…In thinking that parents would welcome cheaper, less flashy private schools

[Newbutoldfather]

This is (obviously) occurred to me over VAT, but also in thinking that the cost of private schools has gone up way way beyond inflation.

The school I went to (ok, left 40 years ago) is now 12x what it cost when I went. (General inflation is 3.3x over same period for reference.

So, where has the money gone, given that they can’t make a profit? Not class sizes, which are actually, on average bigger, certainly pre sixth form. Not teachers’ salaries, which have failed to keep up with inflation. I think a lot is around the overall offering and a bloated, overpaid SLT structure. When I say the overall offering, I mean flashy facilities, wrap-around care, a myriad of available sports, a loss making 6th form offering subjects with only a few takers etc etc.

AIBU in thinking there would be massive demand for a ‘basic’ private school, which would maybe cost 1.5-2x a state school (minimum 3x where I live), have excellent academics and good pastoral care, but ‘ordinary’ facilities, a normal 6th form offering and good but limited sports. Or AIBU and most private school parents want expensive facilities and a huge choice of A levels, wrap around care and co-curricular and have no issues with how much it costs?

Agreed.

My school is 3x the cost when I left (15 years ago ish).

The physical school is completely unrecognisable to the one I attended.

The local prep school is struggling for pupils AFAIK and is currently knocking down the main building to put up a new one.

They obviously think that this is what attracts parents.

It depends on what parents are and are not prepared to pay for.

Some parents, actually most private school parents in the UK, probably consider “lovely facilities and small class sizes” the main reasons to pay for private school; if a private school didn’t offer these, they simply won’t pay for private school fees, and would instead put their money into purchasing a property in the catchment area of a very good state school and into tutoring.

I have however seen niche cases where parents might be prepared to pay for a low-cost private school - basically, in cases where for whatever reason the only state school available is full of disruptive behavior or other issues. Parents who are not able to move might consider paying for a private school that offers class sizes and facilities similar to a state school but where decent behavior can be expected. Probably only during the 11-16 age group; before that age, disruptive behavior is less extreme and it’s easier for parents to make up for dodgy classroom schooling by providing good support at home, and after that age, you are into sixth form and the worst kids have left. And probably best suited to big cities with good public transport like London, where secondary kids can commute and you could therefore attract families from quite a wide geographical area.

Generally speaking, though, I don’t think there is much market for this type of schooling in the UK because of the way the housing market works; people who are not filthy rich generally find it more worthwhile to sink money into property near good state schools because property has always been considered such a good way to invest money in the UK.

Just get grammar parents to pay for their selective schools - it's effectively what you've described.

If we subsidised private schools (as they do in many European countries) say £x per British pupil then it would happen.

It would also be cost neutral in the medium term and boost education. You'd get lots more of the type of schools that you're suggesting.

But that involves sensible policies, not the politics of envy and short-sightedness.

@GreenTeaLikesMe ,

It really surprises me how little parents know what they are buying for their £25k a year (average fees near me, anyway). If they say small class sizes, surely they mean small, not 80% of any other school?

In secondary, years 7-11, the average class size is 24, in top sets often pushing to 25 or even 26. It just isn’t that much smaller than 30. To be fair, in well managed schools, they try to keep bottom sets a lot smaller. But, for an academic child, does 24 vs 30 make a massive difference?

Another thing which I have often wondered is why private schools (yes, there are exceptions) have all copied each other in their model, rather than offering real choices.

Some parents may prefer fewer bells and whistles in other areas but 18 per class.

I am not advocating only having cheaper schools, but a lot more variety generally in the sector, with cheaper options.

There are two types of private schools in France - contracted, which get some funding from the state but over which the state has far more control e.g in terms of the curriculum, and non-contracted, which have no state funding, but have more freedom, though even they are inspected by the state.

Fees at contracted schools, the vast majority, are between €500 and €1,500 per year, with primary schools generally cheaper than secondary. Fees at non-contracted schools are between €8,000 and €17,000 per year, but can be over €20,000.

85% of private schools are Catholic schools, so to a great extent it's a way for parents to take their kids out of the rigorously secular state system and put them in a more religious environment. (Though some see other advantages to them.)

I'd like to agree with you but I think that private schools need to have plenty of clear water between them and the best local state schools to seem "worth it" to parents.

