The question of identity and values

Only 7 per cent of UK school children are taught by private education and yet their alumni continue to dominate every major institution and profession. Christopher Ray in The Telegraph suggested the Left had created a mythology about private education in which schools like Eton and Harrow (which cost £30,000 a year) are overemphasized as part of the problem, when in truth most private schools cost nearer £6000 a year and a lot of the parents earn less than £60,000 a year. But how can you deny a figure of 7 per cent? How do you figure that most parents do not earn anywhere near £60,000?

The debate over private education is one concerned with social justice, and not just for those who are excluded from access to it. A private school can afford to promote extracurricular subjects that are often vital in helping students to form decisions about their career. As I have said before and, as Helen Mirren pointed out at the BAFTAs this week, the rich privately educated kids continue to dominate the arts. The identity of students is formed and solidified in these schools; the privilege they experience at home is reinforced. Some of these students are also trapped in a system where their values are determined and alternative ways to live are denied or belittled. Can we seriously believe that a public school student would consider a career in road maintenance? Too many students are limited into what they think are appropriate careers and ways to live. 

Not only this but private schools' charitable status lowers their tax burden as institutions, but I have yet to see this translated into public good. If two-thirds of a private school's intake was made up from families where the joint income was less than 40,000 a year and where places were funded by the school or by the remaining third we might reach a more equitable system, but no independent school is going to agree to that. In truth they offer just enough bursaries to appear that they are offering support for those who need it but not enough that the privilege and identity of the school is put at risk. Charitable status should be removed and taxation should be raised off such schools unless they offer a minimum of 50 per cent assisted places for low income children. 

Having been lucky enough to get through Oxford from a state-comp background I regularly see my fellow graduates using their school networks to get job openings. Of course, the problem of inequality is reinforced by parents who bank roll their children so they can pursue careers that are already closed to others. I see my fellow graduates do all they can to get an advantage and who wouldn't, but that is why we need to offer better opportunities earlier in life. 

Envy. Undoubtedly for those excluded from the advantages of such an education, or for those who managed to succeed with fewer advantages, jealousy comes into play. But many students will be unaware of the opportunities that were denied them. Even my school, which was a good state school, didn't have the skills to articulate and prep me for Oxbridge interviews. Part of the solution is obviously to invest money in state education and offer students the services and facilities that private institutions can offer but there also needs to be radical rebalancing. Quotas should be placed on private schools for university entrants. How can you hope to have equal opportunities if 60 Westminster kids go to Oxford each year?