State school 6th forms oversubscribed

You said "But the funding per pupil is based on the existing tax take divided between the number of state pupils. If private pupils switch into state, the funding per pupil goes down across the board"

And I said that funding per pupil is a political decision.

Then you replied "And have those politicians announced the big increase in income tax that would fund a higher overall education budget, or indeed that they are cutting other services to increase the education budget?

But now you're not talking about per pupil funding or the impact on it by a minority of private school pupils switching to state schools?

Please do reread my post, as that is patently NOT what I wrote:

And have those politicians announced the big increase in income tax that would fund a higher overall education budget, or indeed that they are cutting other services to increase the education budget?

The VAT increase is not really going to add to the overall education budget. It’s meant to add some extra breakfast clubs and 1/6th of a teacher, or whatever risible amount Bridget Phillipson claimed. If you wanted to fund education properly overall, you’d need an increase in general taxation. Not a stupid class envy policy that will be financially and socially counterproductive.

If it was such a good idea, other countries would be doing it. Instead, in countries with much better education systems than ours, it’s not legal to tax education; and in some, private education actually attracts a tax repayment. Only British voters think it’s a good idea to tax education.

@neverthelastone and as I said, I think you are slightly overestimating the costs if you think that there needs to be a 'big increase in income tax' to account for a minority of private school pupils switching to state education.

You just said you have a son in state education, so how do you have “no skin in the game”? That doesn’t make any sense.

I don’t think you understand the way sixth form education funding works. Take a good look here to start with:
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9194/

https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-9194/CBP-9194.pdf

Interestingly, government projections suggest real terms funding increases are needed because there are increasing projected numbers for post-16 places from this year onwards (the very reverse of the dwindling numbers posters on this thread keep claiming). And the largest per capita funding amounts go to the FE sector and sixth form colleges — not school sixth forms, which are likely to be the parts of the sector under additional pressure from private school pupils transferring in. Local authorities decide those funding formulas, not politicians.

The government has claimed that the money raised from the VAT policy - which even at their projections would be a tiny fraction of the overall state education budget - will go in breakfast clubs in schools. Not on sixth form places or funding. And any increase to the post-16 budget will go proportionately more towards FE (which is in a really parlous state after being hugely cut by the Tories), as their per capita funding is higher, rather than to school sixth forms and sixth form colleges.

I have no skin in the game. I don't care strongly about the policy one way or another. (Other than that I strongly doubt that many of the schools merit their charitable status).

I am just tired of the ceaseless and often inconsistent fear mongering. For all the reasons I listed up thread, many children won't move. And for those who do move it is unlikely to be the end of the world for them or others.

You are completely missing the point. If I thought privately educated pupils were inherently brighter than state ones, why would the VAT policy and resources in the state budget matter at all? The very reverse! If private school pupils have no advantage or only their inherent ability, then why would the govt (and everyone on this thread) want to tax them, and why would the amount of resourcing available in the state matter in any case?

I care about the state sector educating all children well - but this policy is financially stupid and counterproductive. It will do nothing for the state sector apart from put additional pressure on state schools, make a not insignificant number of children distressed at having to move schools and leave friends and settings they’re used to, and will lead to independent school closures and job losses in the sector for ordinary people who work in them. And the gap between rich and not rich will widen further. I’d be against any government policy that relied on making children move schools as a core fundraiser for a public service that should instead be properly and adequately funded via general taxation.

And I’d be ashamed to be the kind of person that enjoyed the thought of children having to move schools as grist to some kind of class envy. It’s clear that quite a few people on this thread really, really like the thought of this, no matter if it actually costs the taxpayer money in the end.

But it is too early to know if there are enough places for September in Y12. Students apply to lots of places, don't confirm their plans until after results day, fail to get the required GCSEs... Most colleges and 6th forms can adapt quite easily to changing numbers and do every year as different cohorts come through.

And have those politicians announced the big increase in income tax that would fund a higher overall education budget

I think you are slightly overestimating the costs here.

And have those politicians announced the big increase in income tax that would fund a higher overall education budget, or indeed that they are cutting other services to increase the education budget?

No, the fiscally illiterate VAT policy is the only thing they are offering, and that looks likely to bring in peanuts compared to the overall education budget - if anything at all.

We will be, but there's just as good a chance it would be my son (if he even wishes to do those things, he has plenty of extra curriculars that take up his time)

We aren't violently competitive. We do well for our own pleasure, someone else doing well doesn't take anything from us. Your attitude seems quite toxic (and continues to assume a privately educated child is inherently brighter than a state one)

But the funding per pupil is based on the existing tax take divided between the number of state pupils. If private pupils switch into state, the funding per pupil goes down across the board

No it's not, it's decided by politicians. If the government want to decrease per-pupil funding, then they can, (the Tories did), but it is not an inevitable outcome of more private schools switching to state.

