Whitehall “braced for private schools collapse” 7

[ICouldBeVioletSky]

Continuation of previous threads discussing VAT on independent school fees. The thread title is a headline from a Times article last autumn.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5237575-whitehall-braced-for-private-schools-collapse
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5242586-whitehall-braced-for-private-schools-collapse-2
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5280646-whitehall-braced-for-private-schools-collapse-3
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5301690-whitehall-braced-for-private-schools-collapse-4
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5317397-whitehall-braced-for-private-schools-collapse-5
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5337850-whitehall-braced-for-private-schools-collapse-6

…it’s been said on here, possibly in these threads - a wish for “no frills” private schools with smaller classes and good teaching but otherwise, nothing “special” in facilities, in the hope that these would be more affordable.

Sorry, should have posted this all in one…

To indicate that if your service is too expensive for your customers, you should reduce the costs of your service is fairly straightforward capitalism, no?

@SheilaFentiman

‘…it’s been said on here, possibly in these threads - a wish for “no frills” private schools with smaller classes and good teaching but otherwise, nothing “special” in facilities, in the hope that these would be more affordable.’

There is a real need for this type of school. If I had started in education younger, I would love to have set one up. Still tempting tbh….

The model most private schools use is a massive subsidy that the parents of stronger pupils pay to subsidise the parents of weaker pupils.

In both the schools I have taught at, the top sets were big, and growing. When I started my top sets were 19-20, when I left they were 24 (and occasionally one or two more, with a pupil pulling a stool up to a fold up bench). The bottom sets were 8-12, and provided fantastic individual support.

And, of course the ‘academic mentoring’ (aka SEN) department was paid for by all equally, even though most never used it.

This isn’t just anecdote, it is pretty much the model used across the sector.

Quite why parents of independent bright kids don’t resent this element of socialism within the school community, but resent VAT so much, is an interesting question.

But, a pure competitive private school, with all sets around 18-20, and no need for an academic mentoring department, could be done quite cheaply and get fantastic results.

“…it’s been said on here, possibly in these threads - a wish for “no frills” private schools with smaller classes and good teaching but otherwise, nothing “special” in facilities, in the hope that these would be more affordable.”

That is what the State SHOULD be providing for all children.
Why should you have to pay for that?

“In both the schools I have taught at, the top sets were big, and growing. When I started my top sets were 19-20, when I left they were 24 (and occasionally one or two more, with a pupil pulling a stool up to a fold up bench). The bottom sets were 8-12, and provided fantastic individual support.”

The model of more kids in top sets and less in the lower sets happens in a lot of state school. Completely standard, no?

The problem in state schools arises when there are not enough teachers going round and the top sets become so huge it is unacceptable. But generally speaking even in state primary schools, my top sets kids have often worked on their own with other kids (on preplanned work that is), whilst the teacher spends far more time with the kids who need it to achieve the expected demands of the curriculum.
Why would it be any different in an independent school and why would anyone resent their top sets Maths kids in an academic independent school being in a larger set with a whole lot of other kids aiming for eg Olympiad. Surely those kids need less teaching and handholding and scaffolding. And when the child needs less and becomes an independent learner and is also doing mastery it is exactly what you would want as a parent as you are setting them up very well for university and beyond.

Err, because to have smaller classes is more expensive?

The state can only pay for so much. As a country we have, over time, deemed that that is 30 per class in the earliest years and maybe 32/33 thereafter.

Just as certain medical treatments are not economically viable for the NHS to cover, or to only cover for certain patients at a more severe level of disease etc.

The State is the tax take, plus any other returns on investment (renting out government owned property etc). The tax take is finite. If you have smaller classes, something else is cut or taxes go up, or both.

I'm pretty sure you know this.

What I know is that we have some of the biggest class sizes in the developed world and it is unacceptable.

But the state could simply choose to prioritise school spending, regardless of VAT on private schools. Personally I support the increase in defense spending, but the government could have chosen to put that money into schools instead and obtain lower class sizes. It could have used the money paid immediately to train drivers to lower class sizes instead. It didn’t. That’s because this government does not see school spending as a priority, hence why the VAT money is now going to housing instead. Because the aim of the VAT policy is not to raise money for state schools; it’s to deliberately damage private schools

IIRC you are a Lib Dem supporter - of course, they had a long term “penny on income tax for education” policy - did that drive your support?

@Araminta1003 ,

‘Surely those kids need less teaching and handholding and scaffolding. And when the child needs less and becomes an independent learner and is also doing mastery it is exactly what you would want as a parent as you are setting them up very well for university and beyond.’

Absolutely, but you are not really understanding my point!

If you set up an academically competitive school which had no need for bottom sets or learning support, as you didn’t take those pupils, it could be a lot cheaper.

