State school 6th forms oversubscribed

[LordGiveMeStrength]

AIBU to be concerned about the impact the new VAT on private schools will have on state school 6th forms?

Our local 6th form open days have been jam packed with so many year 11s moving from private schools.

Issues I see:

1. kids who have been at the local state secondary school since year 7 have been told their space in the 6th form is not guaranteed and if they don’t get as high GCSE results as other potential pupils they will not have a spot. The nearest private schools have amazing GCSE results so very likely to displace existing students to other state school options a far distance from their homes.
2. infrastructure - the local school is already heaving so accommodating a huge influx is not possible, buildings are already crumbling and it will take a long time before investment actually happens to improve the facilities.
3. false economy- currently kids in private schools don’t cost the government to be educated. Government’s plans are that money raised from VAT will pay for additional teachers (but I don’t see that happening immediately). If lots of private schools kids move to the state system not only will government not collect that VAT, but they will all be liable for educating pupils who previously were in the private sector. I believe the current cost from central government to educate in 6th form is £5k with additional payments for more academic subjects (eg further maths A level pupils will equal an additional £900 per pupil per year in the state schools). Apologies if these sums aren’t correct.

https://inews.co.uk/inews-lifestyle/private-school-parents-vat-state-sixth-forms-3473062?srsltid=AfmBOopXOi5842QMq-qO1NqHGR9g9-4BOi6Gc0v_dlhBbFBTMmU5Prsi

We will be, but there's just as good a chance it would be my son (if he even wishes to do those things, he has plenty of extra curriculars that take up his time)

We aren't violently competitive. We do well for our own pleasure, someone else doing well doesn't take anything from us. Your attitude seems quite toxic (and continues to assume a privately educated child is inherently brighter than a state one)

And have those politicians announced the big increase in income tax that would fund a higher overall education budget, or indeed that they are cutting other services to increase the education budget?

No, the fiscally illiterate VAT policy is the only thing they are offering, and that looks likely to bring in peanuts compared to the overall education budget - if anything at all.

And have those politicians announced the big increase in income tax that would fund a higher overall education budget

I think you are slightly overestimating the costs here.

But it is too early to know if there are enough places for September in Y12. Students apply to lots of places, don't confirm their plans until after results day, fail to get the required GCSEs... Most colleges and 6th forms can adapt quite easily to changing numbers and do every year as different cohorts come through.

You are completely missing the point. If I thought privately educated pupils were inherently brighter than state ones, why would the VAT policy and resources in the state budget matter at all? The very reverse! If private school pupils have no advantage or only their inherent ability, then why would the govt (and everyone on this thread) want to tax them, and why would the amount of resourcing available in the state matter in any case?

I care about the state sector educating all children well - but this policy is financially stupid and counterproductive. It will do nothing for the state sector apart from put additional pressure on state schools, make a not insignificant number of children distressed at having to move schools and leave friends and settings they’re used to, and will lead to independent school closures and job losses in the sector for ordinary people who work in them. And the gap between rich and not rich will widen further. I’d be against any government policy that relied on making children move schools as a core fundraiser for a public service that should instead be properly and adequately funded via general taxation.

And I’d be ashamed to be the kind of person that enjoyed the thought of children having to move schools as grist to some kind of class envy. It’s clear that quite a few people on this thread really, really like the thought of this, no matter if it actually costs the taxpayer money in the end.

I have no skin in the game. I don't care strongly about the policy one way or another. (Other than that I strongly doubt that many of the schools merit their charitable status).

I am just tired of the ceaseless and often inconsistent fear mongering. For all the reasons I listed up thread, many children won't move. And for those who do move it is unlikely to be the end of the world for them or others.

I don’t think you understand the way sixth form education funding works. Take a good look here to start with:
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9194/

https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-9194/CBP-9194.pdf

Interestingly, government projections suggest real terms funding increases are needed because there are increasing projected numbers for post-16 places from this year onwards (the very reverse of the dwindling numbers posters on this thread keep claiming). And the largest per capita funding amounts go to the FE sector and sixth form colleges — not school sixth forms, which are likely to be the parts of the sector under additional pressure from private school pupils transferring in. Local authorities decide those funding formulas, not politicians.

The government has claimed that the money raised from the VAT policy - which even at their projections would be a tiny fraction of the overall state education budget - will go in breakfast clubs in schools. Not on sixth form places or funding. And any increase to the post-16 budget will go proportionately more towards FE (which is in a really parlous state after being hugely cut by the Tories), as their per capita funding is higher, rather than to school sixth forms and sixth form colleges.

You just said you have a son in state education, so how do you have “no skin in the game”? That doesn’t make any sense.

@neverthelastone and as I said, I think you are slightly overestimating the costs if you think that there needs to be a 'big increase in income tax' to account for a minority of private school pupils switching to state education.

Please do reread my post, as that is patently NOT what I wrote:

And have those politicians announced the big increase in income tax that would fund a higher overall education budget, or indeed that they are cutting other services to increase the education budget?

The VAT increase is not really going to add to the overall education budget. It’s meant to add some extra breakfast clubs and 1/6th of a teacher, or whatever risible amount Bridget Phillipson claimed. If you wanted to fund education properly overall, you’d need an increase in general taxation. Not a stupid class envy policy that will be financially and socially counterproductive.

