Is anyone else worried about the effect of rising private school fees on state schools?

[BabyIcecream]

Where I live there already aren't enough school places. Three big state secondary's, one is catholic, they are all over subscribed and bursting at the seams using old buildings with not enough funding.

Ive seen reports that at some private schools upto a third of pupils might leave if the fees go up due to VAT.

I'm worried about all these extra pupils needing places, DS already finds his school overcrowded and whilst I don't agree with private education putting extra pupils into the state system is just going to further disadvantage our children.

Unless money raised by increasing private schools costs is going to be used to fund state education? Does anyone know?

The lower middle class parents who take their DC out of private schools because of VAT will have zero impact on government policies.

They’re probably just middle class. Lower is pushing it.

Even GPs and solicitors have been priced out in many cases compared to previously

Still I agree it won’t impact any policy in the way pp expects

It’ll be as pp says

• securing a place at a "better" state school, whether by moving house, getting religion, or doing more preparation for grammar schools
• paying for private tutors
• trying to improve the specific schools where they congregate

Why don't the sharp elbowed parents in the state school already do that. 97% of the population go to state. You really think the tiny number of extra parents making noise will make a difference?

“The way I see it is, that once the sharp elbowed parents are in the state system, they’ll start to agitate the government to improve things , which will be better for all the students.”

You don’t mean “sharp elbowed” parents though, do you? You mean influential journalists and MPs, people with power to sway political opinion?

Sharp elbowed parents like me - we support our schools, fundraise, tell everyone how great our schools are, buy the head teacher a bottle of wine for Christmas, email the teachers praise and thanks and make sure our DCs do their homework, study for their GCSEs, don’t forget their kit and most importantly, if they are disciplined at school we support what the teachers have said! We understand that the more desirable the school - the better its future; the more funding, the less problematic families. The better results reflect the cohort primarily, as well as teaching. We want our kids to be happy, in a nice environment. Every child deserves that.

The journalists sending their kids to state schools is already happening and precisely the reason why this VAT policy is coming about anyway. Because they shout the loudest, comfortably sitting in the most sought after state schools. Which by the way are getting bigger and bigger, at the cost of the failing ones, full of problem children and disadvantaged families.
Here is a good example of a successful huge one, expanding even further:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1174393/ADA4215_Kingsdale_Foundation_School_Southwark_25_July_2023.pdf

The middle classes decide a school is good, Ofsted brands it with Outstanding, good teachers stay, good vibe, great results, happy days (mostly). Has zero effect on a neighbouring failing school. Nobody is going to improve standards for everyone. Why would they? It has nothing to do with private schools and all to do with poverty, deprivation, NHS funding, extra help when kids are struggling, benefits, social services, adequate housing and most importantly lack of drive and mental health issues etc.

Kingsdale is an interesting one.

Their exam results may look good, but their latest progress 8 score, at -0.12, is actually lower than the English national average (-0.03) and way below the average for Southwark (+0.34).

This would suggest that its good results are actually despite the teaching and whatever else it is doing, not because of it. Kingsdale have marketed their school very cleverly, and may have managed to attract the children of "sharp-elbowed parents" who might have otherwise gone down a selective private or grammar route. But on the face of, their children might well do better elsewhere!

It certainly doesn't strike me as a great example of how "sharp elbowed parents" have intrinsically improved the teaching at a school.

The 75% getting 5+ in English and Maths this year probably makes up for the meh Progress 8. With over 400 in each year group, it's probably a pretty blunt tool.

If you want amazing Progress 8 then the Michaela School is superb... personally I wouldn't want that system of education for my child. Or the complete lack of a wide curriculum and extra curricular opportunities.

Michaela have extra curricular opportunities, mainly academic focused with some music and limited sport. I think the head made a good point recently about a lot of selective private and grammar schools not getting as good results as you'd expect e.g. if a school takes the top 5-10% academically they should be getting 8-9's for the majority of their GCSE's and many aren't. So if the 20% happens or even 15% on top of the usual 5-10% year on year increase it will certainly make me question if I'm getting enough value or if its simply no longer affordable.

In 1997 when Labour abolished assisted places for private schools they decided to keep funding those who were already in the system as there was a concern of the impact of disruption to those pupils being displaced quickly in to the state system. But now they have decided it wouldn’t have an impact based upon dubious figures.

I'm not so sure you can say that a selective school should get 8-9 majority for GCSEs.

That isn't really allowing for children being individuals. The whizzy maths kid may be severely dyslexic and massively struggle with humanities.

The top 0.25% IQ kid may actually have no interest in academics and only really want to spend time and effort on their art projects.

The on-track for all 9s kid may have mental health problems or illness or bereavement in Y11.

Should schools be putting noses to grindstone whatever the cost in pursuit of 100% G9?

I find the stats quite a blunt tool.

Does a school have a significant cohort achieving stellar results? If so, hooray, they can teach to that level. But more important is whether they turn out happy kids who are able to access the next level of education if that is what they desire.

Michaela's music extends to one orchestra that learns one classical piece a year for a concert. They have one of the most restrictive curriculums I've ever seen. They don't even offer Drama or Music at GCSE.

