 |
|
 |
|
On Thu, 21 May 2009 14:23:43 -0700 (PDT), bert <...@btinternet.com
On 21 May, 22:03, James Harris <...@googlemail.com
Because originally (say up to about 1850) it was a
form of education open to the public - as distinct
from the employment of a private tutor, which was
the only alternative, available only to the rich.
--
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 21 May 2009 23:28:14 +0200, James Hogg <...@gOUTmail.com
James Harris <...@googlemail.comWhose moving finger wrote, and cheerfully
Clicked "Send" to wing the words below to me,
Is powerless to cancel half a line:
'Tis stored on Google sempiternally.
It might seem like a mystery if you understand the word public in
the sense "paid for out of public funds" or "provided on behalf
of the community by the government or State", which would apply
to "public schools" in the USA. But the term is older than that,
and these British schools predate by centuries the time when the
provision of free education was the responsibility of the state.
The first public schools were public in the sense that they were
open to public applicants, as opposed to education from a private
tutor or at schools in private households, which were more usual
back in 1364, when the term "public school" is first recorded.
The OED definitions starts "Originally, in Britain and Ireland:
any of a class of grammar schools founded or endowed for public
use and subject to public management or control (freq. contrasted
with private school)". These old public schools developed into
what the OED defines as "a fee-paying secondary school which
developed from former endowed grammar schools, or was modelled on
similar lines, and which takes pupils from beyond the local
constituency and usually offers boarding facilities."
--
James
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Wrote:
James Harris <...@googlemail.com
Back in the middle ages, the public schools were private schools open to
the fee-paying public ...
BTW, a "pub" is short for "public house" - in other countries "public
houses" would be houses with "public madams" ...
--
Per Erik Rønne
http://www.RQNNE.dk
Errare humanum est, sed in errore perseverare turpe est
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 21 May 2009 21:34:08 GMT, the Omrud <...@gEXPUNGEmail.com
The Compact Oxford is incomplete in its answer. Not all private,
fee-paying schools are "Public Schools". IIRC, only those which are
members of some Headmasters' club qualify. And to have this meaning, it
must be rendered "Public School". We don't really know what "public
school" means. The UK term for the US "public school" is "state school"
or "local authority school".
Public Schoools are "public" because they were open to all (subject
perhaps, to the ability to pay) at a time when many schools were only
open to a subset of the community, e.g. schools run by monestaries or
which were for the children and grandchildren of a specific aristocrat.
Don't forget that we tend to regard history in centuries. My dad went
to a Public School which can trace its origin back to the 9th Century.
--
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 21 May 2009 23:13:47 +0100, Paul Wolff <...@two.wolff.co.uk
the Omrud <...@gEXPUNGEmail.comI'm sure I don't need to remind regular auers of the words of the Bishop
of Oxford in 1937, but for the casual visitor it might be helpful to
recall that he wrote this, after noting that the "public schools", which
the Clarendon Commission of 1861 counted as being nine in number, served
the richest class in the community, with a curriculum that was in the
main framed on the assumption that most of the pupils were preparing to
enter one or other of the ancient universities:
"With such schools offering them an open door, the aristocratic and
landed classes might well be content, even though the education and
general care of the pupils displayed many features deplored by the most
enlightened of contemporary judges. It is said that Dr Busby, the great
head master of Westminster, was the first to popularize the public
school, as against the domestic tutor, with the titled families of the
country. It is true that the eighteenth century witnessed a certain
reversion to the older system. But by the beginning of the Victorian era
it was obvious that the great public schools had come to stay, for those
who could afford their fees and the heavy additional charges for
travelling, extra tuition, and so forth."
At the bottom end of the scale were the "voluntary" schools (the
Bishop's quotes) derived from Sunday schools and the schools organised
by the National Society of the Church of England and by the British and
Foreign School Society. He states that the teaching was often of a very
low level, and that the average life of a pupil was not more than two or
three years, from eight or nine to eleven. As late as 1836 there were
only 150 infant schools in the country.
From the middle of the nineteenth century a large number of new schools
were established for the education of the sons of the middle classes,
based on the "public school" model, and they came to be called public
schools alongside the great originals.
The school that educated me, and made me the man I am today, was founded
in just such a way in 1858, for the sons of the lowest middle classes,
typically poor curates and trade'smen: hence my mastery of the
greengrocer's apostrophe and the scholar's hip. The fees were GBP 15 per
term, IIRC.
--
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 21 May 2009 22:44:17 +0100, HVS <...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk
On 21 May 2009, the Omrud wrote
There's one which claims it's of Saxon or Danish origins?
