A politically acceptable proposal?

[heritager]

Educationally, we seem to be stuck, in this country. Lots (not all) people feel the comprehensive system doesn't work well enough. Lots (not all) people like grammar schools as an alternative - sometimes because it seems to be the only alternative on offer, see recent thread. Lots (not all) people hate that idea. Lots (not all) people go private, or wish to go private, to avoid perceived deficiencies.

Any solution has to be politically acceptable, as well as rational.

Here's a proposal I might call pupil premium on steroids.

Every pupil has an "educational cost" attached to them. This cost is higher if the pupil lives in a historically deprived post code (perhaps in several bands). It is higher if the pupil has diagnosed SEN (definitely in several bands). Add your own criteria here (discuss).

State school places are allocated more or less as now, with the modification: the school's funding is the sum of the funding allocated to all its pupils (perhaps plus a basic allocation for stability: discuss). The money doesn't have to be spent specifically on the child who brings it (optionally, we also keep PP: discuss). The effect is that schools with more deprived intake are automatically better funded, and so middle-class parents have an incentive to choose mixed-intake schools, thus discouraging segregation.

To make this acceptable to Tory voters: you can also take your child's educational cost to an independent school, topping up to the fee level from your own purse to what the school charges - but what you can take is discounted by say 20% (discuss), eg if your child's educational cost is £5k per annum, you get £4k pa off the school fees, and the state saves £1k compared to having to educate your child. At the same time, independent schools are encouraged to take more deprived pupils (topping up with bursaries) because they take less bursary funding than middle-class bursary recipients. For particular combinations of SEN and deprivation, the educational cost might fully meet the independent school fees: that is, the state might outsource the education of this pupil, as occasionally happens now, but more systematically.

Do you vote for that? Why, or why not? What would need to be changed to make it work?

[Grikes]

That is why I have always advocated that entry to Grammar school should be sorted by postcodes. Those that are from deprived areas should get preference over a more affluent area. This is to allow for upward social mobility.

It may mean that the lower middle class may have to work the night shift to pay for these things. Again that shows that they have the ability to do so. The poor do not have that option.

[EllyMayClampett]

I think it is odd to put effectively an extra tax on the "lower middle class" who have children. Most societies support families at the time their children are growing up because this is a resource draining time and the protection and nurturing of the young is something we work towards together as a group. It's why I wax happy to pay taxes supporting education before having children and don't resent paying taxes for state education when my own children are in private school.

[EllyMayClampett]

Wax=was

[Grikes]

Many do to put food on the table not for tutoring. Like I have always maintained grammar schools places should be given to the poor. It helps with social mobility. You say the lower middle class. I have never said that they shouldn't go. I just say that it should be managed so those from a disadvantaged postcode who will not get tutored should get positive discrimination. Free tutoring from the council and extra points added to their final mark. Schools to be placed in disadvantaged areas to help reduce the cost of traveling for the poor. Maybe share facilities with the local comprehensive. It should not be put in a leafy suburb and designed as a free private school for the rich.