Beoz

Everyone know these survey's have prompting questions like.

- Do you believe private school people have sense of superiority bonus? Yes / No

- Do you believe privately educated people confers a higher position on the ladder of life? Yes / No

Unless asked, "most people" rarely give this any thought, let alone think about a "superiority bonus" - WTF?

I'd hazard a guess that "most people" have never met a privately educated person but I'm pretty certain privately educated people have met "most people"

Lets put the survey on another minority group.

- Do you believe gay men talk with a lisp? Yes / No?

- Do you believe gay men display feminine traits? Yes or No?

Not only are questions like that offensive and bigoted, they are a prompt for "most people" to answer Yes.

Wake up. Read between the lines and stop being so bigoted and blind.

OzTennis

I never read on beyond 'everyone knows'.

Your posts continually show time after time what the research found. Q.E.D.

You read the survey questions of course or 'everyone knows' what they contained? Give professional researchers some credit for knowing how to phrase questions without inducing bias or the question begging an answer and to do a stratified random sample please.

Beoz

Really. Glad to see you made the exception for me and my "superiority bonus"

Glad you agree the questions are "loaded" but then create further confusion by suggesting the questions aren't biased.

Ho Ho. I think its fair to say we are done here. You and the survey are losing credibility.

OzTennis

I said give the researchers credit for knowing how to phrase questions and do a sample; you read what I said differently to suit your agenda. Quote where I said otherwise than it was a professionally conducted survey.

Did you do your research on the NIESR site to make these spurious claims before you opened your trap? No. Made up assumptions of questions and techniques used.

Your own posts show you think private school conveys some sort of bonus. You would have gone to state school otherwise surely? Have I bragged, and bragged is what you did about the pecuniary benefits derived from my education without any prompting?

Beoz

You are spinning wheels now.

I said previously I attended state school too - I thought you were a gun at reading. That puts me in the best position to judge both. Why argue with that? The best you've done is had a friend who taught at a private school.

You brought up the money factor - you brought up the figure of $25k. (its more than that for the best). You started the money talk, not I, but if you want to base it on money, happy to participate and show the ROI. If it didn't suit your agenda (perhaps that's the argument you have been peddling for years) too bad. Sorry sunshine.

How can you commend an organisation who loads questions? The same organisation who said the UK didn't need austerity measures after the CFG. The research was easy - I brought them unstuck. Sorry to disappoint you but not everything you read in the Guardian is correct.

Are we done yet? I hope so, you are embarrassing yourself.

OzTennis

Tiresome. You aren't a teacher but you are an expert on education. A 'gun reader' would notice it was my wife and not a friend who worked in the system and that I did voluntary work for them coaching teams - going into the school, working with their kids and speaking to their staff plus hearing about the system every night from my wife, plus moderating work and advising teachers in my field of expertise etc.

I didn't 'read it in the Guardian' which you seem to think makes anything fake news. I'm still waiting for you to produce evidence to show that the survey wasn't done professionally rather than just making puny assertions.

40% of Debretts 500 most influential British people went to private or independent schools (politicians, business people, arts etc) which far exceeds their % of the school population. Not surprisingly, the category with the lowest % of privately educated was sport. The Debretts result drew this comment from the head of the Sutton Trust which targets educational inequality:

“Britain’s most influential positions remain the preserve of the privileged few and the independently educated still dominate public life. Levels of social mobility are still shockingly low in this country and we must do more to ensure that every young person can achieve his or her potential, regardless of their family background. Access to our leading universities and top professions needs to be based on ability, not ability to pay.”

Beoz

Its all second and third hand. The fact remains, you have not experienced both systems. Your opinion is biased and one sided.

So what? As I said, if you pay to be educated, you expect a return. It wouldn't be worth it otherwise.

That does not suprise me as a sweeping stat. But you love sweeping stats without any depth.

But you have to look at the sports on offer. Usually private schools force students to particpate on Saturdays. I would say sports like rowing and rugby would be heavily dominated by private schools.

Twenty-one of England's 31-man World Cup squad went to fee-paying schools

Funny that, rugby is.

What a resentful statement and incorrect at best. You can see the jealousy resentment building up here, they are making gross errors of judgement.

Myself and my privately educated friends all paid for our own tertiary education. Besides, tertiary education entrance is determined by results, not money.