I'm guessing it's not in England, or not continous, or a disputed
title: isn't it Winchester -- early 14th century -- that usually
claims the title as OPSIE?
--
Cheers, Harvey
CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 21 May 2009 23:07:47 +0100, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <...@peterduncanson.net
On Thu, 21 May 2009 22:44:17 +0100, HVS <...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.ukwrote:
Browsing the Winchester College website I found a list of "Notions"
(words specific to the College):
http://www.winchestercollege.org/Home.aspx?m=0&cat=47
Following the list is:
Not all words and phrases have remained within the bounds of the
School however, and an interesting example is the word goive.
"goive" has a link to:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=goive
A word to express general disinterest in one's situation or
surroundings. Originally from Winchester College, goive has now
spread to some major universities round the country. The word can be
added to with both suffixes and prefixes: Mmyagoive and Goivestani
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 21 May 2009 23:22:59 +0100, Paul Wolff <...@two.wolff.co.uk
HVS <...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.ukPutting on my Brian of Britain hat, I'll go for King's School
Canterbury, 6th century.
[Gotta check before posting -- and this to provoke Harvey:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_King%27s_School,_Canterbury--
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 21 May 2009 21:56:23 GMT, the Omrud <...@gEXPUNGEmail.com
Sorry, I mistook my centuries - it's the 10th, not the 9th. According
to its web site, it dates back to 914. Warwick School - WikiP says it
probably started in Warwick Castle a century before Edward the Confessor.
I would have gone there myself, having gained a free place from the
county based on 11-plus results. I believe I came top of the boys in
Warwickshire. But a fortunate (for me) parental forced job change
caused a family move to the next county (all of 30 miles) and I had to
go to the local grammar. I am eternally thankful.
--
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 21 May 2009 23:15:12 +0100, HVS <...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk
On 21 May 2009, the Omrud wrote
Fair 'nuff; clearly very old -- but I'm afraid the historical
researcher in me doubts the claims of continuity, especially given
how they word the claim on the website.
The website notes 914 as the ASC reference to the *town* of
Warwick, and that "this has long been taken as the date of the
foundation of Warwick School". They don't appear to say precisely
who has long taken it as such, though, or how widely the claim is
accepted -- and I certainly wouldn't put any faith at all in what
someone has managed to put in Wikipee about the probabilities of
its origins.
(Then again, it's my job to be sceptical about these things...)
--
Cheers, Harvey
CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 21 May 2009 23:08:09 +0100, LFS <...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk
A similar experience to mine: coming top in Middlesex, I won a free
place at the august seminary that Katy E attended but my father's job
meant we left London after my first year there. The free place was not
transferable and my parents agonised about taking me away and thought
about leaving me to live with my aunt but the very sensible headmistress
told them that this was a bad idea. I was thrust into the rough and
tumble of the girls' grammar and I had to toughen up pretty quickly - I
can't imagine the nice girls at NLCS roughing anyone up behind the bike
sheds - but I'm sure it did me the world of good.
--
Laura
(emulate St. George for email)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Wrote:
In article <...@mid.individual.netLFS <...@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk
Goodness. You clearly didn't stay very long!
Katy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 08:31:24 GMT, the Omrud <...@gEXPUNGEmail.com
Hmmm. Have we discovered another AUE unifier? Ability, at the age of
11, to do random IQ tests?
--
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 22:18:11 +0100, Robin Bignall <...@ntlworld.com
On Fri, 22 May 2009 08:31:24 GMT, the Omrud
<...@gEXPUNGEmail.com
No.
--
Robin
(BrE)
Herts, England
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 21:58:14 GMT, the Omrud <...@gEXPUNGEmail.com
Right, sorry.
--
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 22:40:00 +0100, Robin Bignall <...@ntlworld.com
On Fri, 22 May 2009 21:58:14 GMT, the Omrud
<...@gEXPUNGEmail.com
S'OK, I caught up a bit later.
--
Robin
(BrE)
Herts, England
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 21 May 2009 20:40:35 -0400, "Don Phillipson" <...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca
"the Omrud" <...@text.news.virginmedia.com...
As noted, at the time of the Clarendon Commission (1860s) there
were only nine such schools in England, boarding schools open
to anyone (who could pay the fees: there were then no free
schools in England except for church-run choir schools etc.)
Many more were founded in the late 19th century to meet the
demand (for public school education for the sons of the
rising middle classes.)
The "Headmasters' Conference" had by the early 20th
century about 25 members. I think this is (or was) a self-
electing body, i.e. offered membership only to those
schools approved by a majority of current members.
Late 20th century reforms (notably partial state funding,
on condition that these boys schools admit girls, also
the abolition of traditional academic "grammar schools")
has made the situation much more complex, but I think
there are still (just as in 1930) four tiers of such schools.
