Independent Grammar School Durham (low-cost private school model): any experiences or thoughts?

[Kokeshi123]

This is not for us (we are not in the UK anyway), but there has been a lot of talk about the cost of private school in the UK recently, especially with the talk about VAT and inflation. The Independent Grammar School Durham supposedly has developed a low-cost private school model. Is there actually a case/need for this kind of thing in the UK, or is private education only considered worth it if it includes things that cost a lot of money (small class sizes, nicer sports facilities and the like)?

Most people I know in the UK use good state schools near their homes and are happy with them, but I do know one or two people who returned to the UK from overseas and were only offered places in schools that were really bad or miles away, so I can see that even with good state systems, there will always be a need for private schools in some cases....

www.theguardian.com/education/2018/sep/15/durham-low-cost-private-school-attacked-by-teachers

BUMP in the night. I found this article, which looks thought-provoking.

Well put it this way, no-one I know chooses to send their DC there. They either choose state (non-grammar area) or private.

Do they have empty places? I don't know if there is much of a model for this type of schooling in the UK - unless teacher shortages really do start to have massively negative impacts on state education (but then, can very cheap private schools pay for and attract staff either)?

I'm a lone parent, private school would be totally out of my reach and I couldn't give up work to home educate. So I could imaging considering this if my child was really struggling in a state setting, because of bullying for example. But I can't imagine it's a huge market.

Just had a look at their website. It looks sweet, but judging by the age of the children it also looks like a private primary school, not an 11+ grammar school. I think choice is important. It is clearly a small nurturing place that is probably very good for a child struggling socially in a large mainstream setting. There are quite a lot of small schools like this around the UK. They are usually more affordable than the big name independents, but this one looks unusually cheap. Not sure how they manage it.

Is it not a private primary? I can't see anything for 11+. So it's a bit misleading as I think most prep schools are £2800 ish a term. So while still cheaper it's not that much cheaper

We have a low cost private school round here, I teach in the old, expensive independent school, I have friends who teach in the local comps and state grammar. The consensus is that both the comps/state grammar/ old public school are good, albeit different - but this low rent private thing is a bit rubbish - it costs a lot to run a school.

Parents are clued up about risks of schools closing etc. Looking at the compare schools tool there are just 59 pupils aged 4-14.

I like the Australian model where parents get a voucher for schooling and can use it at schools where they pay no extra or ‘private’ schools which is often a small top up.

The fees are lower than government funding per pupil for state schools, which doesn't make a great deal of sense. state schools are massively struggling and under funded on c£5000 per pupil per year average - but that average smooths out the effect of additional funding that schools get in proportion to the number of more challenging pupils they have, so yes it's probably feasible to offer a basic education for £2700 per pupil per year if all pupils who are more challenging to educate are excluded, but it wouldn't be to a quality any better than the state can provide. there would be the distasteful "advantage" of ensuring ones child only mixed with children from other wealthier families but if you aren't going to have smaller class sizes and other enhancements over what a state school can offer, what's the point?

The guardian article says they have a total of 22-24 pupils registered so the entire budget for the whole school is less than £65,000 for the year. You're not going to manage much by way of teacher pay on that budget - I imagine the teaching staff must all be on hourly-paid contracts just for a few hours a week, and there would be no flexibility for different subject options. must be awful.

Interestingly I'm in the north east and had never heard of it!

I do like the idea of budget private schools though - for people who really want the best education for their children, in small classes with like minded pupils/parents but at a cost affordable to the majority rather than the minority.

65 on roll as of May 2022 which they hope to increase to 95.

It's 4-13 at the moment. And 4-14 from September. They hope to increase to 4-16 as the students move through.

I think a lot of people will want to see how it does over the coming years before considering it.

We looked into this school, as we live in the area.

I remember thinking that the website all looked very nice, but I struggled to get my head around how the finances worked.

The amount they’re charging in fees per pupil is less than the amount a state school gets per pupil - significantly less IIRC - and I was suspicious about how they can provide an education that’s equal to or better than a state school for less money, even if they can weed out the more challenging pupils. It just didn’t make sense to me.

So it’s an interesting concept, it’ll be interesting to see how they get on if they start offering GCSEs, but it wasn’t a school we seriously considered.

You can't get small classes with good/excellent teachers and good resources/environment on a budget sadly. That's why private schools charge approx 16K per year (that's NE prices).

I think the way you could feasibly do it would be if the students were basically getting the same kind of education as they would get with Home Ed/Distance Learning/Teach Yourself type resources - but with the school providing the physical location, computers, and a small number of general staff to supervise and monitor, but not attempting to teach full lessons to a whole cohort (except maybe for English and Maths).

Maaaaybe.

But again, from a parents point of view, that brings us back to the question of whether it’s providing an education that’s equal, or better, than that provided by the state schools in the area.

I think the low cost model works best when the local state options are either dire or a very poor fit for particular DCs. They are not going to compete with good state provision unless economic or religious segregation is your main driver.

In my area there is a very low cost religious school with 140 children on roll and costs £3,500 a year for boarding, but its academic results are awful as that is not its focus. It probably gets religious subsidies but don’t know the ins and outs of funding.