At the moment, the high attaining pupils financially subsidise the low attaining pupils. Why should they do that in a capitalist enterprise? Surely, those in the smaller sets should be paying more? And learning support should be charged as an extra?

As I said earlier, it is interesting that this socialised model is accepted in independent schools.

My children don't require learning support but I know that it is absolutely charged as an extra and has vat added on top. Awful.

@TooLittleTooLate2 ,

Why is that awful?

It is the entire model behind private schools.

And why should pupils in sets of 10 pay the same fees as pupils in sets of 24?

My (private) school doesn’t charge extra for learning support @TooLittleTooLate2 - guess it varies.

I think it's awful that vat is being charged on SEN support.

@Newbutoldfather - you claim to be/have been a teacher. So you fully well know that some kids are outstanding at eg Physics and Maths but need more support in English inference skills - and last time I checked, everyone had to do 2 English GCSEs. And everyone had to do Maths. Cannot believe a teacher is suggesting no targeted setting.
So even in a narrowly academic school you are going to get all rounders, the STEM types and the English, humanities, language etc types. So you are always going to get more out of kids with setting. Just like you are going to get more out of them offering a wide range of extracurricular catering to the drama, music, artsy types as well as the sporty types and the all-rounders.
You are not going to try and pursue on over the other not in an independent nor a state school, completely.
Private schools can try and change their business model of offering the bare bones to all and then extras as and when. I pay for a lot of extras at grammar school like Latin club, music lessons, Lamda etc too.

I don't disagree with being charged the support, we pay extra for other things, individual music tuition etc, but I do think it's probably particularly galling to be charged vat on top for learning support, especially where a child with SEN has not had their needs met in state.

@sheilafentiman Yes sounds like it varies per school

Completely agree @TooLittleTooLate2 - ludicrous to charge VAT on SEND support.

I agree that VAT should not be charged on learning support.

(Although the whole learning support is massively gamed by some parents-which dilutes it a lot for those who really need it).

You've said that a few times.

You're a physics teacher. Do you think that someone who can run faster is necessarily a stronger physicist? Clever people are often also good at sports,, after all. But it's generally accepted that these are orthogonal skills, and that slow runners shouldn't have that reflected in their physics grade, chemistry grade, maths grade, history grade, geography grade etc. Only in their PE grade.

So we don't start the physics exam timing when the kids are 1km away from the exam hall, which would allow fast runners 20% more time answering the actual physics questions than slow runners.

Likewise, I hope you agree that reading speed is also orthogonal to physics ability. The skills often go together (just like academic and sporting ability) but not always.

Time taken to read questions is a tiny bit harder to adjust for (with extra time for measured differences in visual or auditory processing) than time to run 1km (by starting the timer with the kids sitting in the exam hall). But not much harder.

I particularly like the accomodation where students can use their 'usual way of working'. How closed-minded to think that having the dexterity to use a pen easily - rather than type - has the slightest relevance for a physics or maths graduate in the modern world.

@strawberrybubblegum ,

I am not saying special needs don’t exist or shouldn’t be accommodated. I am saying the system is gamed. That is a completely different thing.

People often try out 3 ed psychs who say no special needs until they find a fourth who gives them the diagnosis they want. There are Ed psychs (typically very expensive) who tend to be more sympathetic to ADHD, say, or dyslexia.

‘Of particular concern is the proportion of pupils getting extra time in private schools – almost 42% compared with 26.5% in state secondaries – which has led to suspicions that some schools are “gaming” the system’

From the Guardian.

42%??!! Do you really think more than 1.5x as many private school pupils need extra time?

Using your analogy, this is like including running speed but giving the faster runners the head start.

Are you asking if I think parents of kids struggling with dyslexia are more likely to want to turn to private schools? Because, umm, duh. Yes.

@Newbutoldfather - the problem is with the exam system itself, not people trying to improve educational outcomes for their own DC and maximising their educational potential.

We should NOT be grading children on bell curves in direct competition with each other where a certain percentage has to fail every year. We should be having a lower bench mark where a pass makes you a functional member of society in eg Maths and English.

@Shambles123 ,

‘Are you asking if I think parents of kids struggling with dyslexia are more likely to want to turn to private schools? Because, umm, duh. Yes’

Are you saying any but a tiny minority have that choice. Ummm, duh, nah.

That effect is not causing the 42% vs 26%.

Yes. Sen is overrepresented at private schools, we all know that.

‘Of particular concern is the proportion of pupils getting extra time in private schools – almost 42% compared with 26.5% in state secondaries – which has led to suspicions that some schools are “gaming” the system
42%??!! Do you really think more than 1.5x as many private school pupils need extra time?

I agree with you, but maybe this statistic is correct since according to many mn posters all privately educated children are thick.