1. Elite schools, Eton, Winchester, Harrow, and few
or no others.
2. Headmasters' Conference, 25+ schools, e.g. Uppingham,
Marlborough, Stowe, Haileybury, Fettes, Rugby.
3. "Minor public schools," at least 50 in number, aspiring
(perhaps) to join the Headmasters' Conference but not
yet recognized as members, e.g. Cranbrook, Epsom, Bedales,
and some that began as grammar schools, sometimes
centuries before. Many of these were not wholly
residential, i.e. had day-boy students who lived near enough.
4. A very few experimental private schools, e.g. Gordonstoun,
Dartington. Their boys came from the public school stratum
of society (top 15 per cent) but each had unique teaching methods.
Sports fixtures were the most obvious badge of school status.
Schools in groups 1 and 2 tended to play (cricket, football, etc.)
only against each other, never with schools outside their
social circle. The summer cricket match between Eton and
Harrow is (was) a major event in London high society.
I do not know about schools today, but public schools
generally taught excellently from the 1840s (inspired by
reforms at Rugby) to the 1860s, because of small classes,
personal supervision, etc. This meant that university preparation
could almost be taken for granted, because bright boys got the
personal coaching that would win them scholarships. But up to
the 1950s only a minority (at my public school) planned to go
to university -- not needed in those days to become (for example)
a doctor or a solicitor (lawyer). A notable feature of my school
was the "army class," a couple of dozen semi-illiterate 17-year-olds
being crammed to pass the examinations to get into the Sandhurst
Royal Military Academy.
Each year had about 100 boys classified by academic ability into
about five streams. It was also taken for granted that all scholarship
boys would be in the top class which specialized in Latin and Greek
(in 1955 exactly as in 1855); second-class brains were allowed to
specialize in History and English or French and German; only the
duller remainder were (in 1955) permitted to specialize in science.
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 11:04:29 +0100, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <...@peterduncanson.net
On Thu, 21 May 2009 20:40:35 -0400, "Don Phillipson"
<...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca
Where 25+ now means 250+. According to the HMC website:
http://www.hmc.org.uk/
There are 67 international (overseas) members.
The HMC treats the Republic of Ireland as part of its home territory.
There is a single HMC school in the RoI: Clongowes Wood College SJ, a
Jesuit institution:
http://www.clongowes.com/
That's a surprise to me.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 00:49:37 +0100, Don Aitken <...@freeuk.com
On Thu, 21 May 2009 20:40:35 -0400, "Don Phillipson"
<...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca
The term "public school" is not restricted to the Clarendon schools,
or to the members of the HMC, and never has been.
The thing which distinguishes a public school is that it offers free
places which may be applied for by all comers. In recent times, I
think, these places are always awarded on the basis of academic
competition, but other methods are possible. If a school has no such
places it is not a public school. However, if it *does* have such
places, it is one, even if, as is always the case, those who win them
find themselves joined by a much larger number of pupils recruited
purely on the basis of ability and willingness to pay large fees.
--
Don Aitken
Mail to the From: address is not read.
To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 11:56:01 +1200, Apteryx <...@xtra.co.nz
Wouldn't comprehensive schools satisfy that definition (at least since
the 1980s when I understand parents have been able to choose which
comprehensive school to send their children to)?
Personally I think that is the more interesting question, ie not so much
why the well known public schools are called that, but why state run
comprehensive schools are not.
Apteryx
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 21 May 2009 18:32:22 -0400, "Raymond O'Hara" <...@hotmail.com
"James Harris" <...@l32g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
The English colonists in America very quickly established what we call
public schools.
The town of Dedham Ma. established the first tax funded school in 1643,
It seems it took longer in the U.K. for such things to come into existence?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 11:36:08 +0100, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <...@peterduncanson.net
On Thu, 21 May 2009 18:32:22 -0400, "Raymond O'Hara"
<...@hotmail.com
Much longer.
http://www.schome.ac.uk/wiki/Dame_schools
Dame Schools
Education was not compulsory for children aged 5 to 10 in England
until 1880. Prior to that date the education was a preserve of the
elite and was only received by children whose parents could afford
to pay. Children from working class backgrounds could not expect to
receive any form of formal schooling.
It was common for children to attend Sunday School, with an
estimated 1.5 million 5-15 year olds attending in the mid nineteenth
century. However Sunday Schools only provided religious instruction,
and not a balanced education. The poorest of British children may
have been lucky enough to attend one of Lord Shaftsburys Ragged
Schools of which there were 200 across Britain, providing a basic
education for children from working class homes. Children residing
in the Workhouse would also have received a form of education, but
their experience of schooling was likely to have been extremely
basic (Higginbottom 2003).