So a state-provided secondary education costs about £8k per year per pupil to deliver. Obviously it's not actually the case that "quality of education" can be measured on a numerical scale and then plotted against cost, but in broad brush terms you might assume that spending £10k per year per pupil might get you an education 25% "better" and £16k per year per pupil might get an education "better" - but the parents have to pay 100% of the private cost. Spending £10k pa for a 25% improvement then seems like a lot worse value-for-money than spending £16k pa for a 100% improvement. In this totally-theoretical scenario, you would be paying £20k per year for each 5% improvement in education deliverable by a "basic" private school but only £800 per year for each 5% improvement in education deliverable by a more expensive one.

I don't actually think that education quality is directly proportional to cost in this way but I think that parental decisions about value-for-money would be based (possiby subconsciously) on a similar idea. They would baulk at funding the full cost for an education that is only a bit better than what the state will provide for free, but feel they were getting a lot better value-for-money if their enormous fees were also buying access to facilities and opportunities that leave the sector so far behind that there's no comparison.

There definitely is a sliding scale of how much additional "luxury" factor different schools add to the educational experience. I see a lot of private schools in my professional life. They range from places which are basically what all state-funded schools should be like if they were adequately funded, with the main difference being about 10-15% lower class sizes and the fact that they have some really old buildings as part of their structure (and often with a leaky roof and buckets on the floor) - up to boarding schools that seem to be run almost like a health-spa retreat for the time when the children aren't in lessons, as well as an enormous curriculum of niche subjects and niche sports.

Schools are just as subject to the pressures of market forces as any other service provider. Their fees are where they are because that is what parents are willing to pay. If they can't attract enough pupils to balance the books they either have to reduce the cost of what they are offering to match their income, or lower their fees until they can attract more pupils. If they are attracting more applicants (meeting their entrance criteria) than they can accommodate then they can expand.

I assume we all would but I don’t see even the most ambitious Labour candidate suggesting anything close to the 15k - 20k per child per annum investment needed (possibly a little lower for primary).

There would be very few private schools in the country (maybe a handful of boarding?) if any government was realistic about what education costs. They bitch and moan about privates while state school teachers do without books and feed their students and equip their classrooms out of their own money. We’re being angry at the wrong people.

And no, I absolutely would not mind increasing income tax to pay for it. Everyone in the country would benefit (financially too) from a better educated population.

Huge agree on the sameyness. I was so surprised when we moved to England how little educational diversity there is.

a ‘basic’ private school, which would maybe cost 1.5-2x a state school

isn’t that still £0?

@DexaVooveQhodu ,

Thank you for a really well argued and well informed post but….

I don’t think parents act in an economically rational way when choosing schools and I don’t think what you say explains the long run evolution of schools and school fees.

I think parents are suckers (for want of a better word) for a great school tour of lovely facilities, and a great head teacher speech. And then they look at leaver’s’ results (often based on selection) and the local reputation. There are definitely parental bragging rights in sending your child to the ‘right’ school. (It is a bit like investing in a flashy household name hedge fund despite high fees and poor performance).

It is fascinating how private schools have moved the demographic of their clients upwards over the years. On the whole the private school parents of today are not the same parents as sent me to school (of course there is overlap).

I could have asked a slightly different question. Would there be demand for more expensive private schools with genuinely small class sizes and even more state-of-the-art facilities? These do exist, mainly in the U.S and Switzerland. I suspect most would say no, but the private schools of today are the answer to the very same equation asked two decades ago.

It is an example of slowly boiling your frog.

They are part funded by the government though.

Bingo

Jersey has three types of schools. Private schools part funded by Govt may be similar to what OP is suggesting

• non-fee-paying government schools
• fee-paying government schools (part government-funded)
• private fee-paying schools

https://www.gov.je/LifeEvents/MovingToJersey/LivingInJersey/pages/education.aspx#:~:text=There%20are%20three%20types%20of%20schooling%20systems%20in%20Jersey%3A,private%20fee%2Dpaying%20schools

What do you mean by cost 1.5 - 3x a state school?

State schools are free so any multiple of 0 is still 0 - not sure how good your private school was if they didn't teach you quite basic mathematical principles?

Our local, more affordable private schools are closing. It seems that in my area parents would rather spend £££ on a fancy independent, or if they have a smaller amount to spend on education they go state and top up with tutors.

I personally had a terrible time at private, and refused to consider it (not that we could afford it). Unfortunately though Gove's "reforms" to education and push for academy trusts have turned the state system into the brutal inflexible way of teaching at private schools in the 90s.