A private school half a Borough away has just folded as despite its relatively low fees of around £8k a year (compared to nearby primary schools of £15k) it had too few pupils.

Put this in the context that pupil numbers are predicted to decline quite substantially over the next ten years, it isn’t a great time to be opening up a school.or trying to expand an existing one.

@PettsWoodParadise the North East is a non-grammar area so in theory a low cost state school would work however it is in Durham where there are already some great state schools so the demand just isn't there. Enough parents can afford private fees so there isn't an incentive for a cheaper private option. So I completely agree with you.

Totally agree - and why I wouldn't touch this model myself.

I can totally see the attraction of an Australia-style system as mentioned above - which is basically what we already have for nurseries and EYFS education up to age 5, where you can get a basic offering totally free but private businesses can offer an upgraded service for extra money. But I can also totally see that this would entrench inequality between those that can pay for a topup and those who can't.

What I would most like to see is a government that will invest enough to increase the spending per pupil to a minimum of £7000 for all schools because I think that's the real cost of a good education.

Failing that, I would love to be able to just top up the £5000 that the government is prepared to spend on my child's education with the extra £2000 that is needed to create this upgrade. I'd even be happy if this was introduced with legislation that meant my topup had to be £4000 such that every "paid" place created a free place for a pupil from a home with a below-average household income.

If I can't do that then I would be perfectly happy with a "low cost" private school option that didn't have the boat houses, swimming pools, gyms and high-tech bells and whistles that seem to be the minimum standard for "normal" private schools, and just gave a fully-funded and well-resourced normal education for about £7000 per year - but at senior level you would need an absolute minimum of 60 pupils per yeargroup for the books to balance, and for classes to be properly taught without shortcuts that would be necessary with smaller yeargroup cohorts.

Given that none of these exist I am coughing up the £15k needed for "normal" private school fees, and keeping my fingers crossed that we can get through to 6th form before the threatenned legislation to make this more difficult gets introduced.

@ArdeteiMasazxu we are just starting the private fee journey from this Sept so looking at 7 yrs, just praying the legislation doesn't come in until she is in 6th form too!

Talking of top up money for state schools, it sort of already happens. One school near me asks for £100 a month for those who can afford it, at DD’s school they have a rebuilding plan they hope parents will pay for. A friend who is a deprived area in the NW parents struggle for the £5 for art supplies.

@PettsWoodParadise is this really happening? I'm shocked and saddened although I probably shouldn't be shocked given the state the education sector is in.

Yes @twistyizzy however in my own shock I may have exaggerated as looking on the website www.saintolaves.net/78/voluntary-donations it is £50 a month suggested although a parent whose son went told me she was suggested £100 as her son had previously been at a prep school and school implied £100 a month was far cheaper than fees and should be no trouble for them.

I'm local and have heard nothing good about this school I'm afraid. I don't think it's going to be a model for our future schooling system. I understand it's run on some quite unusual educational theory lines (don't ask me to name them!)

In Tokyo we have some low-cost international schools that cost about 1/3 of the full-price regular international schools.

They were set up originally by Indian incomers who were middle class (usually software professionals) but lacking in the fat expat packages that some expats have, so they really needed English-medium education at affordable prices. Nowadays, children from a variety of backgrounds also attend.

The facilities are limited - very little outdoor space (the one I am most familiar with has the kids play in the public park next-door in lieu of a schoolyard). Academically they are fine. The classes are over 30 and teaching style is very much textbook based (chalk and talk, work through the textbook and workbook) so not much need for lesson planning. Primary classes can therefore be taught by women who are OK with accepting a lower salary in exchange for a family-friendly job. Secondary teachers can teach more periods so fewer will need to be on payroll. I have to report, the DB and iGCSE/A-level results of the schools suggest that it doesn't do the kids any harm.

Someone mentioned schools where there isn't any complex SEN, that will be a factor. But more broadly, a school where all the families can be assumed to be reasonably "switched on" will not need to fulfil the "social worker" role that state schools find hard to avoid. In a school which has to accept every type of family, you kind of have to find ways to get the kids to swimming lessons and sporting opportunities etc. etc., otherwise quite a lot of kids will wind up unable to swim and never experiencing sports or music. If you can assume that the parents are the kind of people who'd put their kids in swimming lessons anyway, there isn't the same need to provide basic input into these areas at school.

I mentioned India, where a lot of the families come from. In India, I think most kids actually go to low-cost private schools, because the Indian government-run ones are like, dire beyond belief. The guy who set up the Durham school actually made his originally career setting up and supporting low-cost private schools in developing and middle-income countries.

I do not think there is much of a need for these kinds of schools in the UK, where the state sector is basically functional. If I was going to suggest a niche need that such schools might fill, I'd suggest a low-cost private SECONDARY (not primary) in London or similar place (densely populated, actual pressure on school places). You do hear of quite a lot of parents getting no place in a secondary school they are remotely happy with, and secondary-level is the point where "bad schools" are not just non-ideal but actually start to be dangerous and scary places that you would really worry about using. Furthermore, kids can commute from various locations across London once they are secondary school aged, meaning you're not reliant on having a particular group of disappointed parents in one single location, unlike with a primary.