Private school wants to open free school near me. Why?

[Dibbets]

A private school on the other side of the city wants to open a free school near where I live. The idea is quite appealing as there isn't a well regarded school near here and many children bus out to other areas. But I can't help feeling a bit uneasy about the proposal. What's in it for them? They talk about it being a beneficial partnership for both sides but the focus is on sharing knowledge and a moral drive to raise standards across the board. It seems a bit unlikely that they would invest so much effort into this for such woolly reasons.

The government will have to pay for the school at the same rate as every other school, but the private school group will still have to be responsible for it, will still have to run it. And if the school doesn't succeed then it can be taken off them. So if they have a machiavellian plan to ditch bursaries without serious plans to create a good/outstanding school then they are taking a big risk.

How about they could have a genuine reason to actually help the wider community?

If people who ran private schools genuinely were concerned with the wider community then I have a sneaking suspicion that they would not be running private schools...

I looked up the school sponsored by Eton, it's a mixed boarding/day school with fees of £3.5k per term for boarding, with 44 students in Y7.

I'm sure it will be very successful.

"They will be taking a big risk"

What is the risk though? So an independent school fails to meet the obligations decided and changed by successive governments in order for them to retain charitable status. What are the penalties? Removing charitable status which it seems the law prevents doing? Removing charitable status which most of the independent schools say they no longer want anyway? Or is there some other punishment available- what is it?

If people who ran private schools genuinely were concerned ...I have a sneaking suspicion that they would not be running private schools*
Aren't the people who run private schools teachers?

What is the risk though?
Isn't their a risk that the private school is made to look bad should the new school fail. Their brand will be damaged and that could hit the bottom line? There is also a risk that the private school has to send/share resources/teachers/facilities etc to the new school, further diluting their elitist brand.

Aren't the people who run private schools teachers?

What's that got to do with helping the wider community?

Isn't their a risk that the private school is made to look bad should the new school fail.

Well, that risk could be reduced if, instead of opening up a massive state school in a sink estate they opened up e.g. A tiny boarding school with fees.

If the private school shares resources with the 'lesser' school instead of substantially increasing the number of bursaries (which is the other option) then parents would see that as more palatable as the plebs would be kept safely away from their own kids except at carefully orchestrated joint school events.

That's what got me about the 'working in partnership' thing. The private school parents will not want their experience diluted by mixing with the hoards. And they seemed pretty clear that there would not be much sharing of facilities like sports grounds. I can not see it being much of a partnership really.

There is a risk that they could taint their brand if the free school isn't successful. Will be interesting to see if there is any link made explicit in the name of the new school. I bet there isn't.

Just seems a strange claim to say teachers in private schools are selfish and uncaring about the wider community, with the inference that teachers in the state system are akin to martyrs. Massive chip on shoulder much?

I find describing children like 'plebs' and 'a horde' indicative of very nasty beliefs.
It doesn't surprise me that some parents want to get away from that sort of negative mindset.

"fees of £3.5k per term for boarding,"

That's normal (or even cheap side of normal) for state boarding.

More info here: stateboarding.org.uk

Also on penalties: "Removing charitable status which it seems the law prevents doing?" Actually it can be removed, in exactly the same way in which any fake charity is dealt with. It means closing it down completely. 'punishment' enough?

Dd is at a very whizzy private school which works in partnership with a state school in a deprived area of a nearby town. It seems like a good arrangement. I would say it's mutually beneficial as dds best friend is now a girl from the state school

teachers in private schools are selfish and uncaring about the wider community

Not entirely. However, if their priority were the wider community, then they would be working in state schools, surely?

3.5k a term might be cheap for state boarding, but rather out of reach for normal family budgets.

Agree, noblegiraffe but the point is that they are doing exactly what the state does. It's normal for that type of state school.

And demand for state boarding (usually) outstrips supply, as it is popular with Forces families (who have priority admissions and a state subsidy of up to 90% if they meet qualifying criteria).

I find describing children like 'plebs' and 'a horde' indicative of very nasty beliefs. It doesn't surprise me that some parents want to get away from that sort of negative mindset.

What a bizarre argument. You are seriously suggesting that parents send their kids private - the sort of schooling from which the plebs (ordinary people, lower social classes) are excluded, to get away from a negative mindset around the lower social classes?

AnotherNewt but it does make the thing a bit of a con.

