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

Change, good point re siblings: DCs school is lottery with sibling rule for subsequent admissions.
Two schools in our area offer this kind of admission by lottery, but places are only allocated if parents have named the school as one of their three preferences when making their application for a secondary school place. Parents only tend to apply from out of area if logistics work, eg good transport links or en route to parents' place of work. Both schools are in city centre locations in areas of social deprivation but remain popular choices.

There are private schools in Finland (despite what many think). Private schools are, however, not allowed to profit from the basic element of education. The state funds that part of the education for all children, so private schools receive some state funding.

The point about my idea for effectively turning private schools into a "grammar" system accessible to all is that it would do away with the process where those wealthy enough to afford fees nevertheless avoid paying them by careful tutoring in y4-6 to gamr the grammar exams. You can tutor for the place, but if you are affluent enough to afford the fees you will pay. It effectively works like opting in to a higher tax bracket (because itt's means-tested for everyone) if you want the "premium" version of education rather than the "basic" version but the poorest can opt in for minimal or no cost. With the right balance the tutoring becomes unnecessary and irrelevant because the "top up tax" for a higher quality of education than the majority of taxpayers wish to pay could stop being about academic prowess and offer the smaller-class-size more nurturing education options too, so that there are appropriate (lower pressure but still enhanced) options available for the kids who would need tutoring to get into the academic hothouses where they aren't really happy.

Thankfully we live in democracy.

Most LAs are utterly useless, why inflict that on everyone?

The reason why there are still grammar schools in Kent (I don't know about other areas) is because the constituents there didn't want them abolished and their MPs advocated for them. The Tony Crosland paper on comprehensive schooling was guidance not compulsory national policy (although it was enthusiastically adopted in many areas). You can read about this in Hansard if you want. It's quite interesting. There was a strong desire to emulate the USSR educational system.

The grammars have expanded in pupil numbers by around 30% since.

I'm neither pro nor anti grammar but I do think it is important not to ride roughshod over democracy, and nationalisation of private and charitable assets is practised by some pretty questionable regimes too (the grammars that went private or turned comprehensive in the 60s did so after consultation).

When I taught in a grammar there was the odd kid who'd clearly been tutored a lot but 95% of them were extremely bright...

"I would love to see private education in all sectors, including SEN, ceased in favour of a return to state funded education for all."

I did write ceased as opposed to 'seized', so not advocating for wrestling selective or fee-paying provision out of current management / ownership by dint of Marxist takeover.

A more equitable education system could be achieved through democratic means.

I’ve just paid our school fee bill for Spring term. That’s a lot of money I could spend on tutoring and activities instead if everyone was forced to go to a state school.

Will extra-curriculars be banned too? What about a trip to the Globe or skiing at half term? Can we visit Pompeii or is that unfair?

It’s a good thing if I pay extra for schooling and healthcare. It means we deplete the “free” system less!!

Imagine a country run by people who had attended state schools and used NHS for healthcare, and how much more invested they would be in public services as a result.

Can you cite any examples of private schools gifting to state?

Randomly, DC's independent secondary passed on several racing kayaks when they got replacements, so that a local comprehensive could enter a team in the Devizes-Westminster race. I presume that they asked a few schools but only one was interested or had staff prepared to take on the commitment of the training.

Staff prepared to take on the commitment of training... for free.

When I'm sitting in a freezing cold classroom with no pencils, no paper, we've run out of exercise books and there's no staff to support the children who need it, I often think how a donated kayak would solve all my problems.

It won’t make them invest more money in any public schools or health- it won’t- don’t be naive. The people who can pay for things, will still pay for things.

They would have a totally different mindset. You're naive if you don't think having a cabinet made up of people from the same educational background doesn't impact on their support (or lack of support) tor state education.

And how many of those people send their kids to private schools? Or switched them to excellent state schools when they realised the optics weren’t great in regards to their voter base?

Those not in the state system have actually no idea what the reality is. People think the govt would give more money. No they wouldn’t and the wealthier would just buy in certain places, like they do now. The struggle that comes with poverty outside of school would still be there. Just worse as still no extra suppprt.

Private schools are not businesses and don’t have shareholders. They are charities and most of them spend the bulk of their fee income on teachers’ salaries.

I think you are an idiot OP.

SEN provision in the state system is shit. You know why?

Because 30 kids in a class doesn't work for them.

You realise that treating everyone the same is sometimes the most unfair thing you can do.

Your proposal @KaihahUmoniiv assumes that only the brightest children deserve the “private school equivalent” input. Whereas those children often need least additional support, and it’s the middle third who stand to gain the most from targeted support. In reality all children deserve a suitable and sufficient education, it’s just that the state doesn’t currently provide that for many.

This. My DC go to a state school that is like this. Essentially a private school but free. Family homes in the surrounding area start at around £600k - 2m. The parents donate enormous amounts of money and provide free services for the kids so that they have the best.

Those resources and teachers are still for the posh kids.

Our experience is different. Our dc went to our local comprehensive which is rated Outstanding and is oversubscribed.

At the point they atended, within the catchment were some of the cheapest houses in the area, plus a higher proportion of pupils on FSM than the next nearest schools.

The catchment area has now been split in two as a sister school has been built in the cheaper area. That is also Outstanding and oversubscribed.

@Imsorryyoufeelthatway that is exactly what happens with people who consider themselves left wing, it’s actually hypocritical. Personally I find it somewhat distasteful when people rant on and are anti private education but then do this.

I agree with you that all children should have a higher quality education. If I was in charge all schools would have the same funding levels as a typical private school, teachers would be paid better and have sufficient non-classroom time to get all their work done without having to stay up till midnight at home, and it would all be paid for by general taxation.

However the population keeps voting for lower taxes instead because the majority of taxpayers don't want the tax bill that would be necessary to achieve this.

So I am trying to imagine an opt-in higher tax regime that is genuinely means-tested so that the poorest will pay very little and will be subsidised by the richest, so that families who do believe in higher taxation to fund better education are able to do so at all income levels.

I also agree that it should be possible for this to apply at all levels of ability, not just for the brightest kids.

That’s not what your previous post said at all @KaihahUmoniiv which suggested reserving the higher quality provision for the children in the top 3rd.

Spending the most money on the bottom third would probably the most effective from a cost point of view. It would greatly reduce our social care and benefits bills of the future. And it’s not a coincidence that a very high proportion of the country’s prison population has some form of additional learning need.

I think charitable status for private schools is a complete joke. They are re writing the rules to suit themselves

Not the top third academically (I said originally that once balanced right it should stop being about academic prowess). The third of the population that wants a higher quality of education and is in favour of paying more to get it. Which a lot of people aren't.