To think that Eton is being a bit cynical in offering to share some of its sports facilities with the local state academy?

[Shinyshoegirl]

Today's paper reports that Eton is offering free use of some of its 27 cricket pitches and its Olympic standard rowing lake to a local state school. Surely if they were really concerned about helping educational achievement for all they might consider sharing some of their teaching resources instead? I've nothing against cricket and rowing, but it seems like a token gesture towards their charitable responsibilities. Or am I being unreasonably cynical?

YABU-they are offering something that the local schools don't have.

Yes, perhaps the question we should be asking is not whether Eton is being magnanimous or self-interested in sharing its facilities, but why such a thing is necessary. As ABetaDad points out, the facilities for sports and other extra-curricular activities in the state sector are often woeful.

We should be asking ourselves how this situation has arisen, and what we can do about it. The existence of a two-tier system (or multiple-tier, really) is not exactly in a bubble which does not affect this problem.

Given that state school parents "pay their taxes" (the expression often used by private school parents to point out - often somewhat smugly - that they are "paying twice"), should we not expect better?

The schools I went to had wonderful playing fields, swimming pools. Both at primary and secondary. Ds's private school has lovely grounds but they are no bigger than I had. Now though most of the state schools have sold off part of their playing field for housing.

As for paying twice. I have no problem with paying taxes and paying school fees. I do the same for NHS but have private health insurance. What annoys the hell out of me is because ds is at private school we have absolutely no access to any thing provided by the LEA - Ed psych etc. My NHS GP doesn't ban me from seeing him because I have pay for health insurance so I don't understand why the LEA effectively bans my son from accessing any of its services.

Yes, YABU. Why shouldn't they ?

Many State schools have had facilities such as playing fields etc... sold off by the Government.

I find the term 'oiks' very offensive. Just because a lot of parents cannot afford to pay Private/Public School fees doesn't mean that their offspring are uneducated 'oiks'.

Of course some of the parents with children can afford to pay school fees but choose not to.

children at state schools...

MollyO, I said 'a lot of parents'.......

Not 'all'

Just came across this thread quite by accident and I thought I?d put some facts straight. Sorry to be a bit late.

MollieO: ?The rowing lake is not owned by Eton. It was a joint project with the local authority and as such it is a public facility.?

The rowing lake is privately owned and financed by Eton College and no public money has been used.

See here

No need to be cynical, Eton?s public benefit goes back decades if not centuries. And I?m not talking about rowing or cricket.

Here's a brief summary

Hope this helps.

My DS's prep has recently purchased a local cricket club and is in the process of bringing it up to scratch both for the students at the school and the local community who have several cricket teams there.

They're also building a high-tech sports barn which will be available for public use at evenings and weekends.

and ecth I dont think it's the quality of the teaching that's better in the independant sector, it's the fact that they can get on with teaching without the constant low/high level disruption I see every day at the school I work at.

Sorry - meant echt

echt: you can't just "remove" charitable status. If you could, many schools would simply have done sows the financial benefits are not that great.

But it must be maintained as it is the charitable trust that owns all the school assets. They can only use those assets for the charitable purposes for which it was set up. So if the school wanted to be a private business, it would have to move - with zero assets, and the current premises and assets redirected by the trustees to similar aims to the founding intention.

Up until the Labour administration, all charities were obliged to follow the charitable purposes in their founding arrangements. Labour introduced new conditions, unrelated to the existing charitable aims, concerning poverty - a condition they do not appear to have attached uniformly to all charities. This was the result of neither change in the law, nor legal review. The rather nebulous status of the Charity Ommission's new stance is what has led to the possibility of legal challenge (don't think anything legally vonclusive has happened yet, but there is a prima facie case that the Commission has acted beyond its mandate).

Personally I think it was a very cynical attempt to reintroduce the Assisted Places Scheme, but with private school parents picking up the tab rather than the taxpayer. This is failing as a) a good proportion of parents are not that affluent (esp Forces families who would be disproportionately hit) and b) despite an expansion of both provision of bursaries and advertising their existence, there don't seem to be that many new potential pupils who might be able to use the opportunity.

Cognita etc love this possibility as it gives them a chance to buy school buildings (possibly on the cheap), though of course depending on local planning authorities they may be permitted to change use.

