Private school vs private anything educational

[stopitstopitnooow]

If you have an issue with private schools, why? Do you have an issue with:

Buying houses in expensive catchment areas
Extracurricular activities such as music lessons, swimming, sports coaching
Tutors; language, 11+, GCSE

(Also, private healthcare, dentists, opticians)

I honestly don't understand the angst when it comes to private schools. Let people spend their money however they see fit.

I agree it's a partly a parenting issue, looking at the comments a few weeks back about kids being given homework and most parents refusing to do it. That's an example of the missing engagement, it doesn't take long to do 15/30 mins of times tables/spelling/reading of an evening.

What I find interesting is that no other country is having this hand-wringing moment over independent schools that the UK is experiencing right now. It's got everything to do with the complex history of the British class system and how it is tied up with public schools, I think. The US has a larger proportion of children in private schools than the UK, and going to a top private school gives you a vastly better chance of getting into the Ivy League (I'm not saying it's right, but it's true, there is tons of data on the effect of private school on college admissions). And people don't really think twice about it, it isn't even a societal conversation. I live in Canada and a similar percentage of children are educated privately as in the UK, and really no one cares.

But I do think it should be taxed for the majority.

For the vast majority, it's already being paid out of taxed income (which goes into the pot for education and other public services). And probably double taxed income if it's been in a savings account. The VAT addition would be a further tax.

I went to a state school, my kids don't so I wear two hats. For me, the VAT addition is envy politics. It's likely to put pressure on an already squeezed education system and I genuinely believe it will be a net cost to the government. Even if it's not, the magic utopia where private school parents sweep in like shining knights and miraculously transform underperforming schools isn't going to happen.

A 1000,000,000 this!! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

You say that moving privately schooled children into state schools will improve schools because “those parents with pointy elbows will focus on how to improve the school”. However, privately schooled children will not be going to the types of schools that you and I did. They will be going to the “good” schools in the expensive catchment areas. There will be no change to the schools that actually need improving.

This is so true. Anyone who thinks that ex-private school parents will use their resources and social influence to improve failing state schools is living in cloud cuckoo land. They won’t, and why should they? They’ll use the cash they were spending on private school fees to pay the SDLT on their new houses in the catchments of the best state schools - most likely taking places away from poorer children who would otherwise have got in, who’ll then be allocated places at worse state schools.

I have never really understood the handwringing over wealthy people opting to pay for services rather than getting them for free from the taxpayer.

My children are state educated. Although we pay for private football, swimming, gymnastics and tennis lessons. I’m not looking forward to an extra 20% on those. Seems counter-intuitive when so many children and adults are overweight but I assume the VAT has to be on all private educational activities because they’re all unfair advantages.

"However, privately schooled children will not be going to the types of schools that you and I did. They will be going to the “good” schools in the expensive catchment areas."

Although if Mumsnetters are to be believed (they aren't) by some strange demographic process, families who use private schools all live in the catchment of the absolute worst state schools with catastrophic results, daily knife fights, rampant bullying and an established drug and gang culture. Which is odd, because the most challenging schools are almost always in areas of significant social deprivation. A mystery, I tells 'ee. A mystery.

I find the idea that you can improve a taxpayer-funded service by deliberately increasing demand on it really perverse.

You do all realise that very often those living in the best catchments are also paying private? Definitely the case in SW London where I lived. Leafy comp, lovely houses, and futures galore to get into Tiffin and LEH and the rest.

As for the the oft- repeated claim that those in leafy comps pay for extra tuition, the Sutton Trust put paid to that not long ago with a report saying in fact privately educated children are more often given extra tuition. Privilege upon privilege.

I went to a (non-selective) private school as I was physically bullied by boys at my state primary (I only escaped being beaten up by a scooter by climbing a fence). The teachers were lovely and the education itself great, but they couldn’t handle the behaviour and did nothing to stop bullying. These boys would have gone to my state secondary school, which is still 25 years later getting poor ofsted ratings and has issues with crime.

I am very grateful that my dad had enough money to buy me out of that situation. If my state catchment wasn’t so extremely bad, I would have definitely gone to state school.

I totally recognise it’s utterly horrible for other parents in the same situation not to be able to buy their way out of this. But my question is: My dad is an immigrant from a very poor country, moved here without any wealth and became more wealthy through setting up his own import business from scratch. He didn’t inherit anything and his parents never owned property. If it’s not ok for him to spend his money on a better life for kids, then what is it ok for him to spend money on? Stuff?

It’s highly unlikely I’ll have money to send my kids to private school, but after my own experience, the thought of sending my daughter to a mixed-sex school scares me.

I personally would not vote Labour until they actually clarify either how they intend to spend this extra VAT, and specifically what they intend to do to improve the situations in state schools that have behavioural problems. It’s all very well saying ‘it will create extra funding’ but I want specifics about what will actually be done.

That is not what the research said. It said black and asian parents are more likely to tutor (over 50%) across all income groups & wealthy parents are more likely to tutor overall with private tutoring highest amongst grammar school pupils (23%). London under pins the private tutoring industry as you’d expect as many independants and grammars have no catchments & so can be superselective

Also Sutton Trust research implies on people being honest. The research points out that 30% of those who filled in the questionnaire self-reported no tutoring but that might be a pack of lies or tutoring might have been done by a parents.