Who honestly cares about chess teams? At my dc’s state school anybody could do the maths challenge or Oxbridge outreach if they were suitable. That’s the beauty of the state sector it’s inclusive.

I imagine you and he will be equally thrilled if he gets chosen for the maths challenge or the chess team or the place on the Oxbridge outreach course instead of your son! I do hope you’ll enthusiastically cheer him on! 😆

It certainly isn’t me who’s sour - we have a full bursary and the school are paying the VAT for us.

I just call a crappy financially illiterate policy a crappy financially illiterate policy when I see one. Rather, all the people foaming at the mouth with delight to stick it to some kids they’ve never met are the sour ones! So desperate that nobody should have anything they don’t have, that they are willing to experiment with everyone’s kids just for spite. (Except the really rich of course. They can pay the VAT anyway and don’t care, so they will just carry on regardless, thanking posters like you as they go.)

But the funding per pupil is based on the existing tax take divided between the number of state pupils. If private pupils switch into state, the funding per pupil goes down across the board. This is because there are no “extra” parents for the “extra” pupils — the private school parents have already paid the tax that funds the main education budget.

Any addition from the VAT policy is likely to be minuscule, if it makes any revenue at all (and we don’t even know if it will because the impact was so badly forecasted). And if it doesn’t, the funding per pupil head decreases, not increases! In most schools/sixth forms the additional pupil per head funding won’t bring in enough to employ additional teachers or other staff - so it just increases the workload of those who are already there, and puts additional pressure on the existing state school resources.

In fact there's a new child joining my son's school having moved across country. He was previously at a private school. He is being put in top set for maths and my son and his friend helped show him round and they are very thrilled to have a new addition to their chess club. I think he'll have a great time - if he can keep up with them of course

Exactly, if little Jimmy is so much better than all those state school kids that he's a shoo - in for their 6th form places then surely he will have a glorious time shimmering at the top of the top sets and there's no need for all the handwringing.

Sorry but your post just sounds like a an extreme case of sour grapes .

Yes irresponsible because the vast majority know shit happens and private education is highly unaffordable. If your child moving school is a fate worse than death and you don’t put contingencies in place you are irresponsible. Actually moving schools Isn’t a big deal,kids do it all the time up and down the country with no ill effect. I’m sure those uber resilient privately educated kids with their default superior grades will take it all in their stride.

One minute they all have SEN so bad their parents will bankrupt themselves to go private, next minute they are going to steal all the top 6 th form spaces

For the avoidance of doubt, I have no skin in the game. The private schools round here are crap and I can afford tutors when my children need /want them. But I am tired of the scare mongering.

Ah, you’re a pleasant and deep-thinking one:

irresponsible parents didn’t cater for flex in finances as regards paying for a very expensive luxury service the majority of the country can’t afford

Oh, the people whose kids maybe have SEN, maybe have bursaries, could previously just afford it but didn’t magically foresee a mean-spirited anti-education policy being slapped on them mid year are “irresponsible”?

I have voted Labour all my life because I thought it was the option for those who cared about others, and about our social and economic future overall. This government is incompetent and useless, and to be honest, the voters who like this kind of spiteful stuff are also not ones I want to fellow-travel with either. They’re just as thick as the right wingers who voted for Tory spite policies. They simply want to punish other people’s children and don’t care how counterproductive it is or whether it backfires on them either.

Those extra sixth form pupils would bring extra funding to the sixth form as funding is per pupil. More pupils = more money = very welcome in my school.

Exactly. Those who manage fine in a state sixth form were moving anyway

We were all being told not many months ago that there are heaps of children with SEN or who are ND in the private sector, that their parents pretty much selling the clothes off their own back to send them there. These children who couldn't possibly cope in a state secondary are hardly going to thrive if shunted over at sixth form stage. They will either need a vocational type course or the continued support of the private education.

It has been happening for years. Lots of kids go from private to 6th Form Colleges or State Sector. Dome people think it looks good on their Uni applications. My Godson did exactly this and went to Oxford.

Exactly. Plenty already do move

Some more may move

But in my experience people go private for one of these reasons :

• child is very bright and parents wanted to nurture that, but in reality they would have made it into the top 6 th forms whether they were in state or private
• parents are largely concerned with ensuring their children only mix with private school children (unlikely to be moved)
• child can do ok with an extra push from private (these may have the edge over an equivalent child in state but might not enjoy the rigour of a levels and might need the continued push of private anyway)
• child is not very academic /bright or has SEN - again they are probably better in a private 6th form or moving on to do a vocational type 6th form course.
• money is no object - parents will keep them where they are for all the lovely facilities etc
• child needs to board /is heavily into sport or similar - child will stay where they are