Sir, – How revealing that Arthur Godsil, a former headmaster, not once makes reference to equality, inclusion, improving literacy or ending poverty in his support of State funding for fee-paying schools (“Should fee-paying schools get State support?” Opinion, October 24th).
The reason he fails to make reference to these, I suspect, is that fee-paying schools can never stand over such ideals, as they are not enshrined in their ethos and rather such schools work against them by the very nature of their fees. The fact that our State continues to support such schools – even if it is only to pay teacher’s salaries – needs to stop. – Yours, etc,
SHEILA MAHER,
Dublin 14.
‘It was worth all the pain and the disruption’: Transforming a corner house in Rathmines
Ingebrigtsen: Born to Run takes us inside the broken family ties
Michael Harding: ‘Solitude sounds beautiful, but what you get is isolation’
Anna Geary: ‘Losing a sibling is not talked about a lot. They are meant to be there with you when your parents aren’t’
A chara, – It was useful to read both sides of the debate surrounding fee-paying schools and State support .
An advocate of continuing State supports concentrates on financial costs and claims there is a marginal gain for the exchequer in keeping the status quo.
On the other side of the debate, the focus is on empowering children and ending their separation in schools on the basis of gender or background.
I know which side of the debate I prefer but it is quite correct to examine costs to the exchequer. However, marginal short-term savings must be measured against the massive and long-lasting social and financial costs that result from our two-tier education system. – Yours, etc,
REAMONN O’LUAN,
Dublin 14.