick Geoghegan from Trinity College Dublin is bringing in a new pilot programme come 2014 which wont only look at cao points. The first degree programme this will apply to is law. More information below:

The university is to trial a programme within its Law course, beginning in 2014, which would see a proportion of places reserved for applicants who are considered in alternative ways to the straightforward points race. Trinity’s dean of undergraduate studies, Dr Patrick Geoghegan, RTE that the trial would see students appraised based on “contextual data

And the most progressive part:

Having a student from a disadvantaged school get 450 points in the Leaving, Geoghegan suggested, may be “more of an achievement than a student who gets 550 points from an elite fee-paying school”.

Also, if the private school child did better with private schooling than without, why the fuss? Were i that parent i would be delighted by this! My child did better, great!

You see college places are limited so we as a society have to be sure the most intelligent people are getting places. Not those who were confered certain advantages over others which allowed them greater access to teachers, material ect.

sombaht

steddyeddy wrote: »

Theres a large order of magnitude between paying for your son/daughter to have a smaller pupil to teacher ratio and paying for a few grinds towards the end of the year.

So what's the cut-off point? €500, €1000, €2000? Or is it ok to pay any amount of cash as long as all grinds are received in the final year say? Add in 2/3 grind classes throughout the year and a few Christmas/Easter/ mid-term revision courses and you're not far off a years fees for a fee-paying school already.

Cheers,
sombaht

steddyeddy

jackal wrote: »

How exactly do you buy your way into college? Is there shop where they sell CAO points that I don't know about? They all have to sit the same exams to get the points to get into a course. Can you give a concrete example because your posts sound like reverse snobbery.

Yes indeed. Several papers have been put forward detailing the correlation between environment and academic and ability to learn. A more stimulating environment, more attention given to the subject (pupil) and ethos of class environment have positively correlated with better academic performance. Of the studies there have been many conclusions based on class environment e.g. Sandra Scarr-Salapatek et alls paper found that the contribution of genetic variance in IQ test results tended to be larger in a more stimulating environment and proportionately smaller in a disadvantaged environment.

Pupils in schools with student pupil ratios that allow the student greater time with an educator (be that teacher or grind giver) are subject to greater Brain plasticity ( the brain's ability to change structure and function) than those in a less advantaged environment. Going to a school where the teachers encourage you to do well is at odds where the teachers don’t give a monkeys about your career. I don’t think wealth of your parents should dictate that ability to fulfil genetic potential for intelligence.

Yes, there were probably a lot of things that you or your mother could not avail of because of her circumstances. You were most likely deprived of sailing lessons, horse riding and Christmas in the Bahamas also. What's your point?

Its time to flag a cab and head to real street. Horse riding lessons, christmas in the bahamas do not equal a fair chance to get your kids into college on my planet.

No, people are saying that they have the right to PAY THE MONEY THEY HAVE EARNED to send their kid to the school of their choice.

Which is being used to give their child an advantage over an already disadvantaged children in some cases.

Is this something you have any proof of or is it just a "feeling". I would say a childs socio economic background has a hell of a lot more influence than what school he goes to.

If that were true then the people from lower socio economic backgrounds who are given scholarships to private schools wouldnt do aswell as those from more advantaged socio economic backgrounds.

Also the people from working class backgrounds who enter college wouldnt do as well by that measure and thats not the case. Mature students, most of whom have attended public school do better than average in college. As a group they are over represented in terms of those who do well.

Again, can you explain how these children cheated the Leaving Cert to get places "at the expense of someone else who could have been a lot more intelligent", whatever that means.

Well I wont try and explain something I dont hold as an opinion I.E "children are cheating people out of places".

A lot more intelligent means having a higher level of abstract thought, understanding and problem solving amongst many things.

My contention is that a more stimulating enviroment in the form of private schools (I use stimulating to include attention given by educator ect) have been responsible for sending more children to college than a lot of other colleges. Parents who could afford to pay more can get their children into this college and thus the children are more likely to go to college based on that economic choice.

The point about taking places refers to the limited amount of college places available. Traditionally private school children were more likely to progress to college based on that economic advantage. Thus one less place is available. As previously mentioned academic ability is greatly increased in response to enviroment.