...Dame Schools were a phenomenon of the Victorian era, and there is
a great contrast in the levels of education pupils of these unique
schools received.
They were titled Dame Schools as these enterprises were often run by
elderly women from their homes. They catered for the youngest of
children, often from the poorest of families, aged between 2 and 5;
children too young to work.
Some of the young pupil were taught the 3 Rs, Reading, wRiting, and
aRthermatic [sic]. However some of these schools also taught the
pupils skills that would help them to find work when they were old
enough, for example knitting or sewing. As was the norm in Victorian
times, any instruction would have been didactic and the pupils would
have learnt parrot fashion repeating words, spellings and sums
until they had memorised them.
These establishments were mainly provided as a form of child care
for parents who had no choice but to go out to work. It was common
for fees to be as much as 4 pence a week.
The women who ran these schools were rarely trained, and many
undertook other forms of work such as washing or sewing whilst
supervising the children, adding strength to the argument that Dame
Schools were simply another form of child care.
I attended a boy's grammar school (high school) that had its origins in
a dame school founded in 1704 by Elizabeth Fuller. ISTR that "Amethyst
Deceiver" - Linz (Lindsay Endell) attended the girls grammar school that
had its origins in the same dame school:
http://www.watfordboys.org/
http://www.watfordgrammarschoolforgirls.org.uk/
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 14:53:00 +0100, Amethyst Deceiver <...@lindsayendell.co.uk
In article <...@peterduncanson.net says...
Indeed I did. And we spent an inordinate amount of time in the first
year learning where the apostrophe went in "Girls' Grammar School" and
"Boys' Grammar School".
--
Linz
Wet Yorks via Cambridge, York, London and Watford
My accent may vary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 16:14:53 -0400, "Raymond O'Hara" <...@hotmail.com
"Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <...@4ax.com...
It took just 23 years after the landing at Plymouth for American style
"public" schools to be created.
It was what 1888 for it to happened in England. The Enclish brought a lot
with them to the new world but it seems they left the restrictive class
system behind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Wrote:
Peter Duncanson (BrE) <...@peterduncanson.net
Are British headmasters sadists? Only long trousers allowed also in the
summer ...
--
Per Erik Rønne
http://www.RQNNE.dk
Errare humanum est, sed in errore perseverare turpe est
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 08:21:53 -0700 (PDT), Mike Mooney <...@googlemail.com
Well of course they are. What a strange question.
Mike M
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 16:25:10 +0100, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <...@peterduncanson.net
Long trousers are needed to keep the legs warm during a typical British
summer.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 17:25:37 +0200, James Hogg <...@gOUTmail.com
pe...@RQNNE.invalid (Per Rønne)
Whose moving finger wrote, and cheerfully
Clicked "Send" to wing the words below to me,
Can't lure it back to cancel half a line:
'Tis stored on Google sempiternally.
At my school it was short trousers all year round in the first
and second forms (some boys were already six-footers), then long
trousers all year round.
I remember some boys changing to short trousers just as the bus
drove through the school gates, while others were frantically
combing their hair behind their ears.
--
James
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Wrote:
James Hogg <...@gOUTmail.com
It would be rational to use short trousers in the summer and long
trousers or breeches in the winter - right up to and including year 13.
Or simply to let the pupils decide for themselves ...
Personally, I wear shorts from around easter till october - and I only
take on long trousers at funerals or on formal birthdays for 80 or
90-year-old family members.
So one day in September I will wear long trousers - my mother's brother
reaches the age of 80.
--
Per Erik Rønne
http://www.RQNNE.dk
Errare humanum est, sed in errore perseverare turpe est
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 16:24:08 -0400, "Raymond O'Hara" <...@hotmail.com
""Per Rnne"" <...@RQNNE.invalid...
In my school daze I went to a Catholic grammar school with the usual
Catholic school dress code.
I went to the local Public high school and we had a minor dress code, no
jeans, shorts or T-shirts.
Nowadays I see the kids dressed as they wish, times change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 08:36:17 -0400, "Don Phillipson" <...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca
"Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <...@4ax.com... citing:
This narrative seems unreliable in several respects.
1. Education was not before 1880 "a preserve of the elite."
Early in English history (say before printing 1500) education
was a monopoly of the church, which was by no means
coextensive with "the elite" (because before Henry VIII the
church successfully exerted a high degree of independence
in politics.) Most cathedrals maintained choir schools for
"singing boys," several of which developed later into secular
schools for teen-agers (e.g. Winchester, Westminster.)