If it was such a good idea, other countries would be doing it. Instead, in countries with much better education systems than ours, it’s not legal to tax education; and in some, private education actually attracts a tax repayment. Only British voters think it’s a good idea to tax education.

You said "But the funding per pupil is based on the existing tax take divided between the number of state pupils. If private pupils switch into state, the funding per pupil goes down across the board"

And I said that funding per pupil is a political decision.

Then you replied "And have those politicians announced the big increase in income tax that would fund a higher overall education budget, or indeed that they are cutting other services to increase the education budget?

But now you're not talking about per pupil funding or the impact on it by a minority of private school pupils switching to state schools?

@neverthelastone agree with you there

Because the private schools round here are far less good than the state schools. Because I could afford to send him private if I wanted. Because he is the kind of child who would do well academically in any environment.

It was annoying me that different percentages were being given for private attendance so I looked it up. I can't find any Government data - would be great if someone could find it as it must exist I'm just nitvsure how to find it.

The Private Education Poliy Forum states that over 6% of current pupils in the UK are being educated privately and is broken down thus:

At the primary stage, 5 percent of pupils attend private schools.

At the secondary stage, 8 percent of pupils attend private schools.

Of those in sixth forms, 17 percent of pupils attend private schools.

Elsewhere I read that c.33% of London pupils are taught privately.

So presumably in London, a relatively small move from Private to State could make things tricky for local authorities who will have to provide spaces. I don't know how easy that is to do and whether contingency plans are in place for September 2025.

I'm not sure a few extra pupils in school sixth forms costs much extra money. They just increase the number of children in each class so no extra teachers etc.

I suppose it was the term "shit load"

There are other advantages in a state school sixth form, though. You can get additional tutoring for free under "mentorship" programmes, universities are delighted to be able to boast that they have X new undergraduates from the lowest socio-economic quintile of state schools measured by free school meals, etc... (ignoring the fact that the students in question definitely went to those schools, but also had parents who were doctors/accountants/lawyers rather than reflecting the socio-economic background of the school as a whole, IME).
I think the advantages of private school sixth forms, while certainly still existing, are less than they were when I was doing A levels than they are now, 28 years later.

Oh come on we’re talking about a tiny percentage of 6%. This tiny number of children keeping their private education does NOT help “ the gap between rich and not rich” in any way shape or form.

No government is making children move schools, parents who don’t plan for flex in finances are. It’s entirely down to them. Consumers make their own choice as regards what they spend their money on.94% of parents look at school fees that cost more than many earn and think there is no way on earth I can guarantee being able to afford that for the duration of a child’s education. They sensibly don’t then sign up for it. Some will take a chance and think we’ll deal with it should things change. Well things have changed, now you have to deal with it.

And as for the moving schools being a massive hardship it really isn’t. Children do it all the time and always have done. In some counties with the middle school system they move at 8, forces kids move all the time and there has always been movement in all schools years with pupils changing schools across year groups. Since when has moving schools become a major hardship? It really isn’t. There can be positives to it and it’s part of life. If you don’t think you have a child resilient enough to handle moving schools don’t sign them up to a school you are have no flex in paying the fees for.

The dramatising over a tiny percentage of parents no longer able to afford a privileged education is ridiculous. One minute they’re using SEN to fight their cause, something none of them cared a shiny shit about prior. The next there are threats of a super group sweeping up all the available grammar, extra curricular, outreach ops and 6th form spaces. This is all just met with an eye roll by the 94% not in the private sector who have far bigger things to worry about.

Look on the bright side state sixth form may arguably be a better preparation for university for your kids. Teacher friend at grand school told me a minority of his pupils crashed and burned in first term at university without the carefully crafted support system his school provided that they were used to. Kids joining the “rough and tumble mix with all types and do your own independent study” world at 16 not 18 may be no bad thing,

I think that is a good point. Research shows state pupils with the same entry grades do better than private at uni.

Also re glee can I just point out that although this measure is quite popular I have seen hardly any threads started revelling in it. There has however been umpteen threads with the same posters on it complaining about it,full of glee and false catastrophising as to the alleged impact it will have on state pupils. So the accusation of unpleasantness towards children is quite misplaced. Replies to threads such as this are to be expected particularly when they are put on AIBU.It’s a forum and if you start threads making ridiculous declarations you will get replies

Yes absolutely Blu the schadenfraude type posts seem to be coming from your side guys - numerous threads on your imagined doom scenarios of this policy for gen pop. Not seen any threads started crowing about the vat policy.

Frankly I have sympathy for anyone facing a nasty unexpected tax bill as a small business owner have been in that boat myself!

All over the news that the private schools vat raised inflation. Bunch of idiots they brought it forward as well just for the auto gol. Once more people loose jobs and pay even higher mortgages then they would not be laughing at private school children anymore. I hope the first ones to go are the Marxist teachers in state schools. That would be great.

State schools welcomed a big influx of Ukrainian refugees with little to no notice. I am sure the handful of VAT refugees will be fine.

Agreed. I don't think I have seen a single thread started that even remotely gloats about the potential detrimental impact on private school children. It's all faux concern trying to whip up panic in state school parents.