Interesting statistic

[Blandmum]

Found out today that the average cost for each child for each lesson in a secondary school is £3.75.

by the time they reach the end of yea 11 around £15,000 has been spent on each child...on average.

And average 70 minute lesson 'costs' £112

Someone quipped that if a kid messed about and ruined a lesson they should get a bill rather than a detention...only joking before I get told that parents couldn't afford it

well due to ss behaviour over the last few years we would owe the school enough to hire another teacher!!!!! thank god he has left

Interesting...

It's not far off £15k a year for DS's independent senior.

Those numbers don't look right, are they from the BBC ?

A quick look at Section 52 schools budget section for our council seems to give an average of £3,000 per child for 2005/2006 so it looks about right.

I'm surprised it's not more..

I love dominic's comment

Does this include capital spending ?

THis is the figure given to me by one of our SMT. Yes I think it includes the capital spending for our school , which is not in the middle of a massive re-build, not yet a brand new school IYSWIM.

Obviously some lessons are more expensive than others, and this is the average cost per 70 minute lesson, based on a child having 4 such lessons a day for (i think) 43 weeks of schooling.

I do know that for each sixth form bum on seat we get around £5000 in funding

I would suspect not, DC.

If you think, very roughly, that a young teacher earns about £2000 a month, before tax, therefore about £100 a day. That means that a lesson for that teacher is £20. Correct for free periods, holidays and more experience, then add on support staff and senior management and you creep up to £100+

yes, with the figures I see what you mean.

instead of billing the horrors for the whole lesson - there could be some sort of sliding scale of charges. Shall have to think about this -making the offenders pay has a nice ring to it - beats a detention that they never turn up too. It would help put schools on a proper business footing - so we could earn money and get results at the same time!

I didn't realise until very recently that the amount allocated per child per year varies tremendously depending on where you live.

Can't remember any figures but from memory some rural counties seem to do very badly, (leicestershire was the worst I think). Why is more money spent educating city children?

Funding varies from county to county. Where I am (close to the border between two counties) our local comprehensive receives considerably less per head than the next nearest school, which is in a county that receives better government funding. - perhaps this is yet another factor to be taken into account when moving home.

More money is spent on city kids because it costs more to achieve the same level. Teachers need more pay, building land is more expensive, and more kids come from homes where English is not spoken.

Can understand this to a point,especially if lot of kids don't speak english at home.

Doesn't the number of children on free school meals count as well? We live in a rural area lots of low paid jobs.

Can understand this to a point,especially if lot of kids don't speak english at home.

Doesn't the number of children on free school meals count as well? We live in a rural area lots of low paid jobs.

If you're of the mindset that all kids are created equal and opportunities are resources are the thing that causesx differences then city schools are still horribly underfunded.
Not 100% that way myself, but to me a class of kids who have 10 languages used at home needs more resources to sort out than one where all the kids get free school meals. Obviously of course the two things aren't separate.