Why do people favour elite schools?

[paulsterio]

try to get a scholarship to a private school.....

all of the top tier schools offer scholarships

hmm, that's a good point actually, but even after scholarships, private schools do get expensive, in terms of just uniform and other costs as well, not to mention transport if you live far away. Transport time and costs was one of the reasons why I decided not to go to MHS.

[pi]

Transport time is over-rated, you can catch up on sleep or socialise or even study on the train network. I took public transport since yr7 and its never been an issue.

[Jdog]

you can get full scholarships to all private schools,

we have second hand uniform shops that are as cheap as public school's uniforms. Travelling to scotch,skevs would take 30 minutes from gwav.

[Stick]

This is more of a rant than a debate, but feel free to comment. I don't intend to insult anyone, but people may find themselves offended. If you do feel hurt or angered by my comments, I apologise. You can probably detect a frustrated tone in my words. I feel like I just need to get this off my chest.

-----

Back when my father was at high school, he just went to the local state school. While he was there, he was exposed to a lot of different students with different ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds, as well as varying (although overall, below average) academic abilities. My dad, although not the smartest of students, was an incredibly hard worker and had a desire for a more prosperous future. He ended up being the school's dux and was one of the few students from that school to ever go to Melbourne University.

He's always told me that it did not matter where I went to school - as long as I wanted to do well, I'd do well wherever I went. My mother, on the other hand, who attended a private school (and was not very academic), was very keen to send me to an 'elite' school. After many months of squabbling about 'my parents' investment in my education' and touring many of the best schools in Melbourne, my parents both felt the local private boy's school was the best choice - a happy medium between my parents' experiences. Most of the boys from my local primary school were going there as well.

I go to a fairly modest school. It is certainly not an elite school, by any standards. Most year levels here start off with about 200 students, with eight classes of approximately 25 students in each. When we get to Years 11 and 12, about a quarter of the students elect to undertake the VCAL program and the rest of us do VCE. We're not well-known for our academic excellence - we only get about 20 students each year who get an ATAR of 90 or above. Our school is further humbled by the presence of many other elite private schools in the area. Many of my peers tend to blame the teachers or the school itself for their poor academic success, despite it usually being their own fault. My friends' parents have also threatened them that if they fail to perform well academically at this school, that they will be moved to a more elite school. Other than the usual 5 or 6 boys who sit the Melbourne High exam and pass, most students who leave our school expect their new school will be the solution to all their academic problems. It's as if the students feel they have to live out the reputation of their school - 'my school's crap, my education will be crap so I might as well do crap while I'm here'.

I've always believed that every teacher is more or less the same wherever you go. I know personally that there are certainly bad teachers out there - trust me, I've had a few over the years myself. But they all have similar qualifications and the school they teach at is not determined by their ability; in most cases the school they work at is close to home or it was the school they attended when they were younger. So why do people believe that certain schools will guarantee academic success, while others will not? A lot of these elite schools seem to gear themselves towards VCE success by 'poaching' talent away from other schools. We credit certain schools for their high quality of education when they merely lure achieving students in the form of scholarships and kick out underachieving students. Each year at my school, we get a major intake of students in Year 11 who were told to leave their school because they were underachieving. We also lose several kids with genuine academic or sporting talent to elite schools - one boy was offered a scholarship which he didn't even apply for (he took it anyway). This swap of students is what gives a school its reputation and parents, wanting the best quality of education for their child, often gravitate to these pseudo-reputations.

It's all very easy to say this now while I'm on my high horse, but I used to feel as if my school was bad as well. I was determined to get out of my 'hell hole' by the end of Year 7. I told my parents in no uncertain terms that I wanted to sit the Melbourne High exam, so they got me heaps of tutors to help me out. As the exam was approaching, however, I began to have second thoughts about how I felt about my school. It had all the services and facilities that any student would ever need - it was only its 'reputation' that was bothering me. I sat the exam anyway and I was still over the moon when I got the email of acceptance, but after a lengthy period of thought, both my parents and I agreed that it would be best for me to stay at my current school. Could it have been one of the stupidest decisions ever? Potentially. But I don't regret it one little bit. Because I want to show my cohort and the future students who walk past the gates of my high school that reputation doesn't matter. If you want to succeed, you will succeed no matter where you go.

Why do schools feel the need to obtain VCE success by taking talent away from other places, rather than honestly educate their students to the supposed high standard of education they boast to offer? And why are parents so eager to follow these trends? If schools did not 'swap' their students around, we would clearly see a far more level playing field.

Try this question now (read above for my stance on scholarships).

[pi]

try to get a scholarship to a private school.....

all of the top tier schools offer scholarships

hmm, that's a good point actually, but even after scholarships, private schools do get expensive, in terms of just uniform and other costs as well, not to mention transport if you live far away. Transport time and costs was one of the reasons why I decided not to go to MHS.

Pretty sure the main reason is because there are no females at MHS...

we have second hand uniform shops that are as cheap as public school's uniforms.

Same here, I'm pretty sure you can get a full uniform set (blazer, socks, plants, a few shirts, etc.) 2nd hand for ~$250. That's a minor issue paul.

