To ask how you afford private school fees

[Elephantslovetofly]

We have a young DD, and although it's a while away yet we are thinking about school. The area we live in does not have a good local school, and we are considering an independent school for her

Disclaimer - I went to a private school and for what it's worth had a great education. I enjoyed being there and did well in exams. I believe my parents decided to send me there also because of a lack of a good local state school. I might have done fine at a state school, but will never know I guess

We are probably 45 min drive from the school I went to - further than is ideal. DH doesn't mind driving her there if we decide to send her there though (if she is fortunate enough to get a place)

The issue is whether we can afford it. The fees are about £9k per year for junior and £12k for senior. Assuming we therefore need to find £1k per month for fees

My cheeky question is this - if you have a child at private school, what does your household earn and how difficult is it to find the money each month to pay the fees? Our income is about £60k, and at the moment I don't think we can do it (along with our other current expenses). Wages might go up a bit before we would need to start paying, but if this is always going to be a pipe dream i'd rather get over it now

I know we could move closer to a good state school, but am exploring my options at this stage. Don't really want to move, as we have a good house here and are settled

Thanks for reading

Right, so when we abolish private schools, state schools will all magically become even will they? Bollocks. Can't remember which set of tables, but one recently had the top 20 (or maybe 25) as state schools. But we're expected to believe abolishing private will make failing high in deprivedsville an equal opportunity for it's pupils?

Nobody gives a fuck about kids in areas like mine getting an inferior school and education to their own dc's state funded education. But it's suddenly unfair when a tiny minority openly pay for a better opportunity than their own kids.

So you see the problem isn't the school inequality. It's the wealth inequality.

umm.....that's exactly the point!!!!! Welcome!

And, the best way to start addressing wealth inequality? Start addressing education inequality.

You do know that is mostly bollocks, don't you, sandyholme? But if it makes you feel better, fill your boots.

Right, so when we abolish private schools, state schools will all magically become even will they?

No. State schools will start becoming even when......wait for it.......it's coming......we start trying to make them even!

Take private schools out of the equation. Well, this particular equation.

Well come out and say that then Harry rather than hiding behind the education argument.

You want a world where everyone has the same resources. How did that work out in Russia? Are China or North Korea fairer societies?

And in this utopian world in which private schools were abolished, how would the over-stretched state schools cope with the influx of approx 20% more pupils?

Whilst I agree that the disparity between the haves and have nots is depressing, surely state education would be in a far worse position (financially at least) if some of us were not opting out, thereby paying twice - once through taxation and once through fees.

The point that I was making earlier re. Bursary schemes is that there are many, many children in our independent schools who are there despite their parents' inability to pay (as I was 30 years ago).

So Harry you 1. believe we need to address educational unfairness to close the wealth gap but 2. accept wealth inequality makes education equality impossible.

You see the problem there don't you...

I genuinely thought that was obvious, eeyore.

But, no, there is a middle ground between what we have now and communism. Socialism for a start. But I'm not even championing that.

I'm just suggesting that money should not influence how good a education one receives in order to gain hard earned wealth like yours. Not suggesting a system whereby you turnover all your hard earned wealth to drug addicts.

But, yes, you have made it clear money was not a factor in your education. But as a rule, it's generally the case.

Socialist bilge ... Communism ... Marxism ... Yadayada ... someone shout 'politics of envy' and we've got a full house

"I [went to public school and] got into Cambridge on my own merit"

I invite you to read this thought provoking cartoon about education and checking your privilege.

So Harry you 1. believe we need to address educational unfairness to close the wealth gap but 2. accept wealth inequality makes education equality impossible.

In the current system, yes, it does. Which is why I believe it should change.

Have I not made that much pretty clear? I've said it about 19 times!

harry explain how abolishing private will lessen the gap, given the biggest gap is between the best and worst schools?

Do you think if I send dd to suffer the same excuse as the rest of the locals get for an education it will magically improve because it has one extra child?

• best and worst state schools

First way of improving state provision would be to insist that all MPs have to send their DCs to a state school within their constituencies. Let politicians experience for themselves just how frustrating a badly funded, badly managed school can be.

Also the products of private schools are very well educated and although the left don't like to think so they then enhance the nation. They do good work. 8it is why people send their children from abroad to come to our leading schools. You don't cut down what is good unless you're a particularly difficult Marxist. China in the cultural revolution made the intelligensia, doctors, and the like work the fields and stripped them of everything . It did not do much good. You can understand the reason for it - it's why white farmers have been stripped of lands by black Zimbabweans to right a past unfairness but there it has resulted in crops going unpicked because those put in charge do not have the skills. So the answer should always be to improve state schools (which is what has happened in inner London) rather than destroying the jewel in our Crown which is private schools.

In the same ways if parent X cuddles their toddler a lot or reads to it we don't say shame on you for being a good parent. Instead we praise them. There is nothing wrong with excellence and striving at all. Those who choose a different path are free do to do of course but that just leaves the field wide open to those from state and private sector who want to achieve things.

^harry explain how abolishing private will lessen the gap, given the biggest gap is between the best and worst schools?

Do you think if I send dd to suffer the same excuse as the rest of the locals get for an education it will magically improve because it has one extra child?^

Can you stop bringing magic into the discussion! We all know magicians are con artists (except Dynamo and Paul Daniels).

Take private schools out of the equation for now, Let's work on the state schools and leveling the playing field there.

The way to solve (what I believe to be) the problem is not by sending our children to failing schools but by the government funding said schools and putting workable programs in place to improve them.

"Today 17:21 Mominatrix

Harry - I agree. Start by equalising opportunity for the 93% who use state provision. Harping on about private schools distracts from preventing the very real discrepancies within the state system"
We're talking about private education because that's what the thread's about! Happy to talk about what needs to be done about state education on another thread.

Harry - what are the specifics of your solution then? Aboloshing private schools alone won't do it. What else do you propose?

It's all very well to cry 'no fair' but you need to have a solution before anything can change

Sorry x-post

I dunno, eeyore, maybe the best teachers/principals more to work in the lesser state schools.

Improve the overall facilities at lesser state schools.

Have counsellors/tutors/a buddy program/whatever all on hand at lesser state schools.

You know, that sort of thing.

So the problem is really lies in the state school system then. Private schools are just a distraction.

Gnome de plume:
"First way of improving state provision would be to insist that all MPs have to send their DCs to a state school within their constituencies. Let politicians experience for themselves just how frustrating a badly funded, badly managed school can be."

There are, according to Wikipedia, 229 labour MPs in UK. Now, I don't know how many of them have children but I guess quite a few.
Diane Abbot got a lot publicity when she privately educated her son, so we would have heard about it if any other Labour MPs did the same.
Have none of these MPs tried to improve their children's schools? Are the state schools in Labour constituencies much better than those is Conservative constituencies?
I ask, as it seems to be Tory MPs who get the blame for poor state schools on the grounds they send their children to private schools.

harry I agree re levelling state. But private is irrelevant to that issue. And I'm using the word magic because there's no other way that abolishing private could possibly make a difference for the majority.

Eeyore, the problem really lies with the elitist private education system which is in place in this country. But we can level that playing field after we've leveled the state runned one.

Lurked, of course it would. It would make a massive difference.

This country is run by privately educated people. And by run, I mean run. Not specifically governed. Although they are all privately educated, too. So how do you stop the merry go round where by to have any sort of infliuence, you need to be privately educated? So we are run by the elite, who look out for the elite. Dismantling the system which has produced that set up would go a log way towards equality.