To think people have the wrong idea about the reason parents use private schools?

I completely agree. I just don't agree that this policy is the way to do it. @CurlewKate again...I agree the gov should be funding all schools properly, but this isn't going to do that and will only affect those on the margins of being able to afford it. It's really easy to talk about this in the abstract but when you can put names and faces to real children, often quite vulnerable or ND, who may have to leave their secure and familiar environment, friends and staff who know them as a consequence of it, knowing it's going to make not one jot of difference to the situation in state, it's pretty hard to swallow.

Every single teaching thread on here is filled with current and ex teachers talking about how much they hate their job:

violent and disruptive students
unsupportive parents
unchallenged disrespect

verbal abuse
destruction of property
theft
bullying by SLT
lack of facilities
despondent, burnt out teachers
poor discipline

I’ve read many threads where teachers have had or at about to have nervous breakdowns, are desperate to quit and/or sobbing at the idea of having to go into work

why on earth would anyone would voluntarily send their DC into an environment that breaks adult professionals is beyond me.

My DCs schools are no problem free but so far my 4 DC have done a combined 50+ years of education across several schools. They’ve not so much had a disruption in class let alone witnessed a physical assault on a member of staff. teacher student relationships are excellent, facilities and opportunities second to none. Parents are supportive, pastoral care is naturing, respect and discipline expected and achieved as a matter of course.

teachers support extracurriculars and grow genuine interest and passion in their own areas of expertise.

that’s what we pay for.

I work in a niche area of finance and think this policy will raise money. The money that it will raise is totally irrelevant though as it is so minuscule it’s a rounding error, as what schools need is proper investment.

I work in state schools. Your derogatory comments about state schools and the children and parents who have no choice but to use them are horrific op.

You have the privilege to not choose them. Most people don't have that choice.

Give state schools the funding they deserve.

I would imagine many kids are better off in private schools to be fair!

People send their kids to private school because they perceive it will buy them an advantage. Whether that advantage is better exam grades, smaller classes, better facilities doesn't matter. The bottom line is they believe their child will be better off somehow than if they were in a state school. End of.

@BibbleandSqwauk "But not all private schools and parents and kids are the same and this policy will affect the most vulnerable most of all."

Why? The schools will still be there. There will just be a bit more money in the system to help other, even more vulnerable kids.

And that's lovely for you and your friends. Well done you. Not all kids are NT and academically able, or socially confident. They can be extremely vulnerable in large comps with a long list of unmet needs but nowhere near qualifying for an EHCP. The small groups and nurturing environment my kids' school provides keeps them safe and mentally well. I really don't care about academic success so long as those two things are achieved. That's not to say noone does and I've no doubt people rightly or wrongly think private will give that advantage. But not all private schools and parents and kids are the same and this policy will affect the most vulnerable most of all.

You can't compare state schools now to ones in the 90s/early 2000s, they are a completely different kettle of fish.

How is “learning in small classes with lots of amenities and focus on their development” different to advancing academic results?

I enjoyed my state school perfectly fine and did extremely well academically. I imagine some of my peers would have done academically better in the environment you describe. I doubt they’d have done better in many other regards as my friends are all relatively well rounded contributing members of society.

"beyond the actual outcome it's still a fair policy"??? So if it actually ends up costing the state sector more, disadvantaging both the private and state, that's ok because it's fair?? That had to be the most crazy thing I've read for a while. Absolutely the epitome of "stick it to "the rich"" . I don't think a safe nurturing environment in which to learn is a luxury. In my situation, I have had to pay fees to get that. I'm not the only one. I suppose you could argue I should move to a better catchment instead, but as has been rehearsed many times over, that's basically the same thing. Using wealth to buy advantage. But apparently that's ok.

Posters who bang on about how their state school is fabulous and a rival in every way to private are at that school due to wealth. And they'll have an asset to pass on to their kids and perpetuate the inequality further. When mine finish school I'll probably downsize to clear my debt. They won't be inheriting much at all, but they'll have had a safe and non traumatic 5 years growing up. Apparently that's a luxury though and parents like me are selfish arseholes. Ok then.