2. The purpose of Sunday Schools as founded 1780 was
to teach wriiting and reading (the Bible) to children employed in
farms and factories, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Raikes
3. Aside from church schools various public schools were
endowed throughout English history, notably Eton College
(by King Henry VI 1440). The Victorian reform movement
began with Thomas Arnold's taking charge in 1828 of Rugby
School (endowed 1567 by the royal grocer.)
4. Dame schools are mentioned as early as Shakespeare
(whose Seven Ages speech mentions the schoolboy
going unwillingly to school -- obviously not "a preserve of the
elite.") The career of scientist Michael Faraday (1791-1867) is
suggestive. It appears he hardly went to any school but
educated himself as a teen-ager during years of apprenticeship
to a bookbinder, went to public lectures by a star scientist in
London, introduced himself, and was hired at 21 as a laboratory
assistant.
5. The obvious omission above is girls, because the Sunday
Schools were the only ones that (in some places) taught
girls as well as boys. Most of the history of English education
concerns only schools for boys, and most of the history of
schooling for girls amounts to an attempt to replicate for
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 22 May 2009 15:08:51 +0100, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <...@peterduncanson.net
On Fri, 22 May 2009 08:36:17 -0400, "Don Phillipson"
<...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca
I tried to track down information about the status of the organisation
owing that website. At the second attempt I've have discovered that
"schome" is a research project directed by Dr Peter Twining, Senior
Lecturer and head of the Open University's Department of Education.
I made the casual assumption that because the website was in the UK
Higher Education domain hierarchy, "ac.uk", it might contain moderately
reliable information. This was despite the fact that I should have known
better having worked in UK HE in one capacity or another for 40 years
and having had a father who was also in UK HE.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 00:33:14 +0100, Paul Wolff <...@two.wolff.co.uk
Don Phillipson <...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca
We have to be careful in assigning labels such as 'public school' here.
They may well have been founded by merchants, typically, and to be among
the 'public schools' today, but at the time they were more likely
grammar schools. I'm thinking of men like John Roysse who was an early
benefactor of Abingdon School, Sir Thomas White of the Merchant Taylors'
School, and that fellow Colet or Collet (wasn't he a Dean?) who gave
some early beneficence (I forget exactly what) to St Paul's School in
London. All those three are today 'public schools' of high academic
rank, but when they began they were just foundations for educating a few
young scholars. Even my village has a school house, now occupied in part
by the mother and toddler group, originally endowed by a local merchant
who made good in London three hundred years ago, and his established
charity still supports village scholars today.
One of the unwitting obstacles to public education was Dr Johnson. He
defined a grammar school as a school for teaching the learned languages.
His opinion became a totem of the highest regard (though Becky Sharp had
other views on his dictionary). In the year 1805, Lord Eldon gave
judgment in the matter of Leeds Grammar School. Basing himself on
Johnson's definition, he prohibited the governors of the school from
using their endowments to promote the teaching of arithmetic, writing,
and modern languages, instead of, or in addition to, Latin and Greek.
Grammar schools were thereby condemned to teach only the classics to
butchers' apprentices.
Lord Eldon had passed in Hebrew at Oxford by his correct translation of
Golgotha as 'the place of the skull', and in history by stating that
King Alfred had founded University College. He was clearly a man who
knew where his towel was to be found.
Only after being sent on a laboratory health and safety course, I hope.
After all, if only one life can be saved, it's worth it.
--
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 06:52:59 +0100, "Jonathan Morton" <...@btinternet.com
"Paul Wolff" <...@fpwolff.demon.co.uk...
Yes, in quite a few cases the original intention of the founder was allowed
to drift at some point in the 19th or 18th centuries. It's a while since
Harrow has educated many of the poor of that parish. To be fair, in some
cases this was addressed by the governors. In the case of Harrow, this led
to the foundation of the John Lyon School - much more akin to what the
founder John Lyon had in mind, and an excellent day grammar school in its
own right. The same happened at Oundle with the Laxton School. I am sure
there are other examples.
Regards
Jonathan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 08:33:51 GMT, the Omrud <...@gEXPUNGEmail.com
I note that Dr Gaius Baltar of Battlestar Galactica was educted by
Harrow, and that his parents owned a B&B in London. I rather suspect
that they would not have had the moolah to pay to send him to that
august establishment, so perhaps he's one of the poor of the parish.
While I'm ruminating on such things, Jimmy McNulty of Wire went to Eton.
--
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 22:42:43 +0100, Robin Bignall <...@ntlworld.com
On Sat, 23 May 2009 08:33:51 GMT, the Omrud
<...@gEXPUNGEmail.com
You couldn't tell it from his accent. (Just started season 5.)
