# fee paying secondary schools



## teachdeas (23 Nov 2004)

There seems to be a swing towards fee paying secondary schools in Dublin.
Are they worth it generally ?  What more do the offer compared with state schools.
Have we all just got too much money ?


----------



## rainyday (23 Nov 2004)

I heard anecdotal evidence that the student teacher ratios was better in some non-fee-paying schools compared to their fee-paying neighbours following a significant swing in demand, i.e. student numbers had dropped in the non-fee-paying schools. 

After speaking to a recent student of fee-paying Castleknock College in Dublin, there seemed to be little real difference in education standards. He had a couple of superb teachers, mostly average teachers and a couple of crap teachers - much like my own experience with the Christian Brothers 25 years ago.


----------



## ClubMan (23 Nov 2004)

If you want your brats to pursue  then you might have to shell out! :\


----------



## TarfHead (23 Nov 2004)

According to the table in last weekend's Sunday Times, going to fee-paying schools correlates to going on to university.
As a 'product' of a fee-paying school, I should say that IMHO some of their employees weer in the wrong profession.


----------



## rainyday (23 Nov 2004)

> I should say that IMHO some of their employees *weer* in the wrong profession.


Presumably the one responsible for teaching English spellings? :rollin


----------



## purple (23 Nov 2004)

Your a great man for picking up on spelling mistakes rainyday (as I have found out to my cost on occasion).
I am also a product of a Christian brothers school ( though not as long ago as you, old man rainy ) and though the teachers were much like the ones above the peer group pressure was not one that leaned toward third level. That, along with innate stupidity, is the reason that I am a lowly tradesman now and have to rely on the educated classes to look after my welfare.

People want what's best for their kids and taking a holistic view it would seem to be the case (unfortunately) that fee paying schools are better than private schools at the moment.


----------



## rainyday (23 Nov 2004)

> taking a holistic view it would seem to be the case (unfortunately) that fee paying schools are better than private schools at the moment.


Please explain more?

I guess most people would include the grind schools & repeat colleges under the category of fee-paying - Aren't these notorious for *NOT* taking a holistic view and focussing solely on Leaving Cert points at the expense of everything else.


----------



## ClubMan (23 Nov 2004)

*That, along with innate stupidity, is the reason that I am a lowly tradesman now and have to rely on the educated classes to look after my welfare.*

And  too!


----------



## N0elC (23 Nov 2004)

Having read the Sunday Times Survey, I took a different interpretation from the figures. It appeared to me that kids from the middle class areas (mainly South Dublin, and posh parts of the other cities) seemed to be more likely to go to University than others. Indeed, I was surprised to see so many State schools in the top tables. I thought they'd all be private.

In Ireland, we need more analysis and discussion of what makes the difference between a good and bad school. The teachers unions will inevitably balk at any talk of parents getting information on how well a school is doing. We need broader metrics than just university access rates. 

Surely schools should publish a range of metrics, such as number of pupils who go to Uni or other third level, number who complete through to Leaving Cert, number who leave with fewer than five passes at Junior cert, etc.
At present, poor performing schools and teachers can hide behind a lack of data. Our pupils and parents deserve better&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp


----------



## rainyday (23 Nov 2004)

Hi Noel - I understand that part of the concern of the educators about publishing such data is that it results in 'ghettoisation' of the weaker schools, as parents divert their offspring into the better performing schools (which may well overload the better performing ones, funnily enough). The question is 'what is going to be done with the data?' - Will it be used to divert resources to the poor performers?

There is also the issue of whether it is fair to measure teachers solely on the performance of their pupils. A teacher whose pupils have PC's in their homes might well get better results, but that doesn't make him a better teacher. A teacher whose pupils parents see the value of 3rd level education might get more of his students into 3rd level, but that doesn't make him a better teacher.


----------



## purple (24 Nov 2004)

> And proper order too!


 Indeed Clubman, if I had enough of a forelock left to tug I would tug it.


----------



## Henny Penny (24 Nov 2004)

I attended a fee paying school.In my day, from a final year class of 50 five went on to attend University. 
My parents chose to send us to the school for reasons other than academia ... the ethos of the school had much to do with it, together with extra-curricular activities, trips etc. I think their point of view leaned more towards a well rounded education than access to University.


