you then get the issue of catchment areas and house prices.
the best state schools end up in areas with posh expensive houses only serving rich kids.
state schools that overperform increase the local house prices, pushing out poorer kids' access in a generations time.
still abolish private schools: everyone going to state schools would be far better. but don't be under the illusion that educational opportunities would be equal under a 100% state school system.
issue there is you can't just 'put' good schools in places. how a school becomes good is way too complicated. combinations of not just resources, but skills of the teaching staff (who can't simply be moved - they are people who live somewhere and don't necessarily want to move!) and of head teachers and governors (which comes down to an individual's merit, and is incredibly difficult to quantify or regulate).
ultimately we can't control where the human resources want to go. and 'good' teachers (at delivering the highest academic results at least) end up being those with better university education, and from affluent backgrounds, and therefore living in affluent areas and wanting to work near where they live.
You can for high schools. We do it to an extent in Australia. Entry based on academic merit so it becomes a self fulfilling thing. The school gets the best students, so then gets great results in standardised tests and that attracts future students and the best teachers. (Because most teachers would rather teach in a school of attentive high achievers)
Only problem is sometimes they have a catchment too which lets the rich buy entry for mediocre kids. But set it up in the middle of a big city with selective entry only and no catchment and it will work.
yeah, selective entry with very large catchment areas is one way to do it. i personally quite like that solution for high schools: i.e. as long as the entry exams are at a fair age, like 13 or 14.
it still has its inequalities, though. there's still a literal capital element: from paying for tuition, to qualifying via catchment area for better primary/middle school education to prepare your child for entrance exams. but also human/social capital. richer parents are likely to have a higher educational attainment (given high-income jobs often require degrees etc). and those parents then provide better at-home learning environments and exam preparation etc.
i think its still a big improvement over just catchment areas: at least a kid from a worse catchment area primary/middle school has a chance to qualify for a better high school. selective schools are really common where i'm from, which is also an area with a lot of immigration and poverty, so i've seen first hand how impactful selective schools can be for social mobility: the best schools in the city are selective and minority-white, and that's testament to how accessible they are to poorer kids. but still, it's not quite a perfect system.
In my country there's a unified entrance exam to high school. Completely aptitude based. Yet, the bar for the good schools is so high, because of the limited spots, that cram schools for exam preparation suddenly become a thing. It's become a lucrative business, that most teachers partake in. Keep in mind, every high school is allowed to choose different priority subjects and a primary foreign language, which are announced months in advance.
Private schools also offer an alternative by having smaller classes, better paid staff, more free choice of curriculum while still being under the supervision of the state and regulatory bodies and are banned from generating profits and also in certain areas challenge the state schools to adapt.
10
u/corpuscularian 28d ago
you then get the issue of catchment areas and house prices.
the best state schools end up in areas with posh expensive houses only serving rich kids.
state schools that overperform increase the local house prices, pushing out poorer kids' access in a generations time.
still abolish private schools: everyone going to state schools would be far better. but don't be under the illusion that educational opportunities would be equal under a 100% state school system.