Private schools can't read inflation figures

[roguedad]

Is anyone else getting notices of extortionate fee rises right now? I had been hoping for maybe 1-2% in the light of inflation being zero, but I have just had notices from a Oxfordshire junior and senior of about 5.9% and 6.7% from this year to next. Both letters laden with excuses of course, neither really acceptable.
Those not able to access private ed might well say "serves you right". We have already said that to ourselves so please, no posts stating the obvious.

Do nurses count as poor, then?

my friends who are experienced NHS nurses earn £17 an hour, so I imagine they could not afford living AND paying kids' private fees, could they?

not "poor" as in destitute, but certainly not able to afford school fees.

LPM, about the 1k, are you aware a child's state educations costs the state about £5k a year (for secondary)?

Education is expensive, even in the state sector, it is just that we get it for free which is amazing really. It is a huge "benefit" to all parents in the UK.

Where I live there is a general shortage of school places, which means the pressure on Private school places is pretty strong.
mummytime's post points out a major fly in the ointment for all those who want MC DCs to come flooding back to the state system. There won't be an increase in funding of state education to cover the self-funded private school places.
The usual domino effect will occur with housing in desirable catchment areas and a major mismatch of places and prospective pupils as well as resources.

Don'tGo I don't know what you've got against journalists or why you think NHS nurses but not consultants should have access to your DC's school. I'd welcome them all and I'm as keen as you are to see Russian and Chinese children in my DC's school.

The problem is that schools which proclaim they are accessible to everyone, regardless of financial circumstances, are just not delivering on that, partly because of their fee rises, which as OP indicates, don't make much sense in the present economic environment.

Schools are obliged by recent rule changes to make bigger pension contributions. They are not obliged to put their fees up as a result. They could make different choices about their costs, about pricing and about their market, just as other businesses do. They could, if they chose, ensure that they remained more inclusive and diverse.

Has been interesting to note that when politicians (Michael Gove, David Cameron, Nick Clegg) DC get to secondary age (assume Ed Millibands' are still [primary, so no pressure on him yet) the 'state' schools they choose are not the local comp in SM, but a very desirable 'faith' school that is selective in all but label (even tho' NC is a professed atheist). I assume that Clegg and Cameron at least could have afforded indies, thus relieving pressure on state schools. In fact they chose state, so two families moved lower down the list to another less desirable school. I'm sure there art least w=tow families who would have preferred them to go indie...

Not sure where the Goves live, but Greycoats is the local comp if you live in Downing Street.

Not sure why 'more diverse' means people who could afford 34k, but not £35k? I prefer it to mean people who cannot afford to pay anything, and am happy that is what the DC school offers.

Why the obsession with extremes, DontGotoRoehampton?

"Diverse" should mean parents who can afford the fees at their present level, those who could afford them if they were a bit lower, those who couldn't afford them without a bursary, and those who might never have considered the school.

I think it's quite unusual to want a polarised community with only the DC of "those who cannot afford to pay anything" and the DC of those who can afford to pay the full fees and to cope with annual rises of 5% or above.

My posts have been premised on the notion that parents generally want their DC to meet children from many different walks of life, including some with parents whose education and hard work may not have brought them wealth but have brought them recognition in the ranks of the "nouveau poor", eg in medicine, academia, journalism etc.

If schools are doing parental surveys and discovering that their parents just don't want to have such diversity and are happy to pay whatever it takes, by way of fees and bursary donations, to keep the professional riff-raff out, then they can make decisions accordingly. I'm suggesting they might ask some other questions of other parents too and of themselves but it's up to them.

The way I see it, private education is a luxury product. It is akin to having a second home abroad for holidaying in. Most people cannot afford it.
I guess different luxury products are more or less affordable at different times - isn't it just demand and supply really. There are houses I could have afforded 10 years ago, that I no longer can as prices have risen, but equally there are goods (technology comes to mind) that are more affordable than 10 years ago.
There is no 'right' to a private education, or to any other luxury product just because people with a similar income had it previously. Likewise, there is no 'right' to be able to afford to have a family living a middle class lifestyle with only 1 parent working, just because when we were children it was possible on one professional income.
I see it as an irony that people go back to the heritage of these schools as a way to say fees shouldn't rise so much, so that the professional middle classes can afford them and 'diversity' be encouraged. In last 80 years these schools have never been terribly diverse, beyond those who got in with 100% bursaries (and continue to do so - not the middle classes who do not qualify as their incomes are too high) and now are perhaps just a bit less diverse than before. The vast majority have always been excluded due to cost....the vast majority are still excluded due to cost. In that sense nothing has changed really. In the past you never really got lots of blue collar workers complaining they were priced out of the market, but there seem to be lots of white collar professional workers doing that now - why is their position any different - they simply can't afford it and they have no more right to a private education now, than those blue collar workers had a right to it 30 years ago.

I understand that parents like to provide for their own children at least what they had as children as often better. I know colleagues who were educated privately and who now have decent professional careers and cannot afford to educate their own kids privately. They feel they have failed in a sense, because they haven't 'maintained standards'. I just see it as demand and supply - when demand outstrips supply, prices will rise. As people have said, there must come a point when the two are in balance and rising fees lead to supply outstripping demand, which means school closures......doesn't look like it is coming anytime soon though.

I just think that we can have what we can afford. We have no rights to a private education, and as many people have said, lucky for us, we live in a country where education IS seen as a right and all out children will receive it, even if it's not the private education we would like.