So true. I have built such models in my youth and they construct a veneer of sophistication and confidence around a lot of spurious variables for which everyone is guessing the future. Furthermore, economists almost always give a plethora of scenarios and you can choose the one that fits the narrative best. People are very gullible about the power of economics.

I don't expect people to state they are an economist before starting a reply, and anyone with enough sound knowledge is entitled to their opinion on it – as are you. It doesn't even matter if anyone is an economist or not, and that was my entire point – until the policy comes into play it's all just guesswork (be that educated guesswork or armchair guesswork) and no one can say with certainty what exactly will transpire. If anyone is claiming to know exactly what will transpire with certainty, then that's in the realm of delusion.

Beyond the actual outcome, it still doesn't remove its value as a fundamentally fair policy.

People don't generally start a comment by saying "I'm an economist" before getting reply to the OP
Incidentally I'm part of ENT which contains a fair few economists, tax lawyers and HR lawyers. None of them see any value to the policy and the consensus is that is over 10% leave private schools then there will be a net cost to the state. 8-10% leave = net income of between £0-0.5 million. We already look like over 5% will leave and that has increased since Reeves brought the policy forward from Sept 25 to Jan 25.
IFS warned a few weeks ago that Labour were already short of the predicted income and again, that was before the new Jan 25 implementation date.
They now look like they will have to exempt military on top of the exemptions for EHCPs and state boarding. The cost of legal challenges will potentially wipe out any significant income.

By no one having said that they are, thus far. Please point one out if you see one. My DH on the other hand is an economist and worked for HMRC for 10yrs and sees value in the policy.

But how does this policy actually improve anything in the state sector? And please don't tell me 6500 maths teachers. I am a teacher...it's absolutely laughable that anyone believes this can happen. The issues with state education need an investment and long term plan ten times what this is supposedly going to raise. But that's too hard, so this is fine instead as a quick and easy vote winner.

How is my kid not being in that state classroom harming the state sector? How will my kid being put back in help it? I keep hearing the argument that if everyone had to use state there'd be more motivation and pressure to change it, but that makes no sense and is pretty bloody insulting to the 93% of parents who do use state. At a granular level there is not one single way this policy benefits anyone at all. If, in 2/3 years time there actually are 6500 more maths teachers committed and permanently in state schools, I'll come and say I was wrong.

And how do you know no-one on this thread is an economist?

I meant no one on this thread.

The focus needs to be on making real changes, not trying to force every child to suffer in that system. Let’s do better? Or instead, let’s just opt out? Then it’s just other people’s children who will suffer

@twistyizzy ,

‘Well economists are equipped to forecast because that's what they do for a living: build forecast models to predict future financial behaviour’

Except that their back tested forecasts perform little better than the proverbial simian darts player!

That is literally exactly what my private school does. It's small, shabby non selective, not in SE, that people on reasonable professional salaries can afford because mortgages are cheaper here. Not much spare to splash about but given the demographics here, the state secondaries are much as the pp described. Mine were subjected to violent bullying before I took the decision to move them. I'm in debt to do so. I am just as fed up with ignorant, uninformed opinions about what the private sector and it's users are as other posters are with "whinging poshos."

I don't give a crap about connections, smart facilities, or results actually. Mine are not high fliers. But as they have mild SEN and one now is completely paranoid and traumatised if anyone so much as looks his way, you're bloody right I will do all I can to have them not mix with the kind of kids that put him in that condition. I'm not for a minute suggesting all state schools or kids in them are awful thugs, but to deny that any are, that it's all a made up myth is simply wrong.

But really if you feel like that and there is zero interest why do you come onto all of the threads that are so obviously about private schools?

I suspect you are enjoying the moaning about them which is also fine. But telling people they shouldn't discuss it isn't on. You aren't in control of us.

Well economists are equipped to forecast because that's what they do for a living: build forecast models to predict future financial behaviour

I actually think that paying for all the extra facilities and 'opportunities' at private school is why it feels so selfish and unequal.
All of our kids deserve a good experience of education.

It doesn't matter why you send your child to private school. Whatever reason, it usually gives your child an unfair advantage
.
Private schools produced most of the conservative cabinet in the last 14 years who have trashed the country