[Plan-B]

Public, private, elite and what not.. I think they all have their advantages and disadvantages.
Coming from a state school (which Mao could agree ), the only problem for me academically, was the learning environment. The cohort in general had a weaker passion to learn/achieve, and as such, would often become rather disruptive through classes. Coupled with the lack of resources and the setbacks it had to capable teachers (dealing with class problems,etc), learning became quite difficult. However, with a goal in mind, I was able to work independently with the likes of VCE Notes becoming life savers (with resources, community, etc). From my perspective, the only compromise of my public school was academically, where the school developed their students well, socially speaking.

I believe most schools can support you properly when academics aren't the full concern. Even then, it is possible to do 'well' at any school as long as you have the right mindset, goals and values.
The system can never truly be fair, if you want something to be in your favor, you work for it.

[xZero]

try to get a scholarship to a private school.....

all of the top tier schools offer scholarships

hmm, that's a good point actually, but even after scholarships, private schools do get expensive, in terms of just uniform and other costs as well, not to mention transport if you live far away. Transport time and costs was one of the reasons why I decided not to go to MHS.

Pretty sure the main reason is because there are no females at MHS...

we have second hand uniform shops that are as cheap as public school's uniforms.

Same here, I'm pretty sure you can get a full uniform set (blazer, socks, plants, a few shirts, etc.) 2nd hand for ~$250. That's a minor issue paul.

god damn I only spent $150 on brand new pants, polo-shirts and a jumper which lasted me from year 7 till 12, private school is so damn expensive >.<

Moderator action: removed real name, sorry for the inconvenience

[paulsterio]

Pretty sure the main reason is because there are no females at MHS...

yes, that was also a very major issue!

god damn I only spent $150 on brand new pants, polo-shirts and a jumper which lasted me from year 7 till 12, private school is so damn expensive >.<

same here, except i had a shirt instead of a polo and I had to get new shirts in year 11 cause I grew too much and then the Year 12 jumper, all in all, probably around $250 all brand new

I believe most schools can support you properly when academics aren't the full concern. Even then, it is possible to do 'well' at any school as long as you have the right mindset, goals and values.

agreed

Try this question now (read above for my stance on scholarships).

like I've said before, sometimes parents think that a private school education will be beneficial for their child, hence they move their children around, but they do not realise that they are missing some key ingredients (I've talked about this) - also, I doubt parents who send their kids to private schools think about the general student population, even we didn't think of that back when we were in Year 10 (or the like), it's only really once it's done and dusted that we begin to consider the "playing field"

Moderator action: removed real name, sorry for the inconvenience

[ninwa]

Why do schools feel the need to obtain VCE success by taking talent away from other places, rather than honestly educate their students to the supposed high standard of education they boast to offer? And why are parents so eager to follow these trends? If schools did not 'swap' their students around, we would clearly see a far more level playing field.

Try this question now (read above for my stance on scholarships).

Well firstly not all scholarships are academic - there's music, sport and financial hardship as well.

Secondly, some people are just not academically-minded, and no amount of top-quality teaching will change that.

Thirdly, if you read the posts from private school students above, there are a vast number of advantages to going to a private school beyond academic education. Parents take these scholarships because they want their children to be exposed to that kind of learning environment.

Fourthly, and this is at Paul, again you completely miss the point. No matter how much time my parents spend with me they're not going to be able to conjure up an orchestra to accompany me in concerts at Hamer Hall, or give me the opportunity to play the massive organ there, or make it possible for me to visit China for 5 weeks in year 9. Sure parental attention is important but you're being very single-minded here.

[Russ]

I would go further than that, I think he's being a naive fool

[ulbasour]

Going to a private school over public school has many advantages long after school is finished.
There is an old adage that goes along the lines of Melbourne is run by "jews and old boys." The old collegians associations at private schools like scotch, mgs, skc, cgs etc. are extensive and tit-knit, allowing for graduate students to obtain jobs in the upper echelons of society through such connections - a serious advantage in this competitive world.
Plus, there is a general bias for employers (i.e. offering part time jobs) to 18 and 19 yr olds who have graduated from a top tier private school, as there is the general belief that they have been taught certain societal values that reflect professionalism, moral conduct etc., compared to state school kids who are seen as lacking such skill sets - this is just the generalization that exists, not my opinion, the reality is that it varies from student to student. The main difference is that private school environments are generally more inclined and proactive to foster such cultures, whilst generally, state schools don't.
There is more to life than just academics, which is what is taught at these top schools, this is ultimately a significant separator between public and private schools imo.

[paulsterio]

Well firstly not all scholarships are academic - there's music, sport and financial hardship as well.

Secondly, some people are just not academically-minded, and no amount of top-quality teaching will change that.

Thirdly, if you read the posts from private school students above, there are a vast number of advantages to going to a private school beyond academic education. Parents take these scholarships because they want their children to be exposed to that kind of learning environment.

Firstly, I'd just like to add, from now on, this is for the sake of a debate, because I believe that I have many points for public schools in general and I'm not being ignorant.

