Level of family income required for private school fees?

[TheABC]

Had an interesting discussion with DH over tea tonight, after reading in the independent supplement that the average cost of fees per term for a day boarder is 4k. We are approaching that in nursery fees for DS and it's a struggle. I can't imagine trying to juggle that sort of cost for two children over 7 or more years. However, clearly a lot of people are, as 6% of all UK pupils are privately educated and I doubt we have that many millionaires.

DH thinks the income ceiling is around the 80k mark, I think it could easily be lower, depending on family circumstances (e.g mortgage commitments). Who is right?

But Bonsoir, many of these people do leave able to function in at least one foreign (to them) language - English.

I suppose that is why half the world wants to come to a UK uni, because the education is so rubbish Bonsoir. lol.

Getting back to the point that more people would be able to afford fees if they cut back on luxuries etc.
This is true and I have seen it with my own eyes.
I know plenty of people with med size mortgages but really expensive cars, expensive holidays that could cost one persons small salary. They could easily afford fees, but don't want to and I don't blame them at all.

However, I know plenty others, ourselves included, who no matter how many sacrifices we made we couldn't afford fees as we don't earn that money in the first place.

I think there probably is an issue with how challenging A levels are in the grand scheme of things. And how narrow their focus can be depending on which ones a pupil selects.

Some schools have introduced the IB to counter that, but they don't seem to be done terribly well from what I can tell.

DS school does Pre U in certain subjects.

From a university admissions point of view, a student's education to 18 is just the starting point really. We don't find students who have taken different qualification in different countries especially superior.

Whether or not a university notices the difference isn't the point. Anecdotally, DSS2, like DSS1, will in all probability go to a UK university next year to study Economics. What the university notices are their excellent quantitative skills. It pays no attention at all to their two other languages, three sciences, two humanities etc etc because UK university is pretty specialsed. However, university is not the end of the road and those other skills won't die and wither.

I was really glad to have done maths to 18 when, at 28, I decided to do my GMAT and apply for an MBA, having done a MFL degree.

One factor in the escalation of costs is the IT infrastructure needed now (and the expense of getting it to function in old school buildings). Eton has got 70 listed buildings to maintain.

This is all true, grovel.

Some schools, like Eton, are privileged to have enormous resources at their disposal and to have received substantial bequests from former pupils. Other, more recent, foundations have more challenging finances.

Accounts can be found on the Charity Commission website. They show what schools actually spend their money on.

Some "leading" schools have added more new teachers to the staff in the last few years while others have increased pupil numbers and not staff numbers. The latter have generally managed to keep fee rises low and to increase their bursaries. The former have chosen luxury, giving in to demands from the super rich without any justification in terms of educational benefit.

It's all there in their accounts. We don't need to speculate about what their expenses might be. We can look at them and draw conclusions. Some schools have chosen to pander to the super rich, others haven't.

granola

I have just looked at the website, found the school and started to look at lots of accounts I don't understand said sarcastically

Ok, I'm willing to admit dimwit status here, but what on earth is an Feoffee

The one frill I would choose over any other is small classes (a rareity where we live) I am not too bothered about flashy computers/sports/arts/music/language/science centres-but I also do value outdoor space for play times. As a couple we are far from rich yet we would prioritise this,others may to. We also have a primary age child-so our school criteria priorities may change. Certainly some schools can target small classes and bursaries vs some of the above frills. Schools will try to work out who to target and hope they have focused their resources wisely-likewise a Times writer may think of their target market and write a nice piece on a very middle class subject (such as private school fees) to keep their readers engrossed.

Certainly a lot of schools will have changed from centurys ago -if they were founded then. Also, when they were founded, I would expect, a lot of schools did state overly self-righteous claims for themselves and their founders. Those currently incharge may claim it is best to be able to keep the school going giving a small handful of children a bursary every year but continue it into the next century than the school to close after too many years of reduced fees/bursaries.

Search me, morethanpotatoprints. The dictionary says it's some kind of trustee.

There are always quirks in charity accounts but what is interesting is to see how different schools have dealt with some of the common factors in the last 5 years or so, eg pupil numbers, fee increases, numbers and amounts of bursaries, staff numbers, head's remuneration...

granola

The one I was looking at should be very interesting, If I ever understand any of it. You must be very good at reading them.
Trustee sounds about right and I can't wait to get to grups with it.
Thanks for that, I wouldn't have thought to look tbh.
Obviously we looked at the latest inspection reports as it has had inspectors crawling over it recently

Hi all. Just to let you know it was/is a genuine post, prompted by the discussion with my DH. We are currently packing to move, so I have not been mumsnetting much as a result. I am certainly not a journalist (IT professional in the West Midlands) and I did not know about the Times article - all though the original discussion was kicked off by a piece in the independent supplement, so it seems to be a hot topic at the moment. I am amazed it has reached 200 posts (at time of reading) as my threads usually die after 2-3 comments.

Thanks to everyone who has written in. It's been interesting to read all the different viewpoints.

TheABC

Thank you for starting a great thread, we like private school fee threads

I read your OP and didn't see anything wrong with it tbh again.

Granola, checking out school accounts is a great idea. I must try that.

I "name" checked you upthread, MN 164. You did great work on the accounts on the other thread.

Yes, thanks for starting the thread, TheABC. I guess it's one of those "it depends" questions but I do think we're entitled to look to some of the schools to cut luxuries, rather than piling the guilt on ourselves. The super rich don't have to win in all their playgrounds.

This has been a very interesting thread that throws up a lot of questions about what an education is and what parents want to purchase when they opt out of state education.

I just asked DD1 about her class sizes and she said there are 8 in her maths class, 12 in English and History and the same in French. Art and Drama classes are larger - 15.

granola hee hee ... thanks.

I think the small class sizes sell is bogus.

For struggling pupils yes, small classes will be beneficial but for high achievers who need little guidance or explanation a class of 30 is fine. The top sets in my private school were pushing 30 in number and most of them got straight a's.

Large classes are fine, provided all you want is chalk and talk (and yes can produce good grades - see education in many Asian countries).

Properly interactive lessons where everyone joins in a discussion that moves beyond mere passing on of information need to be much smaller for the whole cohort to benefit.

My DSS1 spent his whole school life in large classes - 35 DC in the two final years. When he got to university in England (and was the student in his seminar group who spoke English the least fluently) he was better at pertinent group intervention than the others. Large group discussions also have their own dynamic and tend to teach those who love the sound of their own voice to be more measured, which is not necessarily true of small groups. Personally I think a mixture of large and small classes is the ideal.

I was at a school with some very tiny class sizes and I think it made some of the teachers a bit lazy/complacent. The temptation to wing it when you have 6 or 7 pupils must be quite great!

Bonsoir how could you know he was better? Says who? Him? .

My experience of teaching at university is that the experience of large group activities (lectures) is a very different experience to smaller group activities (seminars, tutorials).

Thoes coming from cultures where large lessons are the norm, take time to adjust to the smaller group sessions.

Except your DSS. Naturally.

"When he got to university in England (and was the student in his seminar group who spoke English the least fluently) he was better at pertinent group intervention than the others."
and how do you know that exactly?