2025 Private School Costs (just a rant)

[sherbsy]

Just a rant ladies as I wanted to get something off my chest...

My DH and I were lucky enough to go to private schools as kids. These schools weren't exactly posh, they were just former grammar schools (i.e. academic student factories) that converted in the 70s to private schools because the Labour government at the time told them to.

I know it's a privilege to go, there's a choice involved, a compromise etc. Neither of us ever went on holiday as kids or had many luxuries and our parents endured a lot to be able to afford it. I'm grateful for all they did and I wanted to do the same for my children.

But despite having good jobs...we just can't.

My rant is just at the excessive cost of it all in 2024. We both earn well and it's still beyond our means. With VAT being added in January, I'm not even sure it's worth it anymore.

When I left in 2000, it cost our parents ~£6,500 for a year. Inflation adjusted, that's about £12,000 in today's money. By no means cheap but both the schools we went to are now charging ~£22,000 per child, per year. That's before you factor in uniform, lunches, trips, exam costs etc.

Finding £44,000+ after tax every year with today's marginal tax rates, mortgage costs, food costs, energy costs etc just isn't possible for us...and I'd surprised many people can find it.

I know it's a middle-class rant, I know there's privilege involved but can anyone else empathise with us? It just feels like the Labour government have twice pulled the ladder away from capable kids (once in the 70s and now in 2024), offering it only to the rich ones.

The fact is your child will have huge advantages throughout their life from going to private school- more jobs in the media, judiciary and politics are occupied by the 7% or so of the population that went to private school. That's what you're paying for.

My point is that, as Education Secretary she had argued against the policy and she never supported it.

But she was overruled in Cabinet - the PM wanted to continue it.
The Cabinet papers have been released and are clear.
Collective responsibility held.

So to continue as Education Sec, she had to sign off on all valid requests under the continuing policy.

It was not her policy, she did not support it personally, and she ended it as soon as she was able to do so.

But yes, the bald fact that most of the sign offs occurred during her tenure is correct. But it's telling us about Heath as PM in terms of the policy, and the level of Cabinet discipline and collective responsibility of that era.

There is nothing ethically wrong about parents choosing to spend their resources on a particular benefit for their children (be it holidays abroad, nice toys, sports camps, private schools, or what have you). The characterisation of private schools as a social 'privilege' is valid only in so far as employers give privately-educated people an unfair advantage with respect to job opportunities and earnings (i.e. between equally bright and qualified candidates). The sectors where this is the case are fortunately rapidly diminishing and rightly so. Where private education still provides an unfair advantage in the job market, the problem lies primarily in the attitudes of employers, and not necessarily with the parents who want their kids to have an elite education. This is because many of these parents would still send their kids to an academically top private school (or grammar for that matter), even if it conferred on them no advantage with respect to job prospects and income. By contrast, they would not send their kids to a mediocre private school, just in the hope that they get a leg up, or acquire a posh accent. These are the parents who just value education highly, as an intrinsic good. And they are found in every socio-economic class.

Feel for you OP.

I went to a grammar school and if I had been unable to provide my DS with at least as good, I would feel that I failed. I'm a single mum with a mortgage. The state school we were offered was in chaos and even OFSTED said it wasn't safe.

BUT I had to compete to win a place a my hugely over-subscribed grammar school.

Our local independent has a scholarship scheme, ds wanted to try for it and he won it. It gives us a 50% discount on fees. It's still a huge financial stretch for me but allows me to give my DS the same chance I was given.

Have you looked for similar schemes? It's awful that anyone has to fight like this for a decent education but hopefully state secondary education will receive more investment over the next five years. In the mean time, we each do the best we can for our dcs.

Yes, we've looked. Sadly, what with the VAT rise and business rates etc, the local independents have stopped offering many bursaries or scholarships.

I don't blame them though - why should they behave charitably if the government is going to remove their charitable status?

Op, that's a shame. Ours thankfully has continued because we have quite a large % of armed forces pupils, paid for ironically enough, by govt.

Sorry I phrased that badly!

Not RTFT but I'm in a similar boat as you OP - DH privately educated, we both have good jobs, have considered but just can't afford private without huge sacrifices (downsize, no holidays) that I'm not willing to make.

DH is desperate for our kids to go, he watched too much Grange Hill + I think peer pressure too, as his mates who were genuinely stinking rich are now all posting pics of Hugo in his boater starting prep (V cute).

I do feel empathy for people in the same boat as you & my DH.
Because genuinely & with sympathy, I think it's a tough epiphany that - after experiencing a huge privilege surrounded by people with huge wealth - actually, you're just going to be a normal family like the ones you saw outside the private school gates.

What really grates for me is church schools - why does a church get a say in which STATE funded school my DC can go to? Why isn't more made of this?

what about businesses getting in on this act? Enough club card points my child can go to Tesco funded academy...