The focus isn’t just results, it’s overall educational experience; having attended a top city comp in the 90s I know lots has changed but they were really on their A game but still could not compete with our local Private school.

Personally, I feel a bit sorry for the parents who have so little faith in their kids that they assume that they will need to rely on nepotism to succeed.

What an awful message to send to your kids... you won't be good enough to succeed on your own merits but I'll pay to connect you with people who will be able to get you in through the back door.

I don't mean to be rude but this seems very naïve to me. Connections make all the difference even in the most informal way, and you can't legislate against that. I'd be more inclined to agree with you if the class system wasn't still firmly entrenched in this country. There's merit involved in success of course but the opportunities to practise your competence are more numerous if you know the right people.

1. Private school students are now doing masters at Oxbridge instead of undergrad courses.
2. Universities look at more than whether someone is state or privately educated. The overall makeup of pupils is considered. Eg someone on a scholarship at a Private School is more likely to be accepted than a student in a high performing State School who isn’t on FSM.
3. Oxbridge by itself doesn’t tend to the first choice of privately educated students. Professional courses tend to be as most families who use privates are middle class and don’t want their children to study courses that don’t come with a guaranteed job. Additionally a lot of privately educated students are in a position to apply overseas and then return to the UK for jobs. Eg at son’s private school 99% of 6th formers (there were 200 of them) went to their first choice medicine, vetenary sciences, law, or dentistry courses at non-Oxbridge universities in the UK. The rest studied these subjects overseas.
4. Universities recognise that there is often no material financial difference in some Outstanding School areas vs some Private School areas and adjust automatically.
5. 90% of jobs are not advertised. Private school pupils still get those.

“60 to 70% of Oxbridge intake are now from state schools. And rightly so in my opinion. So already the majority of the elitely educated of the county are not coming from nor will ever have these private school “social contacts”. “

Graduate recruitment is heading CV blind for PRIVATE SCHOOLS AND UNIS. Nobody is meant to name drop where they went to uni and only the degree awarded is considered in several big companies now.
If “Elite” is out that will include Oxford and Cambridge where more resources and 1:2 is provided as the norm.

I can only speak from my own experience and for my own dc. I have no doubt in her ability to forge her own connections and to succeed on her own merit.

If you don't think your dc has what it takes, then I do understand why you might feel the need to purchase connections with people who can help. I just feel a bit sorry for people who are only able to succeed in that way... the kind of "success" that haven't actually earned would feel a bit empty to me, but I do appreciate that everyone's values are different.

So you believe people buy a private education for connections? How bizarre, it’s literally not on most people’s radars. What is a diverse curriculum, good facilities, excellent teaching and all round experience.

I presume when you say 'you' you don't mean me personally? I'm not a part of that system at all but some of my in-laws are and I see the connections thing in action all the time. It is indeed purchasing connections but that's not how people see it, it's just 'what you do'. Many of the connections were purchased years ago and why wouldn't they want their children to have the advantages they had?

To think your children are operating in a world where they're not having to combat this is doing them a disservice. That's not to say they can't succeed without it but they should know they will encounter - and have to deal with - it.

Of course she is aware that it happens, and so am I. We all know plenty of people promoted beyond their own competence simply because of who they know. I just don't think that progressing in that manner makes for a very happy life, and it isn't what I would ever aspire to for my child.

Like I say, it comes back to values and what you think is important. I don't believe that I'm doing my child a disservice by teaching her that the kind of success that matters is the success that comes from your own hard work and perseverance in relation to stuff that you personally consider important.

Some people have explicitly said that they consider that access to social contacts to be one of the advantages of private education. I was responding to that.

If you have chosen private school for other reasons, then obviously my comments don't apply to your situation.

FWIW, I agree that paying private school fees in order to buy social connections is a bizarre idea, but some people clearly think this is a thing.

@MarshmellowMoon with 'social contacts' it's not just about jobs but meeting people with power and influence.

I would also disagree- just as a case study example, of my friends who is from a working class non academic background attended private school with me via a bursary - every job she's had has been via school friends parents (not in huge corporations but in charities etc) and she's had opportunities to travel and stay in incredible places that she never would have done if she hadn't made friends with people from rich circles. She's also very confident and has the belief she deserves nice things and a nice life etc - I think these aspirations came from her social circle too

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves I think what keeps the class system going is the idea - sold to us by people who think of success as their birthright - that people are happier if they have the kind of success that comes from hard work.

But I think we are ultimately on the same side of this debate.

@MarshmellowMoon you say 60-70% of Oxford and Cambridge students went to state schools. I haven't checked that figure but even if it's right, you might want to check the percentage statistic for the proportion of the population that attends state schools. It is 93%. So even if your statistic is correct, 30 - 40% of those places are taken up by people who went to private school (yes, some of them international students), which is 7% of the population. I don't dispute that's better than it was, but it's a long way off equitable.

I'm sorry you can't find a job - I've been there myself - but you still have the advantages your private education gave you. I haven't been that successful either but I still know I have lots of advantages that don't always work on an individual level!

Private education is more like 20% once you get to sixth form level - not 7%.