--
Robin
(BrE)
Herts, England
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 22:06:33 GMT, the Omrud <...@gEXPUNGEmail.com
Perhaps that's because despite going to Eton, he's from Sheffield.
We've recently finished Season 2. I'm dithering about recording the
remaining seasons from BBC2 as they seem to be broadcasting the lot.
We've just watched the last episode of Season 1 of Battlestar Galactica
and I'm rather unsettled (I won't say why, in case it spoils). I don't
have any more DVDs at the moment ...
--
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 07:29:32 -0400, MC <...@mapca.inter.net
In article <...@text.news.virginmedia.com the Omrud <...@gEXPUNGEmail.com
On the other hand he was only educted there, which may have been cheaper
than getting educated.
--
"Get hip to the consultation of the boolawee."
- P.J. Proby
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 23 May 2009 08:44:34 -0700, R H Draney <...@spamcop.net
MC filted:
Harrow, I take it, is known for drawing out young men?...r
--
A pessimist sees the glass as half empty.
An optometrist asks whether you see the glass
more full like this?...or like this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 19:44:54 +0100, "Alan Jones" <...@blueyonder.co.uk
Perhaps we've strayed a little from the original question, about the Pondian
difference in the labels "public" and "private" school.
What must surprise US observers of such things is the lack of any sharp
distinction in England between, in the AmE sense, "public" and "private".
Yes, at the extremes are what we call "independent" schools and "State"
schools, but in between are various kinds of semi-independent schools.
In this county of Wiltshire most primary schools (5-11) seem to be
"voluntary aided" Church schools: all their running costs, including
salaries, are met from public funds, and capital costs (for new buildings)
are 90% publicly funded, the diocese contributing only the residual 10%.
Almost all these schools are Anglican, though a few are Roman Catholic; in
cities there are some Jewish and a very few Muslim schools run on the same
lines. At secondary level the Churches are less often involved, but quite
recently the Government has set up secular schemes giving even greater
powers to their largely independent governing bodies. The notion of a
"School Board" responsible in some detail for all the schools in a city is
strange to us, because so much is devolved in every school, even a "State
school", to its own Board of Governors.
Perhaps the OQ ought also to know that in BrE usage the term "public school"
is officially dead and is now most often used contemptuously, by those who
disapprove of independent education in principle. Yet it is still true that
the facilities available in what were once the "Public Schools" are usually
such as State schools can only dream of, and the academic teaching is often
exhilaratingly intense.
Alan Jones
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 15:18:16 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy" <...@notmyISP.invalid
The US system may in practice be even worse than many Rightpondians
imagine. For a few years (until the end of 2003) we lived in what was
officially called an "incorporated village" on Long island, NY. Part of
this community was in one school district, the other part in a different
school district. Of those two school districts, one included part of yet
another such "incorporated village" and the whole of a third. That
school district had three elementary schools, one "middle school" and
one high school. The Superintendent and Deputy Superintendents for this,
that and the other probably collected at least $500,000 in salaries
between them.
Many of the people who showed up at school board meetings urged the
board to keep spending more money -- even though it meant that their
property taxes would increase thereby -- because otherwise their
property values would decline.
And with so much of school financing coming from property taxes, areas
with low property values have a tough time providing an adequate
learning environment and teaching materials, and attracting qualified
teachers.
Perce
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 19:49:39 GMT, the Omrud <...@gEXPUNGEmail.com
I count these as state schools - IME the influence of the church on the
vast majority of them is infinitesimal.
It's worth reminding folks that the amount an English school governing
body has to spend is in no way under their own control or influence,
except for the tiny amounts which can be earned by letting the building
to sports clubs, music societies, etc, out of school hours (from which
the caretaker's overtime has to be paid). Each child comes with an
annual amount of money which varies by age, and also dramatically by the
central government funding given to the local education authority.
My local authority is very badly funded; the 440-pupil Junior school
(ages 7 - 10) at which I am a governor receives about £2200 per child
per year. The median for similar schools around the country is about
£2900 and the maximum is around £4000. We are smack clean at the bottom
of the funding chargs and we have been since we were allowed to see the
comparisons - we are the worst funded Junior School in England. We work
hard to balance the books and we achieve first-class results and
inspection reports; we can only dream of what we could do if we had
average funding - an extra £250,000 or so per year. We cannot imagine
what those other schools are doing with it all.