There are good and bad state and private schools, but generally what you gain from a private school is breadth of curriculum. Some of my GC go to private schools, some to state, ditto my own children when they were young. What those at private schools gained was a raft of extraordinary opportunities - in music in particular - with choirs and bands and orchestras and music tours - and above all else the taking part being seen as the norm and not some poor relation add on. I wish I had the money to pay for this for all my GC, rather than just some being lucky enough to have parents who can afford it.

I do agree that in general private offers more opportunities particularly in music & sport. Having said that my dc play an instrument, are in a band & orchestra in primary. And my nephews school offers tuition in 20 plus different instruments (he does the French horn) & puts on fantastic productions & recitals. There are some great state schools but I recognise it’s often very expensive to live close by.

Well OP, you are clearly not hardworking enough and ambitious enough to obtain the kind of job that will allow you to afford to send your children to private school.

It wouldn’t exactly be fair on the parents who are hardworking and ambitious to make them and their children have to mix with the likes of you and yours now, would it?

Yes it is expensive.
But there are ceos earning 2 million a year and footballers etc and overseas billionaire who can pay. So the market is there. Do the schools care who comes?

but you have £ to supplement state school with experiences and extracurricular etc
Language immersion in Spain or China
Pay for Summer schools at oxbridge Or ucl
Etc etc

So your dc will be fine

State schools improve when educated and engaged families use them. That will benefit the area so much more than buying privilege.

Where I grew up you had to go to a sixth form college - there were no schools allowed to go to 18, they maxed out at 16. So the state sixth form college I went to ended up with quite a few private school students.

There was absolutely no noticeable difference academically. They were usually high up the class but never top of it.

They always needed a bit of tough love and gentle teasing before they understood that they weren't the centre of the universe, we didn't need to hear their opinions for an entire hour long class, and they just generally needed to learn how to integrate socially into normal society. The lack of self-awareness never stopped astonishing me and I often felt embarrassed for them with the things they would come out with - their inability to read the room was cringeworthy. But after a couple of terms they typically got a lot better.

Sorry if this sounds harsh, but the fact that you went to private school and yet you can't afford it for your children shows that it isn't all that. I went to a state school and could afford to private school my kids at the prices you're quoting. But I don't think there's any advantage there, it purely comes down to the intelligence and work ethic of the child as to what they'll achieve. And I'd rather see kids actually know how to function in normal day-to-day society without embarrassing themselves, and not only be around people whose biggest problem in life is their parents only allowing them a certain number of outfits on a ski trip and them being unsure what to choose.

There are plenty of pay for music opportunities your state kids can access if you have £ but not quite enough to pay private school . Is defeatist to suggest state school kids (especially those with relaively well off families) won't access anything because they are not at private

it is about home environment and attitude

So if you want to you can access (as well some funds for kids who are talented but do not have resources)

eg prioryfarmmusiccamp.co.uk/

I get your point, but Thatcher was a canny operator and took note that in her own Finchley constituents were against a return to selection:

When she became education secretary in 1970, she found a poll in her Finchley constituency running at 80% against a return to selection.

https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/07/thatcher-grammars-poison-theresa-may-tories

She may have ended the policy but she certainly didn’t reverse it either.

Yes, it’s interesting about the level of collective (and personal) responsibility then compared to today, isn’t it?

Work harder OP. Apparently those who work harder care more about their kids education. Perhaps if private schools charged less than the VAT (which is a few thousand) wouldn't prevent hard workers like you from sending their kids.

I don't blame them though - why should they behave charitably if the government is going to remove their charitable status?

Schools aren’t losing charitable status though. And if they are a charity, then they still have to demonstrate that they provide a public benefit.

My dc didn't go to private school but they got top results, mixed with all stratas of society and look set ro do well in the world of work. No sympathy OP, your kids are already at an advantage due to your middle class status and finances

My theories on who will attend private schools in future:

• The very well off (top 1% of earners)
• Those with wealthy grandparents who cannot bear their children not to attend because it’s ‘the done thing’
• Only children

Plenty of people can afford one set of fees IMO - it’s multiple sets that are unrealistic.

£2.5k a month is in ‘well off people can make cut backs’ territory. £4-5k? £8-9k? Not so much…

This is really just another form of the 'I hate the labour party threads'

I still don’t really get it OP - I suspect I’m in the same demographic as you in that I earn a fair amount of money but realistically to afford this for my 2 children as well as our lifestyle we’d need to earn at least £250k per year.

However, it isn’t something I’d ever give up holidays or standard of living to pay for. Probably because I attended a poor state school and came out of it just fine. Professional life may have been easier for me if I’d been to a private school but it’s absolutely ok to struggle with some things and have a sense of achievement for overcoming them - that’s what I want for my children, to make their own lives a success on their own terms. If they don’t have the ability to do a top earning job then I don’t want that for them - it’ll only make them miserable in the long run.

Yes, that's a pretty good summary really.

That would be lead by the 93%. Where are they? Why no campaigning etc?

I disagree with the notion that if private school parents all moved their students to state schools then state schools will improve. There are already many parents with children in state schools who care deeply about their children’s education but this hasn’t been enough to turn things around.