Private school fees up 43%

[UnquietDad]

story here

Deliberate, do you think?...

So if only "18 professions" can now afford them, and they don't include teachers, architects or police officers, what are they? Any offers?

To repeat, I do not blame those parents who exploit the system in their attempt to do what's best for their own kids (myself included); I blame the system and the Govt for creating and sustaining it (in such a way that those with money, power, education or all of the above but those without cannot).

Well said, I should give up now and enjoy your Friday evening. On a hiding to nothing with some people.

fivecandles, I applaud you for trying to get your message across and for your wonderfully clear posts.

Unfortunately some people don't want to listen to or partake in a reasoned argument.

"The aim of debate should not be victory, but progress." - Joseph Joubert

I'm not sneering. I still have a child in state education and I spend days and days of my time doing pro bono marketing and PR work for that school. And I help out in class--even though my daughter isn't in it and hasn't been for the last two years.

I just miss the drive for academic excellence I see in grammar schools and independents at the secondary level. When this changes, why WOULDN'T I want my children to be educated with the children they went to primary school with? If they (and their parents) were good enough for us then, they certainly are now.

I'm with bossykate and fircone
I think to argue in favour of nonselective education whilst educating your own children privately is very nu-labour!
I remember a thread on here (I started) about why do so many teachers in the state system educate their children privately some abused me for starting it but the ones that answered generally said that it was because it suited their child best. (However wouldn't nearly all private schools argue that they were the best school for any child they were presented with)
One of the main barriers to fairness in the education system is financial which is something no party will address.
Yes selection on academic ability is unfair and doubly so for the near misses but I quite fancy doing the 200 m in the Olympics however I am some way off the time limit I don't see you all championing the unfairness to me. I also quite fancy becomming a self-employed entrepreneur and making a million but I don't have the psychological make-up to do so.
S'not fair too

So if selection isn't doing it and non-selection isn't doing it for our kids then what?

(BTW I don't have the answer nor do I have it in for teachers who privately educate their dcs I was about to send my first to school and wondered if I was missing something those 'in the know' knew)

Really interesting reading all of this. I have no idea what to do when my kids hit school age. My DH is Italian and he laughs at all the angst caused by the very complicated schooling in this country (as someone who hasn't engaged yet, what the hell is the difference between a local state school, a faith school, a grammar school etc etc - so complicated!) Complicated enough in fact to even think about leaving the country for their schooling and letting them go to the local state school in Italy - very few people go to private schools there - most simply go to the school round the corner.

I am dreading having to make all these choices for my kids - how easy it used to be when most kids went to their local school.

Anyhow, I went to a private school (20 years ago) on an assisted place (have they been abolished now?) - it cost £100 a term for me to go - Bargain!! I begged and begged to be able to go to private school because it meant going to school in the big city. I had a great time - mainly because I was academically bright and got pushed HARD and played in the orchestra in the local Cathedral etc. I ended up going to Oxford and getting my degree there. Some kids at the school HATED it and actually probably did worse than they would have at the local state school because they were made to feel inadequate academically even though they were probably still above average. They actually lost confidence rather than gaining it.

My 2 sisters chose to go to the local comp and really enjoyed it. They both did well and went to university and both still maintain they would have been unhappy going to my school because they would have missed their friends too much and are happy with how they did.

Neither of my parents went to University - they both did get into their Grammar School - but didn't have the aspiration for University - it just wasn't so much of the done thing then. They however, IMO, did the intelligent thing and sent us all to schools which suited our personalities.

So in summary, if we do decide to stay in the UK and find our way through the maze of schooling here, we would wait until our kids are 11 years old (send them to the local school in the meantime) and then decide (a discussion also WITH THEM) where they should go. And I am praying by then that we will have the money to send one or both of them to private school if we think it would suit their personality and they were desperate to go there.

Here's someone who found it difficult to pay the school fees. I wonder whether he was a member of one of the 18 professions before he unsuccessfully took up a life of crime?

Haven't read all of the posts but had to stop and post when I got to Swedes note about the lack of points achieved by good schools in the area. Have you ever considered that the results might be staggeringly good considering the plethora of diversity and special needs these schools might be catering for, given that most state schools do not select their pupils on the basis of ability? Unless these are grammar schools of course. I am lucky enough to live near a fantastic state secondary school whose results are nearly that of the best private schools in the area and better than many of the others. But it doesn't select it's pupils and is delighted to help children with all manner of special educational needs. My friend had her little boy accepted at one of the local private schools but he was diagnosed as potentially having learning difficulties before he started and they said 'no thanks in that case'. Not the best place to send him, of course, since they obviously don't have the desire or probably even the knowledge and experience to give him the help he needs, but you have to consider results in the context of the massive amount of selection which goes into these results in the first place. The old admissions officer for my local secondary school often had to deal with parents who for one reason or another were finding they couldn't afford private school fees and were having to move their children to state education. On looking round she said they all seemed astonished at how good the facilities actually are, and equally shocked when she said but actually we're full and your children will have to go on a long waiting list potentially for a very long time if you would like them to come here.

What about care assistants ?