--
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Wrote:
In article <...@text.news.virginmedia.comthe Omrud <...@gEXPUNGEmail.com
This is the most significant difference between the two systems. In
the U.S. system, nearly all schools are run by an independent local
government authority -- usually a school board, but sometimes as a
part of municipal or county government. While they do receive some
level of state funding in many states, their primary source of revenue
is locally imposed taxes. Usually this is a property tax, but some
school systems are partially funded by sales taxes or income taxes.
(In some states, such as Vermont, there is an additional level of
revenue redistribution.)
(The U.S. has a lot of local government: according to the 2007 Census
of Governments, there are 89,476 local governments, of which 39,044
are general-purpose -- county or municipality -- and 50,432 are
special-purpose. Of those special-purpose governments, 14,561 are
public school systems; for census purposes this includes both
independent and dependent school systems.)
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | The real tragedy of human existence is not that we are
woll...@csail.mit.edu| nasty by nature, but that a cruel structural asymmetry
Opinions not those | grants to rare events of meanness such power to shape
of MIT or CSAIL. | our history. - S.J. Gould, Ten Thousand Acts of Kindness
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 08:21:33 GMT, the Omrud <...@gEXPUNGEmail.com
UK local authorities are funded about 75% by central government, and the
remainder by local property taxes (there is no local sales or income
tax). So, if an authority wanted to spend 25% more than its previous
budget, it would have to *double* the local council tax and rates.
That's an extreme example - if the authority wants to raise spending by
2.5%, it has to raise local property taxes by 10%. Even at that level,
it would then be penalised by central government for spending more
than they think is reasonable - I don't know the details but I think it
would lose some future central government funding increases, rendering
the action pointless.
The consequence is that it's effectively impossible for a local
authority to spend more than central government believes it should spend.
--
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Wrote:
the Omrud <...@gEXPUNGEmail.com
That's terrible. In the US the average spending for students is just
over $9,000 a year, which would be £5,600. I don't throw that there in a
"rah rah" way; I think schools here are underfunded, too. I can't
imagine what you're doing _without_ that money.
--
SML
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 21:15:49 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy" <...@notmyISP.invalid
Back in the 1950s Professor C. Northcote Parkinson suggested in _The Law
and the Profits_ that, if income tax were reduced substantially, social
services would improve out of all recognition because, being short of
money, the goverment would have to spend it wisely instead of spending
it because it's there. Spending more does not guarantee better outcomes.
UK teachers' salaries probably are lower than those of US teachers. UK
schools would not have to pay outrageous amounts to cover the staff
health insurance premiums.
Perce
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 10:19:59 +0100, Nick <...@temporary-address.org.uk
"Percival P. Cassidy" <...@notmyISP.invalid
Well I think we're going to find out over the next few (FSVO "few")
years just how well social services respond to not having much money
available to spend on them.
--
Online waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk
development version: http://canalplan.eu
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 23 May 2009 21:22:25 -0400, tony cooper <...@earthlink.net
On Sat, 23 May 2009 16:20:53 -0700, SL56...@DELETEcolumbia.edu (Sara
Before I would accept a comparison, I'd want to know how the figures
were put together. For example, do the figures include health care
benefits in both cases? Staff retirement? Do the figures include
anything towards facility construction or upkeep? I'd have to see a
line-item comparison to feel comfortable with making a comparison.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 08:16:02 GMT, the Omrud <...@gEXPUNGEmail.com
I wasn't inviting a comparison with non-UK schools which would be fairly
meaningless as you say, but for the sake of interest: the funding
covers all the costs of being an employer. Private healthcare benefits
are relatively uncommon in the UK as the NHS covers everybody.
Retirement, yes. The Capital budget is separate - we get a small
capital allowance for ongoing changes but the building and land are
owned by the local authority - any significant changes (new build, for
example) are funded by them, but we would have to wait in a queue for
perhaps 10 years if we need a new classroom. We have to fund IT
equipment, decoration, gardening, utilities, stationary, and so on.
--
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Wrote:
tony cooper <...@earthlink.net
Good point. I'd like to see a solid comparison, but I'm too lazy to do
it myself.
--
SML
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Sun, 24 May 2009 13:42:24 +0100, james <...@marage.demon.co.uk
In message <...@gEXPUNGEmail.com
I dread to think what my monthly council tax bill to Surrey County
Council (SCC) would be if England's education capitation allowance was
increased to above the present highly desirable pauper level.
The whole point of state funded services is that they should be suitably
awful to discourage their use. When my wife was a teacher she and her
colleagues were asked to identify kids in their classes that considered
in need of special care. There was no hesitation in the naming of two
outstanding scallywags. This was more than ten years ago. Both
kiddiwinks are now adults and both have been smacked on the back of the
legs with custodial sentences for murder. They are a pair of
psychopathic killers and doubtless will go on the slaughter rampage
again when they're released. In other words they were only fixed by the
judiciary when they had shown themselves to be broken.
