Not to send my children to private school even though I can afford it

[AdamRyan]

I believe in comprehensive education and think children should all be educated together, to improve social mobility and prevent a "brain drain" where less privileged children go to some schools, and more privileged go to others.
Am I in the minority and being naive?

YANBU - comprehensive schools are the way to go
YABU - I'd send my children private if I could

Of course they are, even if it is sharing perspectives from different backgrounds, understanding a variety of views certainly enhances your critical thinking abilities as opposed to the lack of variety in perspectives in private school.

What, all of them? No variety of perspectives in any private school, apparently 😆

There isn't a lack of variety in perspectives in my own child's private school. I guess this cuts both ways in that people who don't have experience in that sector have prejudices and ideas that aren't necessarily borne out in reality. Luckily I have personal experience of both sectors and so does my child.

Not everyone has experiences of both though and a secondary school experience is different to a cosy primary school setting.

There simply can't be the diversity in opinion from socio economic groups as only 7% of the population attend private school (unless you are that 1% who receive burasries, even then that doesn't mean you have a low family income as we have seen with the examples on this thread), the price of fees automatically denies access to a vast majority of people on normal to low incomes. Whereas state school is open to all and you absolutely do get that range of income, there are people at DS's school that can afford private school but they don't go to private school. This is not a prejudice or a bias, it is a fact, a fact about the different perspectives from socio-economic backgrounds that don't exist in private schools.

The is variety of cultures in some schools but categorically not socioeconomic diversity for the reasons I just outlined.

I actually do feel sorry for some DC at private school as they are not academically able and the pressure is immense to conform and to get the best results due to the fact that your parents' are paying.

Not all private schools are hothouses focused on results. Some are nurturing with an ‘whole child’ focus.

I don’t think you really feel sorry got those children, you’re just trying to permeate your narrow view of private school because you inherently think they’re unfair

The law on charities (part of which I quoted above) is interesting. There were old cases about things like if a nun is in a contemplative order (never leaves, just prays) is that charity - "advancement of religion" - so certainly was in the past even if no "good works" other than prayer are done. It has always been a can of worms and now has that public benefit bit added to it.

If 500,000 places at state schools are not taken up by those of us who paid/pay school fees that is a massive public benefit as there is 500,000x the cost of that available instead to spend on the state school children, but despite that fact private schools still within their means by law must provide some additional public benefit.

Labour knows it cannot just slap 20% VAT on fees for legal reasons as 20% may then have to go on university fees etc. So the Financial Times thinks they may instead have to impose some kind of turnover tax which is a special one a bit like an extra tax on oil and gas companies. it is going to be very hard to do it lawfully and not subject to legal challenge. If it is done as VAT instead, then the schools can claim VAT back on what they buy so they benefit there and if they are not allowed to be charities then they will not have to provide any bursaries etc and can be more exclusive which might be win for some too. It is a complicated issue. Parents can always educate children abroad eg Ireland or Brittany in boarding schools or parents can educate children at home (as our late Queen was educated).

Where i live the primay schools divide by colour and religion - C of E v the one nearest my house with many of the 5 year olds in muslim head covering and then the prep school at end of my road where my twins went which is fee paying has the race/religious mixing you don't get in the state schools at primary level BUT that is a feature of a fairly unusually mixed London borough so not typical of the UK.

The level of energy these people devote to creating and shoring up their stereotypes of private schools never ceases to amaze me. I can’t get that interested in other peoples business. Just can’t.

I think it might be typical of state schools in some other areas of the uk which are ethnically diverse though. See towns in West Yorkshire which have one comp which is 90% plus white and one which is almost all Asian. Whereas the local private day schools will be mixed.

“People don't live by these stereotypes, these neat pigeon holes to make an argument stick.”

The irony. So essentially anyone using stereotypes is lazy and ignorant, unless it’s you banging on about hooray henrys.

So you think they do have a monopoly on clever and talented kids? I suppose you need to justify the fees somehow.

Goldenbear
Eh? Where have I said that?
Also, as others have pointed out, you banging on about others stereotyping state schools is the pot calling the kettle burnt arse. You have done just that about private schools.

You, Adam, are the putative family who lived near enough to a school that wasn't terrible and could send your children there, safe in the knowledge that you could pick up the gaps. Did your kids have swimming lessons outside school? Have you ever taken them to the cinema? Have they joined a club you had to pay for? If you thought they were going to fail their Maths GCSE would you be able to either help them or pay for someone else to do so?
You have no idea about my family/local school/socioeconomic backgrounds. But what is your point here? Most parents from all backgrounds do things on your list. Its hardly relevant to my point, that we shouldnt be dividing society based on income from childhood.

I was wondering last night whether the bursaries are not done out of altruism, but are a way for private schools to ensure they have enough clever kids to keep their grades up.

You have a very narrow view of what private education is and why people might choose it. Some schools are very academic. Some much broader in outlook. They will look to admit kids who can benefit from what they have to offer and make a good contribution to the life of the school. The sneaky agenda is in your head, I’m afraid.

Surely they wouldn’t need to do this, if the students are ‘spoon-fed to A-levels’ anyway?

Absolutely they do provide scholarships and bursaries to children who will reflect well on the school whether sport-academics-music.

Often there are conditions attached regarding the scholarship.

The Economist recently wrote a good article on whether or not Private schools are worth the costs, now fees are going up and up.
Interestingly, they didn't actually answer the question... just pointed out the traditional benefits of getting into the better Unis going away in the UK and that many kids would fare the same given their parents money and connections wherever they went.

'I was wondering last night whether the bursaries are not done out of altruism,'

They're done out of a need to try to 'earn' charity status, and for PR and marketing.
It looks good on a shiny new prospectus - look at us, generous, part of the local community, helping poor 'deserving kids',
and also pushes those MC parents who are wavering over the line into a fee paying school. 'Yes, we'll have to make sacrifices but Lottie/George/Poppy/Olly is so talented at ---- and s/he's given a bursary!'

These schools are businesses, and they have to fight to get new clients. 10% off fees of £20k is nice for MC parents, but isn't making ANY difference to WC parents no matter how bright their child is. Not when the average salary in the UK is around £27k.

No, they do that as well, have you not being reading this thread, as was pointed out the tiny percentage of bursaries handed to the 'dullards' are to fulfill the charitable status conditions.

Then what’s the problem? If private schools aren’t beneficial and state schools are just as good, then why do you need to pay them any mind at all?

By spoon fed you mean ‘supported go reach their full potential’, which apparently you consider to be a bad thing. Do you want schools to be a supportive environment, or are you more in favour of a survival of the fittest ethos?

“Remember kids, achievement only counts if the odds were against you!”

I went to a private school until I was 12, I have wealthy relatives as does DH that send their children to private school, DH works with quite a few private school educated pupils. My DD's best friend has been at private school for the last year, year 7 and DD is included in some of their chats online so you see I 'do' have insight and knowledge on this. The children in these scenarios are nice kids but I genuinely do feel for them with the pressure they are under, if you are coasting academically there seems no acceptance of that being your potential. I also feel that they are mostly sheltered and living in a bubble, unfortunately, money cannot protect you from everything and I think that has the potential to be quite damaging to your mental health.

Of course scholarships and bursaries exist to burnish schools' reputations. They are usually awarded to very able children, and the brightest will often have multiple offers to consider. Just like the brightest graduates will be the most sought after by employers!

I haven't stated that they are 'spoon fed' but they are pressurised to achieve a set of results that reflects on the school and helps the 'business' of the school, even if they have more of a specialism they don't want the children achieving 5s and 6s.