I like your thinking ami but I don't think that it would work in practice. If private fees are currently £F and the value of taxpayer provision is £T then I think that you would find that the voucher system would have the effect of raising fees to £F+T.
So we are back where we started.

I think the number of people able to afford it is going to be dropping further soon. DH and I are both doctors and we could never even consider sending DS to fee-paying school. With house prices as they are even paying the mortgage on our tiny flat is a struggle and if they drop - negative equity here we come! In my experience it is only those doctors that are much older and either have help from their families, were older when they had children (so more years saving) or bought houses when they were much cheaper that can afford it currently. I expect it is similar for other professions.

BTW, we both went to local comps (not good ones either), parents have low paying jobs so worked our way through and I grew up on a council estate! I think academically bright kids whose parents instill a good work ethic will do well anywhere. But I'm still worried about DS getting bullied (or stabbed) at school and if we could begin to afford it I would love to send my kids to a 'better' school (we live in London - hopes she hasn't put to much information here and outed herself!)

unmadam - i am a doctor and my dh is an accountant and we are managing 2 sets of fees = £22000 / year,

mummydoc - cool, I'm happy for you. As I explained, I'm referring to the article in the first post and talking about how the situation might change in the future with rising costs of living and reducing salaries. My DS is only 6m old!

(I'm still keeping my fingers tightly crossed that by the time he is going to school our saleries might have increased enough to pay the fees - but it seems unlikely at the moment )

This debate is really very close to my heart. I'm really keen to get others to comment on this topic and realise that rising private school fees are preventing many families from sending their children where they would wish them to go. I was wondering if anyone fancied posting a short article on this new user generated news site, www,indiconews.com. It's free and recently launched in the UK but has a global reach. I think could act as a really usefull tool in generating some support for a throw back for the ridiculous increase in fees.

Apparently the new middle class game is to send your children to private school until they are 16, take them out and put them into a grunge FE college (but heavily heavily supported by private tuition) for A levels.

So I am told. If you go to a grunge FE college for A level you walk into a good university effortlessly.

Again, so I am told.

I am seriously considering it as a means of defraying the increased cost

Not necessarily - depends on your home background apparently, quat

Oh this is absurd. Why can't they all sit blind aptitude tests of an IQ type variety and abolish interviews and forms that list where they go to school providing they confirm they are doing A levels in the requisite subjects ...

No need to take DCs out of independents for sixth form IME. I think it is an urban myth - unless someone can come up with facts and figures to show otherwise.

It depends on whether you see education only as a means to get a better job/get into the best university or whether you value it for its own sake. I want my children to have the most appropraite education at each stage of their development. For primary it has been a fantastic local school, better than the independent offerings. For secondary it is independent because they need to be in an environment with other children who also want to learn, and a school with the minimum of govt interfence. For further - who knows? They may decide to leave school to become plumbers, decide to travel the world, apply to foriegn universities... Will not worry about getting into the 'right ' university unless and until that seems necessary.

"Apparently the new middle class game is to send your children to private school until they are 16, take them out and put them into a grunge FE college (but heavily supported by private tuition) for A levels. So I am told. If you go to a grunge FE college for A level you walk into a good university effortlessly."

There are many individual stories that seem to support the 'social engineering' conspiracy theory but it is difficult to find facts. There was a programme on the radio about the children who took part on the bid for the 2012 Olympics. Each one was picked to take part in the bid because they were exceptional in some way. The one that struck me was a boy from a poor background who got into an independent on a scholarship; he was Head boy and predicted straight A at A Level. He applied to read Economics at LSE but wasn't even interviewed. From his first-hand knowledge of who got offers and the disparity in required grades, he certainly suspected social engineering.

However, I am sure that someone will be along soon to counter-argue that kids from independent schools get artificially high grades because they are so spoon-fed, and that they flounder when left to their own devices at Uni. Again, I don't know if this is anecdotal or hard fact.

I know that the Universities have problems identifying the best pupils when nearly a quarter of all A Levels gain the top grade. But, on the other hand, they will not use the new A* grade because they know that that will favour the independent sector.

Many Universities are / will be sidestepping A Levels and introducing their own admission exams.

There is no clear-cut answer.
My father had a poor, drunk, gambling father who would not let him go to grammar school because of the cost of the uniform (and probably could not be arsed to even fill in the forms.) My father valued education highly, and tho' in a menial job all his workinglife, was determined to give me the best education available, which he thought would be a grammar. Unfortunately, thanks to the do-gooding upper classes, this was transformed into a sink comprehensive, where everyone did badly, a real levelling-down exercise, and people who had done well at the secondary moderns in that town, sank along with everyone else, so no-one gained from it.
Despite that, I am now in a well paid job, and am passionate about education for my own children, not in a 'results' centred way, simply want them to be in an environment where they are free to learn without being stigmatised for their enthusiasm. So we are not part of the monied aristocracy, but will be paying hefty fees to put our children in an environment where they can flourish. I know there are excellent state schools - just not where we live. And if they are socially engineered out of getting into a UK university because of their parents' choice of school, well, too bad, there are other countries - tertiary is less important - their teenage years are too precious to waste.
I would like to live in a country where everyone gets a good education. That doesn't happen here now, so all I can do is make the best of what is available.