Do you think labour will actually implement 20% vat on school fees?

[labpit]

We have two in Year 7 and year 10 and I am not sure what we will do if this happens. It is a certainty do you think?

And yet this same reasoning doesn't apply when it comes to grammar schools, which like private schools have a pupil body disproportionately drawn from middle class and wealthy families.

Grammar schools have class sizes as large as comprehensives. And yet that isn't seen as a problem by parents.

"Many parents choose private because their DC can't cope in mainstream large state schools with classes of 30+. Lots of SEN kids without an EHCP as an example.
I can't see why you can't understand why that would be an issue."

You've immediately jumped from 'private schools could increase class sizes to cut costs' to 'private schools will be forced to double class sizes to absorb the cost of a 20% VAT imposition on fees' - why?

You've also taken the challenges of large class sizes in the state sector - where teachers may be dealing with large numbers of children with significant behavioural problems, undiagnosed SEN and social deprivation, and suggested that the same conditions will apply in private if class sizes increase.

Of course you know that's rubbish don't you?

Private schools don't offer places to academically struggling children who come from unsupportive and majorly dysfunctional backgrounds, because those are the parents who would never ever jump through the hoops required to attend open days, prepare their child for entrance exams, apply for bursaries ets. Meaning the very very tiny number of children in private schools who come from low income families are absolute outliers. In my experience the very few children I know who come from genuinely poor families who got a bursary to a private school have extraordinary parents - they were people who are absolutely dedicated to their child's education.

It’s not an attempt to be rude. Just wondering how you held both those beliefs at the same time.

It was asked in good faith, I was interested hence the question

I haven't jumped to anything so I don't know what you are talking about tbh.

You are putting words into mouth and have never ever said "where teachers may be dealing with large numbers of children with significant behavioural problems, undiagnosed SEN and social deprivation, and suggested that the same conditions will apply in private if class sizes increase."

We aren't in a grammar area so again that doesn't apply

You were not at all rude. Pointing out cognitive dissonance makes people very uncomfortable and defensive

Because they can't contemplate their child mixing with large numbers of very poor children?

Izimbra there have been plenty of comments from posters not wanting their dc mixing with ghastly entitled private school kids.
Is that any more acceptable?

@izimbra -“If a school has a good progress 8 score and is judged by OFSTED to be a good school, then on what grounds would someone like Araminta1003 judge it as a 'terrible school' and see it as completely unsuitable for their child? Because they can't contemplate their child mixing with large numbers of very poor children?”

I have no problem with my children mixing with all types of children. In fact, it is good for them because they are privileged and I want them to understand their privilege. However, we experienced a school like this in Inner London and the teachers simply had no time for my DC. My DC was ahead and I was the one expected to deal with and stretch my DC. Because the teachers need to focus on SEN and pupil premium and kids with broken homes, rightly so. But my DC also needs a fair amount of attention and there was simply no time for them. This was at primary level. If every class reflected society at large at primary and secondary we would not be coming up against these issues. However, people do not live like that, there are privileged and poor areas and that is a fact. And my DCs will just be ignored if they were put in a school with poor areas because the teachers know they will get to the Government standards with my input alone.

Ok, I'm willing to take that on face value. Your line of questioning made me feel that you were pushing a very particular agenda, and your comment on my values again suggested you me that you were seeking to confirm your own view, not honestly seeking information. I'm glad to have this clarified.

Can you clarify which cognitive dissonance you've identified? That I'd want a better admissions system for state schools while also considering private schools in an imperfect system? This thread is quite replete with people not being willing to see nuance on both sides - the recognition that parents who feel pushed towards private as are much victims of a shitty system as those who are trapped within a completely mad education system.

The public/private debate in this country is massively tribal and people are expected to be purist on one side or another and nuance gets lost.

As general feedback, criticising other people's values is generally not a sign of discussing things in good faith. But as I've said, I'm happy to accept that wasn't the PP's intent.

Yes, that one.

Grammar schools have class sizes as large as comprehensives. And yet that isn't seen as a problem by parents.

Some parents do see it as a problem. Some (I don’t know about all) grammars are heavily focused on academic outcomes only. Children don’t get as much individual attention and it won’t suit all
children. Lots of them do minimal music and sport. People often choose private school for the extras they offer; lots, like us, believe there’s more to a good education than exam results alone. Those extras need staff. The state system too often neglects the arts and sport, and that includes grammar schools. We should be encouraging children to explore their strengths. Arts, music and sport should be seen as a benefit to society.

In any event, my DC go to London grammars so they are very academic schools and there are not many rich people there. Except if you start pretending that earning 70k a year in London makes you rich. Which is the pretence that seems to be put forward by some.

There are loads of Indian families with an IT/medical/engineering type background. The rich bankers/lawyers go to the private schools. We could have chosen the comp but one of my DS could do GCSE Maths in Year 5 comfortably so it simply would not have been fair on him and he is quite an anxious type as it is. I won’t be sacrificing his talents and happiness for some misguided far left wet dream because that lot do not understand that my DS will be far productive to society and pay far more in taxes in the long run if he is properly educated and challenged. So they have it the wrong way round.

