How do people afford private school?

[PopGoesTheWeaselYetAgain]

Following on from discussion House of Commons today, how do people afford private school fees? Is it by sacrificing holidays and other luxuries? That wouldn't by you a year, but did she perhaps mean a term? How do you pay for the other two terms?

I'd appreciate it if posters refrained from speculation. I'm interested in people's actual financial circumstances and decisions.

Araminta1003 I don't regret sending DD's to private school, as we did what was right for them at the time (and their school is excellent). But their school had one of the few prep schools I would have considered in our local area. They would also have had an excellent education at the state school my son attended. Sadly, it is oversubscribed and we would not have been in the catchment area, so it was not an option for them. Both girls have commented on the fact that girls who have joined their senior school from my son's school are among the highest-achievers in the year group, when most have come from prep schools.

Depends on the school, we could easily put two children through a
smaller day school without any sacrifice. We would probably have to make some changes if we sent the to a prestigious larger local school. Essentially one is £2k a month and the other £4k. Other people could afford more per month than we could because they have more money.

@SpanadorFanador ”Sadly, it is oversubscribed and we would not have been in the catchment area, so it was not an option for them.”

My DCs went to a state primary school like that. One is still there. This year’s KS2 SATS are really astounding given the pandemic. Over 70% at greater depth in a number of the areas. These state schools are not representative but are a privileged catchment people buy into either via house prices or church etc. That is the whole point of the lottery system that is state education. The school itself is outstanding and so are the teachers, but it is the educationally privileged parent group that makes all the difference. Many then go onto grammar schools or the top local comps, some to private schools but that is a small minority. You don’t need to pay up for a private school if you already have educational privilege and know how to access the system. However, I know we are saving money and getting to spend it on other things and getting better access to Oxbridge too now, how is that fair?

@Another76543

The fact remains though that Angela Rayner said that private schools were a waste of money and no better than state schools. How, then, can she argue that private schools are a “luxury”?

A Vauxhall will get you where you need to go just as effectively as a Rolls Royce. Are you suggesting that a Rolls Royce is not a luxury?

Angela Rayner is of the opinion that students can get the same results from a state school as from a private school. You may not agree with that sentiment, but her argument is consistent.

And yet working class and foreign children are woefully underrepresented in the gymnasia (grammar schools), in part because primary school teachers tend to recommend the children of doctors to the grammars and the children of cleaners to the comprehensives. No, thank you, I prefer a system where the children have a chance to demonstrate their achievement on an objective exam to one where their futures are so subject to the biases and prejudices of their teachers.

We could do it if we really stretched ourselves but I just think 'what's the point?' private school doesn't necessarily equal success and I would not want to compromise on luxuries for that expense not to pay off. I guess because I'm not surrounded by or have known any ex private school goers, it's just not something I've ever really considered. Plus our local schools are fab.

We had some help from grandparents, we went on camping trips, UK holidays, lived a fairly low key lifestyle.. no big luxury's and managed just!

Private schools are in the luxury category because most of them offer "extras" that are simply not affordable in the state sector. Kids might get the same GCSEs, but the private school kid might do it in nicer surroundings, more activities, more cultural experiences, more wrap round care. And so on.

Araminta1003 I agree, it's not fair at all. That's why I do the job I do. I want to use my skills to make every school I work in better for all the children in that school. And I know from working in London boroughs that the postcode lottery is rife.

We are now more rural and so DS's school has a pretty mixed catchment as it is a village school, which also takes in an estate on the edge of a local town. And the surrounding village schools are generally good too, so it's not a case of getting a great education if you live on one street and a terrible one if you live on the next, although there are differences. However, when I see local families driving their kids to particular (not great) local prep schools I do wonder what benefit they possibly could be getting.

