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?

But they're not pricing themselves out of the market. This a very misleading term. They're not doing that any more than Waitrose is by setting its prices 25% higher than those at Tesco, or Vertbaudet are by selling clothes more expensive than those at George/Asda.

Well, maybe profit is the wrong word, but they need money coming in to cover costs, even if they are a charity and plough all the money back in.

But UQD if fewer professions can now afford them, then presumably fewer people can now afford them. So where are they going to look to replace the families they will lose?

Swedes - the uptake of private education is not rising everywhere. I know of a few private schools that have shut down or merged due to falling numbers. What I expect is happening is that there is a large uptake of private school nursery places due to the govt grants/childcare vouchers and availability of wraparound care.
I expect it is these nursery figures that are being used when people say that private education is increasing.
I would be very surprised if more people are using private schools between 5 and 11 - I think the tendancy is the other way to educate in the state sector and spend money on private tutoring.

I think its sad that many small private schools are closing or merging. I worry the private sector will end up with only large schools in order to provide facilities etc. I expect the Cognita group will snap up more schools to run as businesses.

I think this would be sad as if I were rich enough to afford private education I would like to be able to choose a school of no more than 300 pupils for prep and 800 for secondary where the school is small enough for the Head to know each child and for the school to have a sense of community.

fio

they are registered as charities

That's absolutely ridiculous. Most private schools are charities and non profit making. Private schools (perhaps with the odd exception like Eton) do not set their fees deliberately to exclude all but the very rich and if they did they'd very soon close down. Most private schools offer means tested bursaries for those who would struggle to pay. I'm now detecting just a tiny bit of paranoia along with the inverted snobbery, the stereotyping and the sour grapes.

What about socialism?

One reason for recent rises in private school fees is to cover the costs of more means-tested bursary places being offered as part of complying with the Charities Commission Act 2006

Over 30% of ISC school places are means assisted.

Nobody said "exclude all but the very rich"
Any more than Waitrose does - just more carefully choosing its customers.

Means tested bursaries for those who would struggle to pay? Hmmm, not sure. I thought they were only for the very low income, i.e. £13K and under.

It depends entirely on the school and the pupil UQD

And my question still stands. Turn it round the other way. If private schools are charities - not making a profit - and their rolls are falling, then why are they putting their prices up? Surely they should be putting them down to make themselves accessible to a greater proportion of the population? But they won't.

Not all independent schools are charities. Some are small businesses. Cognita is scooping up a lot of them.

School fees are usually very tightly linked to the national teachers' pay award, UQD. They tend to go up by the same percentage, as teachers' salaries make up the bulk of the expenses (as you can no doubt imagine).

fair point. Even if they are businesses, though, they are businesses whose USP is precisely that they are not available to everyone, and that people who come to them will get better provision than in the free/cheaper options. They are the BUPA, the John Lewis, the Mercedes of the market.

So it makes commercial sense for them to keep prices high.

Remember the BMW story - how it wouldn't sell well until they put the prices up, thus making it seem more "exclusive"?

I thought fees tended to go up way over the teacher's pay award. Double figure increases for the schools.

Not sure where you are getting your info from, nkf

Well the thread said 43%. And there are posts every so often where people compare increases. And it's usually higher than the teacher's pay award. Not proper research. Just MN browsing so quite possibly garbage.

Most independent schools probably charge enough to keep going, not to make a huge profit. If fees go up substantially there will be less competition for places and entrance criteria will fall, ie. it will be easier for slightly less bright kids to get in as long as they can pay. This could have the effect of lowering exam pass standards, this would narrow the gap between good state schools and private schools and combined with the increase in fees will make more parents think twice about going private. If this leads to more bright, middle class kids in state schools raising academic and behaviour standards this would be a good thing IMO.
My background (for transparency), live next door to v. good independent school,could afford fees as have inherited enough money from a relative BUT children have mild learning difficulties and as the school is oversubscribed it would be more than likely to say no thank you if we applied. So, yes I probably do feel a bit chippy (esp as my Dad went to the school in the days when more independent schools genuinely contributed to social mobility(not as much as grammars of course).

I expect the rises are due to paying teacher's salaries, cost of maintaining buildings, cost of adding new facilities, cost of providing bursaries after abolition of Assisted Places.

In schools where numbers are falling and classes aren't full they will still have to pay for the upkeep of the buildings etc. so those who remain in the school will have to pay more.

""if they increase their fees substantially, it is either to keep pace with rapidly increasing costs or it is in order to invest in the school"

... or to make them accessible only to those above a certain level of income?"

What absolute nonsense UQD. The whole ethos is to keep the fees down as far as possible.

Elitism breeds envy and in today's world, any fee-paying establishment that (to use your phrase) goes boutique risks being abolished. We live in a democracy. Create too much envy (like grammar schools) and the public schools risk abolition. It's a difficult line to tread.

Our school is increasing fees by 20% to fund more means-tested grammar schools. Which is effectively reintroducing grammar schools by the back door. You could, if you were so minded, view this as another stealth tax.

UQD - round here private schools offer bursaries for families with incomes up to £75k.

UQD - just read another earlier post of yours which is also based on false premises:

"And my question still stands. Turn it round the other way. If private schools are charities - not making a profit - and their rolls are falling, then why are they putting their prices up? Surely they should be putting them down to make themselves accessible to a greater proportion of the population? But they won't."

Private school rolls are NOT falling. Not a bit. Massive expansion. Huuuuge waiting lists. People falling over themselves to cripple themselves financially.

If you were ironically inclined, You could link it to the failure of New Labour's "Education, education, education".

You can look up the accounts of independent schools on the Charities Commission website. It is quite interesting reading.

The surplus for a year might only amount to one pupil's fees. This is not profit, but rolled into the budget for the following year.

There is no profit in the vast majority of independent schools, and most schools have just one source of income. This income goes primarily on salaries, property costs, heating, teaching costs (books, photocopying...), etc. Small-scale capital projects (eg computer upgrades) will take place each year, so should be in the regular budget.

Large capital projects may be funded more creatively, but the prevailing opinion is to fund them via mortgages, so that the families that benefit pay.

The misconceptions on this thread are quite bewildering.