IT is with some concern that I note you have highlighted a letter which seeks to laud private education in Scotland at the expense of our state sector (Here’s what state educators could learn from independent sector, August 18).

Your correspondent’s purely subjective and self-indulgent narrative provide little if any evidence that the independent sector provides a better education than our state schools. His entire premise is based upon individual anecdotal experience and ignores the fact that the majority of schools and parents involved in the state sector want the best for their children, providing aspirational targets and teaching and learning of a high standard.

READ MORE: Here’s what state educators could learn from independent sector

The independent sector will always enjoy the benefits of smaller class sizes and greater resources, simply because it can afford to do this. It should be added, however, that teachers working at independent schools did not require to be registered with the General Teaching Council Scotland until October 2017, often resulting in staff teaching in private schools who would not have been certified to teach in the state sector.

Having spent 35 years in our Scottish state schools I am justifiably proud of the outstanding work they consistently carry out and the professionalism and dedication of the teachers therein. Your correspondent provides a patronising and banal list of so-called differences between the state and independent sectors which is frankly insulting to the pupils, staff and parents of state schools in Scotland.

It is, of course, his choice to send his son to a private school which will introduce him to a world of advantage, old school ties and upward social mobility. The fact that these schools continue to enjoy, at least for the present, charitable status remains risible.

I would fervently hope that the cornerstones of an independent Scotland will be based on social justice and equality to provide a meritocratic state that leaves the culture of privilege and entitlement behind.

Owen Kelly

YOUR correspondent eloquently extols the advantages of private education – smaller classes, better discipline, more individual attention, better resources and so forth. These are of course benefits that any parent would want for their children, and I am sure that he would wish them for all.

Herein lies the rub, however. Were that to be the case, your correspondent’s child and all others who buy private education would then lose the key advantage of going private, namely exclusivity. The truth of the matter is that private education, like private medicine, is parasitic on the state, drawing away teaching staff and resources from state schools. One has only to look at the relative provision of sport and music to see what that leads to.

If your correspondent really has the interests of the state sector at heart, he should not undermine it by withdrawing his child from it. Alternatively, if his prime motivation is to gain advantage for his child, he should refrain from public hand-wringing.

Douglas Currie

I THINK we’re not doing too badly in Scotland’s new society. We’ve taken the lid off child abuse. The Me Too business is roundly exposing and deglamourising the insidious and largely unforgivable behaviour of a fair number of males in some sort of position of power.

The beating up of wives and womenfolk after the match is lost is no longer acceptable, if it ever were; and more recently, thank goodness, mental cruelty towards a partner is also ruled out.

When we look back at the things we roared with laughter at decades ago, we now feel ashamed. We are moving on towards better behaviour.

What remains to be tidied up? Granny bashing.

The problem with mental cruelty towards the frail and the elderly is that it is unseen. Everything is sweetness and smiles when health visitors and neighbours and the rest of thefamily call round. The frail person dare not make a fuss or begin to tell the truth of the situation for fear of repercussions and of upsetting folk, and he or she – probably not being able to get out alone – remains trapped, often afraid, and bearing insults and estrangement unnoticed but certainly not unfelt.

There are multiple pains on all sides at the difficult time of putting off selling the family home and of weighing up what is best to do. What is definitely not best is to take it out on the vulnerable one at the centre of the situation. And it is not good to objectify the person. Objectifying is out.

This is not my personal problem but I observe it with alarm and even horror.

Can we get it out of the box?

When these things get dragged out into the public marketplace then things begin to change. At least this is what I am hoping.

Hilary Christie