Stories + Views
“Hypocrisy” of private tuition?
When middle class parents elect to send their children to the local comp rather than choosing a state school further afield which is higher up the league tables or remortgaging the house to go private there are often accusations from opponents of double standards if such a parent pays for private tuition to augment their child’s school teaching. This usually takes the form of “no different from paying for a private school” or “if the teaching isn’t good enough it’s unfair on classmates who’s parents can’t afford it” as if our principles have been compromised.
I think such criticms are completely spurious and ill founded. How can there be any moral equivalence to supporting your local school and promoting community values with opting out and going to private school? What is wrong for wanting your child to secure a better exam grade?
Nobody supports their local school which doesn’t happen to have the best exam results in the neighbourhood when other choices are available, on the basis that we are happy to sacrifice our kids education on some politically correct principle. We weigh up the decisions accordingly and decide that there are more pros than cons in having the child educated locally. I do think however think that there can sometimes be an altruistic motive in supporting the local school.
For the record I never paid one penny for private tuition for my kids education or sought outside help of any kind. Fortunately my Economics degree (where I somehow managed to crack integral/differential calculus) enabled me to help my daughters with Maths (my son was pretty good anyway) and when my eldest daughter was booted out of German for misbehaviour and relegated to set 2 where they didn’t even take GCSE, I enquired about transferring to French classes. This was not possible due to timetable clashes so in year 10 I started teaching her from scratch and when she was able to join French classes in year 11 at school, she passed the GCSE with flying colours. My wife also helped the kids with revision in science.
Finally, I don’t think the Blairs were in any way culpable in getting private tuition for at least one of their children. My only observation is that bearing in mind the London Oratory where their sons were educated has the same sort of intake as many selective independent schools with exam results to match, I might conclude that private tuition is as much the preserve of children in posher schools than their more humble counterparts.
Key LSN themes mentioned
Comprehensives & Grammars, Learning, My Local School, Parents, Private Schools, Stories + ViewsRelated posts
Comments, replies and queries
Reply
Hear hear. Our children didn’t have any private tuition either and did very well in their local schools. You are right that having a supportive home background with educated parents counts for a lot. Some research suggests that maternal education qualifications are the most important factor in a child’s success at school and that out of school circumstances, such as poor housing and neighbourhoods, account for about 80% of outcomes, which is why aspirant supportive educated parents should have little to fear from good local state schools, and also why we should be doing more to make society more equal rather than expecting schools to do it all.
I agree, the whole private tuition argument is just one more way to attack, in particular, middle class families that choose to support their local school rather than flee it, and to make those who have rejected local schools feel better about themselves. And from what I hear, more than a few private school parents pay for private tuition on top of school fees…no-one criticises them, of course, because THEIR actions show a care and concern for high standards.
What Melissa says about private school parents paying for tuition is very true. I know several parents who have gone the private route and done this. Indeed I once read an interview in the FTwith a private tutor who solely worked with private sector students.
One thing I have noticed is that when a student does poorly in a state school, the school tends to get the blame. But when a student does poorly in a private school it is assumed it is the fault of the student and not the school.
I agree with you Nigel entirely when you say that we should not ‘sacrifice our kids education on some politically correct principle.’ In one fell swoop you validate the whole pro-choice debate – whether a parent chooses an academy, a free school, the private sector, a faith based ethos or of course the local state comp (which also come in many different flavours). That said you do rather appear to have undermined the whole premise of this site. And so all the more surprising that Melissa, Fiona and Henry agree with you.
I dont see how that follows Jake.
The people behind this site have said they want to see a good local school available for everyone. The process of getting there requires various things including, it is acknowledged explicitly, commitment and input from parents.
I see nothing here about denying parents choices (if it is within their powers to make a choice, not all parents are equally empowered. Some have more “cultural capital” than others, some have more capital than others…surely we all know this). What I do see is a strong line in advancing arguments as to what choices they believe parents should make.
And a related objection to public money being used differentially to support certain kinds of choices.
Lots of room for argument here, but no objection to the “principle” of freedom of choice, but plenty of problems described with the practice of choice. Relatively few parents actually have any.