Socio economics of ones parents determining likelyhood of entering college in part negate the intelligence requirment of college. Hence in my experience it is easier to get into college with a lower academic potential if you come from a private school with all the advantages that confers.

steddyeddy

sombaht wrote: »

So what's the cut-off point? €500, €1000, €2000? Or is it ok to pay any amount of cash as long as all grinds are received in the final year say? Add in 2/3 grind classes throughout the year and a few Christmas/Easter/ mid-term revision courses and you're not far off a years fees for a fee-paying school already.

Cheers,
sombaht

Before we go on do you understand the correlation between extra help (grinds, student to teacher ratio and encouragment) and academic performance or is it the case that you think a monetary figure corresponds to academic performance?

Monetary amounts do not as far as we know have a correlation with genetic variabilty and brain plasticity.

sombaht

steddyeddy wrote: »

Before we go on do you understand the correlation between extra help (grinds, student to teacher ratio and encouragment) and academic performance or is it the case that you think a monetary figure corresponds to academic performance?

Monetary amounts do not as far as we know have a correlation with genetic variabilty and brain plasticity.

Your original argument was kids in fee-paying schools seem to "buy their way into college". Your words not mine.Paying for grinds, revision courses is no different in my eyes. It may cost less, it can cost more, depending on the number of grinds. I dont think I ever stated a monetary figure corresponds to academic performance?
I think what you missed in my post is if paying for grinds, extra tuition is not buying your way into college why is paying for a fee-paying school?

Cheers,
sombaht

Stark

steddyeddy wrote: »

Before we go on do you understand the correlation between extra help (grinds, student to teacher ratio and encouragment) and academic performance or is it the case that you think a monetary figure corresponds to academic performance?

You're the one who thinks that something as wishy washy as being enrolled in a school where your parents pay the fees vs one where the State pays the fees (despite the standard of teaching in both cases being similar due to the State employing the teachers) amounts to "buying one's way into college".

tinkerbell

It saves the state money by having private schools. The government gives a small amount of funding to the private schools. In return, all the students who go to a private school are essentially saving the state money as otherwise they would need to find places for them in public schools and it will end up costing the state more.

Everybody has a right to a free education. There should be some bit of subsidy towards those who opt to go private as it saves the state money anyway. It's a no brainer.

Sulla Felix

I've no problem with this provided anyone sending their child to a private school gets a tax credit to the full value of their contribution through income tax to the public school system.
Can't have it both ways.

steddyeddy

sombaht wrote: »

Your original argument was kids in fee-paying schools seem to "buy their way into college". Your words not mine.Paying for grinds, revision courses is no different in my eyes. It may cost less, it can cost more, depending on the number of grinds. I dont think I ever stated a monetary figure corresponds to academic performance?
I think what you missed in my post is if paying for grinds, extra tuition is not buying your way into college why is paying for a fee-paying school?

Cheers,
sombaht

Ah right well I was referring to the economically advantaged who pay for elite fee paying schools which have a higher proportion of their students going to college. In fairness most people agree that they paying for grind schools to increase their son/daughters chances of college entry.

Im coming from the position of an academic who encounters the wrong people entering college on a yearly basis and the right ones entering college as mature students a few years later.

steddyeddy

Stark wrote: »

You're the one who thinks that something as wishy washy as being enrolled in a school where your parents pay the fees vs one where the State pays the fees (despite the standard of teaching in both cases being similar due to the State employing the teachers) amounts to "buying one's way into college".

Student-teacher ratio and school ethos is not wishy washy in terms of academic achievement. If you prefer I can call it using money to increase your childs probability to enter college. Either way its reducing equality of entry to college which should be based on inherint abilities.

steddyeddy

On the taxpayer funding issue believe it or not I dont particularly mind. The thing that is being implented is a consideration over the context of academic Performance especially in a situation where disadvantaged students are becoming more and more disadvantaged.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

I mean a lot of private school goers in my experience lack the academic ability to do well in college yet because of their assets they buy their way into college. Anything else you dont understand let me know and we can go through it together.

See highlighted text. Buy their way into which college?

Thanks for the offer to go through it together. I've a big backpack, so I'll carry the apostrophes.

steddyeddy

Deleted User wrote: »

See highlighted text. Buy their way into which college?

Thanks for the offer to go through it together. I've a big backpack, so I'll carry the apostrophes.

See above posts where question was answered about three times.

Apologies if my answer was curt (which it was). Im very tired long day . What I wrote above still stands though.

byhookorbycrook

Boombastic wrote: »

Some DEIS schools in my area have a pupil teacher ratio of 5:1

Source????????????

