The advantage is that it would remove a large inequality from the education system. When those in power have to educate their children in the same places as the rest of us, then the standard of education will rise for all of us. The money that rich people plough into unfairly benefiting their own offspring, is taken out of the wage packets of the poor. That's one of the reasons they require their large pay rises to the detriment of lower paid workers.
Would it, Martin? We already see that the comprehensive system doesn't do this with the pupils it already has, so why would it do so for those who currently attend private schools. Remember that the mix of
abilities in the private and public systems are largely comparable - the difference is between the options for the less able, because there is far more opportunity for sporting success in the private sector.
And both have achieved more than someone who gets three 'A's from a top private school. Universities should do more to assess the circumstances of an applicant's education and skew entrance requirements accordingly.
Wrong; the 3 individuals need to be measured on the amount of improvement they have made in their 13 years of education. Often, the greatest improvers never even make it to A-levels because it requires a considerable level of initial ability to even get to the level at 15/16 in be a viable A-level student.
and there is (so far as I know) only one state school with a boarding house... - at least we were told when our kids were there that it was the only one!
My first teaching post was at a state boarding school! I believe that there are several of these, even now. In fact, there is a State Boarding School Association.
http://www.sbsa.org.uk/
Home
Search
Calendar
Login
Register