Onimolap: Wow, this thread's an old one, but I'll try and respond.

What are the assets you refer to? A list of these might prove a fruitful basis for discussion. I realise these might vary from school to school, but generalise a bit; I don't mind

Yes it's old, but the first time it's come uo since I've been around!

I'm referring to absolutely ecerything iwned by the school, when the school is the charity: land, buildings,equipment, invested funds, liquid assets under the charitable wrapper - everything it owns basically.

(I'm not referring to non-charitable schools, or those which are privately owned but have a charity to run bursaries etc).

A colleague in the charity where I now work was involved in attempting to sell off a hospital that had been endowed by various charities: nothing could be sold without an agreement with each one about the sale itself and the return or future use of moveable assets or their cut of cash raised. It would be much the same for schools, though at least it's only one charity to deal with.

Historic ownership by the Church may complicate some cases further.

I'll get back to you on this.

Have drink taken.:o

Thanks!

It's always possible that I've interpreted some of it wrongly. I didn't mention specific bequests - they would need to be separately examined and disposed of in accordance with any valid conditions attached. And consecrated chapels would need bespoke arrangements in addition to any other Church input.

My DSs go to a private school (not Eton). I would like to see the school open its door during holidays to all kids in the area for a fee and for teachers to run special camps for rugby, cricket, drama, music, rowing, etc. The money raised could then go to fund scholarships.

Instead the school is closed to everyone. Facilities lay idle. That seems wrong.

However, the school cannot just open its doors free to anyone and everyone all the time. It has to charge a fee otherwise it would close. It gets no money from the state. There is only so much sharing that can be done. Someone has to pay for the facilities and teacher salaries.

I dont understand the objection to what Eton is doing.

Peteneras is correct - Eton own the lake. It is a fantastic facility and not cheap to use. They will almost certainly be providing boats and equipment as well and quite possibly some manpower since there are staff attached to the rowing centre.
They have in the past run rowing courses through the local authority for children who are in danger of getting excluded from school for example - one of the Army rowing coaches takes the classes.
Does the fact that they have a lot of resources mean that no generosity from them is legitimate? That is like saying that a gift from a wealthy relative is worthless just because they are wealthy. The use of the lake is a big offer, whether or not there are any other motivations behind it.

Not all independent schools have charitable status. Therefore they are under no obligation to "share" anything.

If they do then marvellous if they don't then so what? The whole chippiness of the op bothers me a little bit. Something about Eton brings out the absolute worst in some people.

I don't see the same venom being directed at Harrow, Radley, Haileybury, Rugby..........

If Eton are willing to share their facilities then be polite and say thank you rather than questioning their motives.

I don't think it matters. They have wonderful facilities and they are sharing them-it can only be good so it seems churlish to tell them they should do more.

Our local private schools do have shared lectures in sixth form, especially on Oxbridge entry. Lots of private schools do have their teachers spending some time in local state schools, and vice versa. It is supposed to be good for both sides, as it can develop their teaching skills.
When a local private school had to shut its swimmming pool suddenly, they were grateful for all the local schools (state and private) which shared their facilities. They are actually sad that they can't return the favour as the council has limited who an use their facilities.
Lots of private schools run master classes for local junior schools.

I think Eton was going to be a partner in an academy.

I think that these schools do far more than people know about anyway. My DS won a bursary from a top public school for a week on an Outward Bound course in Wales. We had to get him there, but everything else was paid for. They give 3 every year to those who live in a certain geographical area. My DS found out about it, wrote an application and had an interview and the lucky 3 went to the Headmaster's house, with parents, for a presentation evening.I doubt whether many people know about it-I certainly didn't.

YABU

YANBU, I went to a'local state school' close to Eton. Most of my school's playing fields are covered in houses now. For rowing you had to join the scouts and head up the Thames to the Scout boating lake, needless to say very few of us did.

So too little, too late, yes it is cynical move to stop legislation preventing the charitable status tax dodge. Lots of 'private' schools have two 'companies' a foundation for the charityside and company for the profits leasing out the assests to the foundation. So YANBU lets call a spade a spade, not that anyone form Eton college has ever used one, just managed someone who has.

Are you sure they don't share their teaching resorces.

The top public school I live near provides after school maths and Latin to the DC at DSs school.