I feel a huge cognitive dissonance when I reflect on the experience of the teachers and kids in his school (not to mention DD's school) and the day to day reality of some of the schools I work in. Many are amazing, with outstanding professional practice, getting excellent results and supporting children with a wide range of needs in very difficult catchments. Often those schools have the very best teachers of all. Teachers who would be bored in 'nicer' schools, and whose values align with the great work they do. Other schools are stuck in a very difficult cycle of poor performance, constant crisis management and high staff turnover (if they can get teachers at all) and that is absolutely not the education that any child in this country deserves.

I initially saved for it (50% of income since I was 16-18). Then I got a remote job and used the money I used to pay for my annual season ticket instead. But we’re lucky in the sense that DD has always had a full bursery & so we’re only paying for one. Also, having a low maintenance lifestyle helps - we still enjoy our little luxuries but just not as often. So we only do 1 overseas holiday per year for example

My children don’t have passports and barely remember their last holiday. I think they were 6 and 4 - now both teens!

If one of you is on £250k and the other on £100k you can afford one or two at private

Not any more. Younger parents are used to paying huge childcare fees and just see private school as an extension of this. Fees are quarterly and most primaries will charge 4-5 per term. It works out to be between 1-1.5k a month per child a month often including free afterschool care until 6pm. It’s becoming much more commonplace to see 2 parents on 80-100k combined who have either sacrificed buying a large house in order to send their kids to private school, or delayed it.

As these parents tend to be younger their salaries have room to grow, so they could end up with 300k between them later. Just not at the entry point.

I did by dedicating my entire salary to paying the fees, while we lived off DH's (now ex) salary.

We only had cheap holidays during those 18 years and lived modestly

“And yet working class and foreign children are woefully underrepresented in the gymnasia (grammar schools), in part because primary school teachers tend to recommend the children of doctors to the grammars and the children of cleaners to the comprehensives. No, thank you, I prefer a system where the children have a chance to demonstrate their achievement on an objective exam to one where their futures are so subject to the biases and prejudices of their teachers.”

In the canton I grew up in, in Switzerland, if you disagreed with the teacher’s assessment you could appeal and you could also ask to do a test voluntarily, either way. Offering the best of all worlds.

A prepared for exam is never objective either and favours tutoring and money spent by the parents. Most good teachers know which kids can cope with fast paced academics. The debate is around selection at 11 (favours girls) vs selection at 13 (favours boys). Whatever system there is, there has to be fluidity between the schools too. Again, in the canton I grew up in you can easily transfer later and there are lots of different pathways, offering choice. People don’t pay for private schooling, in general. There was demand for bilingual state education (English German and English Frenc) and the international baccalaureate and the state ended up providing it quite quickly.

@CurlewKate you listed the following things as making private schools luxurious:

nicer surroundings, more activities, more cultural experiences, more wrap round care.

nicer surroundings - very subjective. The draughty cold old buildings appeal to some but not others. Local state school is in a Grade 1 listed building so both sectors have example of new/old buildings. Maybe some have larger playing fields. But again this is a very subjective area.

more activities - yes, but if activities are a luxury then surely out of school activities should be taxed, e.g. tutoring, kids sports clubs, music clubs etc. I can see that some think that anything beyond a very standard one size fits all education should be taxed but I disagree.

more cultural experiences - similar to argument to activities.

more wrap around care - yes, but this is paid for (either by fees or extra charges). Should parents in state schools also be charged tax on the wrap around childcare they use? Again I disagree - taxing childcare would disadvantage working women.

I think that everyone should be clear that when people say private education is a luxury, they are also saying childcare is a luxury, and that children’s activities outside the basic state education is a luxury.

And does this mean that state schools should stop offering any trips/experiences/ after school activities beyond a basic state education?

The local state does more residential trips than the local private school, which are both more than state in the less advantaged area. I assume you would also like to see these type of trips taxed as well?