K-9

tinkerbell wrote: »

It saves the state money by having private schools. The government gives a small amount of funding to the private schools. In return, all the students who go to a private school are essentially saving the state money as otherwise they would need to find places for them in public schools and it will end up costing the state more.

Tbh I don't know where this notion comes about, it just seems to be accepted it will cost more and that's that.

The state pays near €4,000 to private schools for teachers, the private scholls then on average charge double for fees to cover running expenses etc. etc. So €4,000 for capitation and other expenses.

The state pays €345 per pupil, Asti.ie, with some other grants on top. It seems a state education costs less to provide.

sombaht

steddyeddy wrote: »

I'm coming from the position of an academic who encounters the wrong people entering college on a yearly basis and the right ones entering college as mature students a few years later.

I'm not quite sure what you qualify as a right/wrong person for college. If a student sits the same exam as all others and achieves the points for his course, then he is entitled (regardless of where he was schooled ) to take up that place. He may not be suitable for the course and this may only become apparent after the first few months or year into the course, but that has no bearing on where he went to school.
Indeed the drop out from my class in first year (many many moons ago) was roughly 40%, as far as I'm aware I dont believe any of those students came from a fee-paying school.

Cheers,
sombaht

blacklilly

A child who wants to do well in school will achieve this regardless of whether they are privately educated or publicly educated. Many of my class mates did well below average in their exams and yet many people I know who were in public schools did exceptionally well.
It is not just the school that has an influence into a person's academic results, much of it is down to their up bringing and social influences.
Elitism is apparent in all schools it is not confined to private schools.
Also through the Celtic tiger years many parents who found themselves once struggling suddenly found themselves in a position where they could afford to send their children to private schools, the demography of pupils in private education therefore became more broad and children from many types of social backgrounds were sent to these schools.
I honestly think elitism is from a by gone era and should stay there. My friends nor I think ourselves any better than people who were sent to public schools.

Sulla Felix

K-9 wrote: »

Tbh I don't know where this notion comes about, it just seems to be accepted it will cost more and that's that.

The state pays near €4,000 to private schools for teachers, the private scholls then on average charge double for fees to cover running expenses etc. etc. So €4,000 for capitation and other expenses.

The state pays €345 per pupil, Asti.ie, with some other grants on top. It seems a state education costs less to provide.

No. The state will still pay the 345 but now they have an extra student in the public system. So there's an incremental increase in the amount of capitation/capital payments they're going to have to make. Add enough private students into the public system and you reach a threshold beyond which it actually costs the state money to educate those children in the public sector. More than what it was costing them to educate them in the private sector.
The whole crux of the issue is where that threshold lies and if it will be reached. Many of the private schools aren't doing so hot financially so we might see some of them close or be absorbed into the public system. It'll take a couple decades to know for sure tbh.

steddyeddy

sombaht wrote: »

I'm not quite sure what you qualify as a right/wrong person for college. If a student sits the same exam as all others and achieves the points for his course, then he is entitled (regardless of where he was schooled ) to take up that place. He may not be suitable for the course and this may only become apparent after the first few months or year into the course, but that has no bearing on where he went to school.
Indeed the drop out from my class in first year (many many moons ago) was roughly 40%, as far as I'm aware I dont believe any of those students came from a fee-paying school.

Cheers,
sombaht

Well my course (biochemistry and molecular biology) the drop out rate consists of a large amount of private school goers (Im talking about the top 5 private schools. I think that schools can increase probability to enter colleges for sure. A lot of people in college (public and private) think it a right of passage for them to enter college and most only get a 2.1 or even lower as their final degree.

steddyeddy

blacklilly wrote: »

A child who wants to do well in school will achieve this regardless of whether they are privately educated or publicly educated. Many of my class mates did well below average in their exams and yet many people I know who were in public schools did exceptionally well.
It is not just the school that has an influence into a person's academic results, much of it is down to their up bringing and social influences.
Elitism is apparent in all schools it is not confined to private schools.
Also through the Celtic tiger years many parents who found themselves once struggling suddenly found themselves in a position where they could afford to send their children to private schools, the demography of pupils in private education therefore became more broad and children from many types of social backgrounds were sent to these schools.
I honestly think elitism is from a by gone era and should stay there. My friends nor I think ourselves any better than people who were sent to public schools.

