Left-wing snobbery does state schools no favours. Matthew Norman is disingenous in criticising state schools and sending his children to private school.
.
I have a letter in today’s Daily Telegraph defending my old school from the left-wing snobbery of Matthew Norman, writing in Saturday’s paper.
The letter is as follows:
SIR – Matthew Norman (Comment, May 12) is right to lambast educational elitism in Britain. But his views of Britain’s comprehensives owe more to his own prejudice than any sense of reality.
I went to Pimlico School – which Mr Norman credits only with teacher murders and a one-way path to crack dealing – in the Nineties. It was not the easiest school for a middle-class child with professional parents but, like many other children from a similar background in comprehensives around the country, I thrived in the mixed-ability environment.
The comprehensive experience means that brighter pupils have to learn respect for those of different ability, something sadly lacking from many in the private sector.
The school was academically sound and sent two or three pupils to Oxbridge every year, and many others to good universities. For those less inclined towards the academic route, it had serious musical pedigree with Roots Manuva, Asher D and La Roux all alumni.
The secret was an active parent-teacher association and a governing body that took an interest. My father, despite being a shadow cabinet and cabinet member during that time, chaired the board.
In revealing his own choice to send his son to private school, Mr Norman shows that he is part of the problem. If he really cared about Britain’s education system, he should have sent his son to a local comprehensive and invested his own time and energy into helping it improve.
What really annoyed me was this line from Norman:
“Today, living in a rough west London suburb, we send our son to an excellent private school for no more compelling reason than – though a noble and lucrative profession – crack-dealing seems a career ill-suited to his nature.”
• Academisation, academisation, academisation 5 Apr 2012
• Non-academies do just as well as academies 3 Apr 2012
• Think tank Reform’s school academy claim lacks academic rigour 28 Mar 2012
I have nothing against those who want the best for their children. We should aspire to raise standards in all our schools but that process involves parents getting involved in the governance of their local schools.
Dressing up a decision to send your kids to private school by pretending that the state sector does not offer a choice, especially when claiming to be on the left, is incredibly disingenuous. As it happens there are 23 outstanding secondary state schools in London including at least seven in west London.
49 Responses to “Left-wing snobbery does state schools no favours”
Kataskata53
I think you need reminding that independent schools gain financial advantage and tax evasion through having charitable status
Stephen Wigmore
I think you need reminding that you have no idea what the word tax evasion means. Unless you would like to back up that accusation of criminal behaviour?
Stephen Wigmore
“The comprehensive experience means that brighter pupils have to learn respect for those of different ability, something sadly lacking from many in the private sector.”
Stop being a bitter mouthed bigot. How dare you generalise about hundreds of thousands of people, you hate filled individual. Of course some private school kids are idiots, are you claiming all State school pupils are socially conscious, respectful angels? No, obviously not. So there’s nothing there apart from a cheap shot against people who are different to you. You have nothing to be smug about.
Anonymous
But the argument being put forward is that because the state can’t provide the same education as private, that private should be penalised. Dumbing down.
Now what should happen is that there should be payments if you take your children out of the state system into the private. The level should be set below the cost of a state education which is around the 6K a year mark. So if there is a 2K a year subsidy for someone leaving, that is an extra 4K a year for the state to make things better.
Anonymous
Or you could tax both to raise lots of cash.
After all, the state effectively taxes the state pension by diverting NI to other things.