I'd like to see schools genuinely focus on wellbeing. Kids don't notice fancy facilities. They do notice adults who care, and an environment that doesn't put them on edge with constant uniform line ups and bag inspections.

I think/hope the availability will increase.
I'd never had to/been able to consider private school until this year. We are relocating and as we will be renting and moving in August, we can't get a school place lined up for DD (going into y10). We did visit some schools, but the council says they're all oversubscribed and we'd have to apply in September (because they're closed in August) and take what we're given (fair enough!). The only school in the area that I know has spaces doesn't have a good reputation and I can't risk DD's GCSE years (she is predicted 8s and 9s) or her being bullied.
DD is a very shy child with some anxiety and wasn't keen on not knowing where she'd end up or being able to plan transport etc.

We've found a small, independent school (mentioned up thread) with fees that we can just about afford as it's only 2 years and it's worth it to know she will be happy and hopefully she will thrive. She doesn't care about sports facilities or fancy stuff, just wants small classes and not to have to avoid the toilets all day because of gangs of kids vaping and being twats.

@1offnamechange ,

Why the vitriol?

Do you genuinely think state schools are free and that all the teachers work charitably there?!

Cost means cost, the school costs £7-8k per child per annum. This is paid out of government revenue, which comes from our taxes.

So, yes, my question stands as written.

My school was excellent academically, thanks, and is still ranked in the top 50 in the country.

I believe the French government will pay the same amount towards a child's schooling whether it's a state or private school.

Parents who want their children to go to private schools normally fall into two categories, either historically their families have always gone private so it's a family tradition or they are ambitious for their children's futures (and have plenty of money). Both groups want the best school they can get as they would love for their kids to go to oxbridge, row, play the violin to genius levels, have the lead part in the school play, be in the swim squad and captain the debating team. I'm poking fun but it's also true! Private schools know this, these are their main customers, and is why they have very similar offerings. These parents don't want quirky schools(although there are a few private schools who cater for those parents too) or schools that are half the price but have no swimming pools, weird traditions or sports fields.

I am unsure how successful a no-frills private school would be in the long term, I imagine parents would upgrade their children if they became wealthier or pull their kids out if finances took a downturn. Also despite the tag of no frills, I guarantee that parents would become demanding and annoyed if they didn't get the results they were looking for as after all they are paying! And finally why would you pay even half of normal private fees to get a school that offers you less than most state schools in terms of facilities and subject choices?

Flashy facilities 😁

My kids have been to two

1. was a stately house. Gorgeous surroundings but falling to pieces. The junior school was a prefab 😂 Very rural full of farmers - not very good academically but the kids were building bonfires and climbing trees so kids loved it 🙈

2. The prep they are in now - yeah it’s been tidied up recently but it’s still just a big house that’s been converted.

No pool in either.

The other prep I know doesn’t have a pool either.

Where are all these fancy prep schools 😂

Im in Cheshire.

I'd like to agree with you but I think that private schools need to have plenty of clear water between them and the best local state schools to seem "worth it" to parents.
I think this is key.
Our nearest "low frills" independent charges just over £17k per year. I have 3 children, so their secondary educations would have cost me at least £360k. That's a substantial amount of money. I would need persuading that I was getting something worthwhile for that. My DCs state school has comparable GCSE results and A level results. At A level certainly, class sizes are about the same. Leavers destinations are similar. The state school offers a wider range of subjects and is nearer home. The independent has better sports facilities and nicer grounds plus smaller class sizes lower down the school so is better in some ways...but not £360k better. For us state was a no brainer.
However, if I still lived where I grew up and had to send my DC to my old school I would crawl over hot coals naked to get them to the private school. It would be worth it to me then.

My motives for sending my ds to an independent school were quality of maths teaching, safety, lack of bullying, lack of disruptive pupils and class sizes.

It had nothing to do with flash or sports.

My ds is a maths head and I wanted somewhere that would challenge him at maths. And somewhere he would be happy. He got his scholarship, he's been happy for the last five years. He's sitting his gcses now. We shall see if it has been worth it in terms of maths.

I don't think you can compare the upkeep of buildings in state schools to estates of private schools. Dd's has 500 acres with animals/stables/vineyard and boarding houses for starters.

You have to pay for religious education ib uk state Jewish schools so we do have that here as well - for voluntary aided faith schools. It is actually more than 1000 per year even in dh's time and he is in his 30s

The difference is that the payment is 'voluntary', dh's mum couldn't afford it for all 4 kids so the school didn't charge. But most people do pay