Imagine the cost to SCC council tax payers if SCC had decided to
keep those miscreant under some sort of monitoring! It doesn't bear
thinking about.
The policy of only fixing things when they're actually broken works
brilliantly with potholes. SCC's Highways Dept solution is contiguous
potholes. One pothole can be nuisance but a road that has deteriorated
to being an unmade road is a wonderful cash-saving test for Surrey's
huge population of four-wheel drive cars.
About twenty years ago SCC decided to stop teaching village
children cookery lessons. They ripped out the cooking equipment and got
rid of all those nasty knives and cleavers. It was a sensible move that
saved money on teaching staff, insurance, gas and electricity. After
all, what kid needs lessons is getting hold of junk food? All they have
to do is point at the illuminated picture of the Wimpy of their choice
and it's provided by state-educated sous-chef who has been trained to
punch pictograms on a membrane cash register rather than resort to the
skilled task of entering an amount. That function demands a staff member
on a higher rate of pay.
Similar savings were made when SCC scrapped home economics. I recently
spent an eye-smarting afternoon with a Provident Finance agent on her
round on a quite dreadful chav estate. What struck me, apart from the
stink of cigarettes which C2s seem to adore, was that she was greeted as
a friend by all her
customers, and that most of those customers had an attitude to money
that I found quite bizarre bordering on what seemed to me to be
incomprehensible.
Many of her customers were interested only in whether or not they had
reached roll over point on their repayments in order to qualify for loan
'top-ups'. The agent went to considerable pains to point out that new
loans on top of old loans amounted to ludicrous interest rates but I
could tell that the customers weren't interested. Their eyes glazed over
as they waited to sign on the dotted line and grab the money.
On one occasion the money enabled a member of the household to go out
and return with cartons of cigarettes!
I agree that Provident Finance interest rates are a disgrace, but
dictating to people how they acquire their loans or dispose of them
would be an even bigger disgrace. No one held a gun to heads. I don't
know what the answer unless, heaven forbid, financial probity taught in
schools.
A contribution that SSC made to the economy of the country was to scrap
National Savings collections in schools. I've been a
compulsive saver ever since my schooldays when I used to buy a 2/6d
(12-1/2p) National Savings stamp every Monday morning and every eight
weeks had the joy of contemplating another whole one pound saved. My
compulsive savings disorder turned me into someone hates borrowing money
but prefers to pay for things when I can afford it.
I used to think of my saving phobia as a fairly harmless disorder. Now I
learn that blame for many of the ills facing society today can leaned
against my mudscraper so much so that the English government have had to
introduced cash incentives for people to get into dept with their
German-inspired car scrappage allowance.
Today I have to save monthly to pay my council tax bill. Just think what
I'd have to pay if SCC encouraged the 40 per cent of village parents not
to pay to send their kids to private schools by providing decent
education!
--
James Follett. Novelist. (G1LXP) http://www.jamesfollett.dswilliams.co.uk
http://www.pbase.com/jamesfollett
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Mon, 25 May 2009 12:10:04 -0700 (PDT), Vinny Burgoo <...@yahoo.co.uk
On 24 May, 13:42, james <...@marage.demon.co.uk
[snip good stuff
mumble mumble
frequent enough]
If you're having trouble paying your Council Tax, why not get a job
with the Forestry Commission? Aim 1 of the Commission's Equality and
Diversity Strategy is 'To recruit and employ more people from a
diversity of backgrounds in order to make the Forestry Commission
representative of the population of the areas where we operate.' They
are particularly keen to recruit six target groups, chief among them
people aged '0-24 and particularly 65+' and 'women, men and trans-
gender'. (Do you like to press wild flowers, Jimbo?)
**
While I'm here and Jimbo might be looking, does anyone know what the
'E' in 'C3HARGE' stands for? C3HARGE is the new CERIAC. CERIAC was the
UK Health & Safety Executive's CERamics Industry Advisory Committee.
When CERIAC's remit was suddenly and joyously expanded by a
revitalising agenda, it was obvious to everyone that a new nalgonym
was not just essential but vital and necessary: thus was C3HARGE born.
The long-form name is the 'Ceramics, cement, concrete [C3], heavy [H]
clay [the 'A' in clay?], refractories [R] and glass [G] manufacturing
industries joint health and safety advisory committee'.
Which 'E' is it? The one in 'health' or the one in 'safety' or one of
the ones at the end of 'committee'?
This is not a trivial question. Livelihoods - even lives - are at
stake.
(Else why spend all that money?)
--
VB
|
|
|
|
|
|
|