Just wondering... how do you think the financial turmoil will affect private school applications this year?

[PrincessPeaHead]

It was difficult enough to see who the hell could afford boarding fees of £8800 per term in a boom economy... now? Do you think there will be a big move from boarding to private day options (cheaper) or in fact also a big fall in private day applications as people try for grammars/use the good local comp ?

Just musing really.

Neither do I. And I dislike being misquoted.

Who's misquoting? You said private school fees are 'a luxury item'. That's not how I feel about my kids' education.

fivecandles

UD presumably means you can get an education at a state school as well, it's the private bit that makes it a luxury

I think it depends on what kind of state school you're lucky enough to be eligible for.

Yes, but really it's not up to someone else to decide what is and isn't a luxury for others. For me, private school fees are no more a luxury than paying off the mortgage on my house (which admittedly may be considered a luxury for some people). Maybe for UQD it's a 'luxury' but that's really just his perception.

Also, I get how some people might be against private education on principle and in favour of equality of educaation etc etc what I don't get is how some people are relishing in the misfortune of other people and more particularly their kids. It's not pleasant for any child to be taken out of any school where they are happy - no, not a tragedy, but not pleasant - and to take pleasure in this where it happens is pretty nasty.

It's not just my perception. Private school fees are beyond the reach of the vast majority of the population, financially. Indeed, I've argued before that there is business sense behind this. That makes them a luxury item for most people.

It's an odd choice of words UQD especially as education can in no way be described as an 'item'. Would you also describe private dentistry or health care as a 'luxury item' or indeed paying my mortgage. I suppose paying a mortgage may be considered a 'luxury' to some. As I say paying for my kids' education is no more a 'luxury' to me than paying my mortgage. I have friends whose kids go to state school but pay as much money as I do in school fees on shoes, handbags and facials - all items which I might consider 'luxuries' but they consider necessary.

It's the connotations that private school is a sort of status symbol like a flash car or designer clothing but this is a stereotype and very far from the experience of most parents at private school.

As is repeated thousands of times most parents of kids who go to private school work hard to meet the costs.

And there are many people who pay nothing or next to nothing for their independent education because they get bursaries or scholarshps. Hardly a 'luxury' for them then.

As for your stuff about 'business sense', I don't really understand. I remember you arguing that there was some sort of conspiracy behind increases in private school fees once and I remember that being disputed pretty rigorously.

I remember there being an argument about it on which views were expressed on both sides. I think saying that I called it a "conspiracy" is a bit strong. And how many people, really, get bursaries or scholarships?

The facts speak for themselves - many people are pulling their children out of private education and returning to the state sector because of the expenses.

I find that interesting - in a tough financial climate the state sector suddenly seems more attractive, and people realise that all along they didn't need to be paying twice.

But UD, whilst I'mthe first to acknowledge the fact that private school fees are out of reach for a great many people that is not the same as acknowledging that everyone whopays does so with their spare cash every month.

People do prioritise. Many more people can afford the private sector than use it. I know plenty of people, many of them friends who say they cannot afford it yet they go out to eat regularly, buy new clothes frequently, drive fancy cars, have beauty treatments, pay £60 for a haircut, have a cleaner etc. I'm not for one moment suggesting that everyone can afford it but many people have enough disposible income to cover it, yet choose to spend their money elsewhere. (others choose not to pay because of their ideology) That's no criticism. Their money, their family, their choice. What's right for me isn't necessarily right for anyone else. I'm just saying for me, I'd sell the cars, sell the house and down size before I'd take them out of school.

Well, yes. People are cutting back on all sorts of things including some of those you mention. As well.

UQD, I think what's irritating me about what you're saying is that you're using the fact that some people are finding that they can no longer afford private school fees in the current economic climate as evidence that the state sector isn't so bad after all and that private school education is a 'luxury'.

Well, actually it doesn't mean those two things it just means that some people can no longer afford private school fees given the current economic situation.

There are also people who can no longer afford to pay their mortgages but that is not proof that houses are a luxury and it ain't so bad living in council accommodation.

If I suddenly had to educate my kids in the local school I know that I wouldn't be coming home extolling its virtues. I'd be moaning about the class sizes, the lack of resources, the fact that my kids weren't being stretched, the religious and ethnic segregation etc along with all the other parents locally. And indeed the other teachers what with the fact that I am one!

None of which is to say that the state sector doesn't do an excellent job with the resources available to it by and large.

When you talk about parents who choose private school for their children you very often imply that they are snobby, ignorant and rich.

Since I know that a lot of the parents on this site (including me, Martianbishop etc) are actually teachers in the state sector, it's pretty obvious that these qualities just don't apply to us.

It's precisely because I do know my local schools very, very well that I don't want my kids to be educated in them. And as myred says private education for my kids is not part of some luxurious lifestyle (on a teacher's wage!!!) it's the result of very careful financial management and prioritising and making sacrifices elsewhere.

I've said it before but I think if you came and spent some time at my kids' school and with the parents who send their kids there you'd be very surprised about how far the reality is different from your perception.