I was talking to someone about this at the weekend. Apparently some schools local to me have told parents that if this happens there will for a period anyhow be a reduction in base fees as the ability to reclaim vat will give windfalls. This is particularly true for schools that have built better sports facilities / drama dacilities had general upgrades to the building in recent years.

We are waiting on entrance results at the moment and would say there were more applicants than ever this year. It is hugely competitive in my area.

You said it's not reasonable to expect private schools to make cuts to staffing, because many parents specifically choose private schools as they feel large classes in state schools, which include children with SEN, make them unsuitable learning environments for their own children.

The point I was making about grammar schools is that large class sizes clearly don't equal a difficult learning environment when you're dealing with a mostly middle class cohort.

I think private schools and the parents who use them will have to consider their priorities. It may be that the better off parents at a private school would rather throw children from less well off families at that school under the bus by accepting higher fees rather than larger classes or other measures to cut costs. That's how privilege works.

Labour have already said they aren't changing charitable status.

I never said "which include children with SEN, make them unsuitable learning environments for their own children".
What I said was that large class sizes aren't suitable for SEN children hence why many parents choose private schools for SEN kids who don't have an EHCP.

Stop twisting my words.

Are you aware of the many kids with SEN in some private schools?

“Some parents do see it as a problem. Some (I don’t know about all) grammars are heavily focused on academic outcomes only. Children don’t get as much individual attention and it won’t suit all
children. Lots of them do minimal music and sport. “

Not at all true for our grammars which are full of gifted kids with extra curricular talents in music and sports. But then it is very easy in London to access music and sports clubs outside school as well. Those who only study and don’t do anything outside school, that is driven by the parents. Not sure when that became a school’s responsibility. Maybe in the private sector but in state you pay extra for many clubs. Some parents can afford it and value that, some parents can afford it and simply do not value extra curricular clubs. It is difficult for working parents to make time for them if they are not provided at primary school. Our state primary provided loads of clubs. At secondary school in London DCs can easily make their way to outside clubs if the parents support and encourage it.

Isn’t classroom disruption -on the whole - more common in schools in poorer areas though, for various reasons? In the same way that you don’t hear of many gangland stabbings in leafy, middle class areas. These are just uncomfortable truths. Any parent would seek to shelter their child from classroom disruptions in any way they could, so if they were being really honest, yes parents want to limit their children mixing with poorer children because they want the best for their child.

But no one is going to admit that!

Ah ok. You're a tribalist on this one - you can't want reform of the whole system, and see and acknowledge how they affect each other, without picking a side. Not my style, but I can see how some people have ended up there given the public debate.

JassyRadlett · Today 11:35

I've been campaigning for admissions reform since before I had children at school, and have had two children at state primaries.

I admire people who campaign for things they feel strongly about (well, not all causes). JassyRadlett, has your campaigning helped, and have you found it easy to get supporters for the campaign?
My son campaigns against salmon farming which is an iniquitous practice and he says being an activist whilst trying to hold down a full time job is exhausting.

Then that is very disappointing. Too many schools claim charitable status for doing the bare minimum.

But instead they come out with all 8's and 9's at GCSE. Nothing to do with their own effort of course!

I think it’s definitely different in London. It’s very different in many parts of the country. Sports and music are not as easy to access. It will often involve huge amounts of parental time to drive for several hours a week, which some families just can’t fit in with work commitments. Parents with sporty and musical children don’t tend to use our nearest grammar, or certainly not the parents I know.

"I won’t be sacrificing his talents and happiness for some misguided far left wet dream because that lot do not understand that my DS will be far productive to society and pay far more in taxes in the long run if he is properly educated and challenged"

So my son is in his first year of a MEng at an RG university. He left his large London comprehensive last year with top grades in his STEM A levels, as did many others in his year.

I'm wondering why you think your clever & hard working child wouldn't be able to achieve on the same terms as my child, or any of the other brilliant and high achieving children going to state schools?

"I've been campaigning for admissions reform since before I had children at school, and have had two children at state primaries."

Yes - I support this. I'd very much like to see reform in this area, particularly when it comes to faith schools.

https://fairadmissions.org.uk/

Nope. There was some progress over the years but the Fair Admissions Campaign has all but died and the current government has been completely ideologically opposed to any form of reform since day 1 and is overall pro-grammars. There are individual areas where things have improved but the govt's desire to centralise control of education and in particular remove LA influence has reduced the chance of that happening.

The Sutton Trust has done some good work on this and particularly on the drivers of inequality and I'm hopeful that with a change of government it might be possible to get this back on the agenda. But the structural barriers are so enormous, principally as a result of faith schools. Other admission arrangements change pretty regularly anyway so people are more primed to that but the faith schools settlement is so entrenched that actual reform is incredibly hard and would prob need to be incremental.

And it's not terribly sexy, is it? And as PPs have pointed out, the current system give advantages to quite a few people and so undoing is a massive mountain to climb! And meanwhile we've got a new faith school opening nearby, so it just keeps getting more and more screwed.

If you think this thread had been tetchy you should see the faith school debates. 😂