Reading Mark Smith's article ("Let private schools do what they are best at," The Herald, November 26), I feel that the argument relating to these schools needs to go a step further.
Young people leaving state schools, even with excellent qualifications, have to overcome the "private school network" when it comes to careers. The Sutton Trust has shown how the professions in England are dominated by the privately educated. Only seven percent of young people in England are educated in private schools but the numbers far exceed this when looking at the "top" professions. The law, media, finance and civil service for example are all dominated by the privately educated. In journalism the Sutton Trust found over half (54 per cent) of today's top journalists were educated in private schools by 2006.
Young people from the private sector are six times more likely to enter Oxbridge than state educated young people. The Sutton Trust suggests that by the age of 42 some of those educated in the private education sector can earn £200,000 more than state educated pupils.
The numbers in the private education sector in Scotland are smaller overall than in England but what is the situation in Edinburgh (30 per cent educated in the private sector) or Glasgow? Do we have figures similar to those produced by the Sutton Trust for England, to have a picture of the career paths of the privately educated in Scotland?
I am sure that the usual counter arguments will be used to challenge these points: jealousy, class war, chip on the shoulder, parental sacrifice and "we give bursaries" are among the favourites used by supporters of the private education sector. Most of the arguments cannot justify the rewards such an education may provide.
More attention needs to be given to the "hurdles" the state educated young person faces on leaving school. Emphasis on improving qualifications in the state sector is of diminished use if the prospects and careers on offer are dominated by the privately educated.
People are entitled to pay for an education for their children if they wish but let us not pretend that private schools are charities or that they do not confer advantages that the majority of children in Scotland will never receive.
James Waugh,
Nether Currie Crescent,
Edinburgh.
Mark Smith is 100 per cent correct to recognise that in a modern, liberal society we should have the right to choice in education.
However, he makes the mistake, as many have this week, particularly in London, of assuming the issue of charitable status is identical north and south of the border and needs to be "toughened up".
MSPs debated long and hard in 2005 to introduce a test in Scotland for fee-charging charities (of which independent schools are a very small percentage) that is the toughest in the world.
The schools he talks of have spent eight long years meeting that test; some have required more than one attempt.
It was neither easy nor immediate. But the result is that tens of millions of pounds are disbursed in fee assistance - for example, the equivalent of a whole medium-sized secondary school of some 650 pupils receives 100 per cent funded places in Scotland - quite aside from a whole range of academic and community activity outlined in the Charity Regulator's reports.
Schools have embraced the opportunity to audit and update their relationships with local communities, schools and individuals and they have met the challenge presented to them by Holyrood.
John Edward,
Director, Scottish Council of Independent Schools,
61 Dublin Street, Edinburgh.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article