Eton can say that it has successfully set up a state school with X amount of pupils on pupil premium. The government can then say 'well, Eton has managed to do this successfully, and look at their awesome results' and demand that other private schools do the same.

BUT

1. 3.5k will price out a lot of people, thus they will have a selective intake of people who care very much about education.

2. They will take some children who are about to be taken into care. Obviously laudable, however, those children will then be boarding students so the school has control over every aspect of their lives, and the children will be carefully chosen. This will make it much easier for these children to be successful than a school whose children in care can experience very chaotic and unstable lifestyles.

3. The school has said that they will aim for 20% of pupils receiving pupil premium. This sounds great, until you realise that Forces children come under pupil premium. As you mentioned, state boarding schools are popular with Forces families to provide a stable education for children who would otherwise move around a lot. So they can provide an education aimed at Forces children, meet their pupil premium target while at the same time avoid FSM kids who may be more problematic to teach.

That's why the school that Eton has co-founded can't be held up as a shining example of how this can work in general.

Nobel. You are obviously ideological opposed to any money changing hands in education.

The way to reduce or eliminate private schools and to abolish University fees is Any ideas ?.

We all know the number of private schools could be greater reduced (leaving the ones that remain as just hugely Expensive finishing schools for rich foreigners).

Answer 1. The creation of more grammar schools and the state could even pay boarding fees for pupils for grammars.

Answer 2. reduce the number of people going to University to 25%. This would mean the state could provide Higher Education with a 80-90% reduction in fees !

Both these ideas will be frowned upon by you, so bear the consequences of education becoming a money market.

This sounds exactly typical of state boarding.

1. it's the cheapest form of boarding there is

2. the term time 'control' is the same in every full/fullish boarding school.

3. Forces children attract PP because they are a disadvantaged educational group on the basis that their outcomes are considerabky lower than would otherwise be expected. They're not a fudge factor, but a pupil population with genuine needs (and often require significant behavioural counselling and input).

Sandy don't put words into my mouth! Actually I think reducing the number of people going to university and increasing the number of apprenticeships is a good idea. I can't see the government reducing/abolishing tuition fees if numbers drop though. Not the current government anyway.

AnotherNewt Forces children attract significantly less £PP than FSM kids because their educational need is less. If you wanted to target an 'easier' PP group to 'fix', then providing educational stability for a child who would otherwise move around a lot is the one to go for.

I was a Forces child btw.

Oh and it doesn't matter if the Eton school is typical of state boarding, what is important that state boarding isn't typical of state schooling.

There may be needier groups than forces children, but they attract PP because they have greater needs, as a population, than typical pupils. Though if course the need for emotional support (and behavioural management) does vary depending on the level of active operations and number of casualties at any particular time.

Of course a boarding school is somewhat different to a day school. But there seemed to be a misconception earlier than somehow it was chichi and expensive, whereas it is actually bog standard.

Another my point is that where Eton could have chosen to set up a school in challenging circumstances, it has instead decided at every turn to take an option that will maximise its chances of success while the headline looks good.
'Eton school with high proportion of PP students gets excellent GCSE results'
Hides 'Tiny Eton school with £12k a year fees for most parents where the PP students are mainly forces children, not children in poverty gets expected results at GCSE'

I've taught Forces kids who've been there for a year or two before moving on to their next posting. That's what causes a lot (not all, obviously) of the educational disadvantage, and the problem that is sought to be fixed by giving Forces kids boarding school subsidies. I'm not sure whether Forces kids in a boarding school would need PP to the same extent.

I'm sorry that I mentioned Eton at all, as it seems to be dominating the thread.

According to this article from 2013 at least 36 private schools have been sponsoring academies. So there is more going on than one state boarding school.

(Seems to me a no-brainedrthat Eton, a full boarding school, sponsors a state boarding school - a type of school which successive govts have been trying to set up more)

Eton's engagement with the state sector doesn't begin and end with that one state boarding school.

www.etoncollege.com/summaryofpublicbenefit.aspx

So Brighton College is sponsoring a highly selective (need 5 A*/As to get in) state sixth form. It would be unsurprising to hear that it does well.

The next school I looked at was the Bourne Academy in Bournemouth which is sponsored by Canford in Dorset. It has quite a few poor kids. Its results aren't good.

www.compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk/school/136125?tab=secondary

That was the first two I looked at.

mpsw why does the live Eton page of summary of public benefit only go up to August 2011?