Do private schools give bursaries/scholarships to parents with decent salaries?

[Alyosha]

I feel certain that the answer to this will be "no" but wanted to check.

We have two DS, 3 and 3 months. We both have good jobs, joint salary is over £100k, very comfortable and we have no complaints about our standard of living. We live in London, where private school fees seem to have gone absolutely nuts. I went to SHHS which was £9k pa by time I left in 2007; so very expensive but would be just about affordable for me & DH for 2 DCs. Occasionally they send me a begging letter asking me to donate for their fund to build a world class music centre...can't say I'm too motivated to donate now their fees are pushing £20k pa.

I can't see any way that we could afford school fees for both boys in 2- 3 year's time even with our good incomes. But looking at the support available it's only if you're earning under £80k. But there's no way I would have thought a family jointly earning £80k could afford £20k in school fees for 2 children (£40k net a year!) with mortgage, council tax, utilities, groceries etc.

So our only option would be a scholarship, but most scholarships seem to be 20% max off fees, which doesn't make them affordable, especially not long term. Is there anywhere that has substantial fee remission for a scholarship in commuting distance of North London, either primary or secondary?

This is of course assuming the DCs would even get scholarships, which I realise is a tall order!

[quote Alyosha]@NeverDropYourMoonCup (good advice) - Well yes quite, that is indeed why I am very well aware that DH and I very comfortable.

Why did you think that about bursaries, out of interest? Do you have experience with the private sector? When I was at SHHS they were given to very bright girls whose parents couldn't afford the fees. On closer inspection though, their parents were often university educated and one memorably lived rent free in Primrose Hill. So I wouldn't say they were for the poorest talented children, I don't believe they ever have been really.

I definitely agree that if there are only a few bursaries going, they should definitely go to the poorest talented kids. However, due to private schools ongoing fee inflation, those paying full price are able to subsidise not just the poorest but also the comfortable middle classes.

I think private schools are being canny and are aware that they don't have much sympathy in a lot of middle England now so many are priced out.[/quote]
Honestly (my sister worked in a private school until a couple of years ago), I think bursaries could be a force for good. But they were almost solely used to fulfil the 'yes, we're a charity' criteria whilst ensuring that offers were only made to the smallest number of absolutely outstanding poor students (usually for sports) whilst over 90% was used to keep the middle classes where they felt they deserved to be. Which meant there were fewer bursaries available for actually poor children.

She was quite amused when specific programmes to take genuinely poor students were introduced because of the horror on the faces of others when they were publicised.

@Chgl92 Yes that makes sense thanks. I think on the ground SENCO's and teachers tend to do what works for each child though, utilising auditory and kinetic elements especially for children with neurological difference. And we all know that different revision practices work for different children, my 3dc all revise very differently. One learns from multiple writing out of record cards, one sound records listens (dyslexic) and one likes to read aloud and does eg learning spellings lists by reading aloud rather than writes down which I don't get at all. They each found their own way.

Oh, for sure, I'm a big believer in that. Modern classrooms have to include all manner of accommodation and scaffolding to make sure all children can access the content, and there's a lot research and discussion around it (I'm a teacher, btw). But schools used to sit children down and make them do a test to see if they learnt best through a very specific way, and that was stuck to. That's what's been debunked. At the moment, it's about making sure students are processing information efficiently and meaningfully - but there certainly are fads in teaching!

@Innocenta - that's kind of my point. State school pupils do better but private school pupils still hoover up the places & do better after graduation. However I may be out of date on this as many posters have pointed out.

@SallyWD I'm sure they'll be fine - it's more about wanting to ease their path as much as I can. But I think if state continues to be as good as it is I will keep my money and spend it on tutoring. Or whatever else they might need/want.

@naaaahhh another can of worms here - I'd say there is one superior way to revise, and if all of your kids switched to it they'd be more effective revising. :p

@Alyosha
Get back to me in 15 years when you have a little experience of your own children away from Gina Ford manuals and research papers. God forbid one of them might know themselves and how they work best. Or have special educational needs.

Come live on the Wirral. 4 grammar schools (2 f 2m) and a high performing private school.

Dd goes to one of the female grammars. The head told us it's like getting a private education without paying.
She is thriving. Hoping DS goes to the all male grammar.

But as a consequence the comprehensives are shite as all good teachers get swept up into the grammars and the one private.

[quote Alyosha]@Innocenta - that's kind of my point. State school pupils do better but private school pupils still hoover up the places & do better after graduation. However I may be out of date on this as many posters have pointed out.

@SallyWD I'm sure they'll be fine - it's more about wanting to ease their path as much as I can. But I think if state continues to be as good as it is I will keep my money and spend it on tutoring. Or whatever else they might need/want.

@naaaahhh another can of worms here - I'd say there is one superior way to revise, and if all of your kids switched to it they'd be more effective revising. :p[/quote]
'private school pupils still hoover up the places'

I wonder where you get your information from? If you are getting it from a private school or someone who children attend them (post facto justified) then I think turkeys rarely vote for Christmas!

