Nearly £9000 more spent on private secondary pupils than state pupils

[SluggyMuggy]

Research from University College London that found £12,200 a year is the average spending on a privately educated primary pupil, compared with £4,800 on a state pupil. For secondary, it’s £15,000 compared with £6,200.

This entrenches inequality as private pupils are given far more resources towards their education.

I have completed this but also suggested that if the Guardian want an unbiased opinion they would be better asking all schools for their annual reports.

from the all bells & whistles to the simple for children who simply NEED smaller classes and interventions in a calm environment.

The Labour Party couldn’t care less, they just want a policy which will appeal to the left of the party.
Starmer said he’d remove charitable status and then found out that that wouldn’t be possible - as a hot-shot lawyer you’d have thought he’d have done some research.
Do people who support this policy not realise not all independent schools are like Eton or Winchester? Evidently not - and this policy won’t affect Eton.

Thank you for posting this. Signed and shared

@Barbadossunset - I don’t think this policy would affect Eton’s survival or offering, but it will affect the demographic because if 15 per cent are currently on full bursaries and they spend significant endowment funds on their partnerships in the state sector, then some of that cash will have to go towards supporting their more middle class intake going forward. They won’t want just multi millionaires at the top and full bursary students, they need the middle ground too to make it balanced. So the endowment funds will have to be channeled that way. They aim to take any boy good enough regardless of finances.

That’s true, Araminta.

I would imagine that 15% will drop quite a bit to support the middle ground.