Actually, when you think about it, maybe rather than adding tax on, the government should be looking at giving more tax back for anything spent on kids education - somebody mentioned swimming, for instance. At the moment I can use my tax free childcare yo pay for all kinds of educational experiences, from drama to science camp to canoeing. But the mum down the road is out of work, so the government doesn't subsidise any of her kids extra activities.

@Araminta1003 I am not familiar with the Swiss system. Is it also the case that you effectively cannot apply to university if you do not gain entrance to a gymnasium? Because that's something which is even more extreme than the UK system, where, even in a grammar county, students from "secondary moderns" can and do take A-Levels and apply to universities.

We are using the term "objective" in different ways. It is always the case that more preparation, on average leads to higher scores on achievement tests. It is not always the case that money gives a great advantage; in some Asian countries 80%+ of students attend night sessions for university entrance exams.

I am using "objective" to contrast with teacher recommendations which are also affected by expectations which have nothing to do with the student, expectations based on appearance, on their family's socioeconomic background, on their gender ("Girls dislike hard maths", from Katharine Birbalsingh, of all people🙄).

I believe that an exam based system of evaluation is less bad than an expectations based system. You may disagree.

In your example, both brands are taxed at the same rate of VAT. They are treated the same, despite one being more “luxurious”.

I paid two sets of prep fees earning £50k. £2k per month for the fees still left £1k for spends/saving. DH paid all for other household expenses. It meant I could carry on with my career as wrap around care and activities were included. I now earn almost £90k but I only have one set of fees as one DC is at state grammar.

I think I would have given up work had it not been for my DCs being in prep school. It would have been too stressful trying to juggle wrap around care and extra curricular activities. Private schools really do help make things easier for working mums. There are nurses, teachers, police officers and other public sector worker mums at my DC’s private school. It really isn’t all people on mega bucks.

With a family income of around £50k, we don't. We don't have fancy holidays or branded clothes or new cars, so we have nothing to sacrifice to give us enough to cover the fees for one child let alone the others. Our few short breaks a year wouldn't even pay for 1/2 term for one child!

What's that got to do with it? The government is free to tax similar things at different rates. Stamp duty on a £425,000 flat is £0 for a first time buyer. Stamp duty on a £4,250,000 house is £421,250, almost 10%.

@Toansweraboutfees - all very good points. None of this should be taxed and the fact that some swim schools have had to charge VAT is outrageous. It is a life skill. Next they will be adding VAT to care home fees… oh wait they won’t, because they won’t dare to offend the grey vote. That applies to all the parties.

We have a demographic crisis of not enough kids being born. If anything, we should be getting big tax breaks for having children in the first place and bringing them up properly and extending them educationally whilst still working and paying taxes. How about women who would otherwise pay 40 or 45 per cent tax get 5-10 per cent off for also having children, extra percentages for each child?Whilst my parents’ generation are getting tons of free stuff due to their age, their wealth isn’t taxed, their housing equity is huge, they still have the NHS - us working women are constantly being squeezed for every penny, childcare keeps going up, most of us are stressed especially if working full time.
Maybe the far left middle aged men in the Labour Party want us educated women all back cooking at home and producing more kids whilst not worrying about school fees? So they want us all to choose state and breed more and fill in the gaps at home because they have run out of cash to properly fund our schools? They need the kids we produce to be cheap but productive to work and pay for them in their dotage? And why is Angela Rayner defending this madness herself? Because she is lacking in critical thought and a proper understanding of a top level education herself, having not experienced it herself. We can’t criticise Sunak for being a billionaire and sending his kids to private school and Bojo for being a philandering idiot but let off Angela who left school at 16 and thinks she can lecture anyone on Education. She is out of touch too, coming from the opposite end.

A lot of private school kids are funded by the FCO or MOD as one of their parents works there.

I know people who are not on overseas postings but have kids in boarding schools in the UK because potentially they might be asked to go overseas.

It's a massive perk of the job.

Single parent here but have my own company so enough income to pay the fees. although I have an only. Would be tough with two.