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9348541/State-school-east-London-gets-Oxbridge-offers-ETON.html

As for doing better after graduation this is likely to the fact that through the self selection of having come from a rich household and with nepotism and 'connections' they can manage to get their foot in the door. This effect will diminish as 'Tim nice but dims' are less tolerated than they used to be.

@Megan1992xx That school is a real exception though - cheering them on but they're very unusual and their intake has very good grades.

@naaaahhh I have (had?) SEN; it's one of the reasons I'm teaching my son to read myself. I had to suffer in the days of "look-cover-spell-check".

I think when you live in a city, some of the advantages of private schools are reduced, because of the availability of extra curricular opportunities and the transport available. I live rurally (not middle of nowhere, but in a village). The state schools are excellent, and there are wider opportunities around, but you have to be able to get to them. Most of my friends have children in state schools - and they report that sports, music etc are relatively limited. Even when things are on offer, the reliability is poor (eg clubs frequently cancelled because the teacher is off sick or in a meeting - and the schools simply don't have the depth of staffing to cover those things). The majority of MC families I know who have chosen the 'state plus' route have a mum who doesn't work. She (almost always still she) will spend literally hours each week driving kids around to various after school activities to supplement what's on offer at school - sometimes up to 15 miles away because of the area where we live. Personally, I just don't want to spend my week like that. I work pretty much full time (because I love my job, not because I have to), and I don't want to spend my evenings driving all over the place and sitting in the car outside sports halls (or whatever). I know others will argue that 'kids should be kids', and they don't need this level of activity. To some extent I agree with that, especially at primary age, when they spent lots of time after school doing baking or jigsaws or craft or whatever. But once they hit teenagerhood, I find that 'kids being kids' largely means them being on their phones and me telling them to get off their phones. And actually, the things they really get most pleasure out of now are their music and their sport - which they spend hours each week doing at school. So for all those reasons (plus various others) the 'advantage' is really worth it for us. But not everyone would agree!

@impasto That's a really good point. We both work full time and maternity leave has allowed me to teach him to read, get him in Russian lessons (I speak it at home with him). At the weekend he has swimming and football. The music element is the big one; I'd like him to learn a musical instrument. I was forced to learn the violin for 14 years, mainly so it would be a plus on my private school applications! My happiest memories of music are experiencing some of the great classics playing in an orchestra, which is a very private school luxury.

It's not necessarily a private school luxury. Some state secondaries have fantastic music provision, including orchestras, choirs, chamber ensembles etc. But finding one that offers great music AND great sport AND great drama, with both depth and inclusion across the board (eg lots of performance opportunities, sports matches for the F team as well as the A team etc), is less easy. And the thing is, even when your child is 10, you don't necessarily know what they're going to love. It's the same with academic subject choices. One of my children has turned out to be a massively keen linguist, having done no more than a smattering of French at primary school, and is now taking several languages at GCSE. If those subject options hadn't been available to him, he would never have discovered that that's where his passion/talent lay.

OP - just to say we had an excellent orchestra at our state school and we performed all the classics. We even performed at the Albert Hall. You can have these experiences at state schools too.

@Alyosha
Why on earth wouldn't you take your children to see world class concerts at world class venues with the money you weren't spending at private schools? You live in London it will be a cinch to enrich their education. We take our children to all manner of concerts, museums, festivals, interesting foreign trips. Why would concerts have to be a preserve of private schools? You sound involved enough to be able to organise these things for yourself at weekends and after school.
Not all private schools are heavy on music either. Although mine was, we had a brilliant program called susuki which was great for dyslexics, based on the Japanese method of learning. But my children are at state schools and have all played several instruments and taken part in performances and choirs and have a real love of music.

[quote Alyosha]@naaaahhh both of my kids are Gina babies, so at this age (3.5 months) long 2 hour lunchtime nap, 45 min morning nap, bed at 7. Now I've said that he'll be screaming all night!

Here you go "The Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI), a strand of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), has recognised and categorised LS as a neuromyth (OECD 2002). The Education Endowment Foundation, which compiles research and evidence-based practice for teachers to use, characterises the evidence for LS as ‘very limited’ (Education Endowment Foundation 2019, p1)."

@HarrisMcCoo presumably you mean downsize the house?[/quote]
Downsizing, or move to a more affordable area. Live modestly etc. It can be done.

We earn nowhere near that salary you quoted so if one of my DC went to private school in future they would be going via a bursary. We would have a negligible amount to pay, which is only fair.

Tied into what naaaahhh was saying (not tagged, as I know you're busy!), I think the benefit of a private school can often be greater for those who don't have a particular talent than those that do. If your child already plays two instruments and is Grade 8 on one of them by the time they're in Year 6, then you're absolutely going to carry that on, regardless of school (private lessons, orchestras at the weekend etc). Ditto if your child is passionate about football and already plays for a good club. But for the ones that don't - the kids who love to sing, or fancy learning the flute, but are never going to make the NYO, or the ones that love to play netball but are never going to make the A team - then a school that has lots of sports/arts built into the curriculum as well a wide range of well-attended clubs, may well mean that they participate in a lot more of these sorts of activities - particularly if they live in an area where such activities are a bit thin on the ground outside of school.

