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.

Inner London has loads of cash spent on it, Outer London though, Boroughs like Bromley, for example, have very very low state school funding.

More money for state schools.

And also billionaires owning mansions should mean more money for council housing. Because... oh, private and public finance doesn't work like that.

I have had children at private and grammar schools. Very little in it. And one of the grammars actually gets better results and has way more in cash reserves than the private (which was very good).

The children will continue to come from wealthy families who value education. Taking away private school options will not change their family dynamics or values.

We had one at the state secondary school I worked in. She was beautiful. She helped troubled teenagers to calm them and walking her was a reward for good behaviour.

All pupils had a cuddle most days.

Get all those children who are motivated, and have parents interested in their education, into state schools and the quality of state education will improve.

Are there no motivated children and interested parents in the 94% of state educated people? If it’s that easy, why aren’t the 94% doing something about it? The 6% don’t have a magic wand.

If nothing else it will at least level the playing field.

So, just because some children have to deal with chair throwing and feral behaviour, every child should be subjected to the same, in the interests of “levelling the playing field”? Perhaps we should focus on improving the state schools which aren’t performing as well as others.

Well what do you think I paid £37k per annum for two children (secondary) 10 years ago? On top of paying eye watering amounts.of tax and not using our entitlement to a state education.

I paid for:

Superb pastoral care
Superb quality of education
Superb academic results
Synergy with our life ethos (honesty, faith, zero tolerance re drugs, etc)
Effective behaviour management
High expectations

Notwithstanding specialist teaching for every subject, including Art, Music and Sport and a choice of MFL, classical languages, three separate sciences with specialist teachers.

I wasn't too interested in very small classes or excruciatingly expensive facilities.

When all.of the above becomes available in the state system, nobody will have to pay.

Did anyone see the pink pig fly past the window?

I totally agree that private education perpetuates inequality.
Well off people on MN like to pretend that anyone can be well off if they work hard enough, while at the same time spending lots of money on their children to ensure they too are well off. It is a type of cognitive dissonance.

@SluggyMuggy

So I agree - state schools need more funding. Like most of our public services, their funding has decreased over the past 13 years.

But can the state afford to fund an extra £8-9k per pupil?

What outcomes would you expect to see if funding state education at this level?

People paying for tutoring to access selective state schools, buying houses or renting in expensive catchments also perpetuates inequality, as does the huge disparity in state funding. Wealthy families being able to give children huge house deposits whilst having used the state system isn’t exactly promoting equality either. Unfortunately, there is inequality in all walks of life.

Do you have a graph with more up to date figures, op? This one conks out 10 years ago.

There's three private schools near me not one has a swimming pool. I think you'd have to pay more than 12k a year, which is affordable around here 12k , two parents on 30k a year each . Bit of help from grandparents. Work from home, no holidays. It's doable

I totally agree that private education perpetuates inequality.

I think it's a fact isn't it? No one could seriously disagree with you. It's kinda the point that it's worth paying for. I'm against it too but you sound pretty pie in the sky. These aren't new ideas to anyone surely. The world is not fair etc etc. Even those 'well off people on mumsnet' will have a more nuanced take than you're expressing. It's not that things shouldn't be better, course they should, and the state is more ravaged than it's been for a while, but what are you going to do about it? Vote? Get involved in socialism? Campaign? The answer is unfortunately small unsexy steps like that, not dreaming that all rich folk will be forced to put their kids in state schools and that will somehow fix it all.

Upping fees with VAT will only serve to increase the inequality 🤷‍♀️

But just for your favourite kid. 😁

Well of course being wealthy confers advantages in pretty much all aspects of Life!

Isn't that what most people strive for? Better accommodation, food, health care, education?

Look how many threads are started on MN asking "What career earns serious money?"
They don't want to earn more so they can count it. They want to use money to improve their lives.

People must be free to spend their own money as they choose. If private education was somehow cancelled and private schools closed what's to stop parents paying for private tuition after school?

It isn't a level playing field, it won't ever be. People are born with different attributes so aren't all the same from the very start.

Yes, this is my theory too.

The middle classes will be pushed out of the system.

But the truly wealthy won't.

And probably a lot of only children whose families can still just about make it work!

My daughter gets all of this, and more, in one of Belfast's top grammars.
She was previously in private in Scotland and the Belfast grammar is genuinely better.

Yep to both posts including @WittiestUsernameEver

Race to the bottom alert!
Life is a hell of a lot nicer with money than without.
1000% fully intend to perpetuate a higher standard than living on minimum wage.

Who do mean they? The government or parents?

Parents are not going to stop paying for their kids to go private, especially when the state system is in a shambles.

Subsequent governments decide which areas they believe are better vote winners when they consider how much to pay in whether it i s education, NHS etc. People should definitely read manifestos more carefully especially if they want to get more investment in state education.

Unfortunately, many areas elsewhere in the UK don’t have a single grammar option. If there were more schools like the one you use, I’m sure many private school parents would choose that option and save themselves a huge amount of money. The disparity within the state sector is huge.

That is great then but is it relevant to the original post? Are you telling OP that she should find her kids a better state school?

In the UK it's the parents legal responsibility to ensure their children are educated, while in Germany it's the state's responsibility. An interesting feature of Germany's setup is that private schools can't be used to segregate rich and poor and so they have to be run as not-for-profits, and the fees have to be affordable and local government can decide to ban fees in their state (and some of them do), in which case the government ends up subsidising the private school.

Pretty depressing to see some people effectively saying we should just accept inequality and do nothing to try and address it.