I am aware of that I dont think that private school people are all elite Most of my friends from private school (st.gerards) are the friendliest people going. Nor do I think being in a private school could make anyone better than anyone else. A degree is earned a place in school is not unless its a scholarship.

byhookorbycrook

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Source????????????

Because this is what the DES site says:
"There are designated staffing schedules for DEIS Band 1 schools giving a PTR of 20:1 in junior schools, 22:1 in vertical schools (schools with junior and senior classes) and 24:1 in senior schools. Circular 0007/2012 Appendix A"
Might be nice if people actually checked facts before posting horse manure.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

See above posts where question was answered about three times.

Apologies if my answer was curt (which it was). Im very tired long day . What I wrote above still stands though.

It wasn't really answered, all the same. If you're argument is that people are buying their kids college places, you haven't supported it. If your argument is that the Leaving Certificate needs to be changed so that it can't be "gamed" to the extent it currently is, I can relate to that.

There are some interesting arguments around learning capacity and the plastic nature of the brain - but the reality is that those factors are much more relevant at primary school ages. Let's face it, in the overwhelming majority of instances you can tell what kind of "learning/academic/intelligence" path someone is on by the time he or she is 12, and in many cases even before then.

And finally, letting TCD select people on a basis other than strict CAO points performance will NOT make the system fairer for people from disadvantaged backgrounds - and anyone who thinks it will is only codding themselves.

steddyeddy

Deleted User wrote: »

It wasn't really answered, all the same. If you're argument is that people are buying their kids college places, you haven't supported it. If your argument is that the Leaving Certificate needs to be changed so that it can't be "gamed" to the extent it currently is, I can relate to that.

There are some interesting arguments around learning capacity and the plastic nature of the brain - but the reality is that those factors are much more relevant at primary school ages. Let's face it, in the overwhelming majority of instances you can tell what kind of "learning/academic/intelligence" path someone is on by the time he or she is 12, and in many cases even before then.

And finally, letting TCD select people on a basis other than strict CAO points performance will NOT make the system fairer for people from disadvantaged backgrounds - and anyone who thinks it will is only codding themselves.

Well the system benifits those who have an economic advantage at the moment so anything to reduce that benifit will be good enough imo.

Ps Ulysses new studies show that brain plasticity can continue even into old age with the right sort of lifestyle. The brain can literally learn new pathyways in response to something as simple as a change in attitude towards certain things. Cool isnt it?

K-9

Sulla Felix wrote: »

No. The state will still pay the 345 but now they have an extra student in the public system. So there's an incremental increase in the amount of capitation/capital payments they're going to have to make. Add enough private students into the public system and you reach a threshold beyond which it actually costs the state money to educate those children in the public sector. More than what it was costing them to educate them in the private sector.
The whole crux of the issue is where that threshold lies and if it will be reached. Many of the private schools aren't doing so hot financially so we might see some of them close or be absorbed into the public system. It'll take a couple decades to know for sure tbh.

But is it enough to cost more than the €3,500 per pupil saved? I appreciate it is a bit of an unknown which is why I wonder about statements that it will cost us more, with no figures whatsoever.

I don't really care either way, just the way it gets reported it will cost us more with little back up. Seems to come from well obviously private is better and cheaper, so there and no real discussion if that is true.

B.A._Baracus

Aren't private schools just businesses?

So why should they get funding?

K-9

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Aren't private schools just businesses?

So why should they get funding?

Usually they would but in Ireland the 2 main churches are heavily involved. The Vocational Schools would be the largest state run sector.

Sulla Felix

K-9 wrote: »

But is it enough to cost more than the €3,500 per pupil saved? I appreciate it is a bit of an unknown which is why I wonder about statements that it will cost us more, with no figures whatsoever.

I don't really care either way, just the way it gets reported it will cost us more with little back up. Seems to come from well obviously private is better and cheaper, so there and no real discussion if that is true.

How are they saving €3500 when the child moves to public school?

K-9

Sulla Felix wrote: »

How are they saving €3500 when the child moves to public school?

Near €4,000 paid to private schools vs. €345 capitation in public schools. Obviously it isn't as simple as that as acknowledged in my post, neither is just flatly saying this will cost us money. There's a saving of €3.500 per pupil to be made, the more drop down, the less the saving will be but this notion that it will cost us money is very glib.