You certainly dig up some shallow stuff.

OzTennis

Last statement a topper - shows as NIESR said that privately educated persons have a tendency to be unable to empathise with the majority of people. Your reaction to an argument for less inequality and things to be based more on ability is that it is shallow, jealous, shows resentment and gross errors of judgement.

Your argument that I need to have more contact with the private sector, despite having considerable contact and being a teacher, is that you know best because you were a pupil in both systems. I presume you claim to be a doctor because you've been a patient? It is patronising as well to dismiss anything I say on this basis.

You didn't understand the sport point. Rugby union and rowing are private school sports predominantly in the UK so it comes as no surprise that there is a high proportion of privately educated in the sweet chariots. The point made is that influential sports people (not in union and rowing) are not so disproportionately represented by the privately educated. Andy Murray didn't get to world number one via the old boy network as he might have done if he went to private school and then went into politics, business, the arts, diplomatic service, civil service or whatever. Sport doesn't work that way as you have to produce the goods without the help of the tie.

Now, applying your logic, you seem to know all about trade unions. Have you been a member or run a union? If not you haven't experienced it so you're not entitled to an opinion.

Finally, you have this warped view that anyone who disagrees with you is shallow, is a bigot, reads the wrong newspapers, is too easily led, gets things 2nd or 3rd hand, is biased, left, resentful.....................zzzz They think differently and have different values.

Beoz

In this instance you are a bigot. You have been googling, and dredging up any piece of rubbish you can find on the internet which makes private schools and their students look bad. Your actions are quite disgusting. The only way you get away with it is because you see private school students as privileged. For what ever reason, left wingers feel its OK to be bigots against those who they perceive to have privilege.

Both pieces of text have been slammed. If you don't like it, too bad. They are not convincing, bigoted and are riddled with errors. This comes as no surprise. If you have not had the balance of attending both systems, then your opinion will be skewed and in your case, loyalty to the only system you know. (FWIW I have been in a trade union when I was younger - I was pressured to join by the union representatives which was a horrible loss of freedoms - another story for another thread)

The world is getting pretty sick of the left wing, hypocritical attitudes towards bigotry, where on one hand its NOT OK to be intolerant towards those who hold different opinions from oneself, but if that group is deemed to have more, then it is OK to be intolerant towards those who hold different opinions from oneself. The hypocrisy you and your fellow left wingers have been displaying is the very reason the left wing movement is almost dead and buried, and we see things like Trump and Brexit. The world has had enough. People just want to be afforded equal freedoms and free speech. How the tables have turned.

Perhaps if you want a fairer society you should start in your own backyard. Practice what you preach. The problem is we don't live in an equal society. No two people are the same. Unless you want a society controlled and suppressed into equality (which I don't think you really want) then we will all be different, and there will be different outlets and avenues that allow people to pursue the things they are good at. How miserable would the world be if we weren't given those freedoms and avenues to chase our dreams.

Now if 40% of Debretts 500 most influential British people went to private or independent schools, then should we be living in a society of lords and peasants under your rational where private school students never offer empathy? Well - newsflash - we don't and that's because we, no matter if you are a private or state school student, choose to look after those who needed it. That's why we have a progressive tax system where 2% pay 26% of tax, that's why we have public health care, that's why we have unemployment benefits, and for those reasons our society is well contained in equality.

What you are doing here is quite disgraceful towards a certain sector of society. You should really take a step back and have a think. I don't think you mean to do it, you just haven't really grasped the concept of left wing hypocrisy just yet.

OzTennis

'A person who is intolerant to those with a different view'. You meet the criteria for a bigot - just what you said above qualifies. End of another thread which reaches an impasse.

Beoz

Thanks for the final insult. True to left wing form. I think that about sums up where you reside.

OzTennis

It's not an insult but an observation. You don't agree that you are intolerant to anyone with a contrary view to yours, or perhaps you think that your opinion is right and all others' are wrong? At the end of the day an opinion is an opinion. However, on the influence of private schools in creating inequality of opportunity there can be no doubt, the evidence is out there and it can't be disputed despite your attempt to label pointing out the obvious as bigoted and shallow blah, blah.

Beoz

Ok. Lets relate that to a language you understand. I never got to do tennis camp in my youth. Oh the resent. Oh the jealousy. Please be empathetic towards that.