----------



## teachdeas (24 Nov 2004)

Anyone know where I could get a copy of the survey from last Sunday's Sunday Times.  Did not hear about it until now.


----------



## Gordanus (24 Nov 2004)

The reasons I'm sending mine to a fee-paying school are:
1 it's co-ed and there are no free co-eds within any kind of reasonable distance
2 I'm not a Catholic, and would actually prefer a multi-D secondary..... but none exist, so the youngster gets to mix with other religions and maybe gain a little knowledge 
3 it's small..... went to two 2ndry schools myself, one with 300 pupils, one with 600+, and know that in the larger one I was anonymous whereas I had been used to every teacher and the head knowing me (not great when I was up to no good!)

The main reason is the lack of choice in 2ndry schools.   I believe the Dept of Ed pays for teachers in CofI fee-paying schools so that the Protestants can have a school with a CofI ethos; in return they take in all other minority religions.  I don't think they are necessarily better, some parents are having a very hard time paying fees but are committed to their childrens education, whether for religious or other reasons.    And some fee-paying pupils don't go to uni because their family has quicker ways of getting them to earn megabucks! (Auctioneers.....Daddy's business... etc)


----------



## teachdeas (24 Nov 2004)

I'm also committed to my child's education but just feel that fee paying puts a lot of pressure on the student (to produce good exam results) and on the parents (to annually afford the fee).  For instance if you've got 3 children to education over 6 years each it adds up and parents may come to expect more from the child because of the monetary outlay.


----------



## rainyday (24 Nov 2004)

You can't measure parents' commitment to their childrens' education by their willingness to pay fees.


----------



## getoffthepot (25 Nov 2004)

> You can't measure parents' commitment to their childrens' education by their willingness to pay fees.



I agree with that. 

My Kids go to a non paying fee school (Knocklyon) purely because

1. it is short walking distance (5 mins) from home. 
2. It is a new school - first stream are doing leaving set this year.
3. there are new teachers who will want ot make effort,  school will want to start with a good record.
4. Green field site, - new Computer labes, science labs, gymn etc.
5. Could not justify sending them on buses or Mummy taxis just to say they were going to a feee paying school.


----------



## Kildrought (26 Nov 2004)

*League tables*

In regard to the so-called 'league' tables; bear in mind when reviewing them  - the tables exclude : students who go abroad to study (UK or US etc.,), Royal College of Surgeons, National College of Art & Design, National College of Ireland, neither does it include students who may take a 'gap' year or defer a place for other reasons.  There may well be other 3rd level institutions excluded also; these are the ones I know of.  

Personally I don't think the tables are worth the paper they are printed on.


----------



## Gordanus (29 Nov 2004)

*Re: League tables*

Personally, I believe that parents are often committed to their childrens' education, but that we all have different priorites - academic, social, sporting, location, mixed or not etc etc.  That's why the league table are rubbish, even after the points made by Kildrought are taken into consideration.   Our children are al different and will flourish in different spheres and atmospheres.  Some will gain from small schools,especially if they are shy, , some by being in school s that are large enough to offer a wide choice of subjects.


----------



## jem (23 Mar 2005)

*Re: fee paying schools*

Well I never thought I would see that day but this week we have booked our two kids into boarding schools , one the pres convent Thurles and the other into Mt.St Josephs Roscrea(ccr).
The reasons are:
1 smaller schools circa 500 in pres(75 boarders) 300 all boarders (ccr). IMHO smaller schools more attention
2. better facilities 
3. more interest in students.
4. less hanging around down town.
5.the local community school is to say the least rough, not teachers fault but with 1200 students a very rough element attends brighter kids get picked on.
6. We want to give them the best chance that we can. It will be dam hard to see them go but we feel it will be for the best long term.


----------



## teachdeas (24 Mar 2005)

*Re: fee paying schools*

Ursuline in Thurles also has a boarding school.  I'm a past pupil of very long ago.  As far as I know it's still considered to be a very good day and boarding school.  Personally I'd have a preference for a good day school.  Don't know anything about the pres or the cis Roscrea.


----------