As for bursaries. I think more than 20% of children at my dcs school receive one. Means tested so some receive 100% discount on fees. There's also a hardship fund. So some bursaries are offered on entry to the school while others are given if parents circumstances change while the child is at school. They also allow parents to pay fees in smaller and delated installments in the case of hardship. Any decent private school will go well out of its way to ensure that a child does not have to be taken out part way through its education out of compassion (and they take siblings and bullying at state school as examples of things they would take into consideration when offering bursaries or hardhsip fund) but also out of business sense - much better to keep a child in and waive fees temporarily than lose the income represented by that child's place for good.

But again, I do think there's a lot of misguided hand rubbing at other people's misfortune and scaremongering here. Since my dd1 started at the school 3 years ago not one child has left her class (or her part of the school that I know of) while 2 joined it this year. We're not in London where there's likely to be more movement anyway but even so it's hardly the mass stampede you're hinting at.

UQD and see Ladymuck's earlier post where she said, 'schools belonging to the Whitgift Foundation offer bursaries on a sliding scale to anyone with a family income up to £70k.'

And,

'As i understand it whilst the basic fees are over 12k per year (day), over half the parents pay less than that. And some of the scholarships are on the more generous side (50%)'

Again, I remember you going on about there needing to be some rich philanthropists who spend loads of money on education but this is exactly how private schools were set up and you'd be amazed how many people leave money in legacies or through regular or one off donations to the private schools that they went to. All of this money pays for the bursaries. At my dcs school you can give money and state whether you want it to be used for bursaries, hardship fund or new faciliites etc.

Gosh, I think I've got fivecandles on to her pet subject. Is it me or does "it's precisely because I do know my local schools very, very well that I don't want my kids to be educated in them" actually come across as snobby despite protestations to the contrary?

The opinions can be bandied around all we like, but the facts speak for themselves - people are pulling their children out of private school because they are finding it too much of an expense, and one which they can live without. I don't see that as being such a controversial thing to comment on.

"There are also people who can no longer afford to pay their mortgages but that is not proof that houses are a luxury and it ain't so bad living in council accommodation."

Totally separate argument. This is just daft. You can hardly compare council accommodation (in which people don't usually choose to live, and which accommodates a national average of 14% of the population according to the last census), with state education, which 93% of people use - and which, believe it or not, many use because they are happy to do so.

When you say:

"You can hardly compare council accommodation (in which people don't usually choose to live, and which accommodates a national average of 14% of the population according to the last census), with state education, which 93% of people use - and which, believe it or not, many use because they are happy to do so."

I think the analogy is exact and correct for me at least. I'd prefer not to live in social housing in the same way that I'd prefer not to use state education. If the financial situation crunches us, I think the school fees would go before the house.

Why can't people choose the best education for their children without being labelled either snobby (private) or ignorant (state)? For me my ds's education isn't a luxury it is an essential. The fact that I have Hobson's choice for state school was the deciding factor for private. Yes I suppose I should have sent my ds to a school in special measures but frankly I'm not interested in sacrificing his education for the greater good. Instead I am making considerable sacrifices to send him to a successful private school.

UQD, no, nothing controversial about saying that some people will inevitably have to take their children out of private schools or be prevented from applying for them in the first place. Of course this happens anyway and will happen more in the current climate.

As I said, it's the fact that you are using this to prove some sort of point about how these said people are therefore going to be enlightened about the joys of state education that I am arguing with. Maybe some will or maybe some who live near good state schools anyway will decide that actually they're good enough but many won't.

And no my comment about my knowing the local schools extremely well and therfore my decision not to send my kids there is quite clearly not out of ignorance or snobbery or my luxurious lifestyle (which you imply are inevitably the reasons why people choose private school over state for their kids).

I have said many times to you and others that a significant motivating factor for me is because all of the schools near me are segregated by faith and with faith ethnicity and social class and I (and my kids) are atheists. As I work in the state sector as does my dp and live in the very centre of a very deprived and very multicultural area I am hardly a snob.

All I'm asking UQD is that you stop making assumptions and stereotyping parents who choose to send their kids to private school. No doubt there are people who conform to your stereotypes but the majority do not and certainly the people you are talking to on this thread are very obviously not snobs or ignorant or making a choice as part of some luxurious lifestyle.

I think you just need to accept that in some areas and not all the private schools very clearly offer a much better education and experience than the state schools. This isn't right and isn't fair but it is true.

And as I have said and QC and myred are saying we do and will and would make sacrifices in order to provide this for our children.

I just find your comments so far from the reality of my life where as a part-time teacher the school fees for 2 account for the majority of my salary. And the idea that I am buying with these fees a 'luxury item' an 'item' FGS is so absolutely bizarre. Yes, the fees may well be out of the reach of many (although I've already mentioned the bursaries and hardship fund) but for me worth every penny and as long as I can pay my morgage and eat then there is nothing else I can think of that I could pay for that I would value more. Which is not to say that I wouldn't be delighted if I didn't have to pay and would love to have a state school half as good as my dcs school.

I don't know where either you, fivecandles or you, UQD live but I suspect state schools in UQD's are are a lot better than in 5c's.