For those of us who live in London, diversity is not just those DC our DC meet in school - on their daily commute and in their lives outside school they meet DC of all kinds of families - London - is probably the most diverse community there ever has been, anywhere.
In your daily work, how diverse are the people you meet? Maybe not very
Our DC meet bright, enthusiastic and curious DC of many backgrounds and nationalities at school - more than I meet in my daily job. Sounds good to me - delighted with the school, and grateful they live in a diverse and tolerant society that means they are not simply defined by their school, which some posters seem to feel their DC are.

ChocolateWombat well said. My parents could no way have afforded indie education for us, and their own childhoods were very deprived (people actually starved, not a case of just not affording that villa in Tuscany for August). Here, and now, we can afford it for our DC. Great, that's what we choose to do. Perhaps our DC will not be able (or need) to afford indie education for their DC. Fine, the world changes, and the key thing is to adapt and embrace change, not cling to a 1950s view of the world, and whine that it has changed... I do wonder of some of those on this thread are Ukippers, stuck forever in 1952...

I'm all in favour of the disadvantaged receiving bursaries to attend top boarding schools but I'm also in favour of the middle classes receiving bursaries obviously the former will require more financial help. Surely MC children are also entitled to a top education? Fees of 36k per child are outside of the reach of nearly every one, why can't two teachers, or two local solicitors children receive the opportunity of some financial help as two parents on benefits?

Bursaries should be given on who needs them financially (after proper assessment of outgoings/assets etc) regardless of job title. I think this is what the schools mean when they say means blind. I think often the schools just want the best pupils (this maybe academic/sporty/talented at music....) to be able to attend.

No idea, happygardening. Presumably so as not to upset the non-oligarchs who would otherwise be paranoid that the people receiving help were not poor enough and were taking them for a ride while secretly enjoying a 1952 lifestyle.

If you are a couple on professional salaries, then there are costs you can reduce to pay the fees. No-one can argue they 'need' a certain size of house in a certain location, large mortgage etc - why not rent a small flat?
if you are truly low paid - eg refuse collector/carer etc then there is nothing to cut out. Professional couples can of course apply for bursaries , but unless they have cut costs to the same point as the minimum wage carer couple, or single parent - then they are making a lifestyle choice not to cut those costs, which should not be supported by bursaries.

Wasn't there still post-WW2 rationing in 1952?...

I don't know what middle class professionals you know DoGoToRoehampton (I used to keep a horse at Roehsmpton Gate many many moons ago by the way), but few teachers/nurses/country solicitors/middle ranking civil servants could afford 36k+ a year in fees for one child just by living in a cheaper location or buying a flat instead of a house.

DontGotoRoehampton, you are forgetting that the poorest may get help with their housing costs that is not offered to the professional couple, so to expect the professional couple to cut their housing costs to the same level as that paid for by the poor couple out of their own income, you are probably asking the impossible.

Luckily, I don't have to make the tough decisions made by the school as to whom to award bursaries - like other stuff, I am happy to delegate that to the discretion of those with more expertise than me - as I do for my DC education.
In the same way, I delegate decisions re state education (93+% of the country) to the elected government, whomever is elected.
DC are happy, currently on school trips run by their indie school, thanks to those teachers who completely earn their salaries and pensions in running those in the school holidays.
I am happy, preparing lessons for next term for those state school DC I teach.
Will happily bow out and leave the thread to those who support the 'Farage' philosophy of 'get back to the Good Old Days' and do not have DC at indies, but wish they were.

Cripes! I go away to make a cup of tea and I come back to find that I'm accused of being a UKIP supporter, just for suggesting that schools might make more of an effort to keep fees down while their bursary funds are insufficient to help everybody. It's rather odd. I'll read back and try to follow the logic.

Most independent schools offer a much greater fee remission to their staff than 30% - the school that initiated this thread offers 50% and Alleyn's / Dulwich etc. offer two-thirds fee remission for staff. DS1 has five children in his year group alone who are dc of current staff and DS2 has at least ten dc across the year groups at his prep. I'm not complaining; good teachers are hard to attract - there's a shortage of specialist teachers and the Gov. are offering £25,000 training bursaries to attract maths, physics and chemistry teachers for example. On the other hand, half of my friends at grammar school in the 1980s were the dc of teachers, lecturers, accountants, bank managers etc.
Grey Coat Hospital School is also featured in Tatler - it can hardly be described as the local comp though - only 28 places out of 151 are open places (ie non-religious criteria or language aptitude) and these 28 places also have a sibling priority. Tatler says there were 1,140 applicants for 151 places.
All the hospital consultants I know are married to professional women (2 part-time GPs, two senior nurses, two professional health care practitioners) - I guess they work to pay the school fees. They may also receive help from grandparents as they often attend concerts etc.

Clavinova - really? I know schools which offer less than 30%, I have also heard of others which offer 80% or more.

Yes, really mummytime - perhaps cheaper prep schools or GDST only offer 30% fee remission for staff but the St Paul's Schools in London for example offer two thirds fee remission and the op's school throws in BUPA membership for staff as well. Most of the dc of staff that we know are model pupils though - invariably scholarship standard in something - stalwarts of the school orchestra, debating teams or very academic. Perhaps not surprising as most of their teacher parents are ex Oxbridge etc. or maybe they just put pressure on their dc to excel and win more prizes than their colleagues' children!