Closing all private schools would benefit state schools

[Nimbostratus100]

I've been thinking about that the argument of state schools not being able to accommodate another 7 % of pupils. It really doesn't add up

For one thing, state schools are frequently in a situation of having to accommodate 7% more pupils and they just stretch and cope. It wouldn't be any different.

And each pupil brings in more government funding.

And if all the private schools closed, we would have a fresh pool of 14% more teachers! More funding for teachers in state schools, and a massive increase in numbers of teacher applying!

Given that many vacancies are currently attracting zero applicants, this could be a total game changer!

Of course some teachers in private schools would not apply to state schools, an would just leave teaching instead, and some would not be qualified to teach in state schools.

But then, we wouldn't be taking in 7% more pupils, either, given how many private school pupils are overseas, or have parents overseas, and would just move to board in another country.

So say 5% more pupils, and maybe 12% more teachers! fantastic! even more so when you consider the resources potentially freed up - many of our best resources were donated 10 or 20 years ago by private schools, they might have untold wealth in the form of sports equipment, science equipment, technology, test books, musical instruments! working photocopiers!!! school furniture!

And potentially, even school premises

Meanwhile back on Planet Earth...

so what do you think would happen, on planet earth, in the uk, if private schools were closed?

The wealthy people would buy (at inflated cost) the houses in the immediate vicinity of the best state schools. This means that those who would have been able to get their kids in, via catchment, are ousted because they can't now afford the crazy prices for bog standard homes.

So they then get faced with having to use the sub standard schools, even without relocation.

So the crappier schools get pushed and pushed to take more, and the high achieving state schools become state funded private schools essentially.

The wealthy people would buy (at inflated cost) the houses in the immediate vicinity of the best state schools. This means that those who would have been able to get their kids in, via catchment, are ousted because they can't now afford the crazy prices for bog standard homes.

So they then get faced with having to use the sub standard schools, even without relocation.

So the crappier schools get pushed and pushed to take more, and the high achieving state schools become state funded private schools essentially.

but ALL state schools would take more, and ALL state schools would have access to a MASSIVE new pool of teachers applying for work.

ANd houses would only be bought when houses were sold, and many private school parents would not move because they are in very rich areas already

Fab! Those of us who have been paying private fees would now put our children in state schools. At a cost of about £20k per child per year. Funded by you, the tax payer.

great, because it would force more spending in schools! which we need! and that spending could go on staff! because there would be people there, qualified, experienced and applying!

Private schools own their premises and equipment. They wouldn’t just give it to the state and the state couldn’t just take it either.

private teachers usually earn more than state. I don’t think many would be willing to take a pay cut.

badly thought out idea that is doomed to fail.

Unless we leave the country, which a lot of us do...

Do you really think the Tory government would put the money in per child, pound for pound? Hilarious.

private schools do give their hand-me-downs to state schools quite regularly

private school staff are not necessarily better paid, or working in better conditions than in state schools, and many teachers move between the two throughout their careers - I dont ever understand why people dont get this! Private school teachers are coming from the same pool as state school teachers, and many are the same teachers. They are not tow different "species" of teacher - I have taught in both, and the private schools was definitely the worst conditions I have worked in, from the management side of things.

The only private school teachers that might find the move hard are the unqualified ones, as much fewer state schools employ unqualified teachers

It obviously works in Finland. OP, though I believe the changes went hand in hand with better rewards for teachers and an insistence they had to have achieved certain qualifications.

But discussion of it happening in the UK is pointless. Most of the ruling class went to some of the most expensive private schools. There’s no way they will throw away their privilege for the benefit of wider society.

The state schools would 'just stretch'. Like elastic ! Of course they would ! 😂

A labour govt can't just shut charitable trusts that have existed in some cases for centuries. They are legal entities. Court action would take decades. Half their MPs would object to the disruption of their own children's education.

And even if they did, most of the teachers at my ds' school would change career or retire. Most have already left the state sector and wouldn't go back, or are on second careers, after the army.

What about the children of posted service personnel (20% of our intake). Would the state provide boarding facilities? Or would the army have to change their parents' deployment? And the diplomatic/civil service contingent? Bring them home too?

And do you imagine the assets would transfer to the state? Labs and classrooms too small to hold a class of 32. At our school, the parents own the text books, sports kit and technology so nothing to raid there. Minibuses and larger items are leased, or owned by the PTA. Do you think independent schools haven't considered ownership structure and how to protect themselves?

A Labour govt can tax schools and make them more exclusive as a result. Anything else makes a nice soundbite on the campaign trail but won't fly legally and would cause more problems than solutions.

nope. Wouldn’t happen. The Tories are the masters of making people (including teachers) do more with less funding. There would not be a proportionate increase in funding. And another thing that would happen apart from rich people buying up the expensive houses in the best catchment areas is private tutoring would skyrocket.

I used to teach in a state school in an Asian country where private schools were not the norm. What parent did instead is spend lots on private after school programmes and private tutors.

The government pays schools per pupil. and state schools get less per pupil than private schools,, but do far more with it.

