actually private schools are the least tolerant of all. i've recently seen a
child with properly diagnosed adhd whose school on learning of the diagnosis
promptly sacked him  telling the parents that he'd be better off at a state
school "look after those sort of problems". he's absolutely fine purely on
ritalin alone and needs no behavioural programs.
why am i feeling patronised by replies from those advocates of private
education? actually my local state schools results just published are better
than the fairly well-known local private school, as i had great pleasure in
telling a snotty local gp who once siad to me "you're so brave sending your
children to states. i couldn't possibly take that risk"!

>From: Alistair Holmes <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: GP-UK <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: an open email to Michael Howard
>Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 12:47:43 +0100
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Received: from smtp.jiscmail.ac.uk ([130.246.192.55]) by
>MC6-F36.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Thu, 28 Apr 2005
>04:48:14 -0700
>Received: from LISTSERV.JISCMAIL.AC.UK (jiscmail.ac.uk) by
>smtp.jiscmail.ac.uk (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id
><[log in to unmask]>; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 12:47:58 +0100
>Received: from JISCMAIL.AC.UK by JISCMAIL.AC.UK (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release
>1.8e)          with spool id 54686852 for [log in to unmask]; Thu, 28 Apr
>2005          12:47:58 +0100
>Received: from 130.246.192.53 by JISCMAIL.AC.UK (SMTPL release 1.0i) with
>TCP;          Thu, 28 Apr 2005 12:47:58 +0100
>Received: from mail21.nhs.uk (mail21.nhs.uk [62.6.139.215]) by
>fili.jiscmail.ac.uk (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j3SBluQl023209 for
>   <[log in to unmask]>; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 12:47:56 +0100
>Received: from [10.191.254.3] (helo=relayint2.nhs.uk) by mail21.nhs.uk with
>          esmtp (MTC MTA) id 1DR7Ul-0003Ru-Fk for [log in to unmask];
>Thu, 28          Apr 2005 12:47:51 +0100
>Received: from relay.nhs.uk (194.62.42.141) by relayint2.nhs.uk
>(Syntegra-I2          7.0.008) id 4260DD1E003D9816 for
>[log in to unmask]; Thu, 28 Apr          2005 12:47:51 +0100
>Received: from EMIS1156A.EMIS1156.LOCAL (172.19.42.2) by relay.nhs.uk
>    (Syntegra-1 7.0.008) id 426F8039000963C9 for [log in to unmask];
>     Thu, 28 Apr 2005 12:47:51 +0100
>Received: by nt_server with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id
><JZ3R96ZT>;          Thu, 28 Apr 2005 12:47:44 +0100
>X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jHaK7wCbVq+g8woRDGOaqtIbpEJQtPliUE=
>X-RAL-MFrom: <[log in to unmask]>
>X-RAL-Connect: <mail21.nhs.uk [62.6.139.215]>
>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
>X-CCLRC-SPAM-report: 0 :
>X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.38
>Precedence: list
>Return-Path: [log in to unmask]
>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Apr 2005 11:48:14.0959 (UTC)
>FILETIME=[296F67F0:01C54BE8]
>
>Paul Caldwell wrote:
> > the debate about private v state education is one which will never get
> > solved as so many using private education are completely blinkered,
>
>Much truth in that but same so of those using state system too.
>
> > a close family friend was chair of the headmasters conference and a
> > dyed in the wool private man but he said "70% of the private schools
> > in the headmasters conference are below the average state school in
> > teaching and facilities. they only do better fundamentally cos of the
> > background of the kids. in the remaining 30%, it's surprising,
> > granted all the advantages the schools and kids have,  that the kids
> > do not do better than they actually do". i wrote it down.
>
>So we have a system with enough variation that by observation and
>measurement the 'best' system should be derivable for the benefit of future
>generations.
>
>Unfortunately there is little agreement as to what an education is for, is
>it to train the future population to believe the current social model of
>society should not be overturned, or is it to ensure sufficient enquiring
>minds that can push the boundaries and deliver new services and grow the
>economy for the benefit of all (there is a natural conflict inherent
>between
>these views). And there are many other views too.
>
>Further there are many parties within the educational establishment who
>have
>much to loose if there was an agreement on this issue. Thus all parties
>muddy the waters as a defensive strategy.
>
>Like Health after deriving the 'best system' what one will find is the best
>for one sector of ability is an incompatible model with that for those with
>higher or lower abilities in any given subject. The disgrace of the current
>system as one observes it, is the pitiful support offered to those who by
>chance or genetics are very able, and the difficulties of a disabled child
>who is intellectually very able in the current system beggar belief.
>
>Fundamentally the difficulties are around the state delivering a provision
>that is not the right provision for the individual child to maximise their
>opportunity, but the least worst that the population will tolerate, this
>being driven by a macro-economic view that just like health this sector is
>a
>on-cost that reduces a counties productivity thus intrinsically damaging
>the
>economy when measured against others who may as yet not bother with this
>provision.
>
>Alistair