Also-there is so much anecdotage. My godson was relentlessly bullied throughout his time at his very well known prep and public school and nothing was done about it. But it would be absurd of me to extrapolate anything about private schools from that. But one bad experience at a state school, often 20 years ago condemns the entire sector.

Not sure about this. You’d have to be living under a rock not to be aware of the crisis of staff recruitment/retention and chronic under-funding in state education just for starters.

It's about trying to create a fairer society op. You clearly don't care about this.

Not in some people's narrow minded self interest to see it 🤷🏻‍♀️

@Another76543 yes there's more inequality that needs addressing.

Tackling the disparities between rich & poor affects many things.

Imagine all the private schools were turned into state schools.

Imagine all the private schools were turned into state schools.

Except most won't be in reality. Our school is owned by a separate worshipful company, not the school itself. It's also 285 acres of prime property land near to London which would be probably be worth well over 100 million.

I suspect few state schools could fund the maintenance of the listed buildings and a fraction of the land given current funding constraints. Even if the owner was forced/encouraged to sell with a residential/school deal with the LA.

My state school education has served me well and improving standards should be the objective. But pushing private pupils into a stretched state system by adding VAT isn't the answer.

@JustAMinutePleass the 2023 report is skewed by the results of the pandemic, where schools bought in extra tuition. The 2019 report paints a different picture.

But why bother imagining that? It’s so far from the reality of what might happen.

My son has emailed the Head of sixth form to ask about applying for oxbridge next year, in his average/Good state comprehensive.

He hasn't heard anything back. They have no extra classes/help and no interest in helping him. Privilege isn't just about academics, it's about expectations, attitudes and prejudice.

He probably won't be able to apply without support as I've no idea how to help him with the extra exams etc.

I have a few points on this.

Firstly, to those saying that education should be fair and equal: my SEN child could not get a “fair and equal” education in the state system, there just isn’t the staff or provision, and local authorities very much have a “let’s see how they cope with no support but when they finally break that will prove that they need the support so we will agree to provide half of what they need” attitude. My child only gets a fair and equal education because he’s at a private school who will give him the support he needs without us having to fight tooth and nail for it. If private schools suddenly disappeared then I would have to find a way to home educate my child because the large class sizes and lack of support in state schools would have a really negative impact on my child’s mental health and his ability to learn.

Secondly, this belief that an influx of previously privately educated children will raise the standards of state schools. It doesn’t work like that in reality. Back when academies were being formed in our city, they put the highest achieving state school (the type where people buy houses in the catchment purely for a space at the school) with two of the lower achieving schools precisely for the reason that it would bring the lower schools up. It did the opposite. The academy now has a PCSO permanently stationed in the school to deal with the antisocial behaviour. I have witnessed children throwing chairs across classrooms and swearing at the teachers. I think we can all agree that isn’t an environment that is conducive to learning. The debate around education should not be a race to the bottom, it should not be about removing the things that give private schools their perceived edge, it should be about raising state schools up.

Thirdly, what are these connections that people talk of? They may well exist in schools like Eton and Harrow, but in the whole, the parents and families at independent schools aren’t the mega wealthy who can pull strings to get a leg up in life, they are GPs and accountants and farmers and IT analysts. Okay they might be able to give a year 10 a week of work experience but that’s about as far as the connections stretch!

Finally, I know the poster who claimed fees are £30k has already been rebutted, but to add further to that, I think people have a misconception of how expensive private schools really are. Obviously in London and further south, they are likely to be much more expensive, but where we are primary school is around £10k a year (which I understand is still prohibitively expensive for a lot of people) and secondary is £11-16k a year. A vast difference from the £30k mentioned earlier in the thread.

Despite all this, most of the private school parents I know are planning on voting Labour and just hoping they can absorb the extra costs, because they have seen how much damage the Tories have done over the last decade or so, and could not in good conscience vote for it to continue.

I think that most sensible people who oppose private education are realistic about the possibility of actually getting rid of them. Most of us would be happy with them no longer getting tax breaks.

That's a bit defeatist. Thirty years ago I wanted to apply for Oxbridge and my average/poor state comprehensive said they couldn't help and hadn't had anyone go for years. My parents had left school at 15 and couldn't help. So I wrote to the admissions office (pre-internet), got the prospectuses and paper copies of past entrance exams, applied to an open day targetted at people from schools like mine. I worked at my subject, got recommended reading from the library and badgered my teachers to look at my entrance paper answers. I got in.

Yes it's much easier if you have a school that puts on classes etc but Oxbridge are much more switched on to diversity of applicants (many of whom won't have had a 'good' comp education) and there is a vast amount of information on the internet. If he can't do this himself then he's likely to struggle with the independent learning needed on a degree.

The Oxbridge thing is interesting. Running groups would be an excellent way for private schools to tick the "public benefit" box for their charitable status. None anywhere near me do. I wonder why not....