*I wonder where you get your information from? If you are getting it from a private school or someone who children attend them (post facto justified) then I think turkeys rarely vote for Christmas!

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9348541/State-school-east-London-gets-Oxbridge-offers-ETON.html*

That school does achieve amazing results, but their entry criteria is higher than almost all the top independent schools, even for students in their own Year 11. If you don't get top, top grades at GCSE you are out on your ear. Some of the big independents do that too, and it's hugely frowned upon. It's every bit as much of a hot house/Oxbridge factory as any indy I can think of. More so, maybe.

Nonetheless it is still state provided and does not cost the parents a penny.

[quote Alyosha]@impasto That's a really good point. We both work full time and maternity leave has allowed me to teach him to read, get him in Russian lessons (I speak it at home with him). At the weekend he has swimming and football. The music element is the big one; I'd like him to learn a musical instrument. I was forced to learn the violin for 14 years, mainly so it would be a plus on my private school applications! My happiest memories of music are experiencing some of the great classics playing in an orchestra, which is a very private school luxury.[/quote]
No it isn't. I also learnt clarinet throughout school, starting in (state) juniors and play in orchestras throughout my (state) education, achieving a high standard. Every (state) secondary we have looked at has orchestras and choirs. You are very confused in how you perceive state schools. Have you ever set foot in one?

@HelloDulling

*I wonder where you get your information from? If you are getting it from a private school or someone who children attend them (post facto justified) then I think turkeys rarely vote for Christmas!

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9348541/State-school-east-London-gets-Oxbridge-offers-ETON.html*

That school does achieve amazing results, but their entry criteria is higher than almost all the top independent schools, even for students in their own Year 11. If you don't get top, top grades at GCSE you are out on your ear. Some of the big independents do that too, and it's hugely frowned upon. It's every bit as much of a hot house/Oxbridge factory as any indy I can think of. More so, maybe.

The person who wrote the Fail article has evidently never eaten in Bekynton. They don't know what kind of collars the boys wear, either.

Never believe anything you read in the papers!

@HelloDulling Your analysis is spot on. Eton is not a school which turfs boys out who don't get A* in everything. While boys generally do extremely well academically, because they're selected academically in the first place and the teaching is so very good, the school offers and encourages infinitely more than this.

And how much a year does it cost?

@Megan1992xx

And how much a year does it cost?

£44,094 plus extras, if you are asking me. Though I got that from the school website, so the Fail could have done the same (the fees have increased since I had DC there).

@EstoPerpetua welcome back!
My DN was at Eton and they were brilliant at supporting him when he decided to go to art school instead of down a more academic route.

So correct me if I am wrong you think that Eton is 'better' because it is less selective on academic potential but discriminates on how rich your parents are whilst the state school is 'worse' because it selects ruthlessly on academic potential but does not care how much money your parents have and makes no financial claim on them.

What a strange form of 'equity' that is.

No wonder the world is dominated by over entitled patriarchs of limited intelligence.

@impasto I'm clearly in the wrong place. Back when I was applying for schools I think only Camden & Fortismere had orchestras. Also not sure I agree on keeping it up - I certainly wouldn't have had I not gone to the school I did. I'm not particularly musical and only did the violin because of parental pressure. Oh and the sports provision at SHHS was absolutely terrible, I was there 7 years and didn't play a single full game of hockey, netball, tennis - anything. They didn't care unless you were already good at sport. (Why do I want private school again???)

@SallyWD That's great, but not very common for most comprehensive schools, certainly it was something my parents looked very hard for. I tried to get one of the 5 places Camden had for music. Wasn't successful!

@naaaahhh Sorry, I wasn't clear. The experience of playing in an orchestra, experiencing music as part of an ensemble. I am not particularly musical myself but did appreciate that experience. Suzuki is great! I've looked into it but it's practically cult-like, you have to attend watching sessions where all you do is...watch a typical lesson, sign up to a years long waiting list and hope that your name comes up, all the while attending group lessons where you can't participate!

@mewkins Yes, I went to state primary school for 7 years. I then went round several state secondaries with my parents. Only 1, Camden School for Girls, had an orchestra. Fortismere did too but we didn't tour that one as I had no chance of getting in. I've done a quick look - can only see one state school locally with an orchestra.

I think you will find state secondaries in London are very different to your own time at school. I work in London schools and know about music provision in our three good local state schools. They all have orchestras plus smaller ensembles. Some have more, some less, but an orchestra, string and brass group plus choir(s) would be fairly normal. The one I spend most time in has jazz groups, early music, wind ensemble, several choirs, plus all sorts of smaller ensembles but isn’t known for its music as there’s another state school down the road which is. Admittedly it is one of the more highly sought after London comps. I wonder why you think you know which local schools have orchestras? Details are not necessarily going to be on the school website (I can see they’re not for our local schools), so I’m not sure how you’d know without asking the school/attending an open day.