Well to your 2nd point, I'm really interested in why some people aren't academically minded, maybe someone who knows about psychology can help out here, but I've always thought that those who value the importance and the quality of education will always strive to achieve good marks. I understand that 99.00+ might require "academic minds" but surely there are subjects out there to suit everyone, art-y, music-y, english-y, humanities-y, maths-y, science-y...etc. I think if someone isn't achieving their fully potential, they either aren't giving it their all or have picked subjects which they're not naturally good at and interested in. If you took me and put me in a Studio Arts subject, I assure you, I will get below 30, but I've gotten 40s in other subjects, because those areas are my strengths, whereas Art isn't.

Your third point, I understand that, but I play sports (swimming), music (contemporary guitar). I've volunteered in the community, taken part in charity programs, been involved in tutoring underprivileged kids as well as having (what I consider) a balanced and healthy social life as well. None of that has anything to do with my school and I've had plenty of opportunities to pursue these interests outside of school.

Fourthly, and this is at Paul, again you completely miss the point. No matter how much time my parents spend with me they're not going to be able to conjure up an orchestra to accompany me in concerts at Hamer Hall, or give me the opportunity to play the massive organ there, or make it possible for me to visit China for 5 weeks in year 9. Sure parental attention is important but you're being very single-minded here.

I can honestly say that without parental influence, assistance and attention, I would not have developed in interest in Maths and Sciences. I would also not have become a balanced person, academically. I have, through them, also developed an interest in the Arts, in History, for example. Without parental attention, I would not have been encouraged to take part in Maths competitions from a young age, which has motivated me to perform better in maths. Without the influence of my family, I would not have gone into high school academically confident across a wide range of subjects. Although I have become independent over the past few years, I can't deny that they have instilled the value of education within me. I don't think any school could have done it better than them. They spent time with me, every night, to teach me not only academics, but how to think and how to learn, how to be critical and how to develop interests. Without them buying biographies of famous scientists and mathematicians, I would have never been inspired so strongly. Had my dad decided to work a few more hours every day to send me to a private school, I would have never had the opportunity to develop in the way that I have, no school can shape a child the way their parents can shape them.


They have also successfully trained me to become a moral person, they have discussed societal values with me as well.

[s...]

sorry this is a bit late, but:
DON"T BAG XAVIER!!!

A few rotten eggs killed the school's reputation, but I know the smart kids there are really really hardworking. The co-curricular activities are great, and the school holds the Maytime fair where it donates a lot of money to Jesuit missions in poor countries. it's a really good school, but it's a shame some rich kids are just too spoilt. 

Anyway, according to my careers councillor, employers look at the school you go to, and really are biased.(I think someone said this somwhere) All my friends found jobs in about 2 weeks, compared to my public-school going friends, who still havn't found jobs yet. 

What a cruel world we live in.

s.

[EvangelionZeta]

Fourthly, and this is at Paul, again you completely miss the point. No matter how much time my parents spend with me they're not going to be able to conjure up an orchestra to accompany me in concerts at Hamer Hall, or give me the opportunity to play the massive organ there, or make it possible for me to visit China for 5 weeks in year 9. Sure parental attention is important but you're being very single-minded here.

I can honestly say that without parental influence, assistance and attention, I would not have developed in interest in Maths and Sciences. I would also not have become a balanced person, academically. I have, through them, also developed an interest in the Arts, in History, for example. Without parental attention, I would not have been encouraged to take part in Maths competitions from a young age, which has motivated me to perform better in maths. Without the influence of my family, I would not have gone into high school academically confident across a wide range of subjects. Although I have become independent over the past few years, I can't deny that they have instilled the value of education within me. I don't think any school could have done it better than them. They spent time with me, every night, to teach me not only academics, but how to think and how to learn, how to be critical and how to develop interests. Without them buying biographies of famous scientists and mathematicians, I would have never been inspired so strongly. Had my dad decided to work a few more hours every day to send me to a private school, I would have never had the opportunity to develop in the way that I have, no school can shape a child the way their parents can shape them.


They have also successfully trained me to become a moral person, they have discussed societal values with me as well.

Nina: -valid point-
Paulsterio: -irrelevant answer which confirms valid point-

Now I remember why I give up on most VN arguments.

[ninwa]

I can honestly say that without parental influence, assistance and attention, I would not have developed in interest in Maths and Sciences. I would also not have become a balanced person, academically. I have, through them, also developed an interest in the Arts, in History, for example. Without parental attention, I would not have been encouraged to take part in Maths competitions from a young age, which has motivated me to perform better in maths. Without the influence of my family, I would not have gone into high school academically confident across a wide range of subjects. Although I have become independent over the past few years, I can't deny that they have instilled the value of education within me. I don't think any school could have done it better than them. They spent time with me, every night, to teach me not only academics, but how to think and how to learn, how to be critical and how to develop interests. Without them buying biographies of famous scientists and mathematicians, I would have never been inspired so strongly. Had my dad decided to work a few more hours every day to send me to a private school, I would have never had the opportunity to develop in the way that I have, no school can shape a child the way their parents can shape them.


They have also successfully trained me to become a moral person, they have discussed societal values with me as well.

My parents did that too, while sending me to a private school. It's called being a good parent. What's your point again?