Private schools are unfair? Discussion of a TABOO topic [SPLIT]

[sahil26]

Taboo topic :

The advantages of being in a private school and whether it is unfair on government schools as they usually have a lower education level.

[pi]

What do you mean by unfair? AN has literally had dozens of these threads, so I'd like a bit more info on your point. Also, Govt schools being ALL Govt schools?


(note: the fact AN has had so many threads on it doesn't really make it taboo ><')

[paulsterio]

It's not necessarily unfair, we've had this discussion before, as much as I am a fan of public schools in general - especially those in poorer areas where a good amount of money can make a really big difference, you're paying a premium to go to a private school and hence, in many ways, you're paying for an advantage - but people do that all the time, paying for books, paying for tutors...etc.

[Felicity Wishes]

Taboo topic :

The advantages of being in a private school and whether it is unfair on government schools as they usually have a lower education level.

I don't really see it as unfair. You pay for what you get. It would be unfair if you had payed a lot to go to a school and got poor education as a result. Besides, although most people these days get an education not everyone enjoys it or needs the same level so having a a cheaper option that is less quality is sometimes better for certain people.

[paulsterio]

It can't be denied, however, that education is becoming increasingly competitive. For example, would it be fair for someone, who has a lot of money, to go to a private school and get a good education whilst someone who values education just as much cannot get that opportunity because they do not have the money.

In many ways, you could compare it to salary capping in sports to ensure poorer clubs aren't disadvantaged...etc.

[sahil26]

Seriously though, don't you guys reckon education should be something that can't be bought?
At the moment it is...

[Truck]

People are paying for an advantage - that's why it's unfair.

We live in a society where, in theory, we strive to provide equality of opportunity for all kids. It doesn't mean everyone needs to be wealthy/super rich/successful, but it means that everybody should have the same opportunity to make themselves great. Today's private schools completely undermine that philosophy, so until government schools are good enough to the point where people only go to private schools for reasons that are related to social factors (i.e. religion), and not to get an advantage in sports/academics, I'd say it's very unfair.

[pi]

Split topic

[charmanderp]

As someone who's lucky enough to go to a very good public school I can appreciate the disadvantage afforded to those who can't go to such proficient government schools, even if I can't empathise with them. However, it's also a case of what you make of it; the majority of my peers have been fairly inactive during the high school lives and not made the most of the opportunities available. Just like I know several private school kids who just fade into the background and several kids in rural areas and not-so-great public schools whom excel in everything.

[abcdqdxD]

People are paying for an advantage - that's why it's unfair.

We live in a society where, in theory, we strive to provide equality of opportunity for all kids. It doesn't mean everyone needs to be wealthy/super rich/successful, but it means that everybody should have the same opportunity to make themselves great. Today's private schools completely undermine that philosophy, so until government schools are good enough to the point where people only go to private schools for reasons that are related to social factors (i.e. religion), and not to get an advantage in sports/academics, I'd say it's very unfair.

Agree. It's unfair because being in a wealthy family means you're more likely to have a better education and hence become successful later on in life, compared to the kids of low income families.

Parents who pay big money to Private schools might argue, "you pay for what you get, etc.." which in itself is a flawed argument.

For the families who can't afford to pay $20k a year to send their kids to a top tier private school, does it mean their kids don't deserve an education of equal standard?

The reality is that most low income families work just as hard for their kids as their wealthier counterparts, it's unfair that their kids aren't entitled to the same opportunities in life as the wealthier kids.

So the fundamental problem here is that VCE is not a level playing field.

It is worrying that wealthy families can essentially "buy" their kids a good ATAR, but what can be done about it?

[MonsieurHulot]

It is worrying that wealthier families can essentially "buy" their kids a good ATAR, but what can be done about it?

Divert all government funding from private schools to public schools.

[pi]

Well, just because you aren't well off doesn't mean you can't have a good education. There are plenty of opportunities out there to join Accelerated Programs, apply for scholarships, join selective schools etc.

[abcdqdxD]

Well, just because you aren't well off doesn't mean you can't have a good education. There are plenty of opportunities out there to join Accelerated Programs, apply for scholarships, join selective schools etc.

Yes, but that's only for the extremely bright kids. Even then many parents send their kids to tutoring companies promising that their kids will get in the scholarship of their choice. But once again, it's about money.

We also shouldn't forget about the average student. Not everyone is scholarship/accelerated program material. But does this mean that they don't deserve a good education because of their financial background?

[Russ]

Divert all government funding from private schools to public schools.

Last time you said this I commented on the impracticality of it and you never replied. Would you like to address that now?

We live in a society where, in theory, we strive to provide equality of opportunity for all kids. It doesn't mean everyone needs to be wealthy/super rich/successful, but it means that everybody should have the same opportunity to make themselves great. Today's private schools completely undermine that philosophy, so until government schools are good enough to the point where people only go to private schools for reasons that are related to social factors (i.e. religion), and not to get an advantage in sports/academics, I'd say it's very unfair.

I think that if all public schooling provides education to an acceptable level, then there's nothing inherently wrong with private schools offering educational perks associated with money. There's a curve of diminishing returns after a certain point and if you can receive a completely reasonable standard of education at a public school, then we don't need to worry overly much about the fine differences that private schools have. I see the major problem as being that some public schools are too far behind in areas they shouldn't be behind in, rather than there being small disadvantages based on private schools having smartboards etc.

[monkeywantsabanana]

Seriously though, don't you guys reckon education should be something that can't be bought?
At the moment it is...

No, because there'll simply be lack of incentive for the schools to perform and provide.