In some parts of the country private education is a luxury because the state schools are perfectly good and you'd only be paying for extra sporting or drama facilities and the like. but in others the state sector is abysmal and it's totally understandable that any parent who could scrape together the cash would pay its pay out of it (or move).

Where I live state primary education appears fine - at least I'm entrusting dd1 into it. At secondary level it is shocking. I too would forgo a car/all holidays/new clothes forever more etc to move my dcs into the private sector and that's the general view of anyone round here with two pennies to rub together.

I would rather go without food or sell a kidney before I sent my children to our local senior school - it has a constant police presence, a GCSE pass rate (at any grade) of 30% and a huge unauthorised absence rate.

If that makes me a snob then so be it - but I will not compromise my children's education for the benefit of others. I wish I lived in an area with a choice of good schools but I don't, so until I have that choice I will do my utmost to make sure my daughter is well educated.

DD has an academic scholarship and as a result we receive 24% discount on fees.

We have to give two terms' notice (instead of one, for non-scholars) and during the period of notice, the discount is lost.

Realistically once the academic year has started, we are locked in/committed to finding the whole of the published fees for the whole of the academic year.

MollieO - plenty of people have a real Hobson's choice - the local state school or nothing. It therefore irks them a bit to be lectured about this other spurious "choice" of the private sector.

SueW - interesting point - so even people with scholarships may struggle.

fivecandles - I'm not making a point about how "people are going to be enlightened about the joys of state education." I'm just saying a lot more people are finding themselves in the position which 93% of the population are already in, and because they are being very vocal about it you'd think it was some kind of punishment. You said before "If I suddenly had to educate my kids in the local school I know that I wouldn't be coming home extolling its virtues. I'd be moaning about the class sizes, the lack of resources, the fact that my kids weren't being stretched, the religious and ethnic segregation etc along with all the other parents locally." That may be the case. And if it is, then the parents who had always had these problems to contend with would be smiling wryly and saying "welcome to the real world, love."

And I wish you would stop making the assumption that it's as easy as making "sacrifices". You sound, rather worryingly, like my mother. That's not a compliment.

'finding themselves in the position which 93% of the population are already in, and because they are being very vocal about it you'd think it was some kind of punishment.'

Who?? Who is being 'vocal' about it? Seems to me that it's people who are NOT in the position of having to take their kids out of private school that are the ones going on about it. And more specifically people like you and others on the other thread who send their kids to state school and are positively gleeful about the thought that others may be forced to do this too (regardless of the potential suffeirng this may cause because it's horrible to take a child out from ANY school where they're happy in the middle of their education).

And 'punishment' is the wrong word but the reality is that my kids and I would find it very difficult to go our nearest local schools about which incidentally you know nothing.

One of the reasons why we would find it difficult is because we are neither Muslim nor Catholic. A point which I notice you keep avoiding but which is one of the most important reasons why I don't want my kids to go to my local schools (and obviously they wouldn't be allowed to go to the Catholic one anyway even though my taxes contribute to its upkeep).

'You said before "If I suddenly had to educate my kids in the local school I know that I wouldn't be coming home extolling its virtues. I'd be moaning about the class sizes, the lack of resources, the fact that my kids weren't being stretched, the religious and ethnic segregation etc along with all the other parents locally." That may be the case.'

I find your tone incredibly patronising UQD. In my local schools those things WOULD be the case. How do I know?? Oh, well amongst other things, because I have been teaching in my local schools for the last 5 years and so has my dp.

'And if it is, then the parents who had always had these problems to contend with would be smiling wryly and saying "welcome to the real world, love."'

Again, I think I am quite well aware of what the real world is like. That, once again, is why I choose to avoid sending my kids to the local schools that I am very familiar with. Again you assume that I and other parents who choose private school are ignorant and snobby.

'And I wish you would stop making the assumption that it's as easy as making "sacrifices".'

Where? Where have I said or assumed that it's as easy as making sacrifices?? I think you'll find that I have agreed with you that private school is beyond the reach of many people.

But you need to stop making assumptions about my and others lives.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if I couldn't afford your house UQD. In fact, I couldn't afford many houses down South which is one reason why we moved north. But I'm not on this thread going on about how snobby and ignorant the people are who live in leafy suburbs and send their kids to faith schools (which incidentally have just been found to be more socially exclusive than even grammar schools according to recent research by the Sutton Trust).

I could even argue that as I live in a deprived and multi-cultural area I am less snobby, ignorant and unaware of the real world than some people who sit there smugly lecturing other people on their choice to send their kids to private school having just moved to a leafy suburb with a grammar school or faith school next door.

But as the earlier poster said there are a huge number of people who could afford private schools if they made the sorts of sacrifices that I and otehrs do and even more so.

E.g. there are people who say they can't afford the school while one parent is a SAHM or while they fork out for an expensive mortgage etc etc.

That is not to say that everyone is in that position or that they should make those sacrifices. As the other poster said their money, their choice.

You just need to stop assuming that all or even the majority of parents who choose private school are privileged.

I have no idea how that smile icon got on this thread - I am not taking the piss. Just checked threads I'm on and saw it. Weird.