Your child would be educated for far less in a state school, partly because none of your money is going into profit for the business of a private school - which is a business. So the school would not get the £20k, but would not need it either

Do you ever wonder where exactly your £20 k is going? and how much is actually on education?

But yes, not all private school students would come to state schools, as some would just leave the country as you say, but that just increases still further the proportional numbers of fresh teaching talent

many of our best resources were donated 10 or 20 years ago by private schools, they might have untold wealth in the form of sports equipment, science equipment, technology, test books, musical instruments! working photocopiers!!! school furniture

And potentially, even school premises

At a cost.

I think you are forgetting that private schools are businesses with owners and shareholders

They might sell all that stuff to the LEA but at a price.

Certainly won’t be getting stuff for free

Also where are these extra pupils and teachers going to go?

I would say most schools use all there classrooms so where will all these extra teachers teach if each needs a separate classroom

Of course there would be a proportionate increase in funding! That is how state school funding works

Listen to The Nice White Parents podcast. That’s what would happen. You’ll get a lot of state schools that are selective by stealth.

Also how do you outlaw private schools in terms of legislation? You have to say that all children must attend a state school. So you’d also get the homeschool kids back ( not sure how many that is). Many of those children are homeschooled as they didn’t cope in mainstream so you need to find resources to support them. You can’t say homeschool is ok but private school isn’t from a legislative perspective as they are both forms of private education essentially- many homeschoolers use paid services in part.

I also think you’re overestimating number of international students. That only impacts boarding schools - 13% private school students board and probably only half of them ( max) are international. So that’s about 0.3% you’d lose, not 2%.

'...because none of your money is going into profit for the business of a private school - which is a business.'

Not true, most independents are charitable trusts and so monies are invested back into the school.

No idea where you get your made up numbers from, but our children, fully educated in private schools, have never received a penny in government subsidies - private schools don't receive these. On the contrary, we've paid a LOT of taxes, not one penny of which has gone towards our children's education
But that's ok - our eldest is now at university with a scholarship, and we're leaving the country for good, so not another penny of our taxes will be spent in the UK :)

Even if we suspend belief and pretend that is what would happen with funding, it still wouldn’t solve the issues of backdoor private education through excessive tutoring etc.

And if you think the only thing wrong with state schools is lack of funding you’re wrong. I worked for one week in a beautifully equipped and newly built state of the art school in north England.

It was one of the worst schools I’d ever been in and I told the agency I could never go back.

I researched and found out it was due to the area - it was apparently very rough. So basically many of the pupils had parents who had no respect for education or the law and encouraged their kids to violence and it showed in their behaviour and academic performance. I’m sure very few if any of the local go to private schools so if they shut they wouldn’t be attending a school like that. Then you’d get the schools in richer areas continuing to flourish, especially with the influx of formerly privately educated kids.

Are you on something, OP? Where have you got your numbers from? Where did you find this logic? Where would all this bountiful extra public funding come from? Do you think that parents who pay for private schools currently pay a proportionate amount of tax less, because they’ve opted out of state education? And that the govt will no find these people and tax them the same way state school parents are taxed? Are you aware that most private schools have charitable status and aren’t businesses led by profit? What about private schools for children with special needs? Do you think the oligarchs who Tory and Labour governments alike have bent over to entice to the UK with the carrot of an English education and a shot at oxbridge are going to quietly agree to send their kids to a state school? I could go on.

Public education in the UK isn’t about providing the best possible education for our children. It’s about providing a bare minimum consumable for the lowest price possible and whipping teachers and administrators to make that happen. We will all reap what we are sowing within a generation.

OP, the true maths of the situation is this.

All parents pay tax to cover their children's education by the state.

615,000 children receive private education in the UK so they don't cost the state a school place. The govt benefits from 615,000 lots of tax it doesn't have to spend on those school places - about £5k each child or £3,075,000,000 per annum.

If Labour ban independent schools and force everyone through the state sector, they have to pay for the extra school places, but with no extra tax take.

Plus bear the cost of protracted legal battles, disruption to education for countless children, damage to the UK's education infrastructure and alienation of a lot of their own MPs and donors.

Why would they do that?

I think not only would you drive not just the foreign pupils from our shores but also the pupils who’s parents take one look at the local comp and decide to transfer their businesses or jobs abroad in order to put their dc into a private school elsewhere.

So whilst state schools are gaining even more pupils and getting more money in (although not enough to actually cover educating a child given the state of State education)

It is going to cost the government even more money as they now have to pay out for these extra pupils but on top of that the government tax income reduces as some of the parents no longer pay their higher tax in this country

Don't be daft, Whalesong. All school children are taught by teachers whose training was funded by the state ie tax payers money.

The private education sector wouldn't exist without the state, unless it was prepared to fund teacher training which would increase school fees massively.

And where does that funding come from? There isn't an infinite pot of money to be spent, schools are funded from taxes. Quite frankly if parents are willing and able to pay to educate their children whilst they still pay taxes to fund other peoples then crack on! The amounts per pupil are woefully inadequate as it is, most schools have funding shortfalls. Extra